The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 12, No. 72,
October, 1863, by Various

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net

Title: The Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 12, No. 72, October, 1863

Author: Various

Release Date: May 16, 2005 [EBook #15838]

Language: English

Character set encoding: ASCII

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY, VOL. ***

Produced by Cornell University, Joshua Hutchinson, Josephine Paolucci
and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team.

[Transcriber's Note: Footnotes moved to end of document.]

THE

ATLANTIC MONTHLY.

A MAGAZINE OF LITERATURE, ART, AND POLITICS.

VOL. XII.--OCTOBER, 1863.--NO. LXXII.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1868, by TICKNOR AND
FIELDS, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of
Massachusetts.

* * * * *

CHARLES LAMB'S UNCOLLECTED WRITINGS.[1]

SECOND PAPER.

Readers of Lamb's "Life and Letters" remember that before "Mr. H." was
written, before Kemble had rejected "John Woodvil," Godwin's tragedy of
"Antonio" had been produced at Drury-Lane Theatre, and that Elia was
present at the performance thereof. But perhaps they do not know (at
least, not many of them) that Elia's essay on "The Artificial Comedy of
the Last Century," as originally published in the "London Magazine,"
contained a full and circumstantial account of the cold and stately
manner in which John Kemble performed the part of Antonio in Godwin's
unfortunate play. For some reason or other, Lamb did not reprint this
part of the article. Admirers of Charles Lamb and admirers of the drama
will be pleased--for 'tis a very characteristic bit of writing--with
what Elia says of

* * * * *

JOHN KEMBLE AND GODWIN'S TRAGEDY OF "ANTONIO."

"The story of his swallowing opium-pills to keep him lively upon the
first night of a certain tragedy we may presume to be a piece of
retaliatory pleasantry on the part of the suffering author. But, indeed,
John had the art of diffusing a complacent equable dulness (which you
knew not where to quarrel with) over a piece which he did not like,
beyond any of his contemporaries. John Kemble had mad