4 L. A. Sherman 



ment : but It would profit my readers little to be taken point by point 

 through these smaller questions at issue, and (what is more) I have not 

 the necessary self-confidence. 



If, however, we spend a little while in considering Macbeth as a piece of 

 zvorkmanship (or artistry, if you prefer it), we shall be following a new 

 road which seems worth a trial — perhaps better worth a trial just because 

 it lies off the trodden way; and whether it happen or not to lead us out 

 upon some fresh and lively view of this particular drama, it will at least 

 help us by the way to clear our thoughts upon dramatic writing and its 

 method : while I shall not be false to my belief in the virtue of starting 

 upon any chosen work of literature absolutely, with minds intent on dis- 

 covering just that upon which the author's mind was intent. 



The first of Quiller-Couch's eighteen lectures is thus frankly 

 discursive and general. We have quoted here at length from its 

 opening paragraphs as perhaps the most suggestive and character- 

 istic part of the whole work. Having explained and justified his 

 special purpose in the series, the author proceeds to treat of the 

 ' conditions ' under which Shakespeare wrought out his plays. 

 He touches upon features of the Globe theater, the quality of its 

 patrons, and its handicap in having its female parts sustained by 

 boys. Then, quoting the four passages from Holinshed which 

 Shakespeare used as the raw material for Macbeth, the author 

 propounds suggestively the first of his many theses in this form: 



Tragedy demands some sympathy with the fortunes of its hero : but 

 where is there room for sj^mpathy in the fortunes of a disloyal, self- 

 seeking murderer? 



This syllogism, on the instant, gives us pause. There is a flaw 

 in the reasoning somewhere. It is not in the major premise, for 

 of course no play can be a tragedy unless there is sympathy with 

 the hero. But we all have sympathy, and a good deal of it, with 

 the hero of Macbeth. Clearly, then, it is the implied minor 

 premise — later formally afifirmed as the subject of the second 

 lecture — that is unsotnid. Macbeth to us, except constructively 

 and with qualifications, is no disloyal, self-seeking murderer. 



Thus the fault in the logic is due to an ' ambiguous middle 



term.' If Macbeth were regarded at the beginning as an absolute 



traitor, an unmitigated self-seeker, a malicious and unrelenting 



murderer, there could have been no play. Historically, Macbeth 



/ io6 



