ee 
The Theory of Greek Tragedy 13 
of amazement and dismay. ‘The conscience is deeply shocked; 
and there arises that peculiar sense of vertiginous insecurity which 
I have called for convenience the tragic qualm. 
In this connection it is worthy of remark that in Greek you are 
always pretty sure what the protagonist is going to do. He 
seldom or never disappoints you; whereas in Shakespeare the pro- 
tagonist’s behaviour is always more or less doubtful until it is 
settled forever by the inertia of the action. That Orestes will 
kill his mother, is certain from the first; he has come to do so and 
do so he will—he acts consistently in the spirit of his intention: 
what is uncertain is the consequence of his doing so. Whether 
Hamlet will kill the king or not, is always pretty much a matter of 
conjecture before he has done so. In fact that is just the ques- 
tion. Inthe one case it is Hamlet’s character which is on trial; in 
the other case it is Orestes’ act. 
From this shift of dramatic emphasis has resulted a difference 
in the treatment of character which is no less significant of the 
romantic tragedy as compared with the Greek. While the Greek 
protagonist is calculated solely with reference to the action, whose 
moral character is reflected upon him; the Shakespearean has de- 
veloped a character of-his own which is partly implicated in the 
action but is also partly independent of it and uncommitted to it. 
The former is an agency, not an end in himself. It is not he to 
whom the action is indebted for its main interest and its peculiar © 
effects, but contrariwise. In consequence he exists only in and 
for the play ; or what amounts to the same thing, there is no more 
of him than is necessary to motive the drama, with which he is 
virtually coterminous. On this account he has a simplicity, 
breadth, and integrity—he possesses a general, abstract, and typ- 
ical value—to which his modern rival can make no pretension. 
He represents the fates and liabilities of human life rather than 
the varieties and variations of human character. 
The Shakespearean character, on the other hand, as a personal- 
ity more or less inviolable and sentimentally superior to the mere 
circumstances of his lot, appears to live with a larger life than 
that of the action, with which his character is only partially iden- 
tified. Who ever dreams of measuring Hamlet or Othello or 
$141 
