DOCSLIB.ORG

The Dramaturgy of Thomas Heywood 1594-1613 Carson, R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Dramaturgy of Thomas Heywood 1594-1613 Carson, R The dramaturgy of Thomas Heywood 1594-1613 Carson, R. Neil The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author For additional information about this publication click this link. http://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/jspui/handle/123456789/1390 Information about this research object was correct at the time of download; we occasionally make corrections to records, please therefore check the published record when citing. For more information contact [email protected] THE DRAMATURGYOF THOMAS HEYWOOD 1594-1613 THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR JANUARY, 1974 OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE R. NEIL CARSON UNIVERSITY OF LONDON WESTFIELD COLLEGE I)IN 1 ABSTRACT This dissertation is an attempt to describe the characteristics of Thomas Heywood's dramatic style. The study is divided into three parts. The first deals with the playwright's theatrical career and discusses how his practical experience as actor and sharer might have affected his technique as a dramatic writer. The second part defines the scope of the investigation and contains the bulk of the analysis of Heywood's plays. My approach to the mechanics of playwriting is both practical and theoretical. I have attempted to come to an understanding of the technicalities of Heywood's craftsmanship by studying the changes he made in Sir Thomas Moore and in the sources he used for his plays. At the same time, I have tried to comprehend the aesthetic framework within which he worked by referring to the critical ideas of the period and especially to opinions expressed by Heywood him- self in An Apology for Actors and elsewhere. The third part of the thesis is an application of the findings of Part Two to the problems of authorship in Fortune by Land and Sea. The thesis shows Heywood's emphasis on essentially theatrical qualities such as visual effects and effects which can be obtained by controlling the relationship of the actor to the audience. It also illustrates his rejection of "Aristotelian" 2- A. 3 principles of dramatic construction in favour of "rules" derived from the native morality and romance traditions'., and shaped by contemporary theatrical conditions. It concludes that Heywood is essentially a didactic artist but one interested in technical experimentation and audience response. I Our Play is new, but whether shaped well In Act or Seane, Iudge you. (Epilogue, A Mayden- head Well lost. ) 4 PREFACE There are several practical difficulties confronting the student of Thomas Heywood. To begin with, the very length of his career (more than forty years), and the great variety of his writings make it awkward to confine any study to manageable proportions. Furthermore, there is still considerable disagree- ment about the canon of the playwright's work. Consequently it is impossible to establish a firm chronology for the plays. Only one of the dramas written between 1594 and 1613--A Woman Killed with Kindness--can be dated with absolute authority. About virtually every other play ascribed to Heywood during this period there is some uncertainty. Any comparison of the plays on the basis of a conjectural sequence of composition, therefore, rests on a shaky foundation. Closely related to the problem of date is the question of authorship. It is frequently difficult or impossible to know if a work is a collaboration or a revision involving another writer. I have included two plays (Edward IV, and How a Man May Chuse a Good Wife from a Bad) in my discussion of dramaturgy although there is a real possibility that Heywood may have had no hand at all in the second and only "a main finger" in the first. Furthermore, If You Know Not Me and 1 Fair Maid of the West have not survived in their original form and it is now almost impossible to reconstruct the author's intentions. Here again, 5 6 generalizations based on evidence including these plays are bound to be less reliable than one could wish. I have taken several decisions in an attempt to minimize the difficulties just described. To begin with, I have limited the study to the years 1594-1613 during which time Heywood was most closely connected with an acting company. Secondly I have confined the rather detailed and technical discussion of chronology and authorship to a bulky: appendix. This has enabled me to adopt a hypothetical sequence of composition without overcrowding the main discussion of dramaturgy with extended supporting arguments. Finally, I have chosen to use the 1874 Pearson edition of Heywood's plays to which edition I have referred consistently throughout. Since the plays are often not divided into acts and scenes, I have adopted a convention of citing the volume number in Roman and the page number in Arabic numerals (e. g. 2 Edward IV, I, 162). Finally, I would like to acknowledge my indebtedness to my supervisor, Professor W. A. Armstrong, who has been unfailingly helpful and encouraging. