DOCSLIB.ORG

The Pee-Commonwealth Tragicomedies of Sir William

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Pee-Commonwealth Tragicomedies of Sir William The pre-commonwealth tragicomedies of Sir William D'Avenant Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Myers, James P., 1941- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 26/09/2021 21:21:12 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/317874 THE PEE-COMMONWEALTH TRAGICOMEDIES OF SIR WILLIAM DAVENANT' by James Phares Myers, Jr. A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: RICHARD HOSLEY Date Professor of English ACKNOWLEDGMENT I wish to thank Professors Harry F* Robins and Drew B» Pallette for reading this essay and making several suggestions which later led to its improvemento To Professor Richard Eosley I am especially grate­ ful, for without his patience, encouragement, and valuable criticism the inelegancies and inaccuracies would have been more numerous than they are. iii CONTENTS Page Chapter I. TRAGICOMEDY: THE PROBLEM OF A DEFINITION........... 1 II. TRAGICOMEDY: AN HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION ........... 12 (1) TRAGICOMEDY IN RENAISSANCE CRITICISM (2) THE DEVELOPMENT OF TRAGICOMEDY IN ENGLAND III. DAVENANT’S PRE-COMMONEEALTH PLAYS .................. 31 (1) THE PROPER TRAGICOMEDIES (2) THE PROBLEMATICAL TRAGICOMEDIES (3) THE TRAGEDY BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................... - 59 iv ABSTRACT Between the years c* 1626 and 16393 Sir William Davenant, often cited as a transitional figure in the development of seventeenth- century English drama9 wrote ten, or possibly eleven, plays, six of which reveal his predilection for the /tragicomic mode0 It is the assertion of the essay that, inasmuch as he directed into the mainstream of seventeenth-century English drama a number of continental dramatic innovations which adumbrated the Restoration heroic drama, Davenant was, indeed, a transitional figure» In order to demonstrate his importance as an informing influence upon the development of English tragicomedy, I have provided first a brief discussion of the critical background of English Renaissance tragicomedy and secondly a careful examination, in the light of this background, of the six of Davenant1s plays which partake of the tragicomic tradition-- The Just Italians Love and Honour, The Platonic Lovers? The Fair Favourite, The Unfortunate Lovers, and The Distresses— showing, where possible, the manner in which Davenant^modified the tradition and anticipated the Restoration heroic drama» v CHAPTER I TRAGICOMEDY: THE PROBLEM OF A DEFINITION The term tragicomedy is generally used in two ways: on the one hand to denote any mixture of tragic and comic elements, and on the other to signify a specific admixture of tragic and comic ingredi­ ents. Since, in their Renaissance contexts, both references imply an understanding of Renaissance tragedy and comedy, a brief summary of the distinctive features of the two genres may prove helpful in apprehending the nature of the tragicomedy. In general a tragedy is a dignified and serious kind of play in which at least the protagonist encounters death, though more usually other characters also die, and in which the phenomenon of human suffering and the problem of evil (moral or metaphysical) are given prominent treatment. Concerning the tragedy of the English Renaissance, Madeleine Doran has recognized three general manifesta­ tions: De casibus tragedy, Italianate tragedy of intrigue, and domestic 1 tragedy. Because the sentimental domestic tragedy was a short-lived phenomenon, which exerted almost no influence upon the drama of the Endeavors of Art: A Study of Form in Elizabethan Drama (Madison, 1963), p. 115= The following discussion of De casibus tragedy and the Italianate tragedy of intrigue draws heavily upon Doran's observations; see pp. 116-28 and 128-42, respectively. 1 period and, in fact, is represented only by a handfal of extant plays, it may conveniently be excluded from this examination of Renaissance tragedy. Be casibus tragedy has the palace for its main setting; it deals with people of high estate who through some fault of their own or through the operation of a metaphysical force, fall from their high estate and undergo suffering and eventual death; and it is con­ cerned with evil. The fall from greatness, moreover, is often causally related to both the political instability rampant in the protagonist's country and to the personal ambition and quest for power of one or more of the characters. Shakespeare's Macbeth (1606) is an excellent example of Be casibus tragedy, for in this play a noble and heroic general repudiates his honor by murdering his king, usurps the letter's crown, and subsequently falls from his high