DOCSLIB.ORG

Ben Jonson, Britain's First Literary Celebrity?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ben Jonson, Britain's First Literary Celebrity? Ben Jonson, Britain’s first literary celebrity? | TLS 7/16/12 8:02 PM The leading international forum for literary culture Ben Jonson, Britain’s first literary celebrity? Brian Vickers I n the summer of 1619, two writers evaluated Ben Jonson’s character Ian Donaldson and career in contrasting terms. Anthony à Wood, in his biographical BEN JONSON dictionary of distinguished Oxford alumni, summarized the reasons A Life why Richard Corbett of Christ Church “and other poets of this 533pp. Oxford University Press. £25 University did in reverence for his parts” propose him for an MA (US $39.95). Degree: 978 0 19 812976 9 “His own proper industry and addiction to books, especially to ancient Published: 15 February 2012 poets and classical authors, made him a person of curious learning and judgement, and of singular excellence in the art of poetry.” At much the same time, William Drummond, Laird of Hawthornden, near Edinburgh, having had Jonson staying with him after his epic walk from London to Scotland, noted this about his guest: “He is a great lover and praiser of himself, a contemner and scorner of others, given rather to lose a friend than a jest, jealous of every word and action of those about him (especially after drink, which is one of the elements in which he liveth) . He is passionately kind and angry, careless either to gain or keep, vindicative, but if be well answered, at himself.” The Informations to William Drummond, never intended for publication, are the most valuable biographical source for Jonson’s life and opinions about literature. Yet they are not always reliable. Having given his guest ample quantities of wine, Drummond recorded Jonson’s obiter dicta, punchlines in a conversation which the host may have guided, as Boswell sometimes did with Dr Johnson, with a mischievous intent. Drummond asks: “What think ye of Master Shakespeare?” Jonson replies: “That Shakespeare wanted art” – quite the opposite of what he was to write in his verses for the First Folio. Drummond’s critique of Jonson’s egoism may be excessive, yet the final sentence is perceptive about Jonson’s emotional extremes (“passionately kind and angry”), his lack of concern about earning or saving money, and his “vindicative” nature, a word “used here in its more positive Latin sense, ‘eager for judgement’ on all matters, including himself”. Ian Donaldson’s excellent new biography is the fruit of a lifetime’s study, an immersion in its subject intensified by Donaldson’s work, “over the past decade and a half”, as a co-editor of the eagerly awaited Cambridge Edition of the Works of Ben Jonson. It gives the most detailed account we are likely to have of Jonson’s life, based on a mastery of primary and secondary sources, with many penetrating comments on his plays, masques and poems. From it a vivid portrait emerges of Jonson’s imposing presence, in life (he was of massive bulk, with a pock-marked face) as in his works. As Donaldson puts http://www.the-tls.co.uk/tls/public/article872778.ece Page 1 of 3 Ben Jonson, Britain’s first literary celebrity? | TLS 7/16/12 8:02 PM it, Jonson was always ready “to prompt and guide his audiences’ responses to his work through prologues, epilogues, choruses, inductions, epistles, and specially inserted or appended scenes: to point out beauties, novelties, precedents and authorial intentions”, a readiness to act as commentator on his own work which he shares with George Bernard Shaw. Jonson goes beyond Shaw, however, by his daunting presence at performances of his own plays. In Satiromastix, or The Untrussing of the Humorous Poet (1602), Dekker described Jonson sitting in a gallery during performances of his plays, making “vile and bad faces at every line . to make players afraid to take your part”. Indeed, Jonson has characters in his plays glance around apprehensively for the author: “He do not hear me, I hope”, says one, “I am looking lest the poet hear me”, says another. A prolific writer for the public theatre yet often at odds with it, Jonson called himself “Poet”. In his turbulent career Jonson had many scrapes with the law, including prosecution for manslaughter, having killed the actor Gabriel Spencer in a duel in Hoxton Fields. Jonson escaped the gallows thanks to the old law excusing those