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT 2 PREFACE 5 PART ONE: THEATRICAL CONDITIONS I. COVENANTE SEARVANTE (1594-1599) 10 II. DRAMATIST (1599-1613) 32 (a) Derby's Men (1599-1601) 33 (b) Worcester's Men (1602-1603) 50 (c) Queen Anne's Men (1603-1613) 69 PART TWO: DRAMATURGY III. SIR THOMAS MOORE 84 IV. NARRATIVE 117 (a) Theory and Practice 119 (b) Dynamic Form 128 (i) Point of Attack 128 (ii) Exposition 129 (iii) Foreshadowing 135 (iv) Causality 137 (c) Static Form 142 (i) Beginnings 146 (ii) Middles 152 (iii) Endings 166 (d) Conclusion 175 V. DRAMATIS PERSONAE 177 (a) Techniques of Characterization 178 (b) Appearance 185 (c) Gesture 198 (d) Speech 209 (i) Direct Address 213 (ii) Spoken Thought and Feeling 215 (iii) Conversation 224 (e) Grouping 227 (f) Development 233 (g) Conclusion 239 7 VI. SPECTACLE 241 (a) Stage Practice 243 (b) Realism 251 (i) Pranerties 252 (ii) Furniture 255 (c) Semi-Realism 263 (i) Scenic Units 263 (ii) Tiring House Facade 265 (d) Symbolism 273 (e) Conclusion 279 PART THREE: PAGEANTS TO INSTRUCT VII. FORTUNE BY LAND AND SEA 283 VIII. CONCLUSION 310 IX. APPENDICES 314 (1) A Conjectural Chronology 314 (2) Heywood's Stage Directions 378 X. BIBLIOGRAPHY 384 8 PART ONE THEATRICALC0NDIT10N S_ The forthright telling of the play's story, the freedom with time and place which lets the dramatist rivet each consecutive link in it, the confidences of the soliloquy, the spell-binding rhetoric, the quick alternation of one interest and one group of figures with another--all this is adaptation to environment and the solving of practical problems. (H. Granville-Barker, On Dramatic Method, p. 17) 9 I COVENANTE SEARVANTE (1594-1599) Two references to Thomas Heywood in the year 1598 illustrate the multi-faceted nature of his talent. On March 25, the theatrical financier, Philip Henslowe, made the following entry in his record of business transactions with the Admiral's men: Thomas hawoode came & hiered hime seallfe wth me as a covenante searvante for ij yeares by the Receuenge of ij syngell pence acgordinge to the statute of winshester & to beginne at the daye aboue written & not to playe any wher publicke a bowt london not whille thes ij yeareS be exspired but in my howsse yf he do then he dothe forfett vnto me the, Receuinge of thes ijd fortie powndes & wittnes to this Antony wm Borne gabrell spencer monday 1 Thomas dowton Robart shawe Richard Jonnes Richard alleyn. 1Henslowe's Diary, ed. R. A. Foakes and R. T. Rickert (Cambridge, 1961), p. 241. The term "diary" is not quite accurate to describe Henslowe's account book but it has been so universally employed that I follow the customary usage. Subsequent references will be to the Foakes-Rickert edition but will cite the folio pages. Sometime after September of that year there appeared a commonplace book by Francis Meres entitled Palladis Tamia. In it the author makes a comparison between the English poets and playwrights and those of the ancient world in which he lists Heywood as one of the best contemporary 2 dramatists writing comedy. Together these references establish Heywood 2Palladis Tamia (1598), sig. 283v. 10 11 as one of those rare playwrights, who combine with literary ability an intimate knowledge of the technical aspects of acting and stage pro- duction. Just how Heywood managed to follow careers as both writer and performer is not clear. He probably arrived in London as early as 3 1593 after having left Cambridge without taking a degree. He may have 3A. M. Clark, Thomas Heywood (Oxford, 1931), p. 4. 5 been no more than twenty4 and undoubtedly had no great expectations. 