estate, endures suffering, and is finally killed by the legitimate heir to the kingdom. With the usurper's death and the crowning of the rightful prince, political stability is restored. Italianate tragedy of intrigue, like Be casibus tragedy, emphasizes evil and involves people of high degree who fall from their high position and undergo suffering and death. An example of this type, Othello (1604?), reveals the way in which Italianate tragedy of intrigue differs from Be casibus tragedy; a heroic general is led by a slighted and jealous subordinate to doubt his wife's fidelity, kills his wife, and, on learning that he had been deceived, takes his own life. Italianate tragedy of intrigue, it will be noticed, depends more upon the sensational and melodramatic for its dramatic impact than does De casibus tragedy and, more importantly, dramatizes not so much ambition and the quest for political power as personal revenge and crimes of passion. Both Macbeth and Othello reveal admixtures of the comic, the former in its famous Porter scene, the latter chiefly in lago’s gulling of Boderigo. In this admixture the two plays are rather typical of English Renaissance tragedy. Daniel's Cleopatra (1593), on the other hand, examplifies a tragedy devoid of any comic element. In this play, a queen, having lost her lover and her kingdom because of her own emotional shortsightedness and her involvement in political machina­ tions too complicated for her to cope with, commits suicide in order to prevent the victorious general1s final triumph. Although the two themes are rather closely wedded in Cleopatra, the political theme characteristic of De casibus tragedy is given prominence over the emotional entanglements proper to Italianate tragedy of intrigue. As compared with tragedy, comedy is a kind of dramatic repre­ sentation ending happily and exposing through laughter the follies and vices found in human nature. The characters of comedy are of low and middle degree, and the setting is domestic (that is, of the street and/or the household). Since love is usually the most prominent part of the action, this type of play will conclude with either a marriage or the promise of one. Needless to say, deaths and even threats of death are absent from comedy. Gascoigne's Supposes (1566), a transla­ tion of Ariosto's Gli Suppositi (1508), is a convenient example of comedy. In The Supposes, the action is directed in part by such low­ life figures as a parasite and servants; and aside from working towards 4 a happy and "domestic" conclusion in which the lovers receive parental consent to marry and in which a father is reunited with his long-lost son, the action accomplishes its satiric end primarily by subjecting an amorous old man to comic criticism, thus compelling him to realize his follies and pretensions. In general, tragicomedy combines the features of the other two 2 dramatic genres. Its characters represent different social classes, and persons of low degree often figure as prominently in the plot as kings and dukes. Similarly, the action is usually serious or tragic in tone, involving threats of death and even occasionally the deaths of minor characters. In some cases, villainous characters, figuring prominently in the action, meet with death (see, for example. James IV below, p. 24): this feature characterizes a type of tragicomedy known as "tragedy with a happy ending" (tragedia de felice fine). Tragicomedy is frequently set in both the palace and the country, and therefore it often combines a political motif with a pastoral theme. The pastoral convention, moreover, provides a medium in which the playwright can mingle kings and shepherds without violating decorum and into which he can easily introduce that Renaissance embodiment of the satiric spirit, the "satyr." Finally, the language of tragicomedy is usually O For a more detailed and yet brief description of tragicomedy, see ibid., pp. 190-203. something between the high, rhetorical diction of tragedy and the low o idiom of comedy. These generalizations were usually employed by Renaissance literary critics in evaluating or discussing tragicomedies, and as such they can be said to describe tragicomedy "proper." In common usage, however, tragicomedy frequently referred (and refers) to any loose combination of tragic and comic qualities.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 'Tis Pity She's a Whore
