1

‘(…) It is a thing/ One knows not how to name’1 The Aesthetic of Disgust in Early 17th Century English Drama

Fig. 1, Page 11 from ‘Tis Pity She's a Whore, acted by the Queenes Maiesties Seruants, at The Phoenix in Drury-lane, by John Ford. Printed by Nicholas Okes for Richard Collins (1633), source: STC 11165, Houghton Library, Harvard University.

A thesis for the MA Arts & Culture: International Dramaturgy, University of Amsterdam, 2020 Ellen McGrath Student Number: 12551988 Supervisor: Dr. Peter Eversmann Second Reader: Dr. Laurens von Vos Word Count:

1 The Roaring Girl: 1611, ed. Meaghan Brown, Michael Poston, and Elizabeth Williamson (London: Thomas Archer, 1611), 1.2.336. References are to act, scene, and line. 2

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Peter Eversmann for his patience in guiding me through the process of writing this thesis, and for sharing his expertise with me along the way. I would also like to thank Johnny, Kristýna, Ariane, and Alex for their encouragement during my initial brainstorming and the development of the thesis, and my parents Gillian and Laurence for encouraging and supporting me during my studies.

3

Table of Contents:

1. Abstract 4 2. Introduction 5 3. Early Modern Relevancy 7 I. Etymological Significance 7 II. Early Modern Conduct Books 8 III. Shame 9 IV. Contagion 10 V. Humoral System 11 VI. Summary of Early Modern Relevancy 12 4. Kant and Disgust 13 I. Defining the Aesthetic 14 II. The Sensory Experience of Disgust 16 III. The Temporal Aspect of Drama 18 IV. The Difference Between Appreciation and Enjoyment 19 5. Conceptualising Disgust 20 I. Disgust Setting Boundaries 20 II. Disgust and the Self 22 III. Disgust and Desire 23 IV. Summary of Conceptions of Disgust 24 6. The Roaring Girl I. Summary of the Plot 25 II. Analysis of Prologue 26 III. The Language of Disgust 28 IV. The Comedic Impact 34 V. Relation to Other Early Modern Comedies 37 VI. Comedy and the Aesthetic 38 7. ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore I. Summary of Play 40 II. Incest as Plot Device 40 III. Anatomy on Stage 44 IV. Sensationalism 47 V. Tragedy and the Aesthetic 50 8. Conclusion 53 9. Afterthought 55 10. Bibliography 59 11. List of Images 63

4

1. Abstract:

This thesis explores the ways in which disgust operates in early modern English drama. Disgust is evoked in a number of plays from the period by both disgusting language, and the presence of disgusting acts on stage. I examine what the evocation of this emotion does to dramatic pieces from the period.

The concept of disgust has a rich theoretical history, but perhaps the most famous comment on its relation to aesthetics is that by Immanuel Kant. Kant claims that in most cases, disgust is contrary to the aesthetic. I aim to investigate the validity of this claim against the ways in which disgust operates in the theatre of 17th century England. To what extent can the disgusting plays of the 17th century be considered aesthetic in the Kantian understanding of the term?

To answer this question, I first situate the dramas of the period within their early 17th century context. In doing so I consult the etymological history of the disgust, early modern attitudes to the

“self”, the impact of the Great Plague, and the widespread adherence to the Hippocratic and Galenic humoral system. Having established a clear understanding of the causes and effects of disgust during the period, I go on to address Kant. From here I scrutinise the meaning and validity of Kant’s statement, and question what it might mean for theatre in general. The extent to which my question can be answered is limited without an in-depth theoretical understanding of disgust itself. I therefore use the work of contemporary disgust theoreticians, most notably Aurel Kolnai, William Miller, and

Paul Rokin, to establish what precisely is meant by disgust and how the emotion is believed to function.

In order to test out the theoretical knowledge acquired I analyse two case studies: The Roaring Girl by Thomas Middleton and Thomas Dekker, and ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore. These contrasting texts demonstrate the different ways in which disgust was evoked in the period, dependent on genre and authorial style. In the case of The Roaring Girl, linguistically induced disgust adds a liveliness to the drama and enhances the comedy of the piece. The portrayal of disgusting acts in ‘Tis Pity She’s a 5

Whore forms the basis for the tragedy of the play and encourages a philosophical reflection of the position of man within society. These two plays therefore provide strong cases against the Kantian claim that disgust is contrary to the aesthetic, however a wider study is needed to gain a comprehensive overview of the role of disgust in early modern drama.

2. Introduction:

Disgust is a complex and sometimes contradictory emotion. It is difficult to pinpoint a precise definition of the phenomenon, but as a basic starting point we can turn to the dictionary definition of disgust which describes it as a ‘strong repugnance, aversion, or repulsion excited by that which is loathsome or offensive, as a foul smell, disagreeable person or action, disappointed ambition, etc.; profound instinctive dislike or dissatisfaction.’2 Although limited in its scope, this definition indicates the broad applicability of disgust to varying objects whether that be a sensory reaction to something that smells, looks, or tastes unpleasant, or the actions of someone who goes against social expectations. The limited dictionary definition also displays the characteristic negativity associated with the emotion. Keeping this in mind, Immanuel Kant’s opinion on the presence of disgusting objects in art may seem logical.

Speaking of disgust’s position in art Kant notes that:

There is only one kind of ugliness that cannot be presented in conformity with nature

without obliterating all aesthetic liking and hence artistic beauty; that ugliness which arouses

disgust.3

The 18th Century aversion to disgust in the realm of art, as is also apparent in the work of

Mendelssohn and Lessing, indicates a kind of hierarchy of feeling which art must induce. However, in

2 Oxford English Dictionary Online, s.v. “Disgust (n.1)”, accessed April 17, 2020, https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/54422?rskey=dvwnXU&result=1#eid. 3 Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment (1790), trans. Werner Pluhar (Indianapolis: Hackett Books, 1987), 180. 6

more contemporary research the idea that the disgusting can be aesthetic has been explored by the likes of William Ian Miller, Cynthia Freeland, Noel Carrol, and Julia Kristeva. The aesthetic potential of disgust has thus been much contested. I will consider the aforementioned contemporary theorists in due course; however, it is necessary to note that much of their focus is on the genre of horror when analysing disgust’s aesthetic potential.

Departing from this, I argue that disgust is particularly prevalent in early modern drama and will focus particularly on early 17th century English drama to demonstrate this. The presence of disgusting acts and objects in both comedies and tragedies from the period indicates its popularity in drama of the time. This can be traced via the use of disgusting language, most famously by Ben

Jonson, and in the portrayal of disgusting acts on stage, as witnessed, for example, in the cannibalism of Titus Andronicus. These examples hint at the duplicity of the emotion. Therefore, any suggestion that there is a singular early modern disgust is misguided. Rather, the sensation is induced in different theatrical contexts even within the period, and this alters its aesthetic potential.

In order to explore how disgust operates on the early modern stage I will close read two case studies.

The Roaring Girl (1611), by Thomas Middleton and Thomas Dekker provides a text against which to measure the aesthetic value of linguistically induced disgust within the comedic genre. In contrast, the incest plot in John Ford’s Tis Pity She’s a Whore (1626) demands an evaluation of the impact of disgusting acts on stage and how this impacts the tragic aesthetic.

How do contemporary theories on aesthetic disgust fit with the drama of the period, and what does the prominence of disgust say about early modern dramaturgy, as well as early modern society?

Theatre is as a space which often comments on the outside world. Examining the way in which disgust operates on stage further provides an insight into the place disgust had in early 17th Century society. How does disgust operate in early modern English drama and to what extent can the disgusting plays of this time be considered aesthetic in the Kantian understanding of the term?

3. Early Modern Relevancy: 7

The feeling of disgust is displayed in and evoked by many 17th Century plays. In order to detect why this might be the case, and what its specific result may be, it is necessary to understand the conditions under which plays from the period were written. Disgust is a productive lens through which to evaluate early modern English society in general, and the drama of the period in particular.

Indeed, studying the traces of disgust in this period further provides an insight to the concept of disgust itself. Its prominence in the drama of the time makes it a suitable context through which to gauge the accuracy of Kant’s claim, and further to gain an understanding of its nuanced forms and results in a theatrical setting.

3.i. Etymological Significance:

Significantly, the first usage of the word in the English language came into being in 1598 with John

Florio’s translation of the Italian “Sgusto”.4 Florio gave the Italian word four English equivalents:

‘disgust, distast, vnkindnes, dislike.’5 The grouping of these four words hints at their interrelation.

Benedict Robinson notes that the first two specify the Italian word’s ‘relationship to violated taste’,6 whereas the second two ‘link sensory aversion to social antagonism’.7 As I shall demonstrate with contemporary theory, the societal function of disgust and its sensory cause are two of its key characteristics. Therefore, even in the 17th century, the translation of the word highlights its complexity.

Paying attention to disgust’s entrance into the English language is not to say that the concept did not exist until this time, but nevertheless the coining of a term for this very significant emotion suggests that there was something about the turn of the 17th Century that necessitated a language for this feeling. Robinson notes that a number of key words that are still in circulation today were coined

4 Benedict Robinson, "Disgust c. 1600", ELH 81, no. 2 (2014): 553, https://search-proquest- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/docview/1540741054?OpenUrlRefId=info:xri/sid:primo&accountid=14615. 5 John Florio,”Sgusto”, A Worlde of Wordes (London, 1598), ed. Hermann Haller (Toronto: Toronto University Press, 2013), 640. 6 Robinson, "Disgust c. 1600", 557. 7 Ibid. 8

between 1580 and 1700 including ‘disgust, self-esteem, resentment, anxiety, panic, embarrassment.’8 The entrance of this vocabulary into the English language implies a nuanced understanding of emotions that were induced at the time, as is evident in the distinction between anxiety and panic. Notable also is the relation each of these emotions have to the self, and indeed the negative connotations which most prompt. This implies an increased self-awareness and an anxiety at how the self was viewed by others at this time. The entrance of disgust into the English language hints at its increasing relevance. Disgust is recorded as appearing 50 times in print in the first decade of the 17th Century, this increased to 1,010 appearances in the last decade.9This suggests a nation and a time that was becoming more aware of its emotional make up. This awareness can be traced in the drama of the time. Although the theoretical attention paid to disgust did not enhance significantly until the 20th century, its importance to early 17th century society cannot be refuted.

3.ii. Early Modern Conduct Books:

Disgust is used to define what is appropriate and what is not, and this is important in the early modern period. The notion that there was a “proper” way to behave is evident in the advent of conduct books which first appeared in Europe in the 16th Century. These advised citizens on how to behave in order to achieve a noble standing within the community.10 Norbert Elias’ sociological study

The Civilising Process traces how such books taught one how to act in a socially acceptable manner.

Elias notes that a number of acts were denounced in these tracts that later came to be considered disgusting, for example blowing one’s nose on one’s sleeve. These habits ‘became associated with embarrassment, fear, shame or guilt, even when one is alone.’11 Thus, a framework of socially acceptable behaviour was reinforced through non-fictional literature of the time by encouraging an

8 Ibid. 555. 9 Ibid. 553. 10 Norbert Elias, The Civilising Process, ed. Eric Dunning, John Goudsblom, and Stephen Mennell, trans. Edmund Jephcoott (MA: Blackwell, 2000). 11 Elias, The Civilising Process, 127. 9

internal judgement on the self. This set up an environment for an aversive reaction, akin to disgust, at those who carry on in unacceptable manners.

3.iii. Shame:

Elias’ claim that conduct books encouraged ‘embarrassment, fear, shame or guilt’ indicates the pressure placed on individuals to conform with socially accepted ideals. Shame in particular was an emotion that attracted much attention in the 17th century. Much like disgust an increasing consideration started to be paid to this emotion during this time, the connection between the two feelings is evident in their relation to expected social behaviour.

The first book on shame, Annibale Pocaterra’s Two Dialogues on Shame, was written in 1592,12 thus indicating the particular attention the sensation began to demand in Renaissance society. The word

‘shame’ appeared in the English language long before disgust. The Oxford English dictionary defines it as ‘painful emotion arising from the consciousness of something dishonouring, ridiculous, or indecorous in one's own conduct or circumstances (or in those of others whose honour or disgrace one regards as one's own), or of being in a situation which offends one's sense of modesty or decency.’13 Shame is evidently concerned with reputation and social standing, as is disgust. What does the period’s emphasis on emotions such as shame and disgust say about the social zeitgeist? In his study on shame in Shakespeare Ewan Fernie suggests that interest in shame was a consequence of the enhanced self-awareness which has been long associated with the period. He notes that the

‘early modern subject, like its classical forebear, is very much constructed in the eyes of others. This is a crucial reason for shame’s new power.’14 The idea that one’s identity is formed in the eyes of another gives shame a significant power over the individual. Shame’s power is further indicative of

12 Ewan Fernie, Shame in Shakespeare (London: Routledge, 2002), 32. 13 Oxford English Dictionary Online, s.v “Shame (n.1a)”, accessed April 13, 2020, https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/177406?rskey=xEzpDQ&result=1#eid. 14 Fernie, Shame in Shakespeare, 32. 10

disgust’s power: the fear of shame drives one to retrieve from acts that may be considered disgusting.

Reputation was therefore gravely important in the 17th century. Michael Bristol notes that the ‘early modern community was in many ways nurturing and supportive of its members, but it was also coercive.’15 The stifling impact of social custom can be gauged from the extent to which surveillance was carried out within communities. Martin Ingram details how in every parish, churchwardens and their assistants had a duty to report their neighbours to church courts, ‘a step that condemned those neighbours to a summons to court and hence admonition, public penance, or (for the recalcitrant) excommunication’.16 There is a clear indication that the home and family were part of a wider collective, consequently “shame” takes on the coercive power of keeping individuals in line with what is deemed acceptable behaviour. The notion that there were clearly defined parameters between what was okay to do and what was not suggests that those who were deemed disgusting were marginalised to a heightened degree.