4C. J. Sisson ("The Red Bull Company and the Importunate Widow", Shakespeare Survey, 7 (1954), 58-59) cites the depositions Baskervile. There Hey- taken in 1623 in the Chancery suit of Worth v.. 49 thereabouts" and "aged wood is described as being "of the age of or too faith in the 50 yeares, or neare vpon. " Putting, perhaps, much that Heywood born "soon accuracy of these documents, Sisson reckons was after October 3,1573. " 5A. M. Clark (Thomas Heywood, p. 4) speculates that it was the death of the young scholar's father, Robert Heywood, in February, 1593, that caused him to give up his studies. There is some evidence that the young man immediately sought to attract a patron. In his Funeral Elegy on James I (1625), Heywood alludes to a time when he was a servant to the Earl of Southampton. Clark con- jectures that the reference is to Heywood's first years in London when 6 he was an actor in a company under the Earl's patronage.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Download Download
    Early Theatre 9.2 Issues in Review Lucy Munro, Anne Lancashire, John Astington, and Marta Straznicky Popular Theatre and the Red Bull Governing the Pen to the Capacity of the Stage: Reading the Red Bull and Clerkenwell In his introduction to Early Theatre’s Issues in Review segment ‘Reading the Elizabethan Acting Companies’, published in 2001, Scott McMillin called for an approach to the study of early modern drama which takes theatre companies as ‘the organizing units of dramatic production’. Such an approach will, he suggests, entail reading plays ‘more fully than we have been trained to do, taking them not as authorial texts but as performed texts, seeing them as collaborative endeavours which involve the writers and dozens of other theatre people, and placing the staged plays in a social network to which both the players and audiences – perhaps even the playwrights – belonged’.1 We present here a variation on this approach: three essays that focus on the Red Bull theatre and its Clerkenwell locality. Rather than focusing on individual companies, we take the playhouse and location as our organising principle. Nonetheless, we are dealing with precisely the kind of decentring activity that McMillin had in mind, examining early drama through collaborative performance, through performance styles and audience taste, and through the presentation of a theatrical repertory in print. Each essay deals with a different ‘social network’: Anne Lancashire re-examines the evidence for the London Clerkenwell play, a multi-day biblical play performed by clerks in the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries; John Astington takes a look at acting traditions and repertory composition at the Red Bull and its fellow in the northern suburbs, Golden Lane’s Fortune playhouse; and Marta Straznicky looks at questions relating to the audience for Red Bull plays in the playhouse and the print-shop.
    [Show full text]
  • Repertory and Riot: the Relocation of Plays from the Red Bull to the Cockpit Stage
    132 Issues in Review 28 Knutson, Playing Companies and Commerce, 62. 29 Leggatt, Jacobean Public Theatre, 4. Repertory and Riot: The Relocation of Plays from the Red Bull to the Cockpit Stage On 4 March 1617 the newly built Cockpit playhouse in Drury Lane was assailed by a band of ‘lewde and loose persons, apprentices and others’.1 Writ- ing four days after the event, Edward Sherbourne claimed that between three and four thousand apprentices had mobilized themselves, ‘wounded divers of the players, broke open their trunckes, & whatt apparreil, bookes, or other things they found, they burnt & cutt in peeces; & not content herewith, gott on the top of the house, & untiled it’.2 Consequences were not limited to loss of property. Sherbourne elaborates that ‘one prentise was slaine, being shott throughe the head with a pistoll, & many other of their fellowes were sore hurt’.3 On the same day, John Chamberlain wrote to Dudley Carleton of the disorder in town, adding that the players of Queen Anne’s Men, the current occupants of the Cockpit, ‘defended themselves as well as they could and slew three of them [the rioters] with shot, and hurt divers’.4 The gravity of the situation, at least as far as city authorities were concerned, is clear. In a letter to the lord mayor and aldermen of London, it was reported that ‘there were diverse people slayne, and others hurt and wounded’. Later that month, the privy council ordered security and vigilance against the behaviour of citizens and apprentices to be tightened.5 A number of historical narratives have prioritized the riot, which took place on Shrove Tuesday that year.