    From Womb to Tomb: John Ford’s ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore1 John Ford’s controversial Caroline tragedy wrestles with incest, adultery, murderous revenge, and the corruption of religious power. Set in the Italian city-state of Parma, the story opens on Giovanni, a young intellectual, debating with his mentor and spiritual counselor on the virtues of incestuous romance. Meanwhile, a seemingly never-ending line of suitors stalks Annabella’s balcony, seeking attention from the wealthy merchant’s daughter. Despite the number of eligible bachelors vying for her hand in marriage, the titular character turns her sights on the one man she cannot marry: her ruminating, cerebral brother, Giovanni. In spite of religious and moral counsel, Annabella and Giovanni pursue their mutually found romantic love, throwing their family and community into upheaval. Written in the early 1630s for the Queen’s Men, ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore was first performed at the Cockpit Theatre in Drury Lane. Also known as the Phoenix, the Cockpit was one of London’s leading indoor playhouses, designed by famed architect and theatrical visionary, Inigo Jones. Although a contemporary of popular Jacobean playwrights such as Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher, Ford’s work belongs to a later era. As a second-generation playwright in London’s professional theatre scene, well versed in the work of Elizabethan and Jacobean dramatists, Ford’s playwrighting recycles theatrical conventions established by his predecessors. As many scholars have noted, ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore’s Annabella and Giovanni echo another ill-fated romance: that of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future Francis Beaumont
    3340 Early Theatre 20.2 (2017), 201–222 http://dx.doi.org/10.12745/et.20.2.3340 Eoin Price The Future Francis Beaumont This essay attends to Beaumont’s recent performance and reception history, docu- menting a range of academic and popular responses to demonstrate the challenges and affordances of engaging with Beaumont’s plays. The first section examines sev- eral twenty-first century performances of Beaumont plays, focusing especially on the Globe’s stimulating production of The Knight of the Burning Pestle. The second sec- tion considers how Beaumont was both acknowledged and ignored in 2016, the year of his 400th anniversary. The final section suggests some avenues for further research into the performance of Beaumont’s plays. In 1613, illness caused one of the greatest writers of the age to retire from play- wrighting, paving the way for his principal collaborator, John Fletcher, to become the main dramatist for the King’s Men, the company for whom he had writ- ten some of his most popular plays. Three years later, the London literary scene mourned his death. Tributes continued for decades and he was ultimately hon- oured with the posthumous publication of a handsome folio of his works. This is the familiar story of William Shakespeare. It is also the unfamiliar story of Francis Beaumont. The comparison of the two authors’ deaths I have just offered entails a degree of contrivance. Beaumont seemingly retired because he was incapacitated by a stroke, but Shakespeare’s reasons for retiring, and indeed, the nature of his retire- ment, are much less clear.
    [Show full text]
  • Scripted Improvisation in the Antipodes
    ISSUES IN REVIEW 129 ‘Now mark that fellow; he speaks Extempore’: Scripted Improvisation in The Antipodes Concluding his near-paraphrase of Hamlet’s famous advice to the players, Letoy in Richard Brome’s The Antipodes chastises Byplay, an actor with a penchant for improvisation, with the following lines: But you, sir, are incorrigible, and Take license to yourself to add unto Your parts your own free fancy, and sometimes To alter or diminish what the writer With care and skill compos’d; and when you are To speak to your coactors in the scene, You hold interlocutions with the audients— (2.1.93–9)1 Unlike the silent company Hamlet addresses, whose leader assents to Hamlet’s presumptuous lessons with only ‘I warrant your honour’ and a slightly more defensive ‘I hope we have reformed that indifferently with us, sir’ (3.2.13, 30),2 Byplay argues back saying, ‘That is a way, my lord, has been allowed / On elder stages to move mirth and laughter.’ ‘Yes’, Letoy replies, ‘in the days of Tarlton and Kemp, / Before the stage was purged from barbarism, / And brought to the perfection it now shines with’ (2.1.100–4) . Scholars often acknowledge, like Letoy, that improvisation played a signifi- cant role in early English theatre. Actors playing Vice characters in Tudor the- atre improvised before and after the plays in which they performed.3 Renais- sance texts contain stage directions instructing actors to improvise—Greene’s Tu Quoque (1611), for example, includes a direction for characters to ‘talk and rail what they list’ and The Trial of Chivalry (1601) contains the remark- able direction, ‘speaks anything, and Exit’.4 Elizabethan clowns, and in par- ticular Richard Tarlton and William Kemp, were famous for their ability to improvise.
