DOCSLIB.ORG

The Maid's Tragedy ; And, Philaster

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Maid's Tragedy ; And, Philaster Tufts College Library FROM THE FUND ESTABLISHED BY ALUMNI IPR2422 .T5 Beaumont, Francis, 1584-1616. The maid’s tragedy, and Philaster 39090000737565 die 2MIe0?tlettre0 ^eneg SECTION III THE ENGLISH DRAMA FROM ITS BEGINNING TO THE PRESENT DAY GENERAL EDITOR GEORGE PIERCE BAKER PROFESSOR OF DRAMATIC LITERATURE IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 https://archive.org/details/maidstragedyandp01beau The Blackfriars’ Theatre Reproduced, by permission from the collection of E, Gardner, Esq., London. THE MAID’S TRAGEDY AND PHILASTER By FRANCIS BEAUMONT AND JOHN FLETCHER EDITED BY ASHLEY H. THORNDIKE, Ph.D. PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH LITERATURE IN NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY BOSTON, U.S.A., AND LONDON D. C. HEATH & CO., PUBLISHERS COPYRIGHT, 1906, BY D. C. HEATH & CO. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED /X3f?3 YR 242. 3- i 'Bfograp^ Francis Beaumont, third son of Sir Francis Beaumont of Grace Dieu in Leicestershire, one of the Justices of Common Pleas, was born about 1585 and died March 6, 1616. He was admitted gentleman commoner at Broadgates Hall, Oxford, in 1597, and was entered at the Inner Temple, London, November 3, 1600. He was married to Ursula, daughter of Henry Isley of Sundridge, Kent, probably in 1613, and left two daughters (one a posthumous child). He was buried in Westminster Abbey. John Fletcher, son of Richard Fletcher, Bishop of London, was baptized at Rye in Sussex, where his father was then minister, December 20, 1579, and died of the plague in August, 1625. He was entered as a pensioner at Bene’t College, Cambridge, 1 591. His father as Dean of Peterborough attended Mary Queen of Scots at Fotheringay, and was later rapidly promoted to the sees of Bristol, Worcester, and London. Handsome of person and elo- quent of speech, he was a successful courtier and a favorite of the Queen, though he suffered a loss of favor shortly before his death in 1596. The dramatist received by bequest a share in his father’s books, but apparently little other property. He was buried August 29, 1625, in Saint Saviour’s, Southwark. The biographical details of the friendship and collaboration of the two dramatists are involved in uncertainty. It is not known just when Fletcher came to London, when he began writing plays, or when he first became acquainted with Beaumont. D’Avenant in a prologue at a revival of the Woman Hater evidently alluding to , Fletcher, declares that 1 full twenty years he wore the bays.” This would place the beginning of his play-writing in 1604-05, 4 1 vi Biograpln? a date for which considerable other evidence has been accumulated. 1 In 1607, both he and Beaumont prefixed verses to Volpone (acted 1605). Beaumont praises Jonson for teaching 1 our tongue the rules of time, of place,” and both appear as Jonson’s friends. In 1607, then, they were well acquainted with Jonson and probably with each other. Beaumont wrote commendatory verses for Epiccene (1609 ?) and both Beaumont and Fletcher for Catiline 1 6 1 ) . Beaumont also wrote commendatory verses, together ( 1 with Jonson, Chapman, and Field, for Fletcher’s Faithful Shep- herdess (4to Hater probably by 1609?) The Woman , Beaumont alone, was published anonymously, 1607. Beaumont’s oft-quoted 4 epistle to Jonson is entitled in the 1679 written before he and Master Fletcher came to London with two of the precedent comedies, then not finished, which deferred their merry meetings at the Mermaid.” The reference in the letter to Sutcliffe’s wit seems to refer to the pamphlets produced by him in 1606. In 1610, Davies’ Scourge of Folly was registered, containing an epigram on Philaster. In 1612, in the address to the reader prefixed to the White Devil praises “ the less worthy composures , Webster no of the both worthily excellent Master Beaumont and Master Fletcher,” ranking them on equal terms with such scholars and experienced dramatists as Chapman and Jonson, and apparently above Shaks- pere, Dekker, and Heywood. Before 1612, the reputation of Beaumont and Fletcher as dramatists must have been well estab- lished. Only