    [Show full text]
  • From Sidney to Heywood: the Social Status of Commercial Theatre in Early Modern London
    From Sidney to Heywood: the social status of commercial theatre in early modern London Romola Nuttall (King’s College London, UK) The Literary London Journal, Volume 14 Number 1 (Spring 2017) Abstract Thomas Heywood’s Apology for Actors (written c. 1608, published 1612) is one of the only stand-alone, printed deFences of the proFessional theatre to emerge from the early modern period. Even more significantly, it is ‘the only contemporary complete text we have – by an early modern actor about early modern actors’ (Griffith 191). This is rather surprising considering how famous playwrights and drama of that period have become, but it is revealing of attitudes towards the profession and the stage at the turn of the sixteenth century. Religious concerns Formed a central part of the heated public debate which contested the social value oF proFessional drama during the early modern era. Claims against the literary status of work produced for the commercial stage were also frequently levelled against the theatre from within the establishment, a prominent example being Sir Philip Sidney’s Defence of Poesie (written c. 1579, published 1595). Considering Heywood’s Apology in relation to Sidney’s Defence, and thinking particularly about the ways these treatises appropriate the classical idea oF mimesis and the consequent social value of literature, gives fresh insight into the changing status of drama in Shakespeare’s lifetime and how attitudes towards commercial theatre developed between the 1570s and 1610s. The following article explores these ideas within the framework of the London in which Heywood and his acting company lived and worked.
    [Show full text]
  • A Noise Within Study Guide Shakespeare Supplement
    A Noise Within Study Guide Shakespeare Supplement California’s Home for the Classics California’s Home for the Classics California’s Home for the Classics Table of Contents Dating Shakespeare’s Plays 3 Life in Shakespeare’s England 4 Elizabethan Theatre 8 Working in Elizabethan England 14 This Sceptered Isle 16 One Big Happy Family Tree 20 Sir John Falstaff and Tavern Culture 21 Battle of the Henries 24 Playing Nine Men’s Morris 30 FUNDING FOR A NOISE WITHIN’S EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS IS PROVIDED IN paRT BY: The Ahmanson Foundation, Alliance for the Advancement of Arts Education, Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich, Employees Community Fund of Boeing California, The Capital Group Companies, Citigroup Foundation, Disney Worldwide Outreach, Doukas Family Foundation, Ellingsen Family Foundation, The Herb Alpert Foundation, The Green Foundation, Kiwanis Club of Glendale, Lockheed Federal Credit Union, Los Angeles County Arts Commission, B.C. McCabe Foundation, Metropolitan Associates, National Endowment for the Arts, The Kenneth T. and Eileen L. Norris Foundation, The Steinmetz Foundation, Dwight Stuart Youth Foundation, Waterman Foundation, Zeigler Family Foundation. 2 A Noise Within Study Guide Shakespeare Supplement Dating Shakespeare’s Plays Establishing an exact date for the Plays of Shakespeare. She theorized that authorship of Shakespeare’s plays is a very Shakespeare (a “stupid, ignorant, third- difficult task. It is impossible to pin down rate play actor”) could not have written the exact order, because there are no the plays attributed to him. The Victorians records giving details of the first production. were suspicious that a middle-class actor Many of the plays were performed years could ever be England’s greatest poet as before they were first published.