who could read the so-called “neck-verse” from Psalm 51 as a test of literacy. In several plays, Jonson echoes his own experience with allusions to characters being “saved by the book”. Returning from his famous Scottish journey, Jonson has a character in his new masque announce that “one of our greatest poets – I know not how good a one – went to Edinburgh o’ foot, and came back”. (Donaldson, usually commendably attentive to the obsolete senses of words, fails to gloss “greatest”, which here means “largest”). In his final works, Jonson’s candour about his declining powers of invention, being “like an old bankrupt in wit”, makes his self-presentation in those plays seem rather pathetic. In charting the arc of Jonson’s life, Donaldson draws on a wide range of historical scholarship to illuminate its varying contexts. One helpful account documents the widespread discontent at the number of Scottish courtiers surrounding James I, a ressentiment which helped fuel the Gunpowder Plot. Having long been at the centre of Jonson studies, Donaldson benefits from many recent textual discoveries, including one of three songs written for a banquet in 1607, identified in 2003 by Gabriel Heaton and James Knowles, and Knowles’s discovery in 1996 of a masque by Jonson and Inigo Jones called The Entertainment at Britain’s Burse. This was commissioned by Robert Cecil to celebrate the opening in 1609 of the New Exchange, Cecil’s grand new shopping mall in the Strand, designed to draw customers to the West End, away from Gresham’s Royal Exchange in the city. (Imagine Tom Stoppard and David Hockney collaborating on a show for the Westfield shopping centre.) Donaldson himself endorses the old theory that Jonson wrote the anonymous “Address to the Great Variety of Readers” in the Shakespeare Folio of 1623, but we shall have to wait until the supplementary electronic edition of the Cambridge Jonson is published in 2013 to see his full case. As Donaldson shows, Jonson moved in an “unusual range of communities”, “religious, scholarly, theatrical, poetic, legal, parliamentary, civic, aristocratic”. He told Drummond that he had been converted to Roman Catholicism when awaiting trial in Newgate prison for the killing of Gabriel Spencer “by a priest who visited him in prison. Thereafter he was twelve years a papist”. Like many English Catholics, Jonson was frequently in trouble with the authorities on charges of recusancy. Although existing within several communities, Jonson could not be bound by them. An entry in Donaldson’s admirable index, “Troubles with the law”, lists six plays which also got Jonson into trouble. In 1597, he collaborated with Nashe on The Isle of Dogs, which was soon denounced to the authorities as a “seditious play”, presumably for its libelling of people in public life. Nashe fled to Great Yarmouth, but Jonson, together with Robert Shaa and Gabriel Spencer, two fellow players from Pembroke’s Men (which collapsed soon after), were arrested in August and placed in Marshalsea Prison until they were released in October, no charges having been pressed. More seriously, in 1605 Jonson collaborated with Marston and Chapman on Eastward Ho, which included some jokes against Scottish courtiers. Jonson and Chapman spent two months in prison, writing desperate letters to the authorities. Jonson got into further trouble for questionable allusions to powerful contemporary figures in 1601, with The Poetaster; in 1603, with Sejanus (when he was summoned before the Privy Council on charges of “Popery and treason”); in 1616, with The Devil Is an Ass, and in 1632, with The Magnetic Lady. Donaldson notes that all of Jonson’s plays were “remarkably attuned to the contemporary world”: sometimes too closely for his own good. As Sir Walter Ralegh wrote in the preface in his History of the World (1612), “Whosoever in writing a modern History, shall follow Truth too near the heels, it may haply strike out his teeth”. http://www.the-tls.co.uk/tls/public/article872778.ece Page 2 of 3 Ben Jonson, Britain’s first literary celebrity? | TLS 7/16/12 8:02 PM Donaldson so often illuminates the links between Jonson’s life and works that it seems ungrateful to complain, but some interpretations seem far-fetched. He suggests that in Cynthia’s Revels the famous song “To Diana”, “Queen and huntress, chaste and fair” (its metre irremediably transformed in my ear by Britten’s setting of it in his Serenade for Tenor, Strings