three plays in which Beaumont had a share were published before his death, the Hater the Knight the Woman , 1607, of Pestle and Cupid's Revenge and none of Burning , 1613, , 1615; these appeared with his name. In addition to his plays, he wrote verses to the Countess of Rutland, and elegies on the Lady Mark- ham, who died in 1609, the Countess of Rutland, who died in I See The Influence of Beaumont and Fletcher on Shakspere , A. H. Thorndike. I UBiograpljp vii 1612, and Lady Penelope Clifton, who died in 1613. Salmacis Hermaphroditus possibly have been written by him and , 1602, may 5 it is so assigned in the entry of 1639 in the Stationer’s Register. In 1613, he wrote a masque for the Lady Elizabeth’s marriage, which was performed with great splendor by the gentlemen of the Inner Temple and Gray’s Inn, and published, presumably in the same year. There is no direct evidence that he wrote anything for the stage after 1612. There is no doubt that Beaumont’s reputation as a poet was very high even before his death. He was buried in Westminster Abbey close by Chaucer and Spenser and the verses on Shakspere, ; usually attributed to William Basse, bid Renowned Spencer lye a thought more nye To learned Chaucer, and rare Beaumont lye A little nearer Spenser, to make roome For Shakespeare in your threefold, fowerfold Tombe, To lodge all fowre in one bed make a shift Until Doomesdaye, for hardly will a fift Betwixt this day and that by Fate be slayne For whom your curtaines may be drawn againe. Of Fletcher’s life after Beaumont’s withdrawal from the stage, our information is derived mainly from studies of the chronology of his plays and of his relations to collaborators. There is no trace of any discord between him and any of his fellows and his continued 5 friendship with Benjonson is testified to by the latter in his Conver- sations 'with Drummond and by the commendatory verses of William 1 2 Brome. In 1612-13, i n the opinion of the present writer, he with in direct collaboration on Henry was engaged Shakspere VII y and, perhaps, the non-extant Cardenio. the Two Noble Kinsmen , From this time on, he wrote three or four plays each year, collab- orating on many of these with Massinger. A communication of 1 Prefixed to Folio, 1647. 2 The Influence of Beaumont and Fletcher on Shakspere , pp. viii 2]5tograpl)t> about this date from Field, Daborne, and Massinger to Henslow alludes to a “ play of Mr. Fletcher and ours.” Before 1616 he wrote for various companies, but after that date so far as can be dis- covered, exclusively for the King’s Men. Only ten plays in which he or Beaumont had a share were printed before his death: five with his name, — the Faithful Shepherdess, 1609 (?); Cupid's Revenge 16155 the Scornful Lady 1616; A King and No , , King Philaster ’22 (the last , 16195 , 1620, three “by F. four Beaumont and J. Fletcher”): anonymously, — the Woman Hater the Knight the Burning Pestle the , 1607, of , 1613 5 Maid' s Tragedy 1 ’225 Thierry and Theodoret, and , 619, 1621 5 one in the Shakspere Folio, 1623, Henry VIII. There is abundant testimony to the great popularity of Fletcher’s plays during his lifetime and the Beaumont-Fletcher folio of 5 1 647, containing plays not hitherto printed, was accompanied by a formidable array of commendatory verses. The literary reputation of the two friends can be judged from the fact that either during their lives or after their deaths, their praises were heralded by Jon- son, Chapman, Webster, Waller, Denham, Lovelace, Cartwright, Herrick, Brome, and Shirley. 1 The following list includes all the plays in which either Beau- mont or Fletcher had a share, arranged in a conjecturally chrono- logical order. The year of the first performance is given, this co- inciding presumably with the time of composition. The exact date of many of the plays cannot be determined, and matters of date and authorship are in debate. Beaumont is not generally credited by critics with a share in any of the plays of the second period nor s Prize Monsieur Thomas or the Faithful Shep- with Woman' , , herdess of the first period. I The Influence of Beaumont and Fletcher on Shakspere , pp. 92-93. 31 31? IBiograpljt? ix First Period. or The 1 ? Woman' s Prize ; y Tamer Tamed. 