    [Show full text]
  • Francis Beaumont, the Knight of the Burning Pestle
    Francis Beaumont, The Knight of the Burning Pestle First performed i607-8 First published i6i3 The Knight of the Burning Pestle was written for the The enactment of ‘The Knight of the Burning Pestle’ private Blackfriars Theatre, built by Richard Burbage in superficially suggests an innocent preoccupation by the i596, and was performed by a company o f boy actors. citizens with the old stories o f chivalric adventure and The play is significant for the information it offers in nobility. They celebrate, and Beaumont parodies, the tales the Induction and elsewhere about contemporary acting of Guy of W arwick and Bevis of Hampton, meshing companies and the public taste in theatre, as well as these with narratives derived from popular Spanish prose other popular cultural form s, such as the chivalric romances. However, such evocations o f the past also had romance. This, together with its representation o f social a clear place in the official and semi-official discourse of class, and its very specific sense o f the geography of the Tudor and early Stuart state. Edm und Spenser (i552- London and its environs, gives The Knight o f the 99) had written his chivalric romance, The Faerie Queene Burning Pestle a particular authority for students o f early (i590-6), with a seriousness that borders on the seventeenth-century theatre. Beaum ont’s play is a melancholic, framing a mythologised national history that network of overlapping dramatic narratives. The underpinned Elizabethan Protestant identity. The Faerie Induction and the Interludes supply a commentary on Queene is referred to in The Knight o f the Burning Pestle (and intervene in) the two ‘inner’ narratives, that of (II.i80), but the contrast between Spenser’s stately epic Venturewell and his family (the story of ‘The London and Beaumont’s parody is complete, undermining a M erchant’) and the enactment of ‘The Knight of the project that, in more widely accessible forms than Burning Pestle’ itself.
    [Show full text]
  • So We Are Talking Roughly About Twenty‐Five Years of Theatre. Roughly, Because the Tendencies That Characteriz
    So we are talking roughly about twenty‐five years of theatre. Roughly, because the tendencies that characterize Jacobean theatre started before James I came to the throne (1603, died 1625) around the year 1599 – the year when the Lord Chamberlain’s Men relocated their theatre from Shoreditch to Southwark (on the southern bank of the Thames) and called it “The Globe”, the year when the private theatre of Paul’s boys was reopened, and a little later the Lord Chamberlain’s Men got hold of the Blackfriars theatre. These developments brought about an unprecedented avalanche of play‐writing and dramaturgical innovation that made the Jacobean period one of the most dynamic and spectacular periods in theatre history as we know it. The period also established a new generation of playwrights: the most prominent of whom are Ben Jonson, John Marston, George Chapman, Thomas Middleton, John Webster, Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher – who worked alongside, competed with, collaborated and learned from William Shakespeare – the major figure that continued to sway the English stage from the Elizabethan well into the Jacobean period. 1 Of course, at the beginning of the period the most successful playwright in London was Shakespeare. So far, his fame rested mainly on the series of history plays: the two tetralogies (Henry VI, Parts I‐III and Richard III; and Richard II, Henry IV, Parts I‐II and Henry V) and King John; and his witty romantic comedies that Queen Elizabeth reportedly liked so much: e.g. Love’s Labour’s Lost, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Much Ado About Nothing, As You Like It.