    [Show full text]
  • English 9127B: Performance Conditions in Shakespeare’S Time Wednesdays 12:30-3:30 Weldon Library 257
    THE UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO Department of English http://www.uwo.ca/english English 9127B: Performance Conditions in Shakespeare’s Time Wednesdays 12:30-3:30 Weldon Library 257 Dr M.J. Kidnie AHB 0N05 x85830 [email protected] Description: This course focuses on the creation and staging of professional theatre in the age of Shakespeare. Students will study architectural evidence of performance spaces and consider how these spaces might have been put to use in practice, they will be introduced to practical theatrical concerns such as company organisation, payments for scripts, theatrical collaboration, rehearsal, and censorship, and they will examine and discuss surviving textual evidence of the revision and transmission of dramatic manuscripts through to performance. 6 January Introduction to the course Plus seminar assignments. 13 January Early modern stages Dramatists and actors had a shared understanding of the theatres in which their plays would be performed, and the opportunities these spaces provided. This week we’ll explore the stage space of the outdoor amphitheatres in terms of live performance. Tiffany Stern, “Text, Playhouse and London,” Making Shakespeare (Routledge, 2004): 6-33 *Peter Thomson, “Playhouses and Players,” Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare Studies, ed. Stanley Wells (Cambridge, 1986), pp. 67-83 *Andrew Gurr, ‘The Staging’, The Shakespearean Stage, 1574-1642, 3rd ed. (Cambridge, 1992), pp. 172-211 *Peter Stallybrass, “Properties in Clothes: The Materials of the Renaissance Theatre,” Staged Properties in Early Modern English Drama, ed. Jonathan Gil Harris and Natasha Korda (Cambridge UP, 2002): 177- 201 *Shakespeare’s Globe: A Theatrical Experiment, ed. Christie Carson and Farah Karim-Cooper (Cambridge UP, 2008) – select essays 20 January Thomas Heywood, A Woman Killed with Kindness Heywood was a contemporary of Shakespeare, and one of the most prolific playwrights of the age – he claimed to have a “hand or main finger” in 220 plays.
    [Show full text]
  • An A2 Timeline of the London Stage Between 1660 and 1737
    1660-61 1659-60 1661-62 1662-63 1663-64 1664-65 1665-66 1666-67 William Beeston The United Company The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company @ Salisbury Court Sir William Davenant Sir William Davenant Sir William Davenant Sir William Davenant The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company & Thomas Killigrew @ Salisbury Court @Lincoln’s Inn Fields @ Lincoln’s Inn Fields Sir William Davenant Sir William Davenant Rhodes’s Company @ The Cockpit, Drury Lane @ Red Bull Theatre @ Lincoln’s Inn Fields @ Lincoln’s Inn Fields George Jolly John Rhodes @ Salisbury Court @ The Cockpit, Drury Lane @ The Cockpit, Drury Lane The King’s Company The King’s Company PLAGUE The King’s Company The King’s Company The King’s Company Thomas Killigrew Thomas Killigrew June 1665-October 1666 Anthony Turner Thomas Killigrew Thomas Killigrew Thomas Killigrew @ Vere Street Theatre @ Vere Street Theatre & Edward Shatterell @ Red Bull Theatre @ Bridges Street Theatre @ Bridges Street Theatre @ The Cockpit, Drury Lane @ Bridges Street Theatre, GREAT FIRE @ Red Bull Theatre Drury Lane (from 7/5/1663) The Red Bull Players The Nursery @ The Cockpit, Drury Lane September 1666 @ Red Bull Theatre George Jolly @ Hatton Garden 1676-77 1675-76 1674-75 1673-74 1672-73 1671-72 1670-71 1669-70 1668-69 1667-68 The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company Thomas Betterton & William Henry Harrison and Thomas Henry Harrison & Thomas Sir William Davenant Smith for the Davenant Betterton for the Davenant Betterton for the Davenant @ Lincoln’s Inn Fields
    [Show full text]
  • Christopher Beeston and the Caroline Office of Theatrical ‘Governor’
