the reader is sometimes obliged to stop and consider
whether a question is imputed by the speaker to the one
he is addressing, or is a direct question of his own. This is often
the case throughout `The Ring and the Book'. But to the initiated,
these features of the monologue present little or no difficulty,
and they conduce to great compactness of composition--
a closeness of texture which the reader comes in time to enjoy,
and to prefer to a more loosely woven diction.

--
* The dramatic monologue differs from a soliloquy in this:
while there is but one speaker, the presence of a silent second person
is supposed, to whom the arguments of the speaker are addressed.
Perhaps such a situation may be termed a novelty of invention
in our Poet. It is obvious that the dramatic monologue gains over
the soliloquy in that it allows the artist greater room in which
to work out his conception of character. We cannot gaze long
at a solitary figure on a canvas, however powerfully treated,
without feeling some need of relief. In the same way a soliloquy
(comp. the great soliloquies of Shakespeare) cannot be protracted
to any great length without wearying the listener. The thoughts
of a man in self-communion are apt to run in a certain circle,
and to assume a monotony. The introduction of a second person
acting powerfully upon the speaker throughout, draws the latter forth
into a more complete and varied expression of his mind.
The silent person in the background, who may be all the time
master of the situation, supplies a powerful stimulus
to the imagination of the reader.--Rev. Prof. E. Johnson's
"Paper on `Bishop Blougram's Apology'" (`Browning Soc. Papers',
Pt. III., p. 279).
--

The monologue entitled `My Last Duchess. Ferrara' is a good example
of the constitution of this art-form. It is one of the most perfect
in artistic treatment, and exhibits all the features I have just noticed.
Originally, this monologue and that now entitled `Count Gismond.
Aix in Provence', had the common title, `Italy and France',
the former being No. I. Italy; the latter, No. II. France. The poet,
no doubt, afterward thought that the Duke of the one monologue,
and the Count of the other, could not justly be presented
as representatives, respectively, of Italy and France.
In giving the monologues new titles, `My Last Duchess' and `Count Gismond',
he added to the one, `Ferrara', and to the other, `Aix in Provence',
thus