3.iv. Contagion:

In addition to the societal reasons for the emotions being prevalent, disgust is also important in the period in terms of its relation to disease. As Daryl Chalk and Mary Floyd-Wilson note, ‘early modern writers devoted constant attention to the possibility of contagious transmission’.17Although “fear of contagion” is not synonymous with “disgust”, the lexical and theoretical connection between the two is overt: it is often fear of contagion which instigates disgust. Important to note here, is that the idea of contagion prompting disgust does not conflate fear with disgust. Instead, as William Miller puts it, coming into contact with, for example human or animal wastes incites disgust via contagion,

15 Michel Bristol, “Everyday Custom and Popular Custom”, A Companion to Renaissance Drama, ed. Arthur Kinney (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004) 125. 16 Martin Ingram, “Family and Household”, A Companion to Renaissance Drama, ed. Arthur Kinney (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004) 95. 17 Darryl Chalk and Mary Floyd-Wilson, Contagion and the Shakespearean Stage (UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019), 1. 11

not because of ‘any noxiousness’18 but rather because of their association with lowliness and inferiority. The contagiousness of that which is impure or corrupting prompts disgust, regardless of its risk to life. The idea that a substantial amount of writing was composed on the subject during the time, paired with the destructive nature of the Great Plague of London (1665-1666), indicates that fear of contamination was widespread at the turn of the century. This goes some way in explaining why disgusting acts were displayed on stage, but also how disgust may have easily been evoked in the early modern audience.

3.v. Humoral System:

Fig. 2, The Humours, based on a drawing from a 17th century manuscript by Bishop Isidore of Seville, source: Rebecca Earle, 2012.19

The preoccupation with the body at the time is further evident in the adherence to the Hippocratic and Galenic humoral system. This system held that the human body consisted of consist of four bodily fluids called “humors”: blood, phlegm, black bile and yellow bile, as demonstrated in fig.3.

Gail Kern Paster explains the basis of this model: ‘forces of cold, hot, moist, dry constituted the

18 William Miller, The Anatomy of Disgust (Cambridge Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1997),6. 19 Rebecca Earle, The Body of the Conquistador: Food, Race and the Colonial Experience in Spanish America, 1492–1700 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, August 2012), 27. 12

material basis of any living creature’s characteristic appraisals of and responses to its immediate environment; they altered the character of a body’s substance’,20 thus the surroundings one is exposed to influences ones internal health. Good health is determined by an appropriate balance of blood, phlegm, black bile and yellow bile. The balance of these impact a person’s ‘disposition, well- being, morality, and temperament’.21 The Galenic humoral system supposed that the ‘human body was thought to be full of putrefied, disgusting matter, that needed to be expelled.’22 And this led to the practice of bloodletting with leeches, and the use of laxatives. These methods were wildly accepted, for example when Charles II (1630–1685) suffered a seizure he was treated with sixteen ounces of bloodletting from the left arm followed by another 8 ounces from cupping.23 Thus the idea that the body needed to expunge supposedly disgusting matter was a wildly held view at the time.

In addition to fuelling fear of contamination, this model also aided the construction of racial differences and fear of people from lands of different temperatures and environments: thus, establishing a disgust at those who are “foreign”. This suspicion at the unknown can be traced heavily in the drama of the period, as is evident in the setting of numerous tragedies in Italy, for example the gluttony in The Merchant of Venice, the cannibalism in Titus Andronicus or the incest plot of both The Duchess of Malfi, and ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore, to name but a few.

3.vi. Summary of Early Modern Relevancy:

At the beginning of the 17th century the self was created in the eyes of others. Emotions such as shame were investigated in depth for the first time in England, and the prevalence of conduct books ensured that there was a clear divide between what was acceptable and what was not. This

20 Gail Kern Paster, Humoring the Body: Emotions and the Shakespearean Stage (London: University of Chicago Press, 2004), 13. 21 Lesel Dawson, Love Sickness and Gender in Early Modern English Literature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008 2008), 20. 22 Marlisa den Hartog, “Worms, Corruption, and Medieval Detoxing”, Leiden Medievalist Blog, accessed May 7, 2020, https://leidenmedievalistsblog.nl/articles/worms-corruption-and-medieval-detoxing. 23 Gerry Greenstone, “The History of Bloodletting”, BC Medical Journal 52, no.1 (January 2010): 13, https://www.bcmj.org/premise/history-bloodletting. 13

therefore produced a breeding ground for feelings of disgust towards those who did not live up to societal expectations. But disgust expanded beyond interpersonal relations. The destructive nature of the Great Plague of London propounded a fear of contagion which further encouraged a drawing up of boundaries. The bodily boundaries established also have their source in the Galenic humoral bodily beliefs surrounding the impact of environment in the body. Disgust was undoubtedly a prevalent emotion at the time, and this is substantiated by its presence in dramas for the period which I will discuss further in my analysis of The Roaring Girl and ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore.

4. Kant and Disgust:

In his Critique of Judgement (1790), Immanuel Kant proposes that:

There is only one kind of ugliness that cannot be presented in conformity with nature

without obliterating all aesthetic liking and hence artistic beauty; that ugliness which arouses

disgust.24

The definitive nature of this statement, apparent in Kant’s precision (‘only one’, ‘cannot’, ‘obliterating all’) is provocative in its absoluteness. It consequently invites a counter reading of how disgust might operate in art, and what it might mean for the ‘aesthetic’ value of such art. However Kant’s claim is conditional. He makes clear that disgusting phenomena can be presented in art without ‘obliterating all aesthetic liking’ so long as they are presented in a way which diffuses the feelings of disgust with feelings of appreciation for the beauty of that which is represented. The conditional aspect is important to keep in mind when gauging the extent to which early modern drama complies with

Kant’s perspective on the aesthetic. Kant specifies the instances when disgust cannot be considered aesthetic as those in which ‘the artistic presentation of the object is no longer distinguished in our sensation from the nature of the object itself’.25This is difficult to measure and to concretely define.

In early modern theatre the representation of the object aims to achieve a mimetic effect. At least

24 Kant, Critique of Judgment (1790), 180. 25 Ibid. 14

this is the case for physical portrayals of disgusting acts. This undermines theatre’s ability to demonstrate disgusting things onstage without obliterating the aesthetic effect.

In explaining this dynamic, Kant draws on the ‘Furies, diseases, devastations of war,’26 in the context of ‘fine arts’.27 The evocation of the furies calls to mind their presence in Greek tragedy, however theatre as an artistic medium is not taken into consideration by Kant. Instead he focuses on poetry, music, and painting. Thus, the question is raised, how does Kant’s perception of the impact of disgust operates in the context of the theatre? Can his perspective be applied to, or is it incompatible with, the artistic components which constitute the writing and staging of a dramatic piece? One category which Kant does address directly in relation to his claim that the presentation of the disgusting should be ‘distinguished in our sensation from the nature of the object itself’ is that of sculpture. In doing so clarity is added to his statement on ‘aesthetic liking’. He notes that the art of sculpture has ‘excluded from its creations any direct presentation of ugly objects…it has permitted

[ugly objects] to be presented by an allegory’.28 In this regard- the artistic skill in communicating ugly objects through intellectual metaphor distances the artwork from the reality of disgusting objects in an aesthetically pleasing manner. Perhaps then, the possibility of linguistic disgust in drama has can be considered aesthetic. I will address this further when evaluating The Roaring Girl.

4.i. Defining the Aesthetic:

Before going any further it is necessary to define how I understand the term ‘aesthetic’. If we consider the quote again it is apparent that aesthetic liking is essential for artistic beauty. At the most basic we can take the dictionary definition, ‘Of or relating to the perception, appreciation, or taste; giving or designed to give pleasure through beauty; of pleasing appearance.’29 Already then it is quite an insubstantial, non-definitive thing- dependent as it is on a subjective understanding of

26 Ibid. 27 Ibid. 28 Ibid. 29 Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “Aesthetic (adj. 2)”, accessed February 25, 2020, https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/3237?rskey=kRXvQ6&result=1#eid 15

what we consider beautiful. In his Critique on Judgement Kant aims to clarify a more precise definition of the term. In doing so he identifies four distinguishing features of the aesthetic. Firstly, the aesthetic is disinterested: our pleasure in the aesthetic derives from its beauty, as opposed to the other way around. 30 According to Kant the aesthetic is universal, in that everyone should perceive it with the same degree of pleasure and should equally regard it as beautiful.31Kant then goes on to suggest that the aesthetic should impact us as though it has a further purpose, although it does not. 32 Lastly Kant claims that the aesthetic is necessary in that he refers to judgements of taste as being ‘common sense’.33 The friction between aesthetic and disgust therefore seems to be the impossibility of simultaneously feeling adoration and pleasure, whilst also experiencing disgust.

However, this idea is complicated when consulting other understandings of the aesthetic. For example, in Csikszentmihalyi and Robinson’s The Art of Seeing: An Interpretation of the Aesthetic

Encounter, the aesthetic is noted as being present when:

information coming from the artwork (...) fuses with information in the viewers memory -

followed by the expansion of the viewer's consciousness, and the attendant emotional

consequences. (…) when the viewer focuses attention on the object there follows a sense of

concentration, of freedom, clarity, control, wholeness and sometimes transcendence of ego

boundaries (...).34

Their repeated reference to ‘information’ suggests that knowledge of a given thing, and an expansion of this knowledge is necessary for the aesthetic to come into play. But perhaps more significant is the stress placed on the ‘emotional’ reaction that the artwork prompts due to this interweaving of memory with new information. Emotions are key to the aesthetic, as is apparent in

Csikszentmihalyi and Robinson’s listing of the senses which the onlooker goes through when

30Kant, Critique of Judgment (1790), 46. 31Ibid, 53. 32 Ibid, 64. 33 Ibid, 87. 34 Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, and Rick Emery Robinson, The Art of Seeing: An Interpretation of the Aesthetic Encounter (Malibu: The Paul Getty Trust, 1990), 18-19. 16

encountering the aesthetic. At first glance the idea that disgust can fit alongside feelings of ‘clarity, control wholeness’ is unlikely. However, the notion that the experience of the aesthetic is a process implies that a feeling of disgust could be conducive to later reaching the emotions we more readily associate with pleasure. This notion of a prolonged and complex aesthetic experience gains further credit when consulting how Csikszentmihalyi and Robinson argue that the ambiguities of a work of art are part of what establishes the aesthetic: ‘The interaction between those qualities that are apprehensible in the work in the first moment of the encounter and those that still provoke viewers to revise or expand their skills accounts for the continued investment of attention in a temporally stable object.’35 In this regard, the ambiguity of the art work goes some way in establishing the aesthetic. If this is so, then initial instinctive feelings of disgust can develop and be rethought: they can add to the questions raised by the piece and more deeply encourage an emotional response to a work.

4.ii. The Sensory Experience of Disgust:

Kant notes that disgust is produced when ‘the artistic presentation of the object is no longer distinguished in our sensation from the nature of this object’.36 In drama, particularly that from the early modern period, language plays a major role in establishing the situation and evoking emotion in the audience. In one respect the language inciting disgust in drama is not a mimetic representation of an action, but also a thing which can be considered disgusting in itself, this will become apparent when analysing the hyperbolic disgusting language used to describe Moll Cutpurse in The Roaring Girl. It is not the act described which is necessarily disgusting, but rather the language that is used to describe it. Thus, I will carry out a close reading of the linguistic creation of disgust in the drama of the period in order to find out what distinct qualities it takes on when produced in literary form. In this vein the notion of artistic beauty and the disgusting meet in an

35Ibid, 136. 36 Ibid. 17

ephemeral moment of communication. Distinction must be drawn here between the drama as text, and the drama as performance. Although the evocation of disgust in the play as text may be possible to excuse with the artistry involved in establishing it- the physical display of disgusting acts or things on stage requires additional analysis in order to determine its compatibility with Kant’s statement.

In early modern drama words and sounds were the key in establishing a time, place, and character.

Andrea Stevens notes ‘language was exalted as the most important element of early modern drama, not spectacle. Lexis was held to supersede opsis; verbal descriptions created time.’37 The notion that

‘time’ is created through speech indicates the performative force of the utterance in early modern drama, indeed it also created space and interpersonal relations. The limited technical possibilities in early modern drama granted speech a heightened responsibility. In most theatrical settings it is sight and sound which aid the telling of the story and the incitement of emotion. Indeed, this is also the case in the fine arts which Kant describes, thus any triggering of disgust will lack the same intensity as that which smell, touch, and taste can achieve. This undermines the extent to which disgust can be felt by the audience. One way of approaching the nature of disgust portrayed onstage is to consider Aurel Kolnai’s analysis of the sensory nature of the emotion. Kolnai explains that ‘sounds and noises merely betray the existence of objects, they do not ‘present’ them in the sense in which this can be said of visual, tactile and olfactory sensations.’38 In this regard hearing lacks the immediacy that the other senses retain. This view is also held by Miller in his Anatomy of Disgust who notes that ‘hearing is the sense that plays the smallest role in processing disgust’. 39 However a distinction must be made between mere ‘sounds and noises’ which the two theorists discuss, and the impact of the spoken word which is neglected in their analysis of the role of sound and hearing in producing disgust. As we shall see when discussing the linguistic creation of disgust in The Roaring

37 Andrea Stevens, “Drama as Text and Performance”, A New Companion to Renaissance Literature and Culture ed. Michael Hattaway, vol.1 (London: Blackwell Publishing Limited, 2010), 507. 38 Aurel Kolnai, On Disgust, ed. Barry Smith and Carolyn Korsmeyer (Chicago & La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, 2004), 48. 39 Miller, The Anatomy of Disgust, 82. 18

Girl and Tis Pity She’s a Whore, many instances of disgust are created through the evocation of metaphor. This of course holds the audience at a further distance as they are not directly experiencing that which is described. The most intimate senses are the strongest triggers of disgust- taste, smell, and touch- because they involve an object coming into contact with the body and require a closeness which serves to heighten anxieties regarding disgust. However, this does not mean that disgust cannot be evoked to a heightened degree- particularly via the use of disgusting acts and things on stage which supplement that aural description of such things. The aural rarely acts alone on stage, we also are often aided by a visual representation, or a sense of anticipation at what these metaphors may foreshadow. Further, the language of disgust triggers the thought of objects and acts which are absent from sight. It is apparent that the type of disgust established via the spoken word is therefore a form of moral disgust, as Kolnai would classify it- ‘it presupposes a sufficiency in associations called forth in succession by the objects which in visual disgust are consigned to a far greater extent to the background of the intention’.40 In this respect the provocation of disgust is dependent on the imaginative capacity of the onlooker. This would suppose that the level of disgust induced in theatre is not stable, and thus the aesthetic potential of a given play is also changeable, if we are to suppose that Kant’s statement is accurate. This is important to keep in mind when analysing incidents of disgust and measuring how they may support Kant’s theory. Plays which explicitly reveal disgusting acts or physical things onstage of course escalate the level of disgust which can be achieved by language alone.