    Early Theatre 11.2 (2008) Christopher Matusiak Christopher Beeston and the Caroline Office of Theatrical ‘Governor’ The decision in February 1637 to appoint Christopher Beeston (alias Hut- chinson) ‘Gouuernor of the new Company of the Kings & Queenes boyes’ crowned one of the busiest and most innovative careers in seventeenth-cen- tury commercial theatre.1 Beeston had emerged in the 1590s as a young per- former in the Chamberlain’s Men, notably acting with Richard Burbage, Wil- liam Kempe, and William Shakespeare in the first production of Ben Jonson’s Every Man in His Humour. For the better part of the next two decades, he managed the financial affairs of Queen Anne’s Men at the Red Bull and with that company’s assets at his disposal, particularly its valuable wardrobe, he oversaw the building of west London’s first playhouse in 1616 — the Cock- pit (or Phoenix) in Drury Lane. By 1636, Beeston had established himself as London’s pre-eminent theatrical entrepreneur, having led Queen Henri- etta Maria’s fashionable company for ten years and amassed an unpreced- ented personal treasury of playbooks, acting apparel, and other tiring house materials. However, in May of that year the worst outbreak of plague in three decades closed the theatres and suppressed business until the following October 1637. Under the stress of eighteenth months of enforced idleness, acting companies buckled, setting patents and personnel adrift. Among the casualties was Beeston’s relationship with the Queen’s Men. From his van- tage point at the competing Salisbury
    [Show full text]
  • FRONT9 2.CHP:Corel VENTURA
    144 Issues in Review The Red Bull Repertory in Print, 1605–60 With remarkable consistency throughout the early modern period, Red Bull playgoers are characterized as unlettered, ignorant, or possessed of a crass literary sensibility. Interestingly, though, they are also imagined as avid readers: Webster’s well-known depiction, following the failure at the Red Bull of his The White Devil, declares that ‘most of the people that come to that Play-house, resemble those ignorant asses (who visiting Stationers shoppes their use is not to inquire for good bookes, but new bookes).’1 Webster’s association of Red Bull spectators with book-buyers suggests that the persistent representations of the low literacy of this audience may obscure the extent to which the famously spectacle-driven Red Bull repertory intersects with early modern print culture. The number of Red Bull plays that were published with an explicit theatrical attribution, and more importantly the similarities in design and typography between them and plays belonging to the more elite indoor repertories, would seem to bear this out. As reading material, the Red Bull plays indicate that a seemingly ‘low’ or popular theatrical repertory is not sufficient evidence of the social or educational make-up of its audience. It is crucial at the outset to confront the publication figures that have led scholars to assume that a Red Bull attribution on the title page of a play quarto did not have any meaningful currency in early modern print culture: of the roughly 400 editions of plays published
    [Show full text]
  • The Mermaid Series Thomas Hey Wood
    THE MERMAID SERIES THOMAS HEY WOOD LONDON ERNEST BENN, LTD. THE MERMAID SERIES THOMAS HEYWOOD EDITED BY A. WILSON VERITY WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY J. ADDINGTON SYMONDS •1 lie and dream of your full mermaid wine."—Beawnoni. LONDON ERNEST BENN LIMITED NEW YORK CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS " What things have we seen Done at the Memtiaid ! heard words that have been So nimble, and so full of subtle flame, As if that every one from whence they c&me Had meant to put his whole wit in a jest, i\nd had resolved to live a fool the rest Of his duU life." Master Francis Beaurmmt to Ben fonson. •* Souls of Poets dead and gone, What Elysium have ye known, Happy field or mossy cavern, Choicer than the Mermaid Tavern ?"' Kmts. Pritiied in Great Britain PAGE THOMAS HEYWOOD. ........ vii A WOMAN KILLED WITH KINDNESS i THE FAIR MAID OF THE WEST .75 THE ENGLISH TRAVELLER. .151 THE WISE WOMAN OF HOGSDON 249 THE RAPE OF LUCRECE 327 The world's a theatre, the earth a stage, * Which God and nature doth with actors fill: Kings have their entrance in due equipage, And some their parts play well, and others ill. The best no better are (in this thedtre), Where every humour's fitted in his kind ; This a true subject acts, and that a traitor, The first applauded, and the last confined ; This plays an honest man, and that a knave, A gentle person this, and he a clown, One man is ragged, and another brave : All men have parts, and each one acts his own.
