INTELLIGENT READING.

A RECENT episode in a recitation in English 2, which has already received the editorial notice of the Crimson, has probably led many of us to form an opinion as to whether good reading, in such an elective as this in Shakespeare, is or is not necessary; as to whether it is merely a blessing for which, if he gets it, the instructor is to be humbly thankful, but to enforce which he is not bound to make an effort; or else an absolute requisite, and worthy of the greatest amount of time and attention. In other words, "Is it a part of the study of Shakespeare to read Shakespeare well?"

Now a natural thought would be, that to read well

"Non cuivis homini contingit";

that it is a gift like any other, and cannot be expected in the mass of people. This objection, however, applies only to dramatic reading, or, at best, to what is known as "fine reading." Good reading, in the sense in which it is here used, means simply intelligent reading; and anybody who can understand a book can of course read it intelligently.

It is, then, quite possible for all to read well. The next question is, whether good reading should be enforced in the recitations. Professor Child's elective in Shakespeare is made as instructive as his enviable reputation would lead one to expect. He teaches many things which those unfamiliar with the subject could not find out by themselves, and does his best to impart to the students his own evident interest and enthusiasm; but as he himself acknowledges, he takes no pains with the reading, which accordingly is weary, stale, flat, and unprofitable beyond description.

The grounds for this neglect are, that the object of the study is the interpretation of Shakespeare, and that elocution has nothing to do with it As has already been pointed out, we are talking, not of elocution or dramatic reading, but simply of intelligent reading, and this certainly has to do with the interpretation of Shakespeare; for no one who conclusively proves by his reading of a passage that he does not understand it can still pretend that he is able to interpret it; whereas any one who reads the passage clearly, interprets it by doing so.

It seems plain, then, that to insist on good reading would not be out of place on the part of the Professor; but if Mr. Child, who has probably been hardened by long tribulation, has decided to pay no attention to this point, it would still be well for those who take the elective next year to make up their minds to lighten his weight and their own, by putting a little more life into the recitations, and trying to find pleasure in what they read. It is strange that so many who think it worth while to take a course in Shakespeare should not think it also worth while to take an interest in Shakespeare; but that this is the state of the case, any one will testify who has listened to the sleepy, monotonous delivery of the most eloquent speeches and the most humorous dialogues in Shakespeare by the members of English 2.

The object of these words is not to find fault with the work of this year, but to show what another year may be made to bring forth. Mr. Child is beyond doubt in the right about the elocution question; but if he would make it clearly understood that good reading is a desideratum in his classes, and if the students would endeavor simply to pay attention and to be interested (if they did this they would be obliged to read well), then both the advantage and the enjoyment of the course would be doubled. It is somnambulistic and apathetic reading that has tended this year to spoil the pleasure, even if it could not lessen the profit, of Mr. Child's admirable instructions in Shakespeare.

E. C. P.