4.iii. The Temporality of Drama:

A second necessary element of Kant’s statement to evaluate is his forthright belief that when disgust is produced a work of art ‘cannot possibly be considered beautiful.’41 This idea is complicated in drama in that incidents of disgust are usually parts of a larger whole. The presence of disgust may

40 Kolnai, On Disgust, 49. 41 Ibid. 19

last for one scene out of four acts, or one minute out of one scene. In this respect the level of disgust and its power over the audience’s emotions is another nuanced element of drama which may not be as applicable to a painting or sculpture, and which therefore works to complicate Kant’s theory.

4.iv. The Difference between Appreciation and Enjoyment:

In order to make the evocation of disgust compatible with the creation of the aesthetic, it is helpful to consider Carolyn Korsmeyer’s notion that ‘there can be appreciation without enjoyment.’42

Korsmeyer’s observation introduces the distinction between artistic merit and emotional response. I argue that this distinction can have a temporal quality: that which we recoil from in the moment, encourages deep thought on why we experienced such a reaction, thus prompting admiration for the way in which this emotion was induced and to what ends. The evocation of disgust in this respect need not linger past the reception of the work of art. Indeed, even if ‘appreciation’ cannot be experienced in the moment, the potential for contemplative thought opens the possibility for the aesthetic to come into play. Indeed, the depth of thought which these emotions encourage can lead to more enlightenment than those works of art that do not provoke as strong a reaction. Again,

Korsmeyer is a useful source to consult on this possibility, as she notes ‘confronting the revolting presents a fascination simply by virtue of challenging sensibilities.’43 In this sense we are more engaged in art which makes us feel uncomfortable, whether that be via disgust or another traditionally unpleasant emotion. Disgust’s capacity to challenge expectations and outlook supposes that it is complementary to the aesthetic process as opposed to contrary to it. The revolting’s capacity to challenge becomes apparent on a close reading of Middleton’s The Roaring Girl. Before doing so though, it is necessary to more precisely define what is meant by disgust. In order to do so it is necessary to consider the range of approaches which have been taken to the subject, most notably since the beginning of the 20th century.

42 Carolyn Korsmeyer, “Disgust and Aesthetics”, Philosophy Compass 7, no.11 (12th October2012): 759, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2012.00522.x. 43 Ibid, 760. 20

5. Conceptualising Disgust:

A plethora of texts on disgust have been written by numerous theorists from various fields of study.

As a disclaimer it is necessary to note that any attempt to comprehensively cover the topic will fall short. Indeed, there are disagreements concerning the precise nature and cause of disgust, thus my working definition is my own take on what constitutes the emotion.

4.i. Disgust Setting Boundaries:

A useful starting point to understanding the nuances of disgust is Aurel Kolnai’s 1929 book, On

Disgust. Kolnai aims to understand the causes and results of disgust. In doing so he demonstrates the existence of both moral and physical disgust44. Whereas physical disgust stems from material objects, moral disgust is concerned with values which differ from our own. For example: the site of vomit may induce a physical disgust as it is an unsightly bodily fluid, whereas the witnessing of someone eating to excess prompts a moral disgust at the object’s gluttony. In this regard to be disgusted by such a person is to distance oneself from their supposedly poor morals. However before even considering what may cause disgust and the various different forms of disgust. It is necessary to determine what we understand disgust to be at a base level.

Kolnai is again useful in deciphering this. He productively defines disgust by comparing it to other apparently similar feelings in order to specify the unique makeup of the emotion. For example, he distinguishes it from fear noting that disgust does not concern ‘the subject’s survival which is constitutive of the object or of its mode of giveness but rather this object’s own intrinsic constitution.’45Thus, unlike fear, disgust is concerned more with the external object, than with the subjects own internal anxieties at their safety. This is not to say that we cannot fear the disgusting- of course the two are very much interlinked, as is apparent in the evolutionary basis for disgust as explored by the likes of Paul Rozin. Rozin’s research largely concerns disgust’s adaptation

44 Kolnai, On Disgust, 48. 45 Ibid. 39. 21

throughout our ancestral environment, and on the continuous construction of the history of disgust over evolutionary time.46

However it is important to establish what the difference between these two emotions may be.

Kolnai notes that ‘disgust is more aesthetically determined than is fear.’47 In this regard the physical qualities of the disgusting object incite a strong emotion regardless of the threat it poses. This is important in that it indicates the degree of judgement that plays a role in the creation of disgust- the implication being that disgust instils differentiation between what is appropriate and what is not.

This is further evident in Kolnai’s notion that disgust creates a ‘certain low evaluation of its object, a feeling of superiority’.48 This idea of hierarchy is also expressed by Sarah Ahmed who points out the linguistic indicators of what we find disgusting, as is evident in the spatial metaphors which are used in its discussion, for example ‘that which is below.’49 Again, this suggests that disgust is a tool for social organisation, and can be used to distinguish people from one another, as well as what we may more traditionally deem as optimum objects of disgust- food, insects, bodily fluids. It implies that disgust demarcates what is acceptable and what is not.

Imogen Tyler also analyses disgust’s potential for segregation. She writes from a political perspective detecting the disgust which is encouraged by political regimes. For example, one may direct disgust at those who are not like them, thus encouraging a process of “othering”. Tyler notes that this dynamic is established through the false idea that one must define oneself in terms of their difference from the “other”.50 Tyler’s work on the state hints at a notion which is present in the work of Rozin, amongst others, who argues for the arbitrary nature of disgust, citing it as something that

46 Paul Rozin, & Jonathan Schull, “The adaptive-evolutionary point of view in experimental psychology”, Handbook of Experimental Psychology, ed. R. C Atkinson, R. J. Herrnstein, G. Lindzey, & R. D. Luce (New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1988), 503-546. 47 Kolnai, On Disgust, 34. 48 Ibid. 42. 49 Sara Ahmed, The Cultural Politics of Emotion (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004), 88. 50 Imogen Tyler, Revolting Subjects, Social Abjection and Resistance in Neoliberal Britain (London; New York: Zed books, 2013), 20. 22

‘may have some roots in evolution, but it is also clearly a cultural product.’51 This becomes important when discussing disgust in the context of race and gender- again this is extremely relevant when considering the political and social context of early 17th century England. This idea can therefore be extended beyond the political sphere to include interpersonal relations. Tyler’s idea of the “othering” which disgust encourages hints at its role in establishing a sense of self. In this respect identity is grounded in terms not just of what one is but also what one is disgusted by, and this creates a desire for distance between from that which is considered disgusting.

The need for a clear distinction between what is and isn’t disgusting creates the desire for boundaries. Kolnai argues that disgust establishes a need for distance established via boundaries.52

Again, this can be read in a political context, but also in a bodily one. The body has its own boundaries, and this becomes crucial when considering disgust in an early modern context, as is evident in the early modern adherence to the humoral bodily system. Yet this idea of “othering” is more complex than may first appear. The notion that disgust is always directed at an external object is complicated by the fact that one can be disgusted at one’s self. This form of disgust is associated with feelings of shame at one’s own body or actions. It is established when one recognises a physical deformity of moral action which goes against the values of one’s own society. This can be a retrospective disgust at one’s past actions, or a continuous disgust at one’s body and consistent lapsed morality.

5.ii. Disgust and the Self:

The relation between disgust and the self is apparent even when the self is not the source of disgust.

Indeed, one of the intriguing aspects of disgust in general is that it encourages a reflection on the self. Julia Kristeva argues that a ‘subjective horror’,53 stems from the recognition of the self in that

51 Paul Rozin, et. al., “Body, Psyche, and Culture: The relationship Between Disgust and Morality,” Psychology and Developing Societies 9, no.1 (March 1997): 110, DOI: 10.1177/097133369700900105. 52 Kolnai, On Disgust, 40. 53 Julia Kristeva, Powers of Horror: an Essay on Abjection (New York: Columbia University Press, 1982), 44. 23

which is supposedly other, thus upsetting the subject’s sense of self. This notion is also held by Rozin who argues that disgust is caused by an ‘animal-reminder’,54 which brings to mind our own bodily presence. This includes instances when the body is subverted and thus attention drawn to it, for example when it is injured, when it partakes in taboo sexual acts, or when it has poor standards of hygiene. Rozin notes that we ‘attempt to hide the animality of our biological processes by defining specifically human ways to perform them.’55 When the mask slips the ‘uncivilised’ instinctive aspects of the self are exposed. When we see these in another we are reminded of our own ‘animality’ and this provokes an anxiety surrounding our own body and thus our own mortality. Disgust is therefore produced when the parts of ourselves that are usually concealed are exposed in another. Miller takes this a step further arguing that the disgusting, particularly the visually disgusting human body, produces a strong reaction not just because we fear contamination, ‘the horror is not in being intimate with them (though that too), but in being them.’56 This hints at the human body’s malleability and functions which are hidden due to the shame they induce. When that which is hidden comes to the foreground- bodily fluids, deformities, the naked body- the mortal nature of the human body is exposed.

5.iii. Disgust and Desire:

The topic of shame is one that goes hand in hand with disgust and is particularly relevant when studying disgust in the early modern period, as previously discussed. It is found in the psychoanalytical approach which has often been taken to disgust by the likes of Julia Kristeva and

Sigmund Freud. One of the pillars of this approach is the idea that disgust is a defence mechanism against indulging in unconscious desire.57 Again, the notion that certain desires are unacceptable under particular societal codes hints at the moral disgust which Kolnai discusses. The link between

54 Rozin, et. al., “Body, Psyche, and Culture: The relationship Between Disgust and Morality”, 110. 55 Ibid. 113. 56 Miller, The Anatomy of Disgust, 81. 57 Sigmund Freud, “Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality II” (1905), The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, ed. James Strachey (London: Hogarth Press, 1953-1974), 177. 24

disgust and desire is one which is important to consider when analysing why we might indulge in plays which demonstrate disgusting acts onstage.

The boundaries between disgust and desire are small. Indeed, one of the key triggers of disgust is the excess of that which we find pleasant. Miller notes ‘disgust is not a barrier to imbibing but either a punishment for having done so or, less ominously, simply a time activated barrier that judges

(usually too slowly) when enough has been enough.’58 One of the most obvious examples of this is eating to the point of sickness. The temporal aspect of Miller’s explanation suggests that the limit of consumption cannot be known before it is surpassed. Again, disgust is regarded as a method of control: of stopping one from overindulging by setting boundaries of what is socially acceptable, but also of the body giving triggers when too much is too much. To partake in disgusting acts via excess is to demonstrate that one has no self-control.

Miller suggests that the ‘overindulgence in any number of foods, drinks, and activities, sexual or otherwise for which the desire is completely unconscious and acted upon leads to disgust also- the nausea and sickness of surfeit’.59 In his study of disgust Winfred Menninghaus expands this connection of excessive food and drink, to include excessive sweetness. He notes that satietory disgust is ‘basically disgust from excess or over fulfilment.’60 In this respect too much of anything good eventually turns bad. This becomes particularly relevant when exploring the hyperbolic portrayal of emotions in comedies such as The Roaring Girl, but more so in tragedies such as ‘Tis Pity

She’s a Whore, in which excessive love can be regarded as one of the key triggers of the catastrophic ending.

5.v. Summary of Conceptions of Disgust:

58 Miller, The Anatomy of Disgust, 10. 59 Ibid. 110. 60 Winfred Menninghaus, Disgust: Theory and History of a Strong Sensation, trans. Howard Eiland and Joel Golb (Albany: State of New York University Press, 2003), 28. 25

To summarise how we might come to understand disgust, we can view it as an emotional reaction to something which unsettles us. This can take the form of disgust at the self, or disgust at an external object. This disgusting object is deemed socially unacceptable and the arbitrariness of this is found in the different standards of what is considered disgusting, dependent on cultural norms. Disgust is therefore a tool for segregation but is also produced when we recognise the uncivilised aspects of the human in others, reminding us of our own bodily functions and consequently our mortality.

Disgust is a complex and multidimensional emotion. As Jenefer Robinson notes, disgust serves as a

‘building block for other more complex emotions.’61Robinson’s dismissal of disgust as somehow contrary to ‘complex’ emotions reduces the feeling to a simplistic knee-jerk reaction. A brief overview of just some of the works which deal with the levels on which disgust operate point to the ill-judged nature of her comment. However, the metaphorical building blocks invoked point to its collaborative nature. These include, discomfort, anxiety, and intrigue among others. Now that a basic understanding of disgust’s causes and effects has been established, I will analyse two case studies in order to detect how disgust operated in early modern drama, and what effect it has on the aesthetic.

6.i. The Roaring Girl, Summary of the Plot:

The Roaring Girl is a comedy written by Thomas Middleton and Thomas Dekker in 1611. It is set in the city of London, and centres around a sexually ambiguous ‘roaring girl’, Moll Cutpurse. The plot concerns the ambition of a young man called Sebastian to marry Mary Fitzgerald, and his father, Sir

Alexander’s disapproval of this union. In order to convince his father of Mary’s suitability, Sebastian pretends to be in love with Moll, hoping that his father will favour Mary in comparison. Concurrently a young gallant name Laxton assumes that Moll is sexually promiscuous because of how she dresses like a man, she proves him wrong by tricking him and declaring herself chaste to the extent that she

61 Jenefer Robinson, “Aesthetic Disgust?”, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 75, (2014): 58, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1358246114000253. 26

will never marry and remain celibate. The play also includes scenes of housewives and husbands from the city, these are concerned with gender dynamics and the city as a public space.

The disgust which I will consider in relation to The Roaring Girl is that which is directed towards Moll

Cutpurse by the other characters in the play. I argue the language used to demonstrate the anxiety which others have towards coming in contact with Moll Cutpurse encourages a disgust in the onlooker and the reader. In this instance The Roaring Girl demonstrates the temporal quality of disgust, how it is produced, but also how it can be diffused. In this regard Kant’s notion that disgust obliterates aesthetic potential is challenged by the complicated dynamic of disgust which is produced by the play. Disgust is produced in order to be challenged and is the starting point through which to explore the issue of gender fluidity. The comedic genre the play adheres to is key in understanding how disgust operates in this instance, and what it might produce on stage.

6.ii Analysis of Prologue:

The prologue of The Roaring Girl introduces us to the titular character:

None of these Roaring Girls is ours: she flies

With wings more lofty. Thus her character lies;

//

But would you know who 'tis? Would you hear her name?

