16-is shakespeare dead- 第12部分

infant　damnation　and　try　to　bear　it　the　best　they　can；　and　it

looks　as　if　their　Scotch　brethren　will　still　be　burning　babies　in

the　everlasting　fires　when　Shakespeare　comes　down　from　his　perch。



We　are　The　Reasoning　Race。　　We　can't　prove　it　by　the　above

examples；　and　we　can't　prove　it　by　the　miraculous　〃histories〃

built　by　those　Stratfordolaters　out　of　a　hatful　of　rags　and　a

barrel　of　sawdust；　but　there　is　a　plenty　of　other　things　we　can

prove　it　by；　if　I　could　think　of　them。　　We　are　The　Reasoning

Race；　and　when　we　find　a　vague　file　of　chipmunk…tracks　stringing

through　the　dust　of　Stratford　village；　we　know　by　our　reasoning

bowers　that　Hercules　has　been　along　there。　　I　feel　that　our

fetish　is　safe　for　three　centuries　yet。　　The　bust；　toothere　in

the　Stratford　Church。　　The　precious　bust；　the　priceless　bust；　the

calm　bust；　the　serene　bust；　the　emotionless　bust；　with　the　dandy

mustache；　and　the　putty　face；　unseamed　of　carethat　face　which

has　looked　passionlessly　down　upon　the　awed　pilgrim　for　a　hundred

and　fifty　years　and　will　still　look　down　upon　the　awed　pilgrim

three　hundred　more；　with　the　deep；　deep；　deep；　subtle；　subtle；

subtle　expression　of　a　bladder。









XII





Irreverence



One　of　the　most　trying　defects　which　I　find　in　thesethese

what　shall　I　call　them？　for　I　will　not　apply　injurious　epithets

to　them；　the　way　they　do　to　us；　such　violations　of　courtesy　being

repugnant　to　my　nature　and　my　dignity。　　The　farthest　I　can　go　in

that　direction　is　to　call　them　by　names　of　limited　reverence

names　merely　descriptive；　never　unkind；　never　offensive；　never

tainted　by　harsh　feeling。　　If　THEY　would　do　like　this；　they　would

feel　better　in　their　hearts。　　Very　well；　thento　proceed。　　One

of　the　most　trying　defects　which　I　find　in　these

Stratfordolaters；　these　Shakesperiods；　these　thugs；　these

bangalores；　these　troglodytes；　these　herumfrodites；　these

blatherskites；　these　buccaneers；　these　bandoleers；　is　their

spirit　of　irreverence。　　It　is　detectable　in　every　utterance　of

theirs　when　they　are　talking　about　us。　　I　am　thankful　that　in　me

there　is　nothing　of　that　spirit。　　When　a　thing　is　sacred　to　me　it

is　impossible　for　me　to　be　irreverent　toward　it。　　I　cannot　call

to　mind　a　single　instance　where　I　have　ever　been　irreverent；

except　towards　the　things　which　were　sacred　to　other　people。　　Am

I　in　the　right？　　I　think　so。　　But　I　ask　no　one　to　take　my

unsupported　word；　no；　look　at　the　dictionary；　let　the　dictionary

decide。　　Here　is　the　definition：





IRREVERENCE。　　The　quality　or　condition　of　irreverence　toward

God　and　sacred　things。





What　does　the　Hindu　say？　　He　says　it　is　correct。　　He　says

irreverence　is　lack　of　respect　for　Vishnu；　and　Brahma；　and

Chrishna；　and　his　other　gods；　and　for　his　sacred　cattle；　and　for

his　temples　and　the　things　within　them。　　He　endorses　the

definition；　you　see；　and　there　are　300；000；000　Hindus　or　their

equivalents　back　of　him。



The　dictionary　had　the　acute　idea　that　by　using　the　capital

G　it　could　restrict　irreverence　to　lack　of　reverence　for　OUR

Deity　and　our　sacred　things；　but　that　ingenious　and　rather　sly

idea　miscarried：　　for　by　the　simple　process　of　spelling　HIS

deities　with　capitals　the　Hindu　confiscates　the　definition　and

restricts　it　to　his　own　sects；　thus　making　it　clearly　compulsory