    [Show full text]
  • A Dramaturgical Study of Merrythought's Songs in the Knight
    Early Theatre 12.2 (2009) Katrine K. Wong A Dramaturgical Study of Merrythought’s Songs in The Knight of the Burning Pestle ‘Let him stay at home and sing for his dinner’, advises Mistress Merrythought about her highly musical husband, Old Merrythought, who believes in achiev- ing mirth and health through much singing, a good portion of which has the pretext of conviviality, in particular, drinking.1 The philosophy embedded in Old Merrythought’s sundry songs in Francis Beaumont’s The Knight of the Burning Pestle (c 1607)2 shows the coexistence of orderliness and disor- derliness related to music, a duality pervasive in the use of music in English Renaissance drama. Early modern English culture attached a wide range of associations to music; various pairs of ideological dichotomies can be identi- fied, such as sublimation and corruption of the soul, love and lust, masculin- ity and femininity, and destruction and restoration of sanity.3 In this essay, I first provide a brief contextual background of the perception and practice of music, and illustrate with a few episodes from Elizabethan and Jacobean plays the diversity of connotations carried by music as well as how music can be incorporated into various types of dramatic scenarios.4 These examples reflect the general musical landscape of Renaissance drama. I then evaluate the dramaturgical characteristics of Merrythought’s songs in relation to the contemporary cultural and dramatic milieux. Views on Music The negotiation between the divine and the corrupting in music has always been an important part of the social and philosophical understanding of the art since classical times.
    [Show full text]
  • SS Library Anthologies
    Titles An Anthology of Greek Drama: First Series (Edited by C.A. Robinson Jr.) Aeschylus: Agamemnon Sophocles: Oedipus the King, Antigone Euripides: Medea, Hippolytus Aristophones: Lysistrata An Anthology of Greek Drama: Second Series (Edited by C.A. Robinson Jr.) Aeschylus: Prometheus Bound, Choephoroe, Eumenides Sophocles: Philoctetes, Oedipus at Colonus Euripes: The Trojan Women, The Bacchae Aristophanes: The Clouds, The Frogs Greek Drama (Edited by Moses Hadas) Aeschylus: Agamemnon, Summary of Choephoroe, Eumenides Sophocles: Antigone, Oedipus the King, Summary of Oedipus at Colonus, Philoctetes Euripides: Medea, Hippolytus, The Trojan War Aristophanes: The Frogs Greek Tragedies, Volume I (Edited by Grene & Lattimore) Aeschylus: Agamemnon, Prometheus Bound Sophocles: Oedipus the King, Antigone Euripides: Hippolytus Classical Comedy, Greek and Roman (Edited by Robert W. Corrigan) Aristophones: Lysistrata, The Birds Menander: The Grouch Plautus: The Menaechmi, Mostellaria Terence: The Self-Tormentor Masters of Ancient Comedy (Edited by Lionel Casson) Aristophenes: The Acharnians Mendander: The Grouch, The Woman of Sarnos, The Arbitration, She Who Was Shorn Plautus: The Haunted House, The Rope Terence: Phormio, The Brothers Farces, Italian Style (Edited by Bari Rolfe) The Phantom Father Dr Arlecchino or the Imaginary Autopsee The Dumb Wife The Kind Father in Spite of Himself The Lovers of Bologna Commedia Dell'Arte (Edited by Bari Rolfe) 20 Lazzi 35 Scenes The Lovers of Verona Drama of the English Renaissance (Edited by M.L. Wine) Christopher Marlowe: Doctor Faustus Thomas Dekker: The Shoemaker's Holiday, A Pleasant Comedy of the Gentle Craft Ben Jonson: Volpone or The Foe Francis Beaumont: The Knight of the Burning Pestle Ben Jonson: The Masque of Blackness Francis Beaumont & John Fletcher: Philaster John Webster: The Duchess of Malfi Thomas Middleton & William Rowley: The Changeling John Ford: The Broken Heart Four English Tragedies (Edited by J.M.
