Who's he whose fame spreads far and wide
For wealth and ostentatious pride
Until for peculation tried?

My Banker.
Who makes of roguery a trade,
Who, by his conscience undismayed,
To other rascals lends his aid!

My Banker.
Who is't would have us to believe
A child in arms he'd not deceive,
Yet all the while will lie and thieve?
My Banker.
Who, when my Banker stares aghast
At prison walls which hold him fast,
Rejoices that he's caught at last?
Judy, January 29, 1879.

-:0:

My-self

MY BROTHER.

WHO held the tempting apple nigh
And always tried to make me cry,
And stuck the scissors in my eye?
My Brother.

Who left us all on Christmas Day
And to the cupboard made his way
And on the tree left not a spray?
My Brother.
Who threw my playthings on the floor.
And broke my doll behind the door,
And my best ribbons always tore?
My Brother
Who pinched my kitten's ear, or tail,
And ducked her in the water-pail
And pinched my cheek for turning pale?
My Brother.

Who spilt his coffee on his lap,
And tore his mother's new lace cap,
And blurred with ink my atlas map?
My Brother.

Who's glad he is at school now,
And not at home to make a row
I know who's happy, anyhow,

144

PROLOGUE.

MOST potent, grave, and Reverend Signiors,
My very noble and approved good Masters
Of Arts, ye Bachelors and Commoners,

Ye Doctors, Proctors, Scholars, Dons, and Men,
And last, not least, Subscribers, to whose kindness
We owe our life; that we have rushed to print
It is most true, true we have headlong rushed,
The very head and front of our offending,
Hath this extent, no more: and pray you all
If any chaff be found amongst our Parodies,
For the wheat's sake, oh! pardon it!

:0:

N giving the following Parodies on detached passages from the plays of Shakespeare, it must be stated, (though such a statement ought to be perfectly unnecessary,) that not the slightest disrespect is intended, either to the works themselves, or to that great author whose name, and fame, are dear to every Englishman.

Nearly every play written by Shakespeare has been burlesqued, and whenever one of the London theatrical managers produces a grand revival of a Shakespearian tragedy, a travestie of it is almost immediately produced, at one, or another, of the smaller houses, which provide fun for the laughterloving public. There are many worthy people who take offence at this, and fail to see that such fun is of a very harmless description, and that no disrespect is intended to the immortal bard, who was not, himself, above introducing burlesques of his contemporaries, even in his most serious works.

This question was fully discussed in the London daily papers in August, 1883, àpropos of burlesques of The Tempest, and Hamlet, produced by Mr. John Hollingshead, at the Gaiety Theatre. Some of the letters then published throw considerable light on what had been previously done in the way of Shakespearian burlesques, and are also of interest as summing up the arguments, for and against, Parody and Burlesque in general.

Mr Moy Thomas, the theatrical critic of the Daily News, thus introduced the subject in his weekly column, entitled

THE THEATRES.

"WE have received the following letter on the subject of the impending burlesques of 'The Tempest,' and 'Hamlet,' at the Gaiety Theatre. We may remind our readers that we described the project as 'somewhat startling,' while we called attention to the facts that the productions in

May I ask if it is possible that the dramatic critic of the Daily News means to pass over without a word of disapprobation the proposal to burlesque "Hamlet" and "The Tempest?" I think many people must have been as surprised as I was to read your intimation of it in last Monday's issue uncoupled with any word of disapproval or disgust. Surely the English stage may well be thought by Englishmen to have reached its lowest point of degradation, and one strangely in contrast with the honour we profess to pay to it, when two of the finest plays and finest works in all literature are to be sacrificed to the passion for burlesque. We had better consider ourselves no longer the same nation, and cease to pride ourselves on having produced the foremost man in all literature when we descend to this without protest. I do not think any language can be too strong on such a subject from a lover of Shakespeare and of the stage, and one who cannot but contrast the present tastes of the public with the opinion formed of them by Milton two centuries ago;-"What wants there to such a towardly and pregnant soil but wise and faithful labourers to make a knowing people, a nation of prophets, of sages, and of worthies.'"-I am yours faithfully, W. KENNEDY.-Hampstead, August 16."