    [Show full text]
  • Christopher Beeston and the Caroline Office of Theatrical •Ÿgovernorâ•Ž
    Early Theatre 11.2 (2008) Christopher Matusiak Christopher Beeston and the Caroline Office of Theatrical ‘Governor’ The decision in February 1637 to appoint Christopher Beeston (alias Hut- chinson) ‘Gouuernor of the new Company of the Kings & Queenes boyes’ crowned one of the busiest and most innovative careers in seventeenth-cen- tury commercial theatre.1 Beeston had emerged in the 1590s as a young per- former in the Chamberlain’s Men, notably acting with Richard Burbage, Wil- liam Kempe, and William Shakespeare in the first production of Ben Jonson’s Every Man in His Humour. For the better part of the next two decades, he managed the financial affairs of Queen Anne’s Men at the Red Bull and with that company’s assets at his disposal, particularly its valuable wardrobe, he oversaw the building of west London’s first playhouse in 1616 — the Cock- pit (or Phoenix) in Drury Lane. By 1636, Beeston had established himself as London’s pre-eminent theatrical entrepreneur, having led Queen Henri- etta Maria’s fashionable company for ten years and amassed an unpreced- ented personal treasury of playbooks, acting apparel, and other tiring house materials. However, in May of that year the worst outbreak of plague in three decades closed the theatres and suppressed business until the following October 1637. Under the stress of eighteenth months of enforced idleness, acting companies buckled, setting patents and personnel adrift. Among the casualties was Beeston’s relationship with the Queen’s Men. From his van- tage point at the competing Salisbury
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Heywood Was One of Shakespeare's Most Successful and Prolific Contemporaries. Charles Lamb Describes Him As a “Prose Sh
    ENGLISH 9114A: THE STAGECRAFT OF THOMAS HEYWOOD DR MARGARET JANE KIDNIE COURSE DESCRIPTION Thomas Heywood was one of Shakespeare's most successful and prolific contemporaries. Charles Lamb describes him as a “prose Shakespeare” and Heywood claims, probably truthfully, to have had “a hand or at least the main finger” in 220 plays of the period. His plays, some of them collaborative, show a sustained intertextual engagement with the drama and poetry of his contemporaries, and with Shakespeare, in particular. This course will study Heywood’s writings for the stage with close attention to his dramaturgy, his professional association with the popularist Red Bull Theatre, and to his recurrent interest in the politics of marriage and authority. The class meets on Thursdays 9:30-12:30 in ????. INSTRUCTOR INFORMATION My office is in the Old Ivey building, 3G01. Phone: 519-661-2111, ext. 85830. Office hours: Tuesdays 1:30-2:30; Wednesdays 12:30-1:30. TEACHING PROGRAMME SEPTEMBER 4 Introduction Heywood’s career on the professional English stage and the various theatrical companies with which he was associated; surviving manuscript and print drama; critical resources; available editions (with close discussion of EEBO and early modern print conventions). Assignment of seminars. 11 The Four Prentices of London The play is available online through the Weldon catalogue, either through EEBO or Tudor facsimiles. 18 Francis Beaumont, The Knight of the Burning Pestle The New Mermaids edition is available at the Bookstore. Ten-minute seminar presentations. 25 How a Man May Choose a Good Wife from a Bad The play is available online through EEBO (Weldon catalogue).
    [Show full text]
  • The Liar As a Comic Figure in Plays by Ruiz De Alarcon, Corneille and Moliere
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 12-2006 The Liar as a Comic Figure in Plays by Ruiz de Alarcon, Corneille and Moliere Robert Matthew Patrick University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Modern Languages Commons Recommended Citation Patrick, Robert Matthew, "The Liar as a Comic Figure in Plays by Ruiz de Alarcon, Corneille and Moliere. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2006. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/4292 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Robert Matthew Patrick entitled "The Liar as a Comic Figure in Plays by Ruiz de Alarcon, Corneille and Moliere." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Modern Foreign Languages. Bryant Creel, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Edmund J. Campion, Salvatore Di Maria, Heather Hirschfeld Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Robert Matthew Patrick entitled "The Liar as a Comic Figure in Plays by Ruiz de Alarcon, Corneille and Moliere." I have examined the final paper copy of this dissertation for formand content and recommend that it be accepted in partialfulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Mode oreign Langua es.
    [Show full text]