    [Show full text]
  • Politics of English Drama, 1603-1660
    Staging Republic and Empire: Politics of English Drama, 1603-1660 by Judy Hyo Jung Park This thesis/dissertation document has been electronically approved by the following individuals: Cohen,Walter Isaac (Chairperson) Kalas,Rayna M (Minor Member) Lorenz,Philip A (Minor Member) Brown,Laura Schaefer (Minor Member) Murray,Timothy Conway (Minor Member) STAGING REPUBLIC AND EMPIRE: POLITICS OF ENGLISH DRAMA, 1603-1660 A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Judy Hyo Jung Park August 2010 © 2010 Judy Hyo Jung Park STAGING REPUBLIC AND EMPIRE: POLITICS OF ENGLISH DRAMA, 1603-1660 Judy Hyo Jung Park, Ph.D. Cornell University 2010 This study argues that the classical legal concepts of dominium and imperium, ownership and rule, illuminate the political tensions of seventeenth century English drama. The concept of imperium was central to seventeenth century debates over the terms of international commerce, setting important precedents for the development of modern international law. Geopolitical disputes over dominium and imperium shadow the developing conflict between republican, monarchical, and imperial models of the English state from the Stuart monarchy to the post-revolutionary English republic. In the drama of the early to mid-seventeenth century, we can trace the emergence of designs for an imperial English state well before the Restoration and the eighteenth century. Moving from the reign of James I to the Protectorate under Oliver Cromwell, this study reevaluates the genres of tragicomedy, closet drama, topical drama, and operatic masques, analyzing Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher’s Philaster and A King and No King, Elizabeth Cary’s The Tragedy of Mariam, Philip Massinger and John Fletcher’s The Tragedy of Sir John van Olden Barnavelt, and William Davenant’s The Siege of Rhodes.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Studia Metrica et Poetica 7.2, 2020, 43–60 John Fletcher’s Collaborator on The Noble Gentleman Darren Freebury-Jones* Abstract: Although John Fletcher is recognized as one of the most infl uential drama- tists of the early modern period, many of the theories concerning the divisions of authorship in his collaborative plays continue to present insoluble diffi culties. For instance, according to the soundly based chronology developed by Martin Wiggins, many plays attributed in part to Francis Beaumont appear to have been written aft er Beaumont had ceased writing (c. 1613), or even aft er he died in 1616. A prime exam- ple would be Th e Noble Gentleman (1626), which E. H. C. Oliphant and Cyrus Hoy attributed in part to Beaumont. Modern scholarship holds that this was Fletcher’s last play and that it was completed by another hand aft er Fletcher died in 1625. Th is article off ers the most comprehensive analysis yet undertaken of the stylistic qualities of the “non-Fletcher” portions in this play in relation to dramatists writing for the King’s Men at the time, thereby opening up several new lines of enquiry for co-authored plays of the period. Seeking to broaden our understanding of the collaborative prac- tices in plays produced by that company in or around 1626, through a combination of literary-historical and quantitative analysis, the article puts forth a new candidate for Fletcher’s posthumous collaborator: John Ford. Keywords: John Fletcher, Francis Beaumont, John Ford, prosody, linguistic habits, n-grams Th e Noble Gentleman (1626) was licensed for performance by Sir Henry Herbert on 3 February 1626 for performance at the Blackfriars Th eatre by the King’s Men playing company.1 Th is was 5 months aft er John Fletcher’s death.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloading Material Is Agreeing to Abide by the Terms of the Repository Licence
    Cronfa - Swansea University Open Access Repository _____________________________________________________________ This is an author produced version of a paper published in: Shakespeare Bulletin Cronfa URL for this paper: http://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa47972 _____________________________________________________________ Paper: Price, E. (in press). 'Why was The Knight of the Burning Pestle Revived?'. Shakespeare Bulletin, 37(1), 47-66. _____________________________________________________________ This item is brought to you by Swansea University. Any person downloading material is agreeing to abide by the terms of the repository licence. Copies of full text items may be used or reproduced in any format or medium, without prior permission for personal research or study, educational or non-commercial purposes only. The copyright for any work remains with the original author unless otherwise specified. The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holder. Permission for multiple reproductions should be obtained from the original author. Authors are personally responsible for adhering to copyright and publisher restrictions when uploading content to the repository. http://www.swansea.ac.uk/library/researchsupport/ris-support/ Why was The Knight of the Burning Pestle Revived? EOIN PRICE Swansea University Francis Beaumont’s The Knight of the Burning Pestle was a famous failure when it was first performed. Its failure has fascinated generations of critics. Jeremy Lopez has gone so far as to say that “failure is the basis of the play’s canonical identity” (Constructing 75). Walter Burre, the play’s printer, offered one explanation for its lack of success, blaming the 1607 Blackfriars audience who, he claimed, failed to understand its “privy mark of irony” (A2r), yet scholars have offered an ingenious array of other interpretations.