-.0:

A few days later the following replies were pub lished in The Daily News:

SIR,-Your correspondent "Mr. Kennedy" speaks of a proposed new version of The Tempest, of a more or less burlesque character, as if I and Mr. Burnand had discovered a new crime. The World (in the absence of Mr. Yates) also follows suit. Messrs. F. Talfourd, Andrew Halliday, Robert Brough, and others were not afraid to to draw upon Shakespeare for their burlesques, and in the so-called "palmy days" of the drama the parodies of Shakespeare were frequent, coarse, and brutal. The subjects of many of Shakespeare's plays were the common property of the dramatist long before the advent of the master, and if he were now alive he would probably be the last to object to treatment such as Goethe has received in every city in Europe. I am, &c., JOHN HOLLINGSHEAD.-Gaiety Theatre, Strand."

SIR,-This stir about The Tempest seems a storm in a teacup. Both Mr. W. Kennedy, of Hampstead," who naturally takes high ground, and your dramatic critic would have acted more justly to my forthcoming piece had they waited to see what it was before attempting to excite public prejudice against my work. There is an important distinction between what is commonly understood by burlesquing Shakespeare," by which is meant taking his lines and sentiments and giving them an absurd turn, and writing what is now-a-days styled a " burlesque version "

(which is really an extravaganza) of a fairy tale which Shakespeare has immortalised, especially when Shakespeare himself has given the keynote for the fun, as he has done in The Tempest, no doubt with a full consciousness of its humour.

As the lawyer's wisdom is popularly supposed to reside mainly in the wig, so the poet has made all Prospero's magic art lie in his book, wand, and magic robes, without which he is powerless. When he does not wish to be professionally engaged he puts aside his "magic properties" and says lie there my art." When he is renouncing conjuring he buries his books of legerdemain, and has done with it for ever, retaining no sort of power independently of this magic receipt book, or as I shall struggle not to call it, in deference to Mr. Kennedy, of Hampstead to whom a pun on anything Shakespearian must appear quite too-too dreadful, his " spelling book." Caliban is aware of this, and directs his efforts to possessing himself of this book. This perfectly admissible view of Prospero, together with the notion that he himself gives as to Ariel's true character, has furnished me with the materials for an extravaganza at the Gaiety, which will be entitled Ariel, or, the King of the Caliban Island, of which the critics and public will form their judgment when it appears. En attendant, to raise a prejudice against my work is clearly unjust. Let me have fairplay even for an extravaganza founded on a Shakespearian fairy tale. 'Atlas," in the World, had an unfair note on this subject. I have written to him much as I have to you, but with a special "P.S.," which I trust he will have the generosity to publish, pointing out that "Atlas" should be the last to brand as a crime burlesquing anything Shakesperian, as in his own paper a few weeks ago appeared the story of Hamlet travestied, and adapted to "nireteenth century" readers. Yours faithfully,

:0:

F. C. BURNAND,

(To the Editor of the Daily News.)-Sir,-We are told that a parody in three or four acts of The Tempest is in preparation, and we are asked by the author to suspend judgment until its production. The appeal is at any rate superficially fair. But Mr. Burnand's letter is not very reassuring. For instance, he calls the great play" a fairy tale," ie., he seems to put it on a level with The White Cat" and "Puss in Boots." But let that pass. All who reverence the great name of Shakespeare, and who are grateful for his noble plays (and they are numerous, whatever Mr. Burnand and Punch may think), will patiently await The King of the Caliban Island (what charming wit and taste!) leaning upon their swords. In any case Shakespeare's memory cannot suffer. What is to be feared is the degradation of the stage which he ennobled, and of the actors and dramatic authors of whom he ought to be the proudest and most sacred boast.-I am, Sir, yours faithfully, AN OLD PLAYGOER.

:0:

August 20, 1883.