604 Wit at Several Weapons. First version. 1605 ? The Woman Hater. 1606 ? Cure or The Martial ? Love' s , Maid. 1606 Thierry and Theodoret. 1607 ? Monsieur Thomas. 1607-8 ? The Knight of The Burning Pestle. 1607-8 ? Four Plays in One. 1608 ? The Faithful Shepherdess. 1608 ? Philaster or Love lies a-bleeding. 1609-1608 ? ; 1610- The Coxcomb . 1609 ? The Maid's Tragedy. 1 609 ? Cupid's Revenge. 10 ? The Scornful Lady. 11 A King and No King. 161 The Captain. 1 61 ? Second Period. The Nice Valour ; or the Passionate Madman. 1612 ? ? The Night Walker ; or the Little Thief 1612?? The Beggar' s Bush. 1612?? Cardenio. on-extant ( N .) 1612-13 The Mask of The Inner Temple. 1613 The 1 Two Noble Kinsmen. 6 1 ? Henry VIII. 1 6 1615- 1 ? The Honest Man s Fortune. 1616-1 61 Wit Without Money. 1614 ? Love' s Pilgrimage 1614? The Faithful Friends. 1614 ? The Chances. 1615 ? Bonduca. 1615 ? Valentinian. 16 ? The Jeweller of Amsterdam. 17 ? The Bloody Brother or Rollo Duke Normandy. ; y of 1617?? The F^ueen of Corinth. c 1617 The Loyal Subject.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Introduction to the 1645 Volume: Poems of Mr. John Milton
    C01.qxd 8/18/08 14:44 Page 1 Introduction to the 1645 Volume: Poems of Mr. John Milton In 1645, Milton published most but not all of the poems he had composed by that date. The publisher Humphrey Moseley had been bringing out volumes of lyric poetry by royalist poets such as Edmund Waller, and it was likely, as he claims in the intro- duction to the volume, that he approached Milton and encouraged him to publish his verse. Moseley also arranged for the engraved portrait of Milton by William Marshall (see Figure 1), beneath which Milton, who considered the engraving unflattering, placed a witty Greek epigram ridiculing it in a language neither Marshall nor Moseley under- stood. Unlike most contemporary poets, Milton neither wrote a preface, solicited commendatory poems, nor acknowledged a patron. He organized his volume more or less chronologically, thus displaying his poetic development, but also carefully grouped together poems of similar themes and genres. With the Latin tag from Virgil’s Eclogues on the title page (“Baccare frontem / Cingite, ne vati noceat mala lingua futuro” – “Bind my forehead with foxglove, lest evil tongues harm the future Bard”), he promises future poems on even greater themes. In the Latin ode sent with a replacement copy of the volume to John Rouse, librar- ian of the Bodleian Library at Oxford, Milton describes the 1645 volume as a “twin book, rejoicing in a single cover, but with a double title page.” The first section of the volume presents his vernacular poems (mostly in English, but also including a mini-sonnet sequence in Italian), and concludes with A MASK Presented At LUDLOW- Castle.
    [Show full text]
  • The English Lyrics of the Henry VIII Manuscript
    The English Lyrics of the Henry VIII Manuscript by RAYMOND G. SIEMENS B. A. (Hons), The University of Waterloo, 1989 M.A., The University of Alberta, 1991 A THESIS SUBMITTED LN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES, Department of English We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May 20, 1997 ©R.G. Siemens, 1997 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or 'by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. /7 v. Department of The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date DE-6 (2788) Abstract The Henry VIII MS (BL Additional MS 31,922)—a song book with lyrics by Henry VIII, Thomas Wyatt, William Cornish, and other literary figures of the early Henrician court—is a document that contributes greatly to a critical understanding of the connections between poetry, patronage, and power in early Renaissance society because of the prominence of its chief author, the King himself, and the manuscript's reflection of literary, social, and political elements of the early Tudor court. Acknowledging that the contents of the Henry VIII MS have been thoroughly treated as "words for music" by the musicologist John Stevens, whose Music and Poetry in the Early Tudor Court and Music at the Court of Henry VIII are the standard works in the area, my thesis builds on existing scholarship to treat the lyrics of H chiefly as "words," as literary texts.
