OTWAY.
136 lines✦
f Thomas Otway, one of the first names in the English drama, little isknown; nor is there any part of that little which his biographer can takepleasure in relating. He was born at Trottin, in Sussex, March 3, 1651, the son of Mr. HumphryOtway, rector of Woolbeding. From Winchester school, where he waseducated, he was entered, in 1669, a commoner of Christ church; but leftthe university without a degree, whether for want of money, or fromimpatience of academical restraint, or mere eagerness to mingle with theworld, is not known. It seems likely that he was in hope of being busy and conspicuous; for hewent to London, and commenced player; but found himself unable to gainany reputation on the stage[75]. This kind of inability he shared with Shakespeare and Jonson, as heshared likewise some of their excellencies. It seems reasonable to expectthat a great dramatick poet should, without difficulty, become a greatactor; that he who can feel, should express; that he who can excitepassion, should exhibit, with great readiness, its external modes: butsince experience has fully proved, that of those powers, whatever betheir affinity, one may be possessed in a great degree by him who hasvery little of the other; it must be allowed that they depend upondifferent faculties, or on different use of the same faculty; that theactor must have a pliancy of mien, a flexibility of countenance, and avariety of tones, which the poet may be easily supposed to want; or thatthe attention of the poet and the player has been differently employed;the one has been considering thought, and the other action; one haswatched the heart, and the other contemplated the face. Though he could not gain much notice as a player, he felt in himselfsuch powers as might qualify for a dramatick author; and, in 1675, histwenty-fifth year, produced Alcibiades, a tragedy; whether from theAlcibiade of Palaprat, I have not means to inquire. Langbaine, the greatdetecter of plagiarism, is silent. In 1677, he published Titus and Berenice, translated from Rapin, with theCheats of Scapin, from Molière; and, in 1678, Friendship in Fashion,a comedy, which, whatever might be its first reception, was, upon itsrevival at Drury lane, in 1749, hissed off the stage for immorality andobscenity. Want of morals, or of decency, did not, in those days, exclude any manfrom the company of the wealthy and the gay, if he brought with him anypowers of entertainment; and Otway is said to have been, at this time,a favourite companion of the dissolute wits. But, as he who desires novirtue in his companion, has no virtue in himself, those whom Otwayfrequented had no purpose of doing more for him than to pay hisreckoning. They desired only to drink and laugh: their fondness waswithout benevolence, and their familiarity without friendship. "Men ofwit," says one of Otway's biographers, "received, at that time, no favourfrom the great, but to share their riots; from which they were dismissedagain to their own narrow circumstances. Thus they languished in poverty,without the support of eminence." Some exception, however, must be made. The earl of Plymouth, one of kingCharles's natural sons, procured for him a cornet's commission in sometroops then sent into Flanders. But Otway did not prosper in his militarycharacter; for he soon left his commission behind him, whatever was thereason, and came back to London in extreme indigence, which Rochestermentions with merciless insolence, in the Session of the Poets: Tom Otway came next, Tom Shadwell's dear zany,And swears for heroicks he writes best of any;Don Carlos his pockets so amply had fill'd,That his mange was quite cur'd, and his lice were all kill'd:But Apollo had seen his face on the stage,And prudently did not think fit to engageThe scum of a playhouse, for the prop of an age. Don Carlos, from which he is represented as having received so muchbenefit, was played in 1675. It appears, by the lampoon, to have hadgreat success, and is said to have been played thirty nights together.This, however, it is reasonable to doubt[76], as so long a continuanceof one play upon the stage is a very wide deviation from the practiceof that time; when the ardour for theatrical entertainments was not yetdiffused through the whole people, and the audience, consisting nearly ofthe same persons, could be drawn together only by variety. The Orphan was exhibited in 1680. This is one of the few plays that keeppossession of the stage, and has pleased for almost a century, throughall the vicissitudes of dramatick fashion. Of this play nothing new caneasily be said. It is a domestick tragedy drawn from middle life. Itswhole power is upon the affections; for it is not written with muchcomprehension of thought, or elegance of expression. But if the heart isinterested, many other beauties may be wanting, yet not be missed. The same year produced the History and Fall of Caius Marius; much ofwhich is borrowed from the Romeo and Juliet of Shakespeare. In 1683[77] was published the first, and next year[78] the second, partsof the Soldier's Fortune, two comedies now forgotten; and, in 1685[79]his last and greatest dramatick work, Venice Preserved, a tragedy,which still continues to be one of the favourites of the publick,notwithstanding the want of morality in the original design, and thedespicable scenes of vile comedy with which he has diversified histragick action[80]. By comparing this with his Orphan, it will appearthat his images were by time become stronger, and his language moreenergetick. The striking passages are in every mouth; and the publickseems to judge rightly of the faults and excellencies of this play, thatit is the work of a man not attentive to decency, nor zealous for virtue;but of one who conceived forcibly, and drew originally, by consultingnature in his own breast. Together with those plays he wrote the poems which are in the presentcollection, and translated from the French the History of theTriumvirate. All this was performed before he was thirty-four years old; for he diedApril 14, 1685, in a manner which I am unwilling to mention. Havingbeen compelled by his necessities to contract debts, and hunted, as issupposed, by the terriers of the law, he retired to a publick house onTower hill, where he is said to have died of want; or, as it is relatedby one of his biographers, by swallowing, after a long fast, a piece ofbread which charity had supplied. He went out, as is reported, almostnaked, in the rage of hunger, and, finding a gentleman in a neighbouringcoffee-house, asked him for a shilling. The gentleman gave him a guinea;and Otway, going away, bought a roll, and was choked with the firstmouthful. All this, I hope, is not true; and there is this ground ofbetter hope, that Pope, who lived near enough to be well informed,relates in Spence's Memorials, that he died of a fever, caught byviolent pursuit of a thief that had robbed one of his friends. But thatindigence, and its concomitants, sorrow and despondency, pressed hardupon him, has never been denied, whatever immediate cause might bring himto the grave. Of the poems which the present collection admits, the longest is thePoet's Complaint of his Muse, part of which I do not understand; and inthat which is less obscure, I find little to commend. The language isoften gross, and the numbers are harsh. Otway had not much cultivatedversification, nor much replenished his mind with general knowledge. Hisprincipal power was in moving the passions, to which Dryden[81], in hislatter years, left an illustrious testimony. He appears, by some of hisverses, to have been a zealous royalist, and had what was in those timesthe common reward of loyalty; he lived and died neglected. [Footnote 75: In Roscius Anglicanus, by Downes, the prompter, p. 34,we learn, that it was the character of the king in Mrs. Behn's ForcedMarriage, or the Jealous Bridegroom, which Mr. Otway attempted toperform, and failed in. This event appears to have happened in the year1672. R.] [Footnote 76: This doubt is, indeed, very reasonable. I know not where itis said that Don Carlos was acted thirty nights together. Wherever it issaid, it is untrue. Downes, who is perfectly good authority on this point,informs us, that it was performed ten days successively. M.] [Footnote 77: 1681.] [Footnote 78: 1684.] [Footnote 79: 1682.] [Footnote 80: The "despicable scenes of vile comedy" can be no barto its being a favourite of the publick, as they are always omitted inthe representation. J.B.] [Footnote 81: In his preface to Fresnoy's Art of Painting. Dr.J.]
✦