She is call'd mad Moll; her life, our acts proclaim.62

Thus, at the outset of the play we are made aware that Moll does not conform to the stereotype of other “Roaring Girls”. Middleton and Dekker supposedly coined the term which means quite literally,

‘The female counterpart of a roaring boy; a noisy, bawdy, or riotous woman or girl, especially one

62 Roaring Girl (Brown, Poston, Williamson), prologue, 26-31. 27

who takes on a masculine role.’63 Thus the title signifies a recklessness, and a lack of refinement. In her book on leading early modern female characters Jennifer Higginbotham stresses the importance of Moll’s apparent girlhood. She notes that girlhood ‘carried connotations of unruliness and transgressive behaviour…symptomatic of the general association between youth and rebellion in early modern English culture’.64 Therefore a paradox is established from the beginning of the play:

Moll is a ‘Roaring Girl’, but she ‘flies/with wings more lofty’. The metaphor of the wings communicates her superiority to other who share the title. Already a sense of intrigue is established, audience and reader are compelled to continue to pay attention. As Higginbotham remarks, ‘Moll systematically defies classification’65. The ‘roaring girl’ who is not a typical ‘roaring girl’ mirrors the ambiguous nature of her gender: she is a woman, who is not a woman, but neither is she man. The repeated rhetorical questions at the end of the prologue further draw out the suspense- at this stage we are yet to know her name. The questions also appear to be a sort of threat, adding to the idea that she is something so strange that one may not be prepared to ‘know who ‘tis’. The characterisation of Moll as ‘mad’ to the extent that it is part of her name and title, combined with her surname ‘Cutpurse’ meaning ‘pickpocket, thief, robber’66, contrasts to the loftiness spoken about just a few lines earlier. The result of this is a confusion surrounding the character.

The positioning of this description of Moll in the prologue is significant. Far from being an irrelevant add-on, in the 17th century the prologue provided the playwright an opportunity to ‘comment meaningfully on the complex relations of playing and the twin worlds implied by the resonant phrase theatrum mundi...one of their greatest attractions for those interested in how these plays were designed to appeal to, and mean for, their audiences.’67 Thus analysing the prologue can provide

63 Ibid. 64 Jennifer Higginbotham, The Girlhood of Shakespeare’s Sisters: Gender, Transgression, Adolescence (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2013), 87. 65 Ibid. 66 Oxford English Dictionary Online, s.v. “Cutpurse (n.)”, accessed March 27, 2020, https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/46392?redirectedFrom=cutpurse#eid. 67 Douglas Bruster and Robert Weimann, Prologues to Shakespeare’s Theatre: Performance and Liminality in Early Modern Drama (London; New York: Routledge, 2004), 2. 28

substantial information of the cultural significance of the play, and the way in which it drew an audience in. Up until 1600 the prologue was used primarily as an allegory of relevant topics.68By

1700 it was mostly used in a satirical manner or as a framing device. In this instance the prologue serves to expose us to the character of Moll, without showing her and without filling all the gaps.

The prologue is often considered to be the voice of the author. Indeed as Douglas Bruster and

Robert Weimann note, they were considered ‘thresholds between and among, variously, playwrights, actors, characters, audience members, play worlds, and the world outside the playhouse.’69 In Manfred Pfister’s categorisation of characterisation techniques, this would therefore be considered an ‘authorial explicit’70 introduction to her character. Pfister supposes that the audience is therefore ‘obliged to await the entrance of that figure in a state of expectant suspense, a state that can be intensified if the audience is confronted with a number of different and contradictory outside commentaries.’71 This becomes relevant when reviewing the harsher judgements on her person by the characters of the play. It also has an impact on how we experience any feelings of disgust which are encouraged by the speech of other characters: we feel we have a knowledge that is being concealed from the characters in the internal communication system of the play. This prompts a sceptical understanding of what the characters say about her but does not obliterate the disgust produced by the language used. The reception of the prologue via the page differs to that witnessed on stage.

6.iii The Language of Disgust:

Our first introduction to Moll in the context of the play is Sebastian’s description of her:

68Fernando Cioni, “Refashioning Italian Theatrical and Dramatic Conventions: Prologues, Epilogues and Inductions in Early Modern English Drama”, Early Modern Culture Online, accessed February 10, 2020, https://boap.uib.no/index.php/emco/article/view/1508/1288. 69 Bruster and Weimann, Prologues to Shakespeare’s Theatre: Performance and Liminality in Early Modern Drama, 2. 70 Manfred Pfister, The Theory and Analysis of Drama, trans. John Halliday (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 185. 71 Pfister, The Theory and Analysis of Drama, 186. 29

…a creature

So strange in quality a whole city takes

Note of her name and person.72

This distinguishes Moll as separate from everyone else in London- the ‘whole city’ regards her as noteworthy due to her reputation. It also draws attention to the city as a site for easy movement, and therefore easy contamination: Moll is able to travel through the ‘whole city’, and the whole city knows of her. Again, a sense of anticipation is established here, the superlative ‘so strange’ suggests that the character we are about to see will be unlike any we’ve seen before. The dehumanisation of

Moll to a ‘creature’ further segregates her from the other characters of the social world that

Middleton and Dekker establish. It implies that what the audience are about to see is something that will offend their eyes. We are being prepared to be disgusted or at the very least shocked by what we are about to see. This compliments the description in the prologue in its vagueness, but sense of intrigue. In this regard a sensationalist approach towards the figure of Moll is firmly established, one that plays with suspense and tension. In this way it could be argued that the framing of Moll, as evident in the prologue and in the first scene, is a device used to induce thrill as opposed to elevate the work to the aesthetic.

I will now focus in on a particular scene which exemplifies the linguistic potential for disgust within the dramatic form. In Act 1, Scene 2, Sebastian and his Father discuss Moll. This results in an accumulation of insults which play of the audience’s sense of disgust; thus, a purposeful triggering of the emotion is apparent. Sebastian exalts that Moll is a ‘Flesh-fly that can vex any man.’73 The reference to the flesh-fly or blow-fly, which eats and lays eggs in dead flesh, is an unusual and discomforting use of metaphor. The zoomorphism technique dehumanises Moll, depicting her as some form of monster. The short snappy nature of the line reinforces its grotesqueness, which is not

72 Roaring Girl (Brown, Poston, Williamson), 1.1.160-162. 73 Ibid, 1.2.331. 30

diluted by over explanation. The alliterative ‘f’ creates a plosive quality to the line, suggesting a force is inevitable upon delivery. The natural progress of birth conjoining with that of death incites disgust both in its unusual quality, but also in it calling up of the animal process- and indeed reminding the audience of their own mortal body which as we know is one of the key triggers of disgust. The gendered nature of the character’s disgust is apparent in his singling out of ‘man’. Thus, her status as a woman is undermined by her inability to please men. The gendered nature of the disgust projected onto Moll stems from her ambiguous gender: she dresses in breaches and does not conform to expectations that women should be humble, virtuous, and meek. Her ambiguous sexuality provokes disgust in the characters, but also has the potential to disgust the audience. Kolnai regards sexual acts as one of the key elicitors of disgust. He argues that ‘anything with a sexual accent can easily come to have a disgusting effect on the majority of persons’.74.Kolnai’s broad application to the relation between sex and disgust is perhaps too vague to be regarded as a meaningful point.

However, he goes on to more specifically argue that ‘disordered sexuality represents for the sense of disgust, above all what is disorderly, unclean, clammy, the unhealthy excess of life.’75 Again, Kolnai could be criticised here on his conservatism and generalisation in that he omits a definition of what might be regarded as ‘disordered sexuality’. However, his thoughts are applicable here in that the markedly unusual quality of Moll’s outward appearance reminds the onlooker of the human body- and of its animalistic components. It is not so much the transgressive sex act in itself that produces disgust, but rather the focus it brings to the body in a subverted way.

In response to Sebastian, Sir Alexander enhances the level of hatred portrayed:

A scurvy woman,

On whom the passionate old man swore he doted;

A creature, saith he, nature hath brought forth

74 Kolnai, On Disgust, 66. 75Ibid, 67. 31

To mock the sex of woman. It is a thing

One knows not how to name; her birth began

Ere she was all made.

….///

Nay, more, let this strange thing walk, stand or sit,

No blazing star draws more eyes after it.76

In contrast to Sebastian’s short sharp line, Alexander’s tirade indicates a sense of mounting pressure.

His speech is an accumulation of strange, somewhat confusing metaphors. However, the pauses in speech, as indicated by the comma, for example, ‘a scurvy woman,’ effectively allow space for reflection. The word ‘scurvy’ is enough to produce disgust alone. The now obsolete meaning of the word which was in circulation in the 17th century meant ‘covered with scurf; suffering from, or of the nature of, skin disease; scurfy, scabby.’77 Here the reference to skin again implies a bodily abnormality, a contagiousness, an unattractiveness. As in the first scene, Moll is again referred to as a ‘creature’, unhuman, unusual. This is reiterated by the use of ‘thing’ implying a limited vocabulary to describe such a person. The word ‘thing’ has many different uses and meanings- one that was in circulation during the 17th century but now obsolete was ‘a matter brought before a court of law; a charge brought.’78 There are therefore connotations with criminality which stem from the use of the word which gain further significance when considering the Moll’s ‘Cutpurse’ surname. Reflecting on contemporary understandings of the word, Heidegger’s ‘Thing Theory’, and the notion that an object becomes a ‘thing’ when it can no longer carry out its common function79 (for example when a glass is

76 Roaring Girl (Brown, Poston, Williamson),1.2.332-341. 77Oxford English Dictionary Online, s.v. “Scurvy (adj. 1a)”, accessed February 11,2020, https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/173951?rskey=pHvZmT&result=2&isAdvanced=false#eid. 78Oxford English Dictionary Online, s.v. “Thing (n.2a)”, accessed February 20, 2020, https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/200786?rskey=hPAKfz&result=1#eid. 79 Martin Heidegger, Being and Time: A Translation of Sein Und Zeit 1927, trans. Joan Stambaugh (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1996), 70. 32

cracked and cannot hold liquid), is relevant in light of Moll’s rebellion against gender norms and her inability to function as is expected of a young woman. Sir Davy responds to Sir Alexander with, ‘A monster, 'tis some monster.’80 Again, the contrast of the short snappy line with the more descriptive speech of Sir Alexander, draws attention to the summarised version- that she is a ‘monster’, the repetition of which reinforces her unhuman qualities, again enhancing the sense of intrigue we have towards her character.

The suspicion expressed by Sir Alexander is related to the possibility of corruption within his family’s blood line. The breaking down of the boundaries which distinguish Moll from him are therefore a real possibility, thus an anxiety at the outside Moll entering and altering the blood of the family is the specific type of disgust demonstrated by Sir Alexander. This tells us something useful about the gender relations in terms of the body at the time. The early modern understanding of the body firmly associated excess with the female, and restraint and reason with the male. According to the

Galenic humoral model much prescribed to at the time, men as a sex were considered hotter and drier than women.81 This is demonstrated by the different humoral qualities demonstrated in fig. 3.

Further, women are held to be more impressionable than men because their brains are softer, to resemble children in the inconstancy of their feelings, and to be susceptible to different passions.82

However, in her work on love sickness and gender Lesel Dawson proposes that the process of love diverts the body from its normal course, ‘preconceived notions of the gendered conception of excess were somewhat subverted.’ 83 According to the Hippocratic and Galenic models lovesickness causes or is the result of a disruption in humoral balance. Dawson notes that ‘rather than confining individuals to strict gender roles, lovesickness often releases them from conventions of gender and sexual orientation […] love is regarded as an emasculating force that leads to a reversal of the

80Roaring Girl (Brown, Poston, Williamson),1.2.342. 81 Kern Paster, Humoring the Body: Emotions and the Shakespearean Stage, 13. 82 Susan James, Passions and Action: The Emotions in Seventeenth Century Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 8. 83 Dawson, Love Sickness and Gender in Early Modern English Literature,20. 33

traditional gender hierarchy.’84 The fact that Sebastian is supposedly in love with Moll implies to his father that he is under some sort of spell, that he cannot possibly be in his right mind ‘Will you love such a poison?’85 This emasculation that is associated with love sickness is elevated in the case of

Sebastian, who apparently falls in love with a manly woman who ‘Tis woman more than man,/man more than woman’.86 Whilst this may inform some of the disgust incited in audience, it is instead the specific language which is used to convey disgust which creates a reaction of disgust itself.

Fig. 3, Diagram of Humoral model noting differences between males and females, “Quinta Essentia” by Leonhard Thurneysser, Leipzig, 1574, source: Shakespeare.org (http://collections.shakespeare.org.uk/exhibition/exhibition/method- in-the-madness/object/method-in-the-madness-the-humours).

The language of The Roaring Girl has been recognised in its revived productions. One of the most famous revivals of The Roaring Girl is the Royal Shakespeare Company’s 1983 production directed by

Barry Kyle. This production paralleled Jacobean capitalism with Thatcherite Britain. Kyle argues that

‘the cultural anxieties about the economic change in Jacobean Britain were similar to the social

84 Ibid, 5. 85 Roaring Girl (Brown, Poston, Williamson),1.2.364. 86Ibid,1.2.337. 34

upheaval caused by Thatcher’s economic imperatives.’87 The main thrust of the production was therefore its focus on the increasingly capitalist society that came into existence, and the presence of the growing mercantile class evident in the play. It is difficult to detect how precisely disgust was handled in this production. According to one review in The Times it showcased the ‘authentic smell and street speech’88of Jacobean London. Although the review does not elaborate on how this was achieved, of what the specific smells were, it nevertheless implies that the language of disgust remained unaltered. The attempt to bring in smell also indicates the possibility for heightened emotional reaction in general to the acts on stage.

The linguistic devices used by Middleton and Dekker induce disgust in the audience, regardless of the context. They do not refer to any particular activities of Moll, and we do not see disgusting acts onstage. Yet the imagery that is used conjures a series of strange and unsettling images which prompt the audience to fear for the presence of Moll and feel a sort of disgust towards her by association. The way in which these instances are crafted aligns itself with the Kant’s notion that the disgusting may be aesthetic, if the skill of the artist overpowers the lowly feelings experienced in the moment. However, in the context of a staged performance, the anticipation and outrage experienced by the audience are heightened during these scenes. In performance the pace established by the dialogue leaves little time for thought, instead we experience the play through our emotions. Of course, this does not mean that we cannot reflect on the skill involved in evoking these emotions in retrospect. Important here is that the scenes discussed are part of a larger whole, and the evocation of pure disgust is essential for the comedy of the play to reach its full potential.

