“A VISO SCOPERTO” / UNMASKED FACES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE MANDRAGOLA AND THE VENEXIANA by MELINDA CRO (Under the Direction of Thomas Peterson) ABSTRACT In this study I undertake a comparison of two Italian plays of the primo Cinquecento, La Mandragola of Niccolò Machiavelli and the anonymous Venexiana. Although they are frequently mentioned in conjunction, no one has yet undertaken the task of comparing and contrasting these two important works which are so often linked together. I propose to rectify this situation with a comparative and contextual study of these two plays, arguably the most important and innovative dramatic works of the Italian Cinquecento. In order to offer a global look at the plays, I will include a discussion of possible sources and influences as well as a look at the historical context, all of which might well have influenced their creation. In so doing, it will be demonstrated that manipulation and plurality, on various levels, are the overarching “ties that bind”. Further, I will examine the element of spectacle as it applies to this time period and these two plays in particular. INDEX WORDS: Niccolò Machiavelli; Mandragola; Venexiana; Veniexiana; Italian Drama; Italian Comedy; Italian Theatre; Italy-16th Century; Cinquecento; Italian Literature. “A VISO SCOPERTO” / UNMASKED FACES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE MANDRAGOLA AND THE VENEXIANA by MELINDA CRO B.A., King College, 2004 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS ATHENS, GEORGIA 2006 © 2006 Melinda Cro All Rights Reserved “A VISO SCOPERTO” / UNMASKED FACES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE MANDRAGOLA AND THE VENEXIANA by MELINDA CRO Major Professor: Thomas Peterson Committee: Steven Grossvogel Concettina Pizzuti Electronic Version Approved: Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia May 2006 iv DEDICATION I dedicate this work to my parents, Stelio and Ann Cro. Their love, constant support and encouragement, and their infinite faith and wisdom have been a source of inspiration for me throughout my life. This endeavor would have been impossible without them. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank first my major professor, Dr. Thomas Peterson. His guidance and willingness to permit me to explore different avenues of research have been invaluable and I shall never forget it. I was first intrigued by Machiavelli’s work while sitting in a small classroom in Gilbert Hall early one morning in Dr. Peterson’s class, and the seed he planted in my mind that day has blossomed. I am very grateful. I also wish to extend my thanks to the other committee members, Dr. Steven Grossvogel and Dr. Concettina Pizzuti. Their intellectual support and encouragement is much appreciated. These professors meet each task with an enthusiasm that is contagious. I must also thank Dr. Debbie Bell whose understanding, patience, and encouragement meant very much to a young and overwhelmed teaching assistant. I would also like to thank the faculty and staff of the Department of Romance Languages at the University of Georgia. One could not hope for a finer and more able group of people. This work could truly not have come to fruition had it not been for the support and understanding of my family and friends. My parents are a constant source of inspiration. They have lived their lives in the pursuit of knowledge, an adventure that I did not thoroughly understand in my youth but that I always longed to join. I must also mention my sister, Rebecca, whose wit and love have made even the most difficult of tasks seem bearable. I owe a great deal to my family, for I would not be who I am today but for them. I must also thank my friends for their patience as I sorted through this vi research. No matter how “out of it” I might have been, they were always there to offer a shoulder to lean on or a quick break from the monotony of study and office life. Finally, I must offer this work to the Lord above, through whom all things are possible. Thank you. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................................................................................v CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF SCHOLARSHIP...................................1 2 SOURCES AND CONTEXT .............................................................................13 3 MANIPULATION: THE LANGUAGE OF LOVE...........................................46 4 THEATRICALITY, SPECTACLE, AND PERFORMANCE...........................87 WORKS CITED .................................................................................................................104 Cro 1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF SCHOLARSHIP William Shakespeare (1564-1616) saw the world as a stage and expressed this view in the words of one of his characters, Jacques, in the comedy As You Like It: JACQUES. All the world’s a stage, And all the men and women merely players: They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts, His acts being seven ages… (2.7) Jacques’ words, first presented in 1599 with the premiere of As You Like It (Wilson and Goldfarb 193), shed light on an awareness already present in the dramatic works of the beginning of the sixteenth century (il primo Cinquecento) in Italy. The Mandragola of Niccolò Machiavelli and the Venexiana (author unknown) exemplify two works whose authors are clearly aware of the interplay of reality and imagination in the dramatic structure. As vehicles of this interplay, they chose comedy, perhaps feeling it better suited to an intimate look at “contemporary” Italian society. One can but offer educated guesses as to their motivations for selecting comedy (indeed, whether these plays fall into the “classical” comedic genre is a point for later discussion). What is certain is that relatively little attention has been given to these two works of Italian Renaissance theater (particularly in comparison to the amount of scholarship done on Shakespeare, Molière, or Pirandello), despite the fact that they are noted by scholars as original and innovative: “A few years ago there came to light an anonymous comedy, The Venexiana, the only Cro 2 impassioned comedy of the century, the only one—together with the Mandragola— which goes completely beyond the conventional schemes” (Momigliano, qtd. in Richter 134). The words are those of Attilio Momigliano, a well-known Italian literary critic. Bobo L. O. Richter underlines the importance of this “union” in his article, “La Venexiana in the Light of Recent Criticism”: “…it was Momigliano himself, ever aware of newly emerging esthetic values, who pointed out the discovery of a comedy that he did not hesitate to place alongside of Machiavelli’s masterpiece [the Mandragola]” (Richter 134). Mentioning these two works of the primo Cinquecento in conjunction with one another is a common practice in various scholarly articles,1 however, no one has undertaken the task of actually comparing and contrasting them. I propose to rectify this situation with a comparative and contextual study of these two plays, arguably the most important and innovative dramatic works of the Italian Cinquecento. In order to offer a global look at the plays, I will include a discussion of possible sources and influences as well as a look at the historical context, all of which might well have influenced their creation. In so doing, it will be demonstrated that manipulation and plurality, on various levels, are the overarching “ties that bind”. These Renaissance comedies are considered unique thanks in large part to the creativity of their authors. The use of the spoken language, i.e. the dialect; the urban setting; the doubling and plurality of the characters; the use of humor and manipulation— all these elements combine to create a modern drama of human nature. I propose to clarify the context within which each play was written, and to go further by discussing 1 Mention of La Mandragola occurs in a number of articles that deal with La Venexiana, but only briefly— for examples, see those of Carù, Richter, and Alonge in the works cited. All mention both texts in their various discussions. Cro 3 possible performance aspects that at times seem forgotten in the academic discussion of dramatic works. It is important to remember that these works were meant to be seen and heard before being read. Any examination of the texts would be remiss not to note the performance circumstances and histories of the works. Further, I will offer my own textual readings of the plays, comparing and contrasting them. In so doing, I am offering the next natural step that has been proposed by other scholars before me. The importance of such a study is relevant when one looks into the thoughts of leading scholars in theater history circles. In the textbook, Living Theatre: A History, used by many universities, the authors write as follows concerning the Italian Renaissance: Neither Roman theatre nor medieval theatre, for example, is noted for great playwriting, and the same is true of the Italian Renaissance. Most of the plays written during the Italian Renaissance were staged, or sometimes just read aloud, at academies—formal institutions of learning—or for wealthy patrons. These plays left no lasting mark except for their influence on writers who were to follow: some Renaissance playwrights in England, Spain, and France did draw on Italian plays. (Wilson and Goldfarb 154) The fact that a certain amount of scholarship has been conducted on these two