upon　us　to　revere　HIS　gods　and　HIS　sacred　things；　and　nobody's

else。　　We　can't　say　a　word；　for　he　had　our　own　dictionary　at　his

back；　and　its　decision　is　final。



This　law；　reduced　to　its　simplest　terms；　is　this：

1。　Whatever　is　sacred　to　the　Christian　must　be　held　in　reverence　by

everybody　else；　2。　　whatever　is　sacred　to　the　Hindu　must　be　held

in　reverence　by　everybody　else；　3。　　therefore；　by　consequence；

logically；　and　indisputably；　whatever　is　sacred　to　ME　must　be

held　in　reverence　by　everybody　else。



Now　then；　what　aggravates　me　is　that　these　troglodytes　and

muscovites　and　bandoleers　and　buccaneers　are　ALSO　trying　to　crowd

in　and　share　the　benefit　of　the　law；　and　compel　everybody　to

revere　their　Shakespeare　and　hold　him　sacred。　　We　can't　have

that：　　there's　enough　of　us　already。　　If　you　go　on　widening　and

spreading　and　inflating　the　privilege；　it　will　presently　come　to

be　conceded　that　each　man's　sacred　things　are　the　ONLY　ones；　and

the　rest　of　the　human　race　will　have　to　be　humbly　reverent　toward

them　or　suffer　for　it。　　That　can　surely　happen；　and　when　it

happens；　the　word　Irreverence　will　be　regarded　as　the　most

meaningless；　and　foolish；　and　self…conceited；　and　insolent；　and

impudent；　and　dictatorial　word　in　the　language。　　And　people　will

say；　〃Whose　business　is　it　what　gods　I　worship　and　what　things

hold　sacred？　　Who　has　the　right　to　dictate　to　my　conscience；　and

where　did　he　get　that　right？〃



We　cannot　afford　to　let　that　calamity　come　upon　us。　　We　must

save　the　word　from　this　destruction。　　There　is　but　one　way　to　do

it；　and　that　is　to　stop　the　spread　of　the　privilege　and　strictly

confine　it　to　its　present　limitsthat　is；　to　all　the　Christian

sects；　to　all　the　Hindu　sects；　and　me。　　We　do　not　need　any　more；

the　stock　is　watered　enough；　just　as　it　is。



It　would　be　better　if　the　privilege　were　limited　to　me

alone。　　I　think　so　because　I　am　the　only　sect　that　knows　how　to

employ　it　gently；　kindly；　charitably；　dispassionately。　　The　other

sects　lack　the　quality　of　self…restraint。　　The　Catholic　Church

says　the　most　irreverent　things　about　matters　which　are　sacred　to

the　Protestants；　and　the　Protestant　Church　retorts　in　kind　about

the　confessional　and　other　matters　which　Catholics　hold　sacred；

then　both　of　these　irreverencers　turn　upon　Thomas　Paine　and

charge　HIM　with　irreverence。　　This　is　all　unfortunate；　because　it

makes　it　difficult　for　students　equipped　with　only　a　low　grade　of

mentality　to　find　out　what　Irreverence　really　IS。



It　will　surely　be　much　better　all　around　if　the　privilege　of

regulating　the　irreverent　and　keeping　them　in　order　shall

eventually　be　withdrawn　from　all　the　sects　but　me。　　Then　there

will　be　no　more　quarreling；　no　more　bandying　of　disrespectful

epithets；　no　more　heartburnings。



There　will　then　be　nothing　sacred　involved　in　this　Bacon…

Shakespeare　controversy　except　what　is　sacred　to　me。　　That　will

simplify　the　whole　matter；　and　trouble　will　cease。　　There　will　be

irreverence　no　longer；　because　I　will　not　allow　it。　　The　first

time　those　criminals　charge　me　with　irreverence　for　calling　their

Stratford　myth　an　Arthur…Orton…Mary…Baker…Thompson…Eddy…Louis…

the…Seventeenth…Veiled…Prophet…of…Khorassan　will　be　the　last。

Taught　by　the　methods　found　effective　in　extinguishing　earlier