In the next weekly column of The Theatres (August 27, 1883,) Mr. Moy Thomas inserted. another long letter, which had been addressed to him by Mr. F. C. Burnand, referring to his forthcoming burlesque upon Shakespeare's Tempest :—

"I know you are not friendly to burlesques-and probably not to burlesque writers; still, as a critic, as a judge who will have to try the case, it is hardly fair to range yourself on the adverse side, and to make your verdict a foregone conclusion. Patience a moment, and hear-or read. The existence of Robson was an excuse for a burlesque on Shy

lock, and for one on Macbeth; also on Medea. Now, in looking about for a character, a novelty, for Miss Nelly Farren, who is a genius in her way, as Robson was in histhe notion of an Ariel struck me, and the more I considered it the more I liked it. I read the Tempest carefully, and saw how Shakespeare had given the chance of such a view of Ariel as the spirit of enterprise, and had struck the keynote of any amount of fun in the humorous notion of Prospero being absolutely dependent upon his "properties" for his magic power. Evidently he had not had them with him when he was turned adrift by Gonzago in a boat with his child; or rather, as he must have had them with him (according to his own account) they were so packed up he couldn't get at them; otherwise, where would his enemies have been? Caliban's one idea was to possess himself of the book. Well, in him I see a backward boy (done out of his rights, by the way), who, however, wants to acquire knowledge, and who does so in the end. How dull Miranda found the island you can judge from her speeches, and from her going to sleep when her father is prosing. The conspirators, and the remorseful king, are minor characters, calling for no particular remark, except as padding to sustain a weakish plot. Now what do I do? Burlesque it? Not in the sense in which I understand burlesque, as, for instance, I burlesqued Fédora, Diplomacy, Ouida's Strathmore, &c., &c. No; but I take the story and give it a turn similar (though not the same) to what Thackeray gave to Ivanhoe in Rebecca and Rowena. He took up the tale where Scott left off, but he reproduced the scenes and characters under changed conditions. I take the story with its leading characters; I omit the tempest entirely (only a sea-fog, when Prospero had forecasted a "disturbance "), and Ariel, capable of assuming all sorts of shapes and forms, does so and wrecks the ship. The arrangement of scenes doesn't follow the play. Of course Trinculo and Stephano are not in it, for no one making a new comic story could take them or Caliban as far as he is associated with them and make them more funny, whether in dialogue or in business (I know it all, having studied it) than they are in the piece. No one could take the Midsummer Night's Dream and produce a modern extravaganza, though they might (as Planché did) use the fairies out of it, who are immortal. No one deprecates a vulgar, coarse piece of buffoonery by way of burlesque more than I do. I have undertaken this very

work as an advance on Blue Beard, as Blue Beard was (though you would not recognise it) a distinct advance on what had preceded it. It forms one of the "burlesque drama' series-a generic title to which I have objections, but by which Mr. John Hollingshead sets store-and as it is a matter of indifference to the public whether what is really an extravaganza comes under the above heading, I havn't any more to say, but the sum is that I am distinctly not burlesquing Shakespeare's Tempest, as by burlesquing I understand my mode of treatment of Sardou's Fédora, Diplomacy, Ouida's Strathmore, &c., &c.

In September 1883, Mr. Hollingshead also wrote to the Daily News as follows:

"It may interest those who are curious in theatrical history to learn that the last London performance of "The Enchanted Isle," a burlesque upon Shakespeare's "Tempest," by William and Robert Brough, was played at Drury Lane Theatre on the 25th July, 1860, for the benefit of the widow and children of Robert Brough, one of the authors. The cast was as follows: Ariel, Miss Kate Terry, (then in the height of her popularity); Ferdinand, Mrs. Alfred Mellon (Miss Woolgar); Miranda, Miss Fanny Stirling (a daughter of Mrs. Stirling, her first appearance on the stage); Caliban, Mr. F. Talfourd; Alonzo, Mr. George Cruikshank; Prospero, Mr. Leicester Buckingham; and Trinculo, by the writer of this note."

Mr. Moy Thomas followed up this letter by stating that :

"Mr. Burnand has unearthed in the British Museum library an acting copy of Davenant and Dryden's version of the "Tempest; or the Enchanted Isle," which he will probably expound for the benefit of readers in an early number of Punch. Sir Walter Scott's account of this piece is perhaps worth transcribing here:-'It seems probable that Dryden furnished the language, and Davenant the plan, of the new characters introduced. They do but little honour to his invention, although Dryden has highly extolled it in his preface. The idea of a counterpart to Shakspeare's plot by introducing a man who had never seen a woman, as a contrast to a woman who had never seen a man, and by furnishing Caliban with a sister-monster, seems hardly worthy of the delight with which Dryden says he filled up the characters so sketched. In mixing his tints Dryden did not omit that peculiar colouring in which his age delighted. Miranda's simplicity is converted into indelicacy.... The play seems to have succeeded to the utmost wish of the authors. It was brought out in the Duke's house [Lincoln's-inn-fields Theatre, November, 1667], of which Davenant was the manager, with all the splendour of scenic decoration of which he was the inventor. The opening scene was described as being particularly splendid, and the performance of the spirits with mops and mows excited general applause!"