    [Show full text]
  • Front.Chp:Corel VENTURA
    Book Reviews 145 circumstances, as in his dealings with Polonius, and Rosencrantz and Guild- enstern. Did he not think he was killing the King when he killed Polonius? That too was a chance opportunity. Perhaps Hirsh becomes rather too confined by a rigorous logical analysis, and a literal reading of the texts he deals with. He tends to brush aside all alternatives with an appeal to a logical certainty that does not really exist. A dramatist like Shakespeare is always interested in the dramatic potential of the moment, and may not always be thinking in terms of plot. (But as I suggest above, the textual evidence from plot is ambiguous in the scene.) Perhaps the sentimentalisation of Hamlet’s character (which the author rightly dwells on) is the cause for so many unlikely post-renaissance interpretations of this celebrated soliloquy. But logical rigour can only take us so far, and Hamlet, unlike Brutus, for example, does not think in logical, but emotional terms. ‘How all occasions do inform against me / And spur my dull revenge’ he remarks. Anthony J. Gilbert Claire Jowitt. Voyage Drama and Gender Politics 1589–1642: Real and Imagined Worlds. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2003. Pp 256. For Claire Jowitt, Lecturer in Renaissance literature at University of Wales Aberystwyth, travel drama depicts the exotic and the foreign, but also reveals anxieties about the local and the domestic. In this her first book, Jowitt, using largely new historicist methodology, approaches early modern travel plays as allegories engaged with a discourse of colonialism, and looks in particular for ways in which they depict English concerns about gender, leadership, and national identity.
    [Show full text]
  • M a K in G a N D U N M a K in Gin Early Modern English Drama
    Porter MAKING AND Chloe Porter UNMAKING IN EARLY MODERN ENGLISH DRAMA Why are early modern English dramatists preoccupied with unfinished processes of ‘making’ and ‘unmaking’? And what did ‘finished’ or ‘incomplete’ mean for spectators of plays and visual works in this period? Making and unmaking in early IN EARLY MODERN ENGLISH DRAMA IN EARLY UNMAKING AND MAKING modern English drama is about the prevalence and significance of visual things that are ‘under construction’ in early modern plays. Contributing to challenges to the well-worn narrative of ‘iconophobic’ early modern English culture, it explores the drama as a part of a lively post-Reformation visual world. Interrogating the centrality of concepts of ‘fragmentation’ and ‘wholeness’ in critical approaches to this period, it opens up new interpretations of the place of aesthetic form in early modern culture. An interdisciplinary study, this book argues that the idea of ‘finish’ had transgressive associations in the early modern imagination. It centres on the depiction of incomplete visual practices in works by playwrights including Shakespeare, John Lyly, and Robert Greene. The first book of its kind to connect dramatists’ attitudes to the visual with questions of materiality, Making and Unmaking in Early Modern English Drama draws on a rich range of illustrated examples. Plays are discussed alongside contexts and themes, including iconoclasm, painting, sculpture, clothing and jewellery, automata, and invisibility. Asking what it meant for Shakespeare and his contemporaries to ‘begin’ or ‘end’ a literary or visual work, this book is invaluable for scholars and students of early modern English literature, drama, visual culture, material culture, theatre history, history and aesthetics.
