{"id":9853,"date":"2010-02-16T13:49:37","date_gmt":"2010-02-16T18:49:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/?p=9853"},"modified":"2022-03-22T12:32:24","modified_gmt":"2022-03-22T16:32:24","slug":"shakespeare-makes-people-crazy-example-1","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/?p=9853","title":{"rendered":"Shakespeare makes people crazy, example 1"},"content":{"rendered":"

This exchange just gets more and more delightful as it goes on. Max Beerbohm writes a letter to the editor in regards to a recent edition of Shakespeare’s Sonnets. A Shakespeare expert, Mr. Thomas Tyler replies, sending his own letter to the editor, in regards to Beerbohm’s letter, and Max Beerbohm replies again. It is masterful. So so witty. It’s the last sentence of Beerbohm’s last letter that is the “button” of the comedy. The “ching” to the other two letters “ba-dum”. The details. The fervent urgency in Tyler’s letter. Yet also the overwhelming formality and respect they give to one another (rather than today’s perhaps more honest yet incivil and humorless name-calling that passes for “debate” on political sites. Its worst sin, in my mind, is that it represents terrible writing, not to mention cloudy blinkered thinking. If the thought is limited, so too is the language – and vice versa). The letters below show what it means to be passionate about one’s scholarly topic, in a fearless nerdy way. It is also indicative of the near-psychosis this Shakespeare chap can engender. Conscience does make cowards of us all? I would say that Shakespeare does make manic nerds of us all. The exchange also goes to show you that Google and Wikipedia may be awesome and they are, but people who have needed to find shit out<\/i> through history will do so, come hell or high water.<\/p>\n

Enjoy. This is rollicking awesome stuff. To say more would be to give away the joke of it.<\/p>\n

\n

[Max Beerbohm to the Editor of the Pall Mall Gazette<\/i>]:<\/p>\n

5 May 1898<\/p>\n

48 Upper Berkeley Street<\/p>\n

Shakespeare’s Sonnets<\/i><\/p>\n

Dear Sir,<\/p>\n

Your reviewer complains that in Mr. George Wyndham’s edition of the sonnets there is no note upon that much-debated line:<\/p>\n

Time doth transfix the flourish set on youth.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Various editors have sought to elucidate this line in various ways, but so far as I know, none has hit upon the following explanation, which seems to me to be the only one that is quite plausible. In all ancient books of heraldry one finds that the chief escutcheons bear on either side certain wing-like appendages, which are technically called “flourishes”. Each of these appendages signified “a noble Place or Poste under the Crowne”. The tenure of a Royal seal or charter, for example, or admission to the Privy Council, entitled a nobleman to add one of these flourishes to his arms. But if for any misdemeanour he forfeited his privilege the heralds caused a line to be drawn through his flourish, which was thenceforth described by them as a “flourish transfix”. Thus in Hort’s Compleat Booke of Antient Heraldrie and the Devices, published in 1653, one finds that the arms of the Earl of Forde had as many as nine flourishes, two of which were crossed–one “transfix in the yeare 1540 for Rebellion”. All flourishes were abolished by Charles II, soon after the Restoration, when it was found that many noblemen had contrived to embellish their arms with flourishes to which they had no right.<\/p>\n

I am your obedient servant,
\nMax Beerbohm<\/p>\n

\n

[Thomas Tyler to the Editor of the Pall Mall Gazette]<\/p>\n

May 1898
\n5 Thornhill Square, N<\/p>\n

Shakespeare’s Sonnets<\/i><\/p>\n

Sir, A letter signed “Max Beerbohm” in the Pall Mall Gazette for May 7 has come under my notice. The letter mentions a line in Shakespeare’s sixtieth sonnet which certainly presents some difficulty:<\/p>\n

Time doth transfix the flourish set on youth<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

According to Mr Beerbohm the line contains a metaphor borrowed from heraldic usage. “Flourishes” were appendages to coats-of-arms indicating honours attained. Misconduct might be punished by a line “transfixing” the flourish. An alleged case in point is that of “the Earl of Forde”, for information concerning which we are referred to “Hort’s Compleat Booke of Antient Heraldrie and the Devices, published in 1653”. Mr Beerbohm’s suggestion would have been not without value if verification had been possible. Unfortunately this is not the case. No such work as that mentioned is to be found in the British Museum catalogue, or in that of the Bodleian or of the Huth Library, or in Moule’s Bibliotheca Heraldica, or in other well-known lists. Dr Furnivall, who has taken a good deal of trouble in the matter, wrote to a friend of his, a distinguished member of the Heralds’ College; but this gentleman knew nothing of “the Earl of Forde”, and did not believe in “transfixed flourishes”. I do not like to come to the conclusion that Mr Beerbohm’s letter was a practical joke; but if so, it can scarcely be regarded as other than very objectionable. Appearing in a journal so well known and so influential as the Pall Mall Gazette, it may, as Dr. Furnivall points out, crop up again fifty years hence; and even now it may lead astray German or American students, who are unable to consult the great libraries of this country.<\/p>\n

I am, Sir, your obedient servant
\nThomas Tyler<\/p>\n

\n[Max Beerbohm to the Editor of the Pall Mall Gazette]<\/p>\n

30 May 1898
\n48 Upper Berkeley Street<\/p>\n

Shakespeare’s Sonnets<\/i><\/p>\n

Dear Sir, I am sorry that serious men have been taking me seriously as a commentator on Shakespeare, and I hasten to admit that my theory of the heraldic metaphor was but an essay in fantastic erudition, or, as Mr Tyler rather crudely conjectures, “a practical joke”. To Dr Furnivall I have already confessed, receiving a genial absolution. To the others I apologise also. But have I really wasted anyone’s time? The true scholar loves research for its own sake. The exhilaration is in the chase itself rather than in the “kill”. That is a metaphor drawn from fox-hunting. It can be verified in the Badminton Library.<\/p>\n

I am your obedient servant
\nMax Beerbohm<\/p>\n

-from Letters of Max Beerbohm, 1892-1956 \/ edited by Rupert Hart-Davis<\/a>\"\"<\/i><\/p>\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This exchange just gets more and more delightful as it goes on. Max Beerbohm writes a letter to the editor in regards to a recent edition of Shakespeare’s Sonnets. A Shakespeare expert, Mr. Thomas Tyler replies, sending his own letter … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[16],"tags":[218],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9853"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=9853"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9853\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":174675,"href":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9853\/revisions\/174675"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9853"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9853"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9853"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}