This is in contrast to how disgust operates in Ford’s ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore which will be considered when consulted the nature of disgust in 17th Century Tragedy.

6.iv. The Comedic Impact:

87 Sophia Lee Chi-fang, “The Roaring Girl in Retrospect: the RSC Production of 1983”, New Theatre Quarterly 30, no.3 (August 2014): 292, doi:10.1017/S0266464X14000517. 88 Ibid, 275. 35

The presence of comedy influences the way in which disgust operates. In Act 1, Scene 2, the continued rant of Sir Alexander takes places within the context of his son’s plot. We are therefore encouraged to laugh at Sir Alexander in equal measure that we are prompted to be disgusted by the infamous Moll. The hyperbolic nature of Sir Alexander’s rant, apparent in its length and the references to things beyond the earth, ‘no blazing star’, depicts Sir Alexander as a ridiculous figure that is vulnerable to manipulation. Therefore, in this instance the two reactions work together to make a more complex viewing experience. Nora Strohminger notes that disgust and comedy go hand in hand. She aptly notes that the reason for this may be that humour ‘often follows on the heels of a neutralized threat, or an incongruity resolution, or when we realize something is not as bad as it seems’.89 In the exchange between Sebastian and Sir Alexander this helps to explain how disgust is a source of comedy for the audience, but not for Sir Alexander: he does not know that this is a mere trick. Further, this theory can be applied to the entire structure of the play in relation to the audience’s own experience of disgust. Again Strohminger is useful in her observation that disgust is

‘is easy to provoke, and it permeates the imagination with peculiar force, even when the source is completely hypothetical or mimetic…ripe for exactly the sort of conditions that breed comedy: perceived social or environmental threats which are quickly seen for what they are—false alarms.’90

In this light the metaphorical references to hypothetical disgusting creatures or objects are less offensive because they are experienced at a safe distance- we are not visually shown the ‘flesh-fly’, and initially we are not shown Moll who is supposedly likened to it. If the level of disgust present in the opening stages of the play persisted throughout, if Moll was as dangerous and malicious as we are led to believe, then there would be little space for comedy. Rather, it is the precise undermining of the panic expressed by characters at the beginning which creates the comedy of the piece

89 Nina Strohminger, “Disgust Talked About”, Philosophy Compass 9, no. 7 (2014): 486, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/520cf78be4b0a5dd07f51048/t/53b6fa3de4b01e06b37bbbd4/1404500 541450/StrohmingerPhilCompass2014.pdf. 90 Ibid. 36

This dynamic is apparent in the juxtaposition between the descriptions of Moll, and her portrayal onstage. As opposed to being a threat, she helps Sebastian with his plot without an ulterior motive.

If we compare her speech to that of Sir Alexander it is measured and reasonable:

Moll: How many of our sex by such as thou

Have their good thoughts paid with a blasted name

That never deserved loosely, or did trip

In path of whoredom beyond cup and lip?91

The iambic pentameter of Moll’s soliloquy in this scene establishes a measured, consistent rhythm, thus presenting Moll as a sensible character. This is reinforced via the rhyming couplet ‘trip’ and ‘lip’.

Her self-defence is therefore composed in an eloquent manner, contradicting the description we have had of her before her entrance. This further reinforces the comedic element of the disgust prompted earlier in the performance, thus demonstrating the ability of theatre to develop emotions and creates instances of irony. The disgust experienced through the language is felt in the moment but laughed at in retrospect. Despite this, the figure of the female dressing as the male and eschewing marriage may have created a different response in the audience of the time, who may not have been as forgiving at a contemporary reader or audience member coming to the play. Yet in saying this, the presence of the female who dresses like a male would not have been out of place within the realms of the theatre. All parts on English stages were played by male actors up until

1660, therefore the extent to which cross dressing incites disgust within the confines of the theatre is presumably limited. Indeed, the consistent anxieties displayed by Sir Alexander at the manly woman create another layer of humour via irony when taking into consideration that all other female parts, for example Mary, were played by men in costume. Sophia Li Chi-fang argues that in

1611 Moll’s ‘outrageous behaviour made her the subject of gossip in London’s theatrical

91 Roaring Girl (Brown, Poston, Williamson),3.1.1176-1179. 37

community.’92 The play was first performed at the Fortune. The Constitutory of London Correction

Book recorded that Mary Frith, the character which roaring girl Moll Cutpurse is based off, appeared at the Fortune Theatre dressed in man’s apparel93. Frith gained fame from her ‘transgressive performance of gender.’94 This demonstrates the extent to which attention and intrigue was directed at those who subverted or questioned gender norms. Mary’s presence at the theatre on occasion was one of the incentives which the audience had in going to see the play. This implies that the curiosity at the cross-dressing woman overpowered feelings of disgust that it may have raised.

This is of course speculation, but it further demonstrates the possibility of humour diffusing disgust within the comedy.

6.v. Relation to Other Early Modern Comedies:

It is misguided to take The Roaring Girl as an archetypal comedy for the early 17th century. Indeed, an archetype for comedy did not exist during this time, and many writers composed dramas in their own distinct style. The Roaring Girl does however have many features of the popular sub-genre City

Comedy. This type of drama was characterised by its London setting as opposed to a foreign fantasy one, portraying ‘deeds and language such as men do use’.95 These contained grittier characters, such as Moll, and often contained a moralistic message. As with The Roaring Girl disgust is evoked in many of these comedies in order to produce humour, but also to convey a deeper message. Perhaps one of the best-known writers of early modern City Comedies is Ben Jonson. Many of Jonson’s plays use disgust in order to establish character and keep the audience engaged. Like with The Roaring

Girl, much of this disgust is established linguistically. For example, in The Alchemist (1610) is set

92 Chi-fang, “The Roaring Girl in Retrospect: the RSC Production of 1983”, 274. 93 Michelle O’Callaghan, Thomas Middleton, Renaissance Dramatist (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009), 47. 94 O’Callaghan, Thomas Middleton, Renaissance Dramatist, 48. 95 Laura Kolb “Jonson’s old age: The force of disgust”, Disgust in Early Modern English Literature, ed. Natalie K. Eschenbaum & Barbra Correll (New York & London: Routledge, 2016), 162. 38

against the backdrop of the plague in London. During the fight which takes place at the opening of the play Subtle explains how he saved Face:

Thou vermin, have I ta'en thee out of dung,

So poor, so wretched, when no living thing

Would keep thee company, but a spider, or worse?96

As with The Roaring Girl we see zoomorphism used as a technique to degrade a character and incite disgust in the audience. The reference to ‘dung’ heightens the disgust evoked by the reference to

‘vermin’. The hyperbolic nature of this speech, evident in the repetition of ‘so’ and the rhetorical question creates a comedic effect when considered in the context of a small fight. Laura Kolb argues that Jonson’s use of linguistically prompted disgust ‘commands attention and it compels a response’.97 The vivid use of language to convey disgusting imagery adds to the dynamism and comedy of the dramatic piece, much like it does in The Roaring Girl.

6.vi. Comedy and the Aesthetic:

It is now established that the disgust produced in The Roaring Girl enhances the comedic impact of the drama. But do the comedic elements necessarily mean that the play can be considered aesthetic? On a surface level there are many connections between the aesthetic and the comedic.

Mordechai Gordon draws parallels between the ‘noninstrumental’98 attitude that is characteristic of each. He further argues that the ‘imagination’99 is central to both humour and the aesthetic, as is their subjective nature and their ability to be ‘beneficial in providing social criticism and exposing inconvenient truths that might otherwise be difficult for many people to accept.’100 Each of these

96 The Alchemist, ed. Charles Montgomery Hathaway (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1903), 1.1.64-66. 97 Kolb, “Jonson’s old age: The force of disgust”, 165. 98 Mordechai Gordon, “Exploring the Relationship between Humor and Aesthetic Experience”, The Journal of Aesthetic Education 46, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 113, doi:10.5406/jaesteduc.46.1.0110. 99 Ibid. 100 Ibid,114. 39

components can be found in The Roaring Girl, particularly in its ability to challenge expectations surrounding gender norms and the place of women within 17th society in a light hearted manner. As

I have demonstrated, the triggering of disgust is central to achieving this. However, the relation between the comedic and the aesthetic is more complex than a simple list of similarities. Indeed,

Gordon himself goes on to suggest that comedy lacks the depth which the aesthetic requires.101 He further argues that contrary to the aesthetic, humour ‘is primarily assessed not on the basis of its beauty but rather by how funny it is.’102 In this regard having a comedic component does not automatically grant a piece of art an aesthetic value. Therefore, detecting The Roaring Girl’s comedic appeal does not necessarily refute Kant’s claim. However, in analysing the play it is apparent that the instances which incite disgust do add value to the piece, as opposed to detract value from its artistic merits. As Kolb’s comment on the compelling nature of Jonson’s use of language demonstrates- the descriptions of the disgusting have a vivacity which demand to be appreciated for the skill in which they are written. Kolb goes as far as to argue that disgust has a rhetorical power equal to that of beauty, as argued for in the Renaissance by Philip Sidney and in more recent times by Dave

Hickey103. This is of course dependent on the way in which disgust is presented. In the cases of

Middleton, Dekker, and Jonson it appears that Kolb’s claim rings true. This is evident in the immediacy and thrill which is induced alongside, and because, of the disgust which is encouraged via skilled linguistic techniques. It is difficult to determine the extent to which this relates to Kant’s argument that the disgusting can be portrayed in art so long as ‘the artistic presentation of the object is…distinguished in our sensation from the nature of this object’.104 In the instance of linguistic portrayals of disgusting things- the artistry involved is appreciated from the outset.

However, its success is measured by the levels of disgust felt- therefore that which is most appreciated is that which explicitly confronts the most gruesome parts of the disgusting. In this

101 Ibid. 102 Ibid, 115. 103 Kolb, “Jonson’s old age: The force of disgust”, 165. 104 Ibid. 40

regard the impact of disgust in the City Comedies of the early 17th century contradict Kant’s hypothesis.

7.i. ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore, Summary of Plot:

‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore is a play written by John Ford, first published in 1633. Like The Roaring Girl, the main source of disgust in this play is the sexual deviation of the main characters. The play is set in Parma and concerns the incestuous relationship between brother and sister Giovanni and

Annabella. A number of suitors fight for Annabella’s hand in marriage, with Annabella’s father favouring Sorenzo. When Annabella learns that she is pregnant with Giovanni’s child she resigns to marrying Sorenzo. Annabella and Giovanni’s secret is found out, causing Sorenzo to seek revenge. In the final scene Giovanni kills Annabella, the shock of which kills their father, Giovanni then kills

Sorenzo, and Sorenzo’s servant Vasque kills Giovanni. The subplot of the play focuses on Sorenzo’s ex-mistress seeking revenge on Sorenzo for breaking up her marriage and killing her husband

Richardetto. Unknown to the other characters Richardetto is alive and plotting his revenge. The traces of disgust in ‘Tis Pity are more varied and intense than those evident in The Roaring Girl.

Whereas in the latter we experience disgust through the description of disgusting things, in the former we see disgusting acts take place onstage, and this enhances the intensity of the emotion. In this regard the play provides an archetype against which to judge how disgust might differ in the context of tragedy from that of comedy, and if this alters its aesthetic potential.

7.ii. Incest as Plot Device

The main source of disgust in the play is the incestuous act between brother and sister. early modern attitudes to incest were much the same as those held now, perhaps even stronger due to prevalence of the church. Richard Golden argues that incest ‘revealed the ultimate pollutant of family relations, adding confusion to the perfect household...Incest consequently challenged 41

Christianity’s sexual politics and the state’s image of the family.’105 Golden’s use of the term

‘pollutant’ to describe the impact of the act, indicates its destructive quality and also how it taints the family unit. It is therefore often deemed as selfish, putting one’s own sexual desire ahead of societal and familial duty. This was particularly the case in early modern England in which the family unit and its reputation held grave importance. Incest brings structures such as ‘family’ into question and challenges the status quo. Incest’s sexual nature, and its deviation from the sexual norm, make it a subject of intrigue and disgust.

The first British revival of ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore was not staged until 1923. Kate Wilkinson notes that this was ‘relatively late for revivals of Renaissance plays…even then the text was cut to reduce its impact.’106This indicates the shock and disgust with which the incest plot was received. Indeed, the incest plot has been at the core of reductive arguments which consider Ford’s work as little more than decadent pieces of immoral sensationalism. Many critics, such as Cyrus Hoy and Robert

Ornstein, conflate Giovanni with Ford believing that the play is a demonstration of the merits of incest.107 Writing in 1932 WA Neilson argues that Ford’s ‘farce lacks much of the buffoonery of his predecessors. It is not realistic; it is not the expression of high spirits; it is a perfunctory attempt to season tragedy and romance with an admixture of rubbish, without humour and without joy’.108 The evidently harsh evaluation of Ford’s work indicates the strong reaction it has ignited in critics since its first performance. Neilson’s classification of the play as a ‘farce’ links to accusations of melodrama that have been levelled at ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore. Robert B Heilmann notes that Ford is a

‘great melodramatist whose work at times feels the pressure to be tragic’.109 The implication here

105 Richard M. Golden, “Notions of Social and Religious Pollution in Richard Remy’s Demonaltry”, Politics, Ideology, and the Law in Early Modern Europe: Essays in Honour of J.H.M. Shalom, ed. Adrianna Bakos (Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 1994), 31. 106 Kate Wilkinson, “The Performance History”, ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore: a Critical Guide, ed. Lisa Hopkins (London: Continuum, 2010), 34. 107 Lisa Hopkins, ed., ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore: a Critical Guide (London: Continuum, 2010), 25. 108 W.A. Neilson, “Ford and Shirley”, The Cambridge History of English Literature, ed. A.W. Ward, A.R. Waller, vol. 6 of 15 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1932), 193. 109 Robert B Heilmann, Tragedy and Melodrama: Versions of Experience (Seattle, WA: Wisconsin University, 1968), 299. 42

being that the play lacks the substance and gravity which tragedy demands. The extravagant end scene in which most of the characters are killed does undermine the play’s classification as tragedy, as it verges on the ridiculous. However, the incest plot is fulfilled in a distinctly tragic manner: an individual’s fatal flaw places him in a position at odds with the demands of his society with no way to redeem his situation in a favourable manner. Indeed, as Karl J. Holznecht notes ‘‘Tis Pity She’s a

Whore is a serious treatment of the tragic theme of incest, which, far from condoning such a repulsive sin, treats it with rare understanding and restraint.’110 I will now evaluate the extent to which this is the case, and how this impacts the play’s aesthetic status.

