The _Werner_
of 1821, with all its shortcomings, is the production of a playwright.
of 1821, with all its shortcomings, is the production of a playwright.
Byron
e.
_ in
1801, when the fourth volume of the _Canterbury Tales_ was published),
and again in 1815, he set himself to turn the tale into a drama. His
first attempt, named _Ulric and Ilvina_, he threw into the fire, but he
had nearly completed the first act of his second and maturer adaptation
when he was "interrupted by circumstances," that is, no doubt, the
circumstances which led up to and ended in the separation from his
wife. (See letter of October 9, 1821, _Letters_, 1901, v. 391. )
On his leaving England for the Continent, April 25, 1816, the fragment
was left behind. Most probably the MS. fell into his sister's hands, for
in October, 1821, it was not forthcoming when Byron gave directions that
Hobhouse should search for it "amongst my papers. " Ultimately it came
into the possession of the late Mr. Murray, and is now printed for the
first time in its entirety (_vide post_, pp. 453-466: selections were
given in the _Nineteenth Century_, August, 1899). It should be borne in
mind that this unprinted first act of _Werner_, which synchronizes with
the _Siege of Corinth_ and _Parisina_, was written when Byron was a
member of the sub-committee of management of Drury Lane Theatre, and, as
the numerous stage directions testify, with a view to
stage-representation. The MS. is scored with corrections, and betrays an
unusual elaboration, and, perhaps, some difficulty and hesitation in the
choice of words and the construction of sentences. In the opening scene
the situation is not caught and gripped, while the melancholy squalor of
the original narrative is only too faithfully reproduced.
The _Werner_
of 1821, with all its shortcomings, is the production of a playwright.
The _Werner_ of 1815 is the attempt of a highly gifted amateur.
When Byron once more bethought himself of his old subject, he not only
sent for the MS. of the first act, but desired Murray "to cut out Sophia
Lee's" (_vide post_, p. 337) "_German's Tale_ from the _Canterbury
Tales_, and send it in a letter" (_Letters_, 1901, v. 390). He seems to
have intended from the first to construct a drama out of the story, and,
no doubt, to acknowledge the source of his inspiration. On the whole, he
carried out his intention, taking places, characters, and incidents as
he found them, but recasting the materials and turning prose into metre.
But here and there, to save himself trouble, he "stole his brooms ready
made," and, as he acknowledges in the Preface, "adopted even the
language of the story. " Act ii. sc. 2, lines 87-172; act iii. sc. 4; and
act v. sc. 1, lines 94-479, are, more or less, faithful and exact
reproductions of pp.
1801, when the fourth volume of the _Canterbury Tales_ was published),
and again in 1815, he set himself to turn the tale into a drama. His
first attempt, named _Ulric and Ilvina_, he threw into the fire, but he
had nearly completed the first act of his second and maturer adaptation
when he was "interrupted by circumstances," that is, no doubt, the
circumstances which led up to and ended in the separation from his
wife. (See letter of October 9, 1821, _Letters_, 1901, v. 391. )
On his leaving England for the Continent, April 25, 1816, the fragment
was left behind. Most probably the MS. fell into his sister's hands, for
in October, 1821, it was not forthcoming when Byron gave directions that
Hobhouse should search for it "amongst my papers. " Ultimately it came
into the possession of the late Mr. Murray, and is now printed for the
first time in its entirety (_vide post_, pp. 453-466: selections were
given in the _Nineteenth Century_, August, 1899). It should be borne in
mind that this unprinted first act of _Werner_, which synchronizes with
the _Siege of Corinth_ and _Parisina_, was written when Byron was a
member of the sub-committee of management of Drury Lane Theatre, and, as
the numerous stage directions testify, with a view to
stage-representation. The MS. is scored with corrections, and betrays an
unusual elaboration, and, perhaps, some difficulty and hesitation in the
choice of words and the construction of sentences. In the opening scene
the situation is not caught and gripped, while the melancholy squalor of
the original narrative is only too faithfully reproduced.
The _Werner_
of 1821, with all its shortcomings, is the production of a playwright.
The _Werner_ of 1815 is the attempt of a highly gifted amateur.
When Byron once more bethought himself of his old subject, he not only
sent for the MS. of the first act, but desired Murray "to cut out Sophia
Lee's" (_vide post_, p. 337) "_German's Tale_ from the _Canterbury
Tales_, and send it in a letter" (_Letters_, 1901, v. 390). He seems to
have intended from the first to construct a drama out of the story, and,
no doubt, to acknowledge the source of his inspiration. On the whole, he
carried out his intention, taking places, characters, and incidents as
he found them, but recasting the materials and turning prose into metre.
But here and there, to save himself trouble, he "stole his brooms ready
made," and, as he acknowledges in the Preface, "adopted even the
language of the story. " Act ii. sc. 2, lines 87-172; act iii. sc. 4; and
act v. sc. 1, lines 94-479, are, more or less, faithful and exact
reproductions of pp.
