______
This tragedy is one amongst Shakspeare's dramas, which requires, in representation, such eminent
powers of acting, that it is scarcely ever brought upon the stage, but when a theatre
has to boast of performers highly gifted in their art.
The part of King John is held most
difficult to perform. John is no
hero, and yet he is a murderer—his best actions are debased by meanness,
deceit, or cowardice, and yet he is a king. Here is then to be pourtrayed, thirst
of
blood, without thirst of fame; and dignity of person, with a groveling mind.
Garrick was so little satisfied with his
own performance of this character, that, after playing it with cold approbation from
the audience, he changed it for the illegitimate Faulconbridge;2 where nature forced him to oppose the author's
meaning by a diminutive person, though art did all its wonders in his favour.
The genius of Kemble gleams terrific
through the gloomy John. No auditor
can hear him call for his Kingdom's rivers to take their courseThrough his burn'd bosom,3 space between stanzas and not feel for that moment parched with a scorching fever.
b 2[Page 4]
Yet, in a previous scene with Hubert, by
suffering his auditors to get before him, as it were, he fails of perfection in the
part. An attentive audience is never dull of comprehension; and, however swiftly an
actor proceeds, will follow close: but if permitted to gain ground of him, and
penetrate the secret he should disclose, he gives up his prerogative by dallying with
the impatient, who dive into impending events, with fatal consequence to all scenic
deception.
Though Hubert sinks in importance by not
being of the blood royal in this play, his character is illustrious from his virtue.
Cooke, in the habit of performing
characters far superior, elevates Hubert
so much above the level where performers in general place him, that he displays, in
this single instance, abating every other, abilities of the very first class.
Constance is the favourite
part both of the poet and the audience; and she has been highly fortunate under the
protection of the actress. It was the part in which that idol of the public, Mrs. Cibber, was most of all adored; and
the following lines, uttered by Mrs.
Siddons in Constance, ———Here I and sorrow sit: This is my throne, bid kings come bow to it,4 space between stanzas seem like a triumphant reference to her own potent skill in the
delineation of woe, as well as to the agonizing sufferings of the mother of young
Arthur.
Faulconbridge, one of the brightest testimonies of Shakspeare's comic power, is
excellent relief to that part of the tragedy which may be styled more dull [Page 5]than pathetic. Mr. C. Kemble
personates this child of love, as Shakspeare himself could wish.—If those who remember Garrick in the part complain of C. Kemble's inferior gaiety and
spirit, the inferiority is granted. Still, he would be something nearer an equality
with this great archetype of actors, could but those critics recall their gaiety and spirit, which, in their juvenile days,
inspired them with the ardour to admire.
Prince Arthur is of more importance than
either manager or actors generally conceive. They seldom care whether a princely or
plebeian child is to perform the part; whether from feature, or from voice, Arthur shall belie his royal birth, and take
away all sympathy in his own and his mother's sufferings.
Though Shakspeare's
King John is inferior to many of his plays, yet it contains some
poetic passages, and some whole scenes, written with his hand, beyond all power of
forgery.
Theobald says, in his commentaries on
this drama, "The action of the play begins at the thirty-fourth year of the King's life, and takes in only
some transactions of his reign to the time of his demise, being an interval of about
seventeen years."5 b 3