    [Show full text]
  • AN EXAMINATION of PLAYS in MANUSCRIPT ET ME Begin by Stating As Clearly As I Can the Purpose L.4 of This Exploratory Study
    TEXTUAL DEGENERATION OF ELlZABETHAN AND STUART PLAYS: AN EXAMINATION OF PLAYS IN MANUSCRIPT ET ME begin by stating as clearly as I can the purpose l.4 of this exploratory study. It has seemed to me that in accounting for variation among Elizabethan and post-Eliza- bethan dramatic texts too little weight has been given to the activities of prompters and actors as compared with those of printers and copyists. According to R. B. McKerrow and Evelyn Albright,l the incompetence of printers has been greatly exaggerated, and the defense they offer seems sound and just, and, as for copyists, they seem, as a class, to have been the most efficient of those who worked on plays. On the other hand, the conditions of play production, now, in the Elizabethan age and in general, are such as not only to pro- voke alteration of texts but to necessitate it. The simplest in- vestigation of the history of Shakespeare on the stage (and on the screen) will reveal habitual and not infrequently vio- Ient modifications of his texts and even of his intentions. A visit to a production lot will convince any visitor that the pro- ducer feels free to alter the script without any reference to the author or what he has written. I remember a conversa- tion in 1908 with Eugene Walter, whose Paid in Full was then en uogue, and of hearing him describe without the least of- fense, indeed with pride, the great changes made in his play when it was produced on Broadway, Stage aIterations are and have been since the Elizabethan age and before the merest commonplace and by no means inconsiderable.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cultural and Ideological Significance of Representations of Boudica During the Reigns of Elizabeth I and James I
    EXETER UNIVERSITY AND UNIVERSITÉ D’ORLÉANS The Cultural and Ideological Significance Of Representations of Boudica During the reigns of Elizabeth I and James I. Submitted by Samantha FRENEE-HUTCHINS to the universities of Exeter and Orléans as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English, June 2009. This thesis is available for library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgment. I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. ..................................... (signature) 2 Abstract in English: This study follows the trail of Boudica from her rediscovery in Classical texts by the humanist scholars of the fifteenth century to her didactic and nationalist representations by Italian, English, Welsh and Scottish historians such as Polydore Virgil, Hector Boece, Humphrey Llwyd, Raphael Holinshed, John Stow, William Camden, John Speed and Edmund Bolton. In the literary domain her story was appropriated under Elizabeth I and James I by poets and playwrights who included James Aske, Edmund Spenser, Ben Jonson, William Shakespeare, A. Gent and John Fletcher. As a political, religious and military figure in the middle of the first century AD this Celtic and regional queen of Norfolk is placed at the beginning of British history. In a gesture of revenge and despair she had united a great number of British tribes and opposed the Roman Empire in a tragic effort to obtain liberty for her family and her people.
    [Show full text]
  • From Ben Jonson and Shakespeare (1921)
    Greenwood - Ben Jonson and Shakespeare 61 From Ben Jonson and Shakespeare (1921) Sir George Greenwood HE sheet anchor of the traditional belief with regard to the authorship of t he plays and poems of Shakespeare is undoubtedly Ben Jonson. It is to the Jonsonian utterances that the apostles of the Stratfordian faith always makeT their appeal. That faith we are told is based on the “irrefragable rock” of Ben Jonson’s testimony. Well, it was not so very long ago that we used to be told that the truth of a universal deluge and the preservation of mankind and animals of every kind and species, in Noah’s Ark, was established on the “impregnable rock” of Holy Scripture, and yet to-day we find even high Church digni taries—with whom Mr. J. M. Robertson would certainly be in entire agreement here—disavowing any belief in this interesting mythological tradition. Is it not, then, possible that the Jonsonian testi mony may prove no more “irrefragable” or “impregnable” than that of those old chronicles, which age-long tradition has ascribed to the authorship of “Moses”? As a distinguished writer, well-known both in the political and the literary world, has written to me, the difficulties in the way of the orthodox “Shakespearian” belief seem to be insuperable. Are the Jonsonian utterances of such weight as to outweigh them all? I reply, put Jonson in one scale and all the difficulties and improbabilities — if not impossibilities — of the “Stratfordian” hypothesis in the other, and old Ben will kick the beam. Now let us briefly consider this Jonsonian testimony.