The play begins in media-res with an explicit introduction to the incestuous desires of Giovanni. A disgusting act is therefore central to the structure of the play:

Giovanni: Say that we had one father, say one womb,

(Curse to my joys) gave both us life, and birth;

Are we not therefore each to other bound

So much the more by Nature; by the links

Of blood, of reason; Nay if you will have ’t,

Even of Religion, to be ever one,

One soul, one flesh, one love, one heart, one All?111

The brother and sister relationship between the two is explicit from the beginning of the play. The reference to ‘one father’ establishes the societal family unit in which they are both a part, reinforcing the taboo nature of their sexual relationship in terms of the role of marriage in maintaining a healthy family lineage. The extension of this to ‘one womb’ introduces the dynamic of

110 Karl J. Holznecht, Outlines of Tudor and Stuart Plays 1497-1642 (London: Barnes & Noble, 1947), 390. 111 ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore, ed. Brian Morris (London: Ernest Ben Limited, 1968), 1.1.27-34. (References are to act, line, and scene). 43

physical disgust which is maintained throughout the play. The womb is the site of birth, but also reminds us of our own animality: it is a site of excess. The full relevance of this will be considered further upon analysis of how disgust is generated at the female body in the play. The repeated use of the first person singular and plural indicates that the object of disgust is not that which is described, but something that is felt by the character of Giovanni. The physical connection between Giovanni and Annabella is apparent in the repeated reference to the body in the first passage, to the ‘blood’ and ‘flesh’ which they share. Their familial status is reiterated throughout the early stages of the play, emphasising the forbidden nature of their sexual love. The positioning of this speech at the beginning of the play uses disgust to draw the audience in- we are both repelled and intrigued by the figure onstage.

Incest necessitates two characters, thus Annabella’s absence at the beginning of the play creates a sense of suspense in relation to her reciprocation of the feelings. Any disgust experienced through

Giovanni’s declarations of love is intensified by the reciprocation of this love at the end of Act 1

Scene 1: ‘Love me or Kill me Brother’112, ‘Love me or Kill me Sister’113 ‘You are my Brother

Giovanni’114 ‘You/ my Sister Annabella’.115 The repetition of brother and sister reinforces their primary relationship as blood siblings. During this scene their love is embodied via the kiss Giovanni and Annabella share : ‘He kisses her’.116 This elevates the source of disgust from language and feelings, to disgusting acts taking place in front of the audience. It moves the plot forward: we see the incest accepted by the other half and this causes further outrage and disbelief because of its perceived immorality. Disgust is used here as a function in the plot: it is used to thrill the audience.

Giovanni’s passion is evident in his first confession of love for his sister, ‘One soul, one flesh, one love, one heart, one All’. The repetition of ‘one’ and the listing device accumulating in ‘All’ indicate

112 Ibid, 1.1.252. 113 Ibid, 1.1.255. 114 Ibid, 1.1.227. 115 Ibid, 1.1.228-229. 116 Ibid,1.1.258. 44

the all-consuming excessive passion which Giovani feels towards his sister. Lesel Dawson refers to

Giovani’s intermingling of the spiritual with the bodily as a ‘perversion of Neoplatonism,’117 therefore hinting at a love which is driven more by sexual desire than spiritual union. The physical component of this union suggests an excess overflowing from the female to the male. The reference to the heart is particularly important, it was regarded as ‘the seat and Organe of all passions and affections’,118 if the two are sharing the heart, then they are sharing the same humoral qualities.

Indeed, one could argue that Giovanni conceives himself as one with Annabella. The extremity of

Giovanni’s emotions calls to mind Millers theory of the connection between disgust and surfeit.119

As discussed earlier Miller argues that the ‘sickness of surfeit’ is a key trigger for disgust. The excessiveness of Giovanni’s language and love and the introspective all-consuming way in which he carries out his actions, establish him as a figure of disgust- one that is not aware of the boundaries of socially acceptable behaviour. Thus, disgust is central to both plot and character formation in the play.

7.iii. Anatomy Onstage:

Incest onstage is not unique to ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore. Perhaps the most well-known play to tackle the issue is Sophocles’ Oedipus. Indeed, the topic became increasingly popular during the early modern period. L. E. Bueler argues that incest is a recurring feature of Jacobean and Caroline theatre. She notes that at least forty-two plays of the period feature the trope in a substantial way.120 The prominence of the topics in theatre of the time suggests that it was something that sold well, something that audiences wanted to see. To this ends it could be viewed as a device used to encourage a sensationalist response to a given play. The shock value inherent in ‘Tis Pity is explicit throughout, particularly in relation to the incest plot as discussed. This reaches its climax at the end

117 Dawson, Love Sickness and Gender in Early Modern English Literature, 146. 118 Richard Burton, The Anatomy of Melancholy, ed. Thomas C. Faulkner, Nicolas K. Kiessling, Rhonda L Blair, vol 1 (Oxford: Claredon Press, 1989-2000), 145. 119 Miller, The Anatomy of Disgust, 10. 120 L. E. Bueler, “The structural uses of incest in English renaissance drama”, Renaissance Drama 15, no.3 (1984): 17, https://www.jstor.org/stable/41913883. 45

of the play in which Annabella’s heart is brought on stage on a dagger during a banquet. The culmination of the play in the setting of a banquet reinforces the consistent connection between love and food that is maintained throughout the play, and thus the notion that the gluttony and surfeit of food consumption is interchangeable with that of sexual lust. The presence of the heart on stage is one that has been much discussed by critics of Ford’s play- it is a moment so strange and so extravagant that it has caused confusion surrounding its full significance. The defamiliarization of the human anatomy is a core source of disgust. It extends beyond the disgust experienced in the language of the play, or even that of the incestuous kisses between brother and sister. In the instance when the heart comes on stage the audience is confronted with their own anatomy.

Matthew Martin uses Levi Strauss’ theory of the cooked and uncooked to frame the moment as an exposition of the raw, uncooked, and uncivilised human body on show.121 This can be further related to Rozin’s idea that disgust is generated via the revelation of our own animality. The sensationalist responses the scene would have generated in early modern performances is further evident in the early modern grotesque fascination in human anatomy. Fig.4. demonstrates an anatomical theatre, and how the human body is turn into a spectacle. In The Body Emblazoned: Dissection and the

Human Body in Renaissance Culture, Jonathan Sawday analyses the rising popularity of anatomical theatre during the Renaissance. He notes how the bodies would be used in novelty ways: in the anatomy theatre, the anatomist reads a lecture upon the cadaver he has just dissected, while in the anatomy books the cadaver strikes emblematically significant--and at times erotic--poses.122 The fixation on the human body indicates the intrigue that spectators had towards it at this time: the

121 Matthew Martin, “The Raw and the Uncooked in Ford’s ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore”, Early Theatre 15, no. 2 (July 2012): 132, www.jstor.org/stable/43499629. 122 Jonathan Sawday, The Body Emblazoned: Dissection and the Human Body in Renaissance Culture (London, 1995), 64-9. 46

popularity of anatomy theatre suggests that the presence of body parts onstage is something which drew audiences to pay to watch, but the aesthetic status of this spectacle is questionable.

Fig. 4, Willem Isaacsz Swanenburch, the anatomical theatre of Leiden University (Vera anatomiae Lugduno-Batavae cum sceletis et reliquis quae ibi extant delineatio – title on object), after Jan Cornelisz. van ’t Woudt (Andries Clouck: 1610). Engraving, 33 x 39.4 cm, source: Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.123 The heart as metaphor is used by Ford throughout the play, as is evident in Giovanni’s declaration of

‘One soul, one flesh, one love, one heart, one All’, discussed earlier. However here the metaphor is obliterated and instead we are presented with the real heart in all its physicality onstage. The duality of the human body was particularly relevant in early modern society, it was both a sign system rich in metaphor, but also a ‘biological entity’.124 The disgust inherent in Giovanni’s act stems from the obliteration from metaphor to actuality. As Denis Gauer notes, the heart in this scene 'emphasizes how artificial the link between the symbolic instances of Culture and the real ones of Nature actually is.'125 Again, this links to Martin’s application of the “uncooked” status to this act which brings the uncivilised animalistic aspects of the human onstage and encourages us to rethink the previous metaphorical uses of the heart as metaphor. The presentation of the heart on the dagger further encapsulates the extremities of Giovanni. The multitude of deaths which take place in the final scene

123 “Anatomical theater of Leiden University, 1610”, Rijksmuseum website, accessed May 8, 2020, https://www.google.com/search?q=rijksmuseum&rlz=1C1GCEA_enIE840IE840&oq=rijsk&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j 0l7.4225j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8. 124 Martin, “The Raw and the Uncooked in Ford’s ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore”, 133. 125 Denis Gauer, “Heart and Blood: Nature and Culture in 'Tis Pity She's a Whore”, Cahiers Élisabéthains 31, no.1 (April 1, 1987):55, https://doi.org/10.1177/018476788703100107. 47

contribute to a melodramatic effect that can be linked to the prevalence of disgust within the play.

The disgust here takes on a darker tone than that of The Roaring Girl, thus indicating the malleability of the causes and effects of the emotion within the dramatic space.

7.iv. Sensationalism:

However, it is necessary to go beyond the obvious sensationalism of disgust in ‘Tis Pity in order to detect what other effect it may have, and how it might be possible to counter Kant’s claims. Bueler argues that there are ‘dramaturgical virtues’126 of the incest motif. These include ‘(1) its structural usefulness in complicating and unravelling plots; (2) its peculiar economy for probing the moral relationship between individual passions and social well-being’.127 The first point implies that incest makes for a good story, however this perhaps feeds more into the idea that it is sensationalist, than it counteracts the assumption. Bueler’s second point is of greater merit-the idea that confronting an audience with disgusting things such as incest forces them to consider their place in the social world, why we find them disgusting, and how they match up with our value system. Indeed, the character of Annabella, the female protagonist of the piece who is victimised by Sorenzo and killed by her brother- is one that we both side with and repel from. The depiction of her character and the way that others speak of her sets up a tension between our feelings of disgust and our feelings of sympathy. For example, in In Act 4, her body is again used as an inciter of disgust:

Sorenzo: The heyday of your luxury be fed

Up to a surfeit, and could none but I

Be picked out to be cloak to your close tricks,

Your belly-sports? Now I must be the Dad

126 Bueler, “The structural uses of incest in English renaissance drama”,116. 127 Ibid. 48

To all that gallimaufry that’s stuffed

In thy Corrupted bastard-bearing womb128

The womb of love and creation of Act 1 is tainted by the sexual union of Annabella and Giovanni.

Miller notes that the process of creation can be a source of disgust. He argues that death ‘horrifies and disgusts not just because it smells revoltingly bad, but because it is not an end to the process of living but part of a cycle of eternal recurrence. The having lived and the living unite to make up the organic world of generative rot – rank, smelling, and upsetting to the touch.’129 Thus Miller implies that death in itself is not disgusting, but rather the cyclical process that it alludes to is. The abundance implied by the ‘generative rot’ suggests that the process of bringing new life is also, to an extent disgusting. Indeed this belief was held strongly in the early modern period, especially due to the heightened interest in the anatomical human body as discussed earlier. For example Latin phrases alluding to this idea, ‘Nascentes Morimur’ (we are born to die), ‘Principium Moriendi Natalis

Est’ (birth is the beginning of death), and ‘Mors Ultima Linea Rerum’ (death is the line that marks the end of all), can be found on an etching from 1610 depicting the anatomical theatre of the Leiden

University.130 This demonstrates the fascination with death at the time, but also how it is linked to birth. The physical display of the womb onstage is therefore a marker of death, in addition to a symbol of new life.

Annabella’s pregnancy therefore has the potential to generate disgust from the outset. The reference to the womb here also alludes to the seventeenth century suspicion of the female uterus.

In her study on early modern bodies, Mary E. Fissel documents how from 1603 the womb was regarded as the ‘the source of many of women’s maladies’131 in vernacular texts. The generative

128 ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore, (Morris) 4.3.9-14. 129 Miller, The Anatomy of Disgust, 40. 130 “Anatomical theater of Leiden University, 1610”, Rijksmuseum website, accessed May 8, 2020, https://www.google.com/search?q=rijksmuseum&rlz=1C1GCEA_enIE840IE840&oq=rijsk&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j 0l7.4225j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8. 131 Mary E. Fissell, Vernacular Bodies: The Politics of Reproduction in Early Modern England (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 53. 49

qualities of the womb were a cause of ‘wonder and amazement’132 but also of ‘anxiety and concern, leading men to mutter about witches and harlots’.133 The very presence of the womb onstage therefore has the potential to evoke such connections in the audience.

Indeed the language of disgust used by Sorenzo calls to mind the negative associations with the womb which were widespread at the time. Sorenzo’s speech is full of images of excess: ‘luxury’,

‘stuffed’, ‘surfeit’, thus provoking a strong sense of disgust. The use of the ‘belly’ in place of womb calls to mind the part of the body which receives food, reinforcing the gluttonous image of Annabella which Sorenzo’s tirade establishes. This connection to food is reinforced by the reference to

‘gallimaufry’. According to the Oxford English Dictionary this now obsolete word meant ‘A dish made by hashing up odds and ends of food; a hodge-podge, a ragout.’134 The idea of liquids and foodstuff being mixed within the body has connotations with the process of digestion. Attention is therefore drawn to the animalistic bodily functions of Annabella, this in turn produces disgust. The mixture also connotes gluttony, again which alludes to surfeit and the disgust which it produces, but also to the sexual lust of Giovani and Annabella- the notion of stuffing oneself is a repeated idea in the descriptions of Annabella when she becomes pregnant. The multiple ways in which the metaphor operates indicates the interconnection between different sources of disgust. When the womb is referred to it is tainted by the modifiers ‘Corrupted bastard-bearing’. The capitalisation of

‘Corrupted’ indicates the stress placed on the word in the line. There is a sense that the body has sinned and therefore can never return to its original, innocent state. The plosive alliteration

‘bastard-bearing’ reinforces the status of the body as a vessel for sin, this cannot be hidden because of the visible bump that pregnancy produces. In contrast to The Roaring Girl the metaphors and imagery which produce disgust in relation to Annabella focus is on a particular incident and aspect of

132 Ibid. 133 Ibid. 134 The Oxford English Dictionary Online, s.v. “Gallimaufry (n.1)”, accessed March 4, 2020, https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/76303?rskey=G4d7kc&result=1&isAdvanced=false#eid. 50

her body- the pregnancy. Instead of being likened to other things, the bodily processes which she undergoes are directly related to her specific situation.

