More on Mrs. Lincoln's [non] faux pas

[David Lockmiller]

Mr. Lincoln turned to Mr. McDonough, who seemed lost in contemplation of the grave and dignified man who, despite the cares of his great office, was so easy in social intercourse, and said, “I am very glad to meet you, Mr. McDonough, and am grateful to Kelley for bringing you in so early, for I want you to tell me something about Shakespeare’s plays as they are constructed for the stage. You can imagine that I do not get much time to study such matters, but I recently had a couple of talks with Hackett—Baron Hackett, as they call him—who is famous as Jack Falstaff, but from whom I elicited few satisfactory replies, though I probed him with a good many questions.”

Mr. McDonough avowed his willingness to give the President any information in his possession, but protested that he feared he would not succeed where his friend Hackett had failed. “Well, I don’t know,” said the President, “for Hackett’s lack of information impressed me with a doubt as to whether he had ever studied Shakespeare’s text, or had not been content with the acting edition of his plays.” He arose, went to a shelf not far from his table, and having taken down a well-thumbed volume of the Plays of Shakespeare, resumed his seat, arranged his glasses, and having turned to Henry VI. and read with fine discrimination an extended passage, said, “Mr. McDonough, can you tell me why those lines are omitted from the acting play? There is nothing I have read in Shakespeare, certainly nothing in Henry VI., or the Merry Wives of Windsor, that surpasses its wit and humor.” The actor suggested the breadth of its humor as the only reason he could assign for its omission, but thoughtfully added that it was possible that if the lines were spoken they would require the rendition of another or other passages which might be objectionable.

“Your last suggestion,” said Mr. Lincoln, “carries with it greater weight than anything Mr. Hackett suggested, but the first is no reason at all;” and after reading another passage, he said, “This is not withheld, and where it passes current there can be no reason for withholding the other.” But, as if feeling the impropriety of preferring the player to the parson, he turned to the chaplain and said: “From your calling it is probable you do not know that the acting plays which people crowd to hear are not always those planned by their reputed authors. Thus, take the stage edition of Richard III. It opens with a passage from Henry VI., after which come portions of Richard III., then another scene from Henry VI., and the finest soliloquy in the play, if we may judge from the many quotations it furnishes, and the frequency with which it is heard in amateur exhibitions, was never seen by Shakespeare, but was written, was it not, Mr. McDonough, after his death, by Colley Cibber?”

-- Remininscences of Abraham Lincoln by Distinguished Men of His Time, Chapter XIV, Section III, pages 265-67.

Can anyone professing knowledge of Mary Todd Lincoln’s superior literary prowess provide a comparable intellectual inquiry and analysis regarding a major literary figure that was accomplished by Mary Todd Lincoln? As to the unnecessary comparison of the literary education of Anne Rutledge, I would suggest that perhaps the Rutledge family in New Salem, Illinois were unable to afford such an education for their daughter. One thing is certain—the Rutledge family did not have any slave servants to make life easy for a pampered daughter.

[LincolnToddFan]

David,

Most of MTL's existing letters (600+) have been published in an excellent anthology. She discusses poetry and literature in quite a few of those published letters. Shortly before the assassination she had ordered a life of Julius Caesar for herself. And during the period of her widowhood she made it a point to journey to England and Scotland because she wanted to visit in person the historical places and castles from Shakespeare's MACBETH.(Mary Todd Lincoln: Her Life in Letters/1972/ Linda Leavitt-Turner and Justin Turner)

She certainly discussed both poetry and literature in depth with her good friend, the well read multilingual Charles Sumner of Massachusetts during her famous White House Blue Room Salon. Sumner was no dilettante, and would not have been a member of her inner circle if she had been one.

I doubt if she was as brilliant or as deep as her husband-few men or women of his time were-but the woman was no slouch. Furthermore she could discuss her ideas in a flawless Parisian French, which Lincoln certainly could not. The fact that AL was proud of his clever wife pretty much says it all. Intellectually she was perfect for him.

Your point about the Rutledges' lack of slave labor in comparison to the Todds is well taken. But I think you assumed that Eva's question about Ann's education was meant to be unkind. I don't think it was, and I can assure you that nothing I said about her was meant to denigrate Ann Rutledge in any way. We know from the testimony of New Salem sources that she was a bright young woman and that she had the intellectual curiosity that might have made her a very educated person if she had not died young.