    [Show full text]
  • The 'Nirbhaya' Movement: an Indian Feminist Revolution Garima Bakshi
    'Nirbhaya' Movement The 'Nirbhaya' Movement: An Indian Feminist Revolution Garima Bakshi In December 2012, New Delhi witnessed a horrifc crime – a female medical student was violently gang-raped on a moving bus and then dumped onto the highway, injured and unconscious. While she didn’t survive the attack, Nirbhaya, as she was named by the media, sparked a revolution in India and its neighboring countries. Tis paper delves into the many aspects of the movement, examining it as a whole by drawing on the theories of Castells, Jenkins, Papacharissi, and Sundaram. It examines the protests that took place on digital forums which then transcended onto the streets, the afective nature of the movement, and international responses it elicited. Garima Bakshi is a Master's candidate at New York University's Media, Culture, and Communication department. Her research focuses on the intersections between feminism, youth movements, and creative protest in South Asia. gnovis • 43 Volume 17, Issue 2 •Spring 2017 n the night of December 16, 2012, protestors took to candlelight vigils and medical student Jyoti Singh and her peaceful demonstrations at India Gate, friend Avanindra Pandey, looking eventually leading to a change in criminal Ofor transportation home, boarded a private laws, and the setting up of a fast track court bus in South Delhi. Immediately after the to prosecute the attackers (Harris and four other men in the bus turned of the lights Kumar, 2015). and snatched Singh’s and Pandey’s phones. Tey beat them up with iron rods, leaving Te outrage that followed the attack opened Pandey half-unconscious (“Delhi Gangrape up a previously nonexistent space for victims Victims Friend Relives the Horrifying 84 and those close to them to speak out against Minutes of December 16 Night”, 2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Download [ 11,08 MB ]
    ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Part of the materials used in this block is drawn from self-learning materials developed by IGNOU, New Delhi and few other Open Education Resources duly acknowledge in the reference section at the end of the unit. BACHELOR OF ARTS (HONOURS) IN ENGLISH (BAEG) BEG-2 British Poetry and Drama: 17th And 18th Centuries BLOCK-3 17TH AND 18TH CENTURIES DRAMAS UNIT 1 BEN JONSON: VOLPONE (PART I) UNIT 2 BEN JONSON: VOLPONE (PART II) UNIT 3 JOHN DRYDEN: ALL FOR LOVE (PART I) UNIT 4 JOHN DRYDEN: ALL FOR LOVE (PART II) UNIT 1 BEN JONSON: VOLPONE (PART I) STRUCTURE 1.1 Learning Objectives 1.2 Introduction 1.3 Ben Jonson: The Playwright 1.3.1 His Life 1.3.2 His Dramatic Career 1.3.3 Few Famous works Of Ben Jonson 1.4.4 Few Quotes on Jonson 1.4 Jonsonian Comedy 1.5 Critical Reception of Jonson 1.6 Let us Sum up 1.7 Answers to Check Your Progress (Hints Only) 1.8 Possible Questions 1.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES After going through this unit, you will be able to discuss Ben Jonson as an important English playwright of the 16th century make an assessment of Jonson and his works explain the nature of Jonsonian type of comedy provide a critical reception of Jonson 1.2 INTRODUCTION Volpone is Ben Jonson's most famous comedy . Written in 1606 and represented in March of the same year at the Globe Theatre in London by the King's Men , it was published for the first time in 1616 .