    [Show full text]
  • Francis Beaumont: Dramatist
    Francis Beaumont: Dramatist By Charles Mills Gayley BEAUMONT, THE DRAMATIST CHAPTER I "Among those of our dramatists who either were contemporaries of Shakespeare or came after him, it would be impossible to name more than three to whom the predilection or the literary judgment of any period of our national life has attempted to assign an equal rank by his side. In the Argo of the Elizabethan drama—as it presents itself to the imagination of our own latter days—Shakespeare's is and must remain the commanding figure. Next to him sit the twin literary heroes, Beaumont and Fletcher, more or less vaguely supposed to be inseparable from one another in their works. The Herculean form of Jonson takes a somewhat disputed precedence among the other princes; the rest of these are, as a rule, but dimly distinguished." So, with just appreciation, our senior historian of the English drama, to-day, the scholarly Master of Peterhouse. Sir Adolphus Ward himself has, by availing of the inductive processes of the inventive and indefatigable Fleay and his successors in separative criticism, contributed not a little to a discrimination between the respective efforts of the "twin literary heroes" who sit next Jason; and who are "beyond dispute more attractive by the beauty of their creations than any and every one of Shakespeare's fellow-dramatists." But even he doubts whether "the most successful series of endeavours to distinguish Fletcher's hand from Beaumont's is likely to have the further result of enabling us to distinguish the mind of either from that of his friend." Just this endeavour to distinguish not only hand from hand, but mind from mind, is what I have had the temerity to attempt.
    [Show full text]
  • The Knight of the Burning Pestle
    Francis Beaumont (1584–1616) was a dramatist in the English Renaissance theatre, most famous for his collaborations with John Fletcher, which began in 1605. They had both hit an obstacle early in their dramatic careers with The Knight notable failures; Beaumont's The Knight of the Burning Pestle , first performed by the Children of the Blackfriars in 1607, was rejected by an audience who failed to note "the privy mark of irony about it;" that is, of they took Beaumont's satire of old-fashioned drama as an old-fashioned drama. The play received a lukewarm reception. The following year, Fletcher's Faithful Shepherdess failed on the same stage. In 1609, however, the two the collaborated on Philaster , which was performed by the King's Men at the Globe Theatre and at Blackfriars. The play was a popular success, not only launching the careers of the two playwrights but also sparking a new taste for tragicomedy. Beaumont and Fletcher went on to replace Shakespeare around 1609 as chief dramatists of the King's Men. Burning [adapted from wikipedia] the play Pestle The Knight of the Burning Pestle was printed in quarto in 1613. The date of composition is uncertain. It is most likely that the play was written for the child actors at Blackfriars Theatre. In addition to the by Francis Beaumont textual history testifying to a Blackfriar's origin, there are multiple references within the text to Marston, to the actors as children, and other indications that the performance took place in a house known for "The breathtaking virtuosity of Beaumont's writing biting satire and sexual double entendre.
    [Show full text]