Dramatic Genre and Social Consciousness in Early Modern England
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 2018 Citizens and Kings: Dramatic Genre and Social Consciousness in Early Modern England Anna Ullmann Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Ullmann, Anna, "Citizens and Kings: Dramatic Genre and Social Consciousness in Early Modern England" (2018). Dissertations. 2985. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/2985 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 2018 Anna Ullmann LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO CITIZENS AND KINGS: DRAMATIC GENRE AND SOCIAL CONSCIOUSNESS IN EARLY MODERN ENGLAND A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY PROGRAM IN ENGLISH BY ANNA N. ULLMANN CHICAGO, IL AUGUST 2018 Copyright by Anna N. Ullmann, 2018 All rights reserved. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first like to thank all members of the Loyola University Chicago English Department faculty and staff who contributed to the success of this dissertation. In particular, Drs. James Biester, Paul Jay, and Pamela Caughie provided valuable instruction and insight into early modern literature and literary theory more broadly that has, alongside that of my committee, been instrumental to my thinking about early modern genre and ideology. Dr. Elissa Stogner’s personal support and encouragement has also been especially important to me. Ms. Brenda Jervier and Mr. Stephen Heintz have greatly helped smooth some of the more practical aspects of the writing and research process. Dr. Suzanne Gossett, in addition to sparking my interest in history plays and drama outside the Shakespearean canon, has provided rigorous and discerning feedback on both this project and other work I have done on early modern drama. Dr. Christopher Kendrick opened my mind to the knowledge and possibilities offered by Marxist literary theory; without his course on the subject and his many Socratic conversations with me throughout this process, the dissertation would not have been possible in its current form. Finally, there are perhaps no adequate words to express my gratitude to Dr. James A. Knapp. As director of this dissertation, director of graduate programs for the English department, and instructor of several courses completed in progress to my doctoral degree, his ideas, feedback, questions, and empathy have set a superb example for both scholarship and mentorship. I owe much to his positive attitude, his patience, and his confidence in me. iii I would also like to thank the Graduate School of Loyola University Chicago for the years of funding which made this possible. Five years of funding on a departmental merit award provided by the Graduate School and Department of English from 2012-2017 and a Pre-Doctoral Teaching Fellowship for 2017-2018 enabled me to take on and complete a dissertation and degree that might otherwise have been impossible, and to do so in a timely manner. The resources provided to me by Cudahy Library and the funding to attend several national conferences in my field also greatly enabled and enhanced my research. No one accomplishes anything alone in this world, and the overwhelming love and support from my community of fellow English graduate students has been absolutely vital to this dissertation process. In particular, Dr. Devon Madon, Dr. Justin Hastings, Mary Lutze, Lydia Craig, Emily Sharrett, Lauren “Wren” Craig, Richard Gilbert, Dr. Brandiann Molby, and William Farina deserve my heartfelt thanks for their humor and advice. I especially wish to thank my dear friends, Dr. Stephanie Kucsera and Fr. Shane Gormley, whose companionship, compassion, patience, and willing ears have sustained me for the last several years and will continue to do so. Finally, last and greatest, I wish to acknowledge the personal sacrifice and enduring love of my amazing husband, J.P. Ullmann. He has lifted me up, cheered me on, and pushed me throughout this process, and he has loved me unconditionally even when my own attitude and the pressure of academia made me feel far from deserving. His natural curiosity and love of knowledge, his healthy perspective, and his inexplicably persistent faith in me are what have made this dissertation possible. His love continues to bless me every day. