Page:Some Textual Difficulties in Shakespeare.djvu/104

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
86
SOME TEXTUAL DIFFICULTIES IN SHAKESPEARE

he ends with thinking himself very shrewd indeed—"when the thunder would not peace at my bidding; there I found 'em, there I smelt 'em out." This passage is a study of mind, character and personal history. The unbalanced mind, as Shakespeare shows it, does not lack idea; it lacks continuity of thought.

What idea, then, are we to get from these words, "To say 'ay' and 'no' to everything that I said! 'Ay' and 'no' too was no good divinity." This is a question which does not seem ever to have been satisfactorily answered. White queries, "Why should his knights say 'ay' and 'no' to everything he said?"

The first Folio has it: "To say I, and no, to every thing that I said: I, and no too, was no good divinity." The first Quarto reads: "saide, I and no toe, was," etc. Inasmuch as our modern reading is an editorial correction of the Folio, which is as usual punctuated at random, I think that if I were editing the play I should not long hesitate to adopt a suggestion made several generations ago: "To say ay and no to everything that I said ay and no to was no good divinity."

Lear's one great lesson had been that his followers were self-seeking flatterers; they did not tell him the truth about himself. A man who will say ay or no to anything whatever, according as his interest lies, is simply a liar; and lying is no good divinity. A "clothier's yard" does not refer to a particular sort of yard