However, over the course of the play we have also viewed Annabella’s wit when dealing with potential suitors, and the purity of her love for her brother. Unlike Giovanni, Annabella demonstrates restraint when speaking of this love: ‘For every sigh that thou has spent for me, /I have sigh’d ten; for every tear, shed twenty’.135Such a revelation is multifaceted in its significance.

The expansion from one to ‘ten’, and one to ‘twenty’ indicates a more profoundly felt adoration than that of Giovani. However, paradoxically, the expression of this love in precise numerical terms hints at a balance or measurement which is lacking in Giovani’s frequent outbursts. We therefore get the impression of the female feeling deeply but managing these feelings so that any ‘excess’ cannot be traced. In terms of dialogue spoken, the male to female ratio is tilted so that Giovanni is the raging one, whereas Annabella is passively passed from man to man, she goes with what appears the most logical and what will be right for her reputation, but she is unable to conceal the physical excess of the child. In this instance the revelation of her own internal excess is forced upon her, there is a clear passivity to the female’s expression of excess. This complicates any accusation that may be made at the play for inducing disgust to a sensationalist end. As with Moll in The Roaring

Girl, the figural explicit commentary of others is in tension with how the characters present themselves. 136 However, the disparity here is more complicated than a simple binary- Annabella has indulged in incestuous acts, therefore the words of Sorenzo are not completely false. The audience is therefore put into a position of crisis, having to balance feelings of disgust with sympathy for the leading lady.

7.v. Tragedy and the Aesthetic:

135 ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore, (Morris) 1.2.244-245. 136 Pfister, The Theory and Analysis of Drama, 185. 51

Tragedy’s relation to the aesthetic is perhaps more complex than comedy’s. At the offset tragedy is more difficult to precisely define than comedy. However, a definitive component of tragedy which makes it more readily compatible with the aesthetic is its philosophical drive. 137 In this sense it has the depth that the aesthetic requires which comedy can often lack. Disgust is prevalent to varying levels in many tragedies. Whether that be in the form of gruesome violence in Macbeth, the cannibalism in Titus Andronicus, or indeed the incestuous relations at the core of ‘Tis Pity She’s a

Whore. As I have demonstrated disgust operates in numerous ways in ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore.

However, whether this enhances its tragic appeal is yet to be made clear. In his work on tragedy and the aesthetic Aaron Ridley argues that ‘tragedy that failed to disturb would, in at least one sense, be a failure’.138 Here Ridley alludes to tragedy’s portrayal of catastrophic acts on stage which prompt the audience to indulge in their own feelings of sorrow or pain in a cathartic release. Ridley’s use of the word ‘disturb’ is noteworthy when attempting to detect disgust’s position within tragedy. To disturb implies to agitate and unsettle. It points to tragedy’s role in confronting an audience with unpleasant philosophical questions in a dark manner. It therefore seems that disgust is a helpful tool within tragedy to disquiet an audience by presenting them with taboos and that which is normally hidden.

Indeed, the incest plot in ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore is the source of the tragedy of the piece. In addition to demonstrating shocking acts onstage, its centrality to the drama raises larger issues and questions such as man’s place within society- individual needs versus societal duties. The evocation of disgust in the audience as opposed to just the characters achieves the disturbance which tragedy so often depends on. It encourages a philosophical reflection on the cause of these feelings and places the audience in a state of conflict- as we have seen in the complex portrayal of Annabella.

137 Aaron Ridley, “Tragedy”, The Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics, ed. Jerrold Levinson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 408. 138 Ridley, “Tragedy”, 411. 52

Robert Douglas-Fairhurst addresses disgust’s place in tragedy in depth in his essay “Disgust in

Tragedy”. Fairhurst goes further than Ridley in terms of disgust’s place in tragedy. He argues that the tragic form has ‘successfully reinvented both itself and its audience (is) through its use of another piece of cultural thinking that involves similar negotiations between self and other, good and evil, life and death: the complex set of responses that cluster around disgust.’139 In this bold state Douglas-Fairhurst implies that disgust is not just complementary to tragedy, but rather it is essential for it to operate successfully. Whilst the validity of this statement is questionable, Douglas-

Fairhurst makes a convincing case for the centrality of the emotion of disgust in achieving tragedy.

Further still Douglas-Fairhurst draws parallels between what disgust and tragedy achieve, and what their purpose might be. He notes that ‘like tragedy, disgust is central to our attempts to make sense of the world, both on and off the page; ethically and aesthetically, it is one of the key ways in which a culture defines its priorities, conventions, and acceptable transgressions.’140 With this in mind the importance of disgust in ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore is apparent. The incitement of disgust is necessary to understand why the actions we watch unfold may be considered tragic. By feeling disgust at actions as they unfold onstage, we are confronted with the cultural codes and the impact of their subversion. The emotional reception of these philosophical ideas grants us a more intimate understanding of the questions posed by the tragic drama.

Many theories on disgust focus on the divide between culture and savagery. The instinctive animalistic parts of the human often prompt disgust . This is another notable parallel that can be drawn between the two phenomena. Douglas-Fairhurst reflects that tragedy often ‘engages with this question of how much distance a particular society has succeeded in putting between itself and its atavistic earlier state.’141 This inquiry into the strength of civilised codes of conduct and convention is tested in tragedy time and time again. In Shakespeare’s King Lear structures such as

139 Robert Douglas-Fairhurst, “Tragedy and Disgust”, Tragedy in Transition, ed. Sarah Annes Brown Catherine Silverstone (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2007), 61. 140 Ibid.63. 141 Ibid. 65. 53

monarchy are placed under the microscope, the chaotic acts of brutality which take place indicate the fine line between culture and barbarism- thus inciting a level of disgust. In Ford’s ‘Tis Pity She’s a

Whore, the reference to an ‘atavistic earlier state’ takes the form of the incest between brother and sister, which rebels against the family structure and social bonds of marriage. The slippage from structured civilised rules alludes to their weak basis, and this is all part of the tragic model. In doing so, of course disgust is triggered by what Rozin calls the ‘animal reminder’ of what we are behind all the pretences of civilisation.

Tragedy is a well-respected genre and has been the centre of much theoretical discourse from the

17th century on. As I have demonstrated disgust is a useful tool within tragedy. However not all tragedies can necessarily be considered ‘aesthetic’. Disgust’s role in tragedy does not automatically deem it compatible with aesthetic experience. However, as my analysis has shown it is apparent that disgust does not necessarily prevent a piece from being considered aesthetic. Its evocation in ‘Tis

Pity She’s a Whore does not distract with its ugliness. Rather, the undergoing of the emotion adds a depth of aesthetic experience to the play and allows us to access philosophical questions on an intimate level.

8. Conclusion:

The emergence of disgust into the English lexicon at the end of the 16th century marked a moment in history acutely preoccupied with emotion and ideas of what constituted the ‘self’. Although my analysis has been limited to only two plays, the traces of disgust can be found in a multitude of plays from the period. This takes the form of disgusting acts onstage, reference to disgusting acts off stage, and the use of disgusting language, each of which ignite a strong reaction from audience members and readers of the drama of the time.

Attempts to define the precise nature of the disgust present in the drama of the period must take into consideration the different ways in which the emotion operates in comedy and in tragedy.

Further, within these genres many playwrights composed their pieces in a distinct style. As I have 54

demonstrated, although parallels can be drawn, for example, between the linguistic disgust achieved by Dekker and Middleton, and that established by Jonson, it is apparent that each playwright has their own grasp of the English language and comedy as a form. Individual style also plays a role in the way that disgust operates in tragedies of the time. For example, Ford approaches the topic of incest in a much more direct and arguably romanticised way than it is dealt with, for example, in

John Webster’s The Duchess of Malfi- in the latter the incest is one sided and expressed by the villain of the piece. A further step in researching disgust in the drama of the period would be to take a closer look at other prominent playwrights of the time.

In The Roaring Girl, Middleton and Dekker provide a text rich in scope for evaluating how disgust played a part in comedies of the time. In the case of The Roaring Girl disgust is evoked in order to be challenged. The hyperbolic nature of this disgust creates a sort of unrestricted propagation of disgust amongst characters. This contrasts with the measured language and character traits of the supposed disgusting. The Roaring Girl adopts a comedic response to the notion of disgust; however, we are invited to laugh at the disgusted as opposed to the supposed disgusting. The disgust in this instance operates in a nuanced way which differs from that apparent in many tragedies of the time.

It is apparent that the use of disgusting language does not hinder the aesthetic in this case. Instead the presence of disgust adds to the vibrancy of the play. It heightens our emotional response and works to aid the play’s message.

The extremity of incest in ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore, has repeatedly been disregarded as immoral, sensationalist and provocatively disgusting. It is therefore possible to deem this type of disgust as exemplary of Kant’s theory on disgust’s position within art. The physical display of the disgusting acts on stage garners an intensity of disgust, more than can be achieved through language alone.

However, disgust has a more complicated role in this drama than it may seem from a superficial reading. Rather than being merely sensationalist, the disgusting acts on stage put the audience into 55

a state of crisis and enhances the intensity of the tragedy achieved within the play. Disgust’s role in the tragedy of the time is perhaps therefore the strongest argument for refuting Kant’s claim.

9. Afterthought:

My analysis of how disgust operated in the 17th Century has been somewhat limited in its scope in that it is largely based on hypothetical audience reactions and follows a system of interpretation that may or may not have been enacted by the original audiences of these plays. The contextual background of the writing of the two plays analysed evidently points to a moment in history in which an awareness of disgust was growing. Although an audience today does not have the same frames of reference when watching a play, the theories that I have used to detect disgust in both plays are applicable to the 21st century as much as they are to the 17th century.

What does the circulation of early modern plays in the 21st century say about Kant’s claim on the relation between the aesthetic and disgust? Perhaps one of the most obvious cases to refute Kant’s claim is the fact that The Roaring Girl and ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore, as well as several other disgusting plays, have withheld the test of time and hold a place in the English literary canon. However, their place in a literary context must be differentiated from their theatrical status as a performed play. I will now therefore consult a number of contemporary reviews of each of the plays to get some sort of impression of their impact today, and how disgust might operate in each.

As already briefly mentioned, the RSC’s production of The Roaring Girl in 1983 is one of the highest profile revivals of the piece. The production’s focus on the economic context of the play which depicts the growing mercantile class and capitalist system indicates the RSC’s attempts to translate the play so that it is politically and socially relevant for the 20th century audience. As discussed, the disgust in this play is generated from its language and it is difficult to detect the extent to which scripts have been adapted judging by reviews alone. However, as noted- the productions use of

‘smell’ has been noted by numerous reviews hinting at the RSC’s attempts to fully immerse the audience in the world of 17th century London, and thus not shying away from potentially disgusting 56

moments. The Roaring Girl does not have an expansive performance history. After 1983 the play was not performed again in London until 2000. This performance took place at a pub theatre, the

Finborough.142 The review of the performance by Christopher Hoile does not mention disgust, but instead praises the ‘feminist’143 thrust of the play, arguing that it has been ‘so unjustly neglected.’144

As with the 1983 production, the review therefore focuses on the political significance of the play as opposed to the emotional reaction which particular scenes may prompt. This implies that the severity of language does not detract from the audience’s experience of the more contemplative issues which the play raises. However, a third noteworthy production of the play was produced, again by the RSC, in 2014. In this production the play was set in 1890, the reasoning for which remains unclear from reviews of the performance. Notably, one review in The Guardian comments on how the play ‘seethes with verbal filth’145 thus acknowledging the centrality of disgusting language to the piece. The reviewer Michael Billington does not regard this as offence, instead he comments on the authenticity and liveliness it brings to the play. It would seem that contemporary productions of the play have received a largely positive reception. Indeed the faults found in the play by reviewers are more concerned with its structural organisation and incoherent subplots.

‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore has a richer performance history than The Roaring Girl. It was first revived just 30 years after its first performance; however it had a large gap between its 17th century production and subsequent performances. It was next performed in 1923 at the Shaftsberry Theatre, and there were a number of high-profile performances throughout the 20th century. The gap in performances hints that the moralistic criticism levelled at the play impacted its performance history, and it could be speculated that the extremity of the incest plot is one of the key reasons that

142 Christopher Hoile, review of The Roaring Girl by Thomas Middleton and Thomas Dekker, directed by Abagail Anderson, Steam Industry, Finborough Theatre, London, Elsewhere, December 31, 2000, http://www.stage-door.com/Theatre/Elsewhere/Entries/2000/12/31_London,_GBR__The_Roaring_Girl.html. 143 Ibid. 144 Ibid. 145 Michael Billington, review of The Roaring Girl, by Thomas Middleton and Thomas Dekker, directed by Jo Davies, Royal Shakespeare Company, London, The Guardian, April 16, 2014, https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2014/apr/16/roaring-girl-review-dashing-lead-performance. 57

the play was not performed again until the 20th century. One notable production of the play is the

2005 production directed by Edward Dick at the Southwark Playhouse. Dick modernised the production with contemporary dress and intensified the notion of corruption surrounding the incestuous lovers.146 The play was reviewed by Michael Billington for The Guardian, in which his closing remarks note the production brought ‘the play's horrors uncomfortably close to home’147 thus implying that historical distance was eschewed for an unsettling telling of the tale that resonates with a modern audience in an intense manner. The trend for updating the play was evident too in the Young Vic’s production of ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore in 2012. During this production modern technology such as MP3 players, contemporary music, and laptops were used to bring the play into the 21st century.148 Again this obliterates any comfort that may be garnered from setting the play in its original context, thus implying that one of the most interesting parts of the play is the disgust it generates. Reviewer Pete Wood remarked on the productions ‘dark and gory delights’149 implying that the disturbing moments of the play are part of what makes it most appealing to the audience.

Disgusting language and content have not prevented either play from being revived, instead these aspects of the plays give them a distinct character which makes them interesting objects to be worked with and interpreted in new ways relevant for the contemporary audience. The moralistic attitude adopted by literary critics towards ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore has not been mirrored by reviewers of staged performances of the plays, hinting at the ability of the material to be adapted in ways which move the audience when performed onstage, despite its disgusting aspects. In this

146 Michael Billington, review of ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore, by John Ford, directed by Edward Dick, Shaftsberry Theatre, London, The Guardian, October 5, 2005, https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2005/oct/05/theatre.art1. 147 Ibid. 148 Pete Wood, review of ’Tis Pity She’s a Whore, by John Ford, directed by Declan Donnellan, the Old Vic, Bristol, British Theatre Guide, October 25, 2012, https://www.britishtheatreguide.info/reviews/tis-pity-she-s- bristol-old-vic-8205. 149 Ibid. 58

respect the modern adaptations of the play further contradict Kant’s claim on the presence of disgust in art.