offenders　by　the　Inquisition；　of　holy　memory；　I　shall　know　how　to

quiet　them。







XIII





Isn't　it　odd；　when　you　think　of　it；　that　you　may　list　all

the　celebrated　Englishmen；　Irishmen；　and　Scotchmen　of　modern

times；　clear　back　to　the　first　Tudorsa　list　containing　five

hundred　names；　shall　we　say？and　you　can　go　to　the　histories；

biographies；　and　cyclopedias　and　learn　the　particulars　of　the

lives　of　every　one　of　them。　　Every　one　of　them　except　onethe

most　famous；　the　most　renownedby　far　the　most　illustrious　of

them　allShakespeare！　　You　can　get　the　details　of　the　lives　of

all　the　celebrated　ecclesiastics　in　the　list；　all　the　celebrated

tragedians；　comedians；　singers；　dancers；　orators；　judges；

lawyers；　poets；　dramatists；　historians；　biographers；　editors；

inventors；　reformers；　statesmen；　generals；　admirals；　discoverers；

prize…fighters；　murderers；　pirates；　conspirators；　horse…jockeys；

bunco…steerers；　misers；　swindlers；　explorers；　adventurers　by　land

and　sea；　bankers；　financiers；　astronomers；　naturalists；

claimants；　impostors；　chemists；　biologists；　geologists；

philologists；　college　presidents　and　professors；　architects；

engineers；　painters；　sculptors；　politicians；　agitators；　rebels；

revolutionists；　patriots；　demagogues；　clowns；　cooks；　freaks；

philosophers；　burglars；　highwaymen；　journalists；　physicians；

surgeonsyou　can　get　the　life…histories　of　all　of　them　but　ONE。

Just　ONEthe　most　extraordinary　and　the　most　celebrated　of　them　all

Shakespeare！



You　may　add　to　the　list　the　thousand　celebrated　persons

furnished　by　the　rest　of　Christendom　in　the　past　four　centuries；

and　you　can　find　out　the　life…histories　of　all　those　people；　too。

You　will　then　have　listed　fifteen　hundred　celebrities；　and　you

can　trace　the　authentic　life…histories　of　the　whole　of　them。

Save　onefar　and　away　the　most　colossal　prodigy　of　the　entire

accumulationShakespeare！　　About　him　you　can　find　out　NOTHING。

Nothing　of　even　the　slightest　importance。　　Nothing　worth　the

trouble　of　stowing　away　in　your　memory。　　Nothing　that　even

remotely　indicates　that　he　was　ever　anything　more　than　a

distinctly　commonplace　persona　manager；　an　actor　of　inferior

grade；　a　small　trader　in　a　small　village　that　did　not　regard　him

as　a　person　of　any　consequence；　and　had　forgotten　all　about　him

before　he　was　fairly　cold　in　his　grave。　　We　can　go　to　the　records

and　find　out　the　life…history　of　every　renowned　RACE…HORSE　of

modern　timesbut　not　Shakespeare's！　　There　are　many　reasons　why；

and　they　have　been　furnished　in　cart…loads　（of　guess　and

conjecture）　by　those　troglodytes；　but　there　is　one　that　is　worth

all　the　rest　of　the　reasons　put　together；　and　is　abundantly

sufficient　all　by　itselfHE　HADN'T　ANY　HISTORY　TO　RECORD。　　There

is　no　way　of　getting　around　that　deadly　fact。　　And　no　sane　way

has　yet　been　discovered　of　getting　around　its　formidable

significance。



Its　quite　plain　significanceto　any　but　those　thugs　（I　do

not　use　the　term　unkindly）　is；　that　Shakespeare　had　no　prominence

while　he　lived；　and　none　until　he　had　been　dead　two　or　three

generations。　　The　Plays　enjoyed　high　fame　from　the　beginning；　and

if　he　wrote　them　it　seems　a　pity　the　world　did　not　find　it　out。

He　ought　to　have　explained　that　he　was　the　author；　and　not　merely

a　NOM　DE　PLUME　for　another　man　to　hide　behind