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER ONE: “A TWO-FOLD OPERATION”: HISTORY AND IDEOLOGY IN SHAKESPEARE’S HENRY IV AND THE MERRY WIVES OF WINDSOR 24 John Falstaff as Dramatic Anachronism 27 Historiography and Historical Consciousness 30 Henry IV: Falstaff’s Critique 35 Emergent Windsor: the Problem of Falstaff 44 CHAPTER TWO: “UNRIVALLED MAJESTY”: CITIZEN IDEOLOGY AND THE PROBLEM OF HISTORY IN HEYWOOD’S EDWARD IV 66 The Falconbridge Rebellion and the Citizen Hero 71 Court and City and Conflicting Ideologies 81 The Tanner of Tamworth 95 Mistress and Matthew Shore 102 Conclusion 112 CHAPTER THREE: GENTLE CRAFT: THOMAS DEKKER’S THE SHOEMAKER’S HOLIDAY AND THE NATURALIZATION OF CITIZEN IDEOLOGY 116 History Play and Historicizing Project 121 The Failures of History 138 Merchants and Masters, Artisans and Laborers 143 A Tale of Two Janes 151 Immigrants, Investment, and Imitation 157 Conclusion 166 CHAPTER FOUR: “INQUYRE FOR THE OLDE WAY”: THEATRICAL REPRESENTATION AND IDEOLOGICAL ORIGINS IN THOMAS MIDDLETON’S HENGIST, KING OF KENT; OR, THE MAYOR OF QUEENBOROUGH 169 The Protestant Historiographical Project 173 The Ancient Faith and the Problem of Monarchy 179 Ancient Authority and the Problem of Paganism 186 The Clown Sets off the King: Middleton’s Theatrical Critique 196 Conclusion 207 CONCLUSION 211 BIBLIOGRAPHY 218 VITA 230 v INTRODUCTION From all that’s near the court, from all that’s great, Within the compass of the city walls, We now have brought our scene. –Induction.1-3 These lines begin Francis Beaumont’s The Knight of the Burning Pestle, and they are a good place to begin the present study for two reasons. First, as the Prologue’s address to the audience, they indicate the literal setting of the play and stage amongst the commons of the City as opposed, pointedly, to the Court. Of course, when speaking of the commons, it is important to note that this means wealthy commoners—the sort of merchants, authority figures, and important men of the City who could afford to go to the private theatres, where Knight played (Gurr 89). These were the kinds of citizens who, around the turn of the seventeenth century, were busily earning and growing their wealth and steadily establishing themselves as the rising social class in London, becoming a viable political match for the aristocracy who, as Lawrence Stone has demonstrated, were in financial crisis by 1600 (Crisis 6-9). Second, the lines speak to a trend happening across the commercial theatres which, I will argue, was directly related to this steady shift in economic and political power from the Court to the City. It has been noted by many scholars that, by 1600, a significant change was occurring in the types of productions that the London theatres offered. Quite literally, the acting companies were bringing their works from “all that’s great” into “the compass of the city walls” when it came to genre and content, and they were increasingly probing the metatheatrical relationship between genre, content, and culture, as the existence of a play like Knight suggests. Dramatic 1 2 works, even tragedies, were no longer focusing solely on “great men” or noble themes but were often incorporating citizen and clown figures into what, according to intellectuals like Sir Philip Sidney, should have been theoretically unified artistic plots. This had been happening for some time, as Sidney famously complained when he noted the “gross absurdities” committed by the acting companies, their “mingling kings and clowns” by thrusting the clown into “majestical matters” (244). Tragedies and especially histories quite often included characters from among the citizens and peasants, and by the 1590s these characters were not, as Sidney suggests, merely thrust into the historical content for the sake of comic relief, but served as critical commentary and a reminder that history included both citizens and kings. The chronicle history play, which, alongside romances and comedies, had dominated the theatrical scene of the 1580s and 90s, is generally acknowledged to have been in slow decline after 1600. The genre had enjoyed a period of widespread popularity during Elizabeth’s reign with foundational works such as Gorboduc (1561) and Cambyses (1569) and culminated in the works of Marlowe (Tamburlaine, 1588; Edward II, 1593) and Shakespeare. Roslyn Knutson notes “changes taking place around 1600 in the choice of subject matter for English history plays” (94), changes such as a focus on more recent history rather than medieval as well as a tendency to feature famous commoners such as Thomas Cromwell or Thomas Gresham rather than kings. Irving Ribner argues—rightly, judging by performance and publication dates—that “following the accession of James I the history play passes into a period of rapid decline” (266). Critics have attempted to explain this decline in various ways. Phyllis Rackin suggests that, as the field of historiography became more formalized, a “division between historical fact and literary truth foreclosed the possibility of writing historical drama” (32). Leonard Tennenhouse argues that the history play genre depended on a kind of glorified nationalism that aged and 3 finally died out with Elizabeth (85, qtd. in Morgan-Russell 246). Ribner significantly notes that the decline of the history play coincided with the rising popularity of “the sophisticated satiric drama of Marston and Jonson” and suggests that chronicle history simply couldn’t compete (267).