    [Show full text]
  • 'Tis Pity She's a Whore
    From Womb to Tomb: John Ford’s ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore1 John Ford’s controversial Caroline tragedy wrestles with incest, adultery, murderous revenge, and the corruption of religious power. Set in the Italian city-state of Parma, the story opens on Giovanni, a young intellectual, debating with his mentor and spiritual counselor on the virtues of incestuous romance. Meanwhile, a seemingly never-ending line of suitors stalks Annabella’s balcony, seeking attention from the wealthy merchant’s daughter. Despite the number of eligible bachelors vying for her hand in marriage, the titular character turns her sights on the one man she cannot marry: her ruminating, cerebral brother, Giovanni. In spite of religious and moral counsel, Annabella and Giovanni pursue their mutually found romantic love, throwing their family and community into upheaval. Written in the early 1630s for the Queen’s Men, ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore was first performed at the Cockpit Theatre in Drury Lane. Also known as the Phoenix, the Cockpit was one of London’s leading indoor playhouses, designed by famed architect and theatrical visionary, Inigo Jones. Although a contemporary of popular Jacobean playwrights such as Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher, Ford’s work belongs to a later era. As a second-generation playwright in London’s professional theatre scene, well versed in the work of Elizabethan and Jacobean dramatists, Ford’s playwrighting recycles theatrical conventions established by his predecessors. As many scholars have noted, ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore’s Annabella and Giovanni echo another ill-fated romance: that of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future Francis Beaumont
    3340 Early Theatre 20.2 (2017), 201–222 http://dx.doi.org/10.12745/et.20.2.3340 Eoin Price The Future Francis Beaumont This essay attends to Beaumont’s recent performance and reception history, docu- menting a range of academic and popular responses to demonstrate the challenges and affordances of engaging with Beaumont’s plays. The first section examines sev- eral twenty-first century performances of Beaumont plays, focusing especially on the Globe’s stimulating production of The Knight of the Burning Pestle. The second sec- tion considers how Beaumont was both acknowledged and ignored in 2016, the year of his 400th anniversary. The final section suggests some avenues for further research into the performance of Beaumont’s plays. In 1613, illness caused one of the greatest writers of the age to retire from play- wrighting, paving the way for his principal collaborator, John Fletcher, to become the main dramatist for the King’s Men, the company for whom he had writ- ten some of his most popular plays. Three years later, the London literary scene mourned his death. Tributes continued for decades and he was ultimately hon- oured with the posthumous publication of a handsome folio of his works. This is the familiar story of William Shakespeare. It is also the unfamiliar story of Francis Beaumont. The comparison of the two authors’ deaths I have just offered entails a degree of contrivance. Beaumont seemingly retired because he was incapacitated by a stroke, but Shakespeare’s reasons for retiring, and indeed, the nature of his retire- ment, are much less clear.
    [Show full text]
  • 6 X 10.Long New.P65
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-71397-9 - How to Read a Shakespearean Play Text Eugene Giddens Index More information Index accidental, 32, 44, 47, 100, 101, 116, 144 Brown, Arthur, 105, 149 act and scene divisions, 77–80 Brown, John Russell, 148, 150 advertisements, 12, 97 Buc, Sir George, 17 Alcorn, Thomas, 35 Burbage, Richard, 27 Allde, Edward, 40, 134 Burre, Walter, 61 Arden Shakespeare, 4, 50, 102, 112, 117, 149, 154, Burt, Richard, 13, 18 159, 160, 161, 164, 165, 167 Butter, Nathaniel, 62 arguments, 75 Armin, Robert, 27 Cambises, 72 Aspley, William, 27, 61, 97 Cambridge School Shakespeare, 167 Cambridge University Library, 143 bad quartos, 23–5, 49 Campion, Thomas Barton, Anne, 163 Masque at Lord Hay’s Marriage, 72 Bate, Jonathan, 109, 112, 154, 163, 167 Capell, Edward, 161 Beaumont, Francis, 9, 12, 18, 23, 33, 35, 39, 41, capitalisation, 81, 85, 88, 93, 107, 140 66, 69, 147, 150, 152 Carson, Christie, 171 Beaumont, Francis and John Fletcher Carson, Neil, 8, 9, 10, 35 Wild Goose Chase, 18 casting off, 41, 42, 89, 90, 133, 134 Beaumont, Francis, John Fletcher, and Philip catchwords, 96, 124–5, 151 Massinger chainlines, 137–8 Beggar’s Bush, 62 Chamberlain’s Men, 27, 29, 58 Benson, John, 19 Chapman, George, 9, 65 Berger, Thomas L., 160 Chettle, Henry, 14, 18 Bertram, Paul, 102 Clare, Janet, 16, 17 Best, Michael, 170 collation, 121–3 beta radiography, 135 collation line, 151, 160–4 Bevington, David, 81, 151, 158, 162, 164 collation, stop-press correction, 142–5 Blackfriars Theatre, 27 colophons, 97 black-letter, 86 composing stick, 43, 133 Blayney, Peter W.
    [Show full text]