:0:

HAMLET'S SOLILOQUY.

No one passage from the plays of Shakespeare has been so frequently parodied, and imitated, as the celebrated Soliloquy commencing "To BE, OR NOT TO BE." The following version of the original is taken from the famous Folio edition of Shakespeare's works put forth in 1623. In addition to the quaint orthography, there are one or two verbal differences between this, and the version given in modern editions of the poet's works; notably the expression "the poor man's contumely," which is now generally printed as "the proud man's contumely: "-

Enter Hamlet.

Ham.-TO BE, or not to be, that is the Question :
Whether 'tis Nobler in the minde to suffer
The Slings and Arrowes of outragious Fortune,
Or to take Armes against a Sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them: to dye, to sleepe
No more; and by a sleepe, to say we end
The Heart-ake, and the thousand Naturall shockes
That Flesh is heyre too? 'Tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To dye, to sleepe,
To sleepe, perchance to Dreame; I, there's the rub,
For in that sleepe of death, what dreames may coine,
When we have shufflel'd off this mortall coile,
Must give us pawse. There's the respect
That makes Calamity of so long life;

For who would beare the Whips and Scornes of time,
The Oppressors wrong, the poore man's Contumely,
The pangs of dispriz'd Love, the Lawes delay,
The insolence of Office, and the Spurnes

That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himselfe might his Quietus make

With a bare Bodkin? Who would these Fardles beare,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,

The undiscovered Countrey, from whose Borne
No Traveller returnes, Puzels the will,
And makes us rather beare those illes we have,
Than flye to others that we know not of.
Thus Conscience does make Cowards of us all,
And thus the Native hew of Resolution

Is sicklied o're, with the pale cast of Thought,
And enterprizes of great pith and moment,
With this regard their Currants turne away,
And loose the name of Action. Soft you now,
The faire Ophelia? Nimph, in thy Orizons
Be all my sinnes remembred.

The Tragedie of Hamlet.

AMONGST the announcements for April, 1846, in George Cruikshank's Comic Almanack appeared the following:-

APRIL.

The Shakespeare Jubilee Festival will be celebrated at the "Only National Theatre" on the 23rd, with the following performances :

The Grand Opera of 'HAMLET;' the Music by Mr. Balfe; the libretto by Messrs. Shakespeare and Bunn.

From the Opera, the following song may be predicted to be sung by the first tenor, Hamlet :

"TO BE, OR NOT TO BE.
"OH say! To be, or not to be?
That is the question grave;
To suffer Fortune's slings and darts,
Or seas of troubles brave.

To die, to sleep! perchance, to dream !—
Ay, there's the rub! when we

Have shuffled off this mortal coil -
To be, or not to be!

Oh! who would bear time's whips and scorns,
The pangs of disprized love;

When he might his quietus make

By one bare bodkin's shove?

Who would these fardels bear, unless
That bourne he could foresee,

From which no traveller returns!—
To be, or not to be!"

Arrangements will be made for the characters to promenade in the daytime full dressed, upon the top of the Portico, to the Music of the Orchestra in Beef-eaters dresses. The pageant will be very splendid.

20:

TO BE or not to be ?-that is the question;
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
Vile strokes and scratches from outrageous Pens,
Or to take up THATCHER'S, 'gainst a sea of others,
And, using it, to end them? To write-with ease-
For ever! And with that ease to say we end
The headache and the thousand natural shocks
Which clerks are heir to-'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wished! To write-with ease-
With ease! enhanced to speed! Aye, there's the rub!
As 'tis with ease of Pen our thoughts will flow,
Now we have shuffled off that mortal toil

We cease to pause! Here's the good Pen
That lessens the calamities of life;

For who will suffer the whips and scorns of time,
The writer's wrongs, the schoolmaster's contumely?
The fangs of despised Pens, cause of delays