Word Count: 17,779

59

Bibliography: s.v. “Aesthetic(adj.2). Oxford English Diction Online. Accessed February 25, 2020. https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/3237?rskey=kRXvQ6&result=1#eid.

Ahmed, Sara. The Cultural Politics of Emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004.

Billington, Michael. Review of ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore, by John Ford, directed by Edward Dick, Shaftsberry Theatre, London. The Guardian, October 5, 2005. https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2005/oct/05/theatre.art1.

Billington, Michael. Review of The Roaring Girl, by Thomas Middleton and Thomas Dekker, directed by Jo Davies, Royal Shakespeare Company, London. The Guardian, April 16, 2014. https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2014/apr/16/roaring-girl-review-dashing-lead-performance.

Bristol, Michel. “Everyday Custom and Popular Custom”. A Companion to Renaissance Drama, edited by Arthur Kinney. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.

Bueler, LE. “The structural uses of incest in English renaissance drama”. Renaissance Drama 15, no.3 (1984):115-145. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41913883.

Burton, Robert. Vol 1 of The Anatomy of Melancholy (1621), edited by Thomas C. Faulkner, Nicolas K. Kiessling, and Rhonda L Blair. Oxford: Claredon Press, 1989-2000.

Chalk, Darrly, Floyd-Wilson, Mary. Contagion and the Shakespearean Stage. UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019.

Chi-fang, Sophia Li. “The Roaring Girl in Retrospect: the RSC Production of 1983”. New Theatre Quarterly 30, no.3 (August 2014): 274-297.doi:10.1017/S0266464X14000517.

Cioni, Fernando . “Refashioning Italian Theatrical and Dramatic Conventions: Prologues, Epilogues and Inductions in Early Modern English Drama”. Early Modern Culture Online. Accessed February 10, 2020. https://boap.uib.no/index.php/emco/article/view/1508/1288.

Correll, Barbra, Eschenbaum Natalie. Disgust in Early Modern English Literature. New York & London: Routledge, 2016.

Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, and Rick Emery Robinson. The Art of Seeing: An Interpretation of the Aesthetic Encounter. Malibu: The Paul Getty Trust, 1990. s.v. “Cutpurse (n.)”. Oxford English Dictionary Online. Accessed March 27, 2020. https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/46392?redirectedFrom=cutpurse#eid

Dawson, Lesel. Love Sickness and Gender in Early Modern English Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Dekker, Thomas, and Thomas Middleton. The Roaring Girl, edited by Meaghan Brown, Michael Poston, and Elizabeth Williamson. London: Thomas Archer, 1611 den Hartog, Marlisa. “Worms, Corruption, and Medieval Detoxing”. Leiden Medievalist Blog, July 2018, https://leidenmedievalistsblog.nl/articles/worms-corruption-and-medieval-detoxing. Accessed May 7, 2020. s.v. “Disgust (n.1). Oxford English Dictionary Online. Accessed April 17,2020. https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/54422?rskey=dvwnXU&result=1#eid. 60

Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. UK: Routledge, 1966.

Douglas-Fairhurst, Robert. “Tragedy and Disgust”. Tragedy in Transition, edited by Sarah Annes Brown and Catherine Silverstone, 58-77. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2007.

Earle, Rebecca. The Body of the Conquistador: Food, Race and the Colonial Experience in Spanish America, 1492–1700. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, August 2012.

Elias, Norbert. The Civilising Process, edited by Eric Dunning, John Goudsblom, and Stephen Mennell. Translated by Edmund Jephcoott. MA: Blackwell, 2000.

Fernie, Ewan. Shame in Shakespeare. London: Routledge, 2002.

Fissell, Mary E. Vernacular Bodies: The Politics of Reproduction in Early Modern England. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Florio, John. ”Sgusto”. A Worlde of Wordes (London, 1598), edited by Hermann Haller. Toronto: Toronto University Press, 2013.

Ford, John, Monsarrat, Gilles D., Vickers, Brian, and Watt, R. J. C. The Collected Works of John Ford Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2013.

Ford, John. ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore, edited by Brian Morris. London: Ernest Ben Limited, 1968.

Forman, Valerie. “Marked Angels: Counterfeits, Commodities and The Roaring Girl”. Renaissance Quarterly 54, no.1, (2001): 531–60.

Freud, Sigmund. “Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality II” (1905). The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, edited by James Strachey, 125-245. London: Hogarth Press, 1953-1974. s.v. “Gallimaufry (n.1). The Oxford English Dictionary Online. Accessed March 4, 2020. https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/76303?rskey=G4d7kc&result=1&isAdvanced=false#eid.

Gauer, Denis. “Heart and Blood: Nature and Culture in 'Tis Pity She's a Whore”. Cahiers Élisabéthains 31, no.1 (April 1, 1987): 45-57. https://doi.org/10.1177/018476788703100107.

Green, Matthew. “A Grim And Gruesome History Of Public Shaming In London: Part 1”.The Londonist. Accessed May 12, 2020. https://londonist.com/2015/12/publicshaming1.

Greenstone, Gerry. “The History of Bloodletting”, BC Medical Journal 52, no.1, (January 2010): 12-14. https://www.bcmj.org/premise/history-bloodletting.

Golden, Richard M. “Notions of Social and Religious Pollution in Richard Remy’s Demonaltry”. Politics, Ideology, and the Law in Early Modern Europe: Essays in Honour of J.H.M. Shalom, edited by Adrianna Bakos. Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 1994.

Gordon, Mordechai. “Exploring the Relationship between Humor and Aesthetic Experience”. The Journal of Aesthetic Education 46, no.1 (Spring 2012): 110-121. doi:10.5406/jaesteduc.46.1.0110.

Haynes, Alan. Sex in Elizabethan England. UK: Wrens Park Publishing, 1997.

Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time: A Translation of Sein Und Zeit 1927. Translated by Joan Stambaugh. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1996. 61

Heilmann, Robert B. Tragedy and Melodrama: Versions of Experience. Seattle, WA: Wisconsin University, 1968.

Higginbotham, Jennifer. The Girlhood of Shakespeare’s Sisters: Gender, Transgression, Adolescence. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2013.

Hoile, Christopher. Review of The Roaring Girl by Thomas Middleton and Thomas Dekker, directed by Abagail Anderson, Steam Industry, Finborough Theatre, London. Elsewhere, December 31, 2000. http://www.stage- door.com/Theatre/Elsewhere/Entries/2000/12/31_London,_GBR__The_Roaring_Girl.html.

Holznecht, Karl J. Outlines of Tudor and Stuart Plays 1497-1642. London: Barnes & Noble, 1947.

Hopkins, Lisa, ed. ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore: a Critical Guide. London: Continuum, 2010.

Ingram, Martin. “Family and Household”. A Companion to Renaissance Drama, edited by Arthur Kinney. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.

James, Susan. Passions and Action: The Emotions in Seventeenth Century Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Jonson, Ben. The Alchemist, edited by Charles Montgomery Hathaway. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1903.

Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Judgment (1790). Translated by Werner Pluhar. Indianapolis: Hackett Books, 1987.

Kern Paster, Gail. Humoring the Body: Emotions and the Shakespearean Stage. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004.

Kolb, Laura. “Jonson’s old age: The force of disgust”. Disgust in Early Modern English Literature, edited by Natalie K. Eschenbaum & Barbra Correll, 164-183. New York & London: Routledge, 2016.

Kolnai, Aurel. On Disgust, edited by Barry Smith and Carolyn Korsmeyer. Chicago & La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, 2004.

Korsmeyer, Carolyn. “Disgust and Aesthetics”. Philosophy Compass 7, no. 11 (October 2012): 753-761. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2012.00522.x.

Kristeva, Julia. Powers of Horror: an Essay on Abjection. New York: Columbia University Press, 1982.

Martin, Matthew. “The Raw and the Uncooked in Ford’s ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore”. Early Theatre 15, no. 2 (July 2012): 131-146. www.jstor.org/stable/43499629.

Menninghaus, Winfred. Disgust: Theory and History of a Strong Sensation. Translated by Howard Eiland and Joel Golb. Albany: State of New York University Press, 2003.

Miller, William. The Anatomy of Disgust. Cambridge Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1997.

Montrose, Louis. The Purpose of Playing, Shakespeare and the Cultural Politics of Elizabethan Theatre. London: University of Chicago Press, 1996.

Neilson, W.A. “Ford and Shirley”. Vol 6 of The Cambridge History of English Literature, edited by A.W. Ward, A.R. Waller, 15 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1932. 62

O’Callaghan, Michelle. Thomas Middleton, Renaissance Dramatist. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009.

Paul, Ryan Singh. “The Power of Ignorance and The Roaring Girl.” English Literary Renaissance 43, no. 3 (September 2013): 514–540.

Pfister, Manfred. The Theory and Analysis of Drama. Translated by John Halliday. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Rainolds, John. The Overthrow of Stage Plays (1599), in Shakespeare’s Theatre a Source Book. ed. Tanya Pollard. New Jersey: Blackwell Publishing, 2004.

Rankin, William. Mirrour of Monsters (1587) in Shakespeare’s Theatre a Source Book. ed. Tanya Pollard. New Jersey: Blackwell Publishing, 2004.

Ridley, Aaron. “Tragedy”. The Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics, edited by Jerrold Levinson, 408-421. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Rijksmuseum website. “Anatomical theater of Leiden University, 1610”. Accessed May 8, 2020. https://www.google.com/search?q=rijksmuseum&rlz=1C1GCEA_enIE840IE840&oq=rijsk&aqs=chro me.1.69i57j0l7.4225j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8.

“Roaring Girl”. Lexico.com. Accessed February 10, 2020. https://www.lexico.com/definition/roaring_girl.

Robinson, Benedict. "Disgust c. 1600." ELH 81, no. 2 (2014): 553-583. https://search-proquest- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/docview/1540741054?OpenUrlRefId=info:xri/sid:primo&accountid=14615.

Robinson, Jenefer. “Aesthetic Disgust?”. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 75 (2014): 51-84. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1358246114000253.

Roxane, Pajoul. “Medicine, Menstruation, and Misogyny: Sexism and Male Menstruation in the Early Modern Period”. Investigating Versailles (blog), December 19, 2016. https://investigatingversaillesblog.wordpress.com/2016/12/19/medicine-menstruation-and- misogyny-sexism-and-male-menstruation-in-the-early-modern-period/.

Rozin, Paul, et al. “Body, Psyche, and Culture: The relationship Between Disgust and Morality”. Psychology and Developing Societies 9, no.1 (March 1997): 107-131. DOI: 10.1177/097133369700900105.

Rozin, Paul, and Jonathan Schull. “The adaptive-evolutionary point of view in experimental psychology”. Handbook of Experimental Psychology, edited by R. C Atkinson, R. J. Herrnstein, G. Lindzey, & R. D. Luce, 503-546. New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1988.

Sawday, Jonathan. The Body Emblazoned: Dissection and the Human Body in Renaissance Culture. London, 1995. s.v. “Scurvy (adj.1a). Oxford English Dictionary Online. Accessed February 11, 2020. https://www- oedcom.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/173951?rskey=pHvZmT&result=2&isAdvanced=false#eid s.v. “Shame(n.1a). Oxford English Dictionary Online. Accessed April 13, 2020. https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/177406?rskey=xEzpDQ&result=1#eid.

Stage, Kelly. “The Roaring Girl’s London Spaces.” Studies in English Literature, 1500 - 1900 49, no. 2 (2009): 417–436. http://search.proquest.com/docview/204342854/. 63

Stevens, Andrea. “Drama as Text and Performance”. Vol. 1 of A New Companion to Renaissance Literature and Culture, edited by Michael Hattaway. London: Blackwell Publishing Limited, 2010.

Strohminger, Nina. “Disgust Talked About”. Philosophy Compass 9, no.7 (2014): 478–493. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/520cf78be4b0a5dd07f51048/t/53b6fa3de4b01e06b37bbbd 4/1404500541450/StrohmingerPhilCompass2014.pdf. s.v. “Thing (adj.1.a)”. Oxford English Dictionary Online. Accessed February 20, 2020. https://www-oed- com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/view/Entry/200786?rskey=hPAKfz&result=1#eid.

Tyler, Imogen. Revolting Subjects, Social Abjection and Resistance in Neoliberal Britain. London; New York: Zed books, 2013.

Weimann, Robert, and Douglas Bruster. Prologues to Shakespeare’s Theatre : Performance and Liminality in Early Modern Drama. London; New York: Routledge, 2004.

Wilkinson, Kate. “The Performance History”, ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore: a Critical Guide, edited by Lisa Hopkins, 34-62. London: Continuum, 2010.

Wood, Pete. Review of ’Tis Pity She’s a Whore, by John Ford, directed by Declan Donnellan, the Old Vic, Bristol. British Theatre Guide, October 25, 2012. https://www.britishtheatreguide.info/reviews/tis-pity-she-s-bristol-old-vic- 8205.

List of Images:

Fig. 1. Nicholas Okes, page 11 from ‘Tis Pity She's a Whore, acted by the Queenes Maiesties Seruants, at The Phoenix in Drury-lane, by John Ford(1633). Scanned copy of original print as sold in Paul’s Churchyard. STC 11165, Houghton Library, Harvard University.

Fig. 2. Rebecca Earle, The Humours, based on a drawing from a 17th century manuscript by Bishop Isidore of Seville. The Body of the Conquistador: Food, Race and the Colonial Experience in Spanish America, 1492–1700 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, August 2012), 27.

Fig.3. Leonhard Thurneysser, “Quinta Essentia”, Diagram of Humoral model noting differences between males and females, Leipzig (1574). Shakespeare.org (http://collections.shakespeare.org.uk/exhibition/exhibition/method-in-the- madness/object/method-in-the-madness-the-humours).

Fig.4.Willem Isaacsz Swanenburch, the anatomical theatre of Leiden University (Vera anatomiae Lugduno-Batavae cum sceletis et reliquis quae ibi extant delineatio – title on object), after Jan Cornelisz. van ’t Woudt (Andries Clouck: 1610). Engraving, 33 x 39.4 cm. Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.

64