and Horn, converting its four beats per line into seven), the line “Hesperus entreats thy light” is a coded appeal to Elizabeth to forgive her former favourite Essex, whom Donaldson also identifies with “the flying hart” Actaeon. Later, we are told that Cynthia’s reference to Actaeon’s “fatal doom” was inserted at the last moment before Essex’s execution on January 6, 1601 “as a stern reminder of his downfall”. But Jonson can hardly be both pleading for Essex and saying that he deserved what he got. Donaldson suggests that “the society that Jonson depicts in Sejanus closely resembles that of Catholic communities in London . intimidated by the constant threat of surveillance, forced to maintain silence or communicate in whispers”; but in a later chapter he offers the same interpretation for Morose in Epicene, who has a pathological dislike of noise.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Shakespeare, Jonson, and the Invention of the Author
    11 Donaldson 1573 11/10/07 15:05 Page 319 SHAKESPEARE LECTURE Shakespeare, Jonson, and the Invention of the Author IAN DONALDSON Fellow of the Academy THE LIVES AND CAREERS OF SHAKESPEARE and Ben Jonson, the two supreme writers of early modern England, were intricately and curiously interwoven. Eight years Shakespeare’s junior, Jonson emerged in the late 1590s as a writer of remarkable gifts, and Shakespeare’s greatest theatri- cal rival since the death of Christopher Marlowe. Shakespeare played a leading role in the comedy that first brought Jonson to public promi- nence, Every Man In His Humour, having earlier decisively intervened— so his eighteenth-century editor, Nicholas Rowe, relates—to ensure that the play was performed by the Lord Chamberlain’s Men, who had ini- tially rejected the manuscript.1 Shakespeare’s name appears alongside that of Richard Burbage in the list of ‘principal tragedians’ from the same company who performed in Jonson’s Sejanus in 1603, and it has been con- jectured that he and Jonson may even have written this play together.2 During the years of their maturity, the two men continued to observe Read at the Academy 25 April 2006. 1 The Works of Mr William Shakespeare, ed. Nicholas Rowe, 6 vols. (London, printed for Jacob Tonson, 1709), I, pp. xii–xiii. On the reliability of Rowe’s testimony, see Samuel Schoenbaum, Shakespeare’s Lives (Oxford, 1970), pp. 19–35. 2 The list is appended to the folio text of the play, published in 1616. For the suggestion that Shakespeare worked with Jonson on the composition of Sejanus, see Anne Barton, Ben Jonson: Dramatist (Cambridge, 1984), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Skewels of Poetry
    ! A Branded Felon ! Katie Gallamore ! On a cold, rainy day in September of 1598, playwright Ben Jonson was arrested for manslaughter. ! Between his birth in 1573 and his death in 1637, Ben Jonson was at different times a soldier, an actor, a playwright, a poet, an essayist, and a translator. His fortunes and misfortunes were equally varied: from branded felon to poet laureate, from lionized man of letters to impoverished pensioner. Though he was incredibly influential as a mentor to young writers (The “Sons of Ben”) Jonson is remembered primarily as a dramatist, not simply for his dozens of masques and tragedies, but for his renowned comedies. ! As arrogant and brash as he was talented and innovative, Ben Jonson lived a life as rife with drama as any of his many plays. At an early age Jonson joined the army and traveled to Flanders, where he killed a man in single combat. Back in England by 1594, he became an actor and playwright. ! In 1597 a play titled The Isle of Dogs, written by Jonson and Thomas Nashe, was suppressed after greatly offending the royal court. The content of the play remains unknown as every copy was destroyed and none are known to exist. However, it is known that the play was reported to the authorities as “lewd” and full of “slanderous matter”. The play was referenced in The Return from Parnassus (II) which alluded to the satirization of Queen Elizabeth I, herself. Consequently, the Queen issued arrest warrants for Jonson, Nashe and Gabriel Spenser (who we’ll see later), resulting in Jonson’s imprisonment in Marshalsea Prison.
    [Show full text]
  • So We Are Talking Roughly About Twenty‐Five Years of Theatre. Roughly, Because the Tendencies That Characteriz
    So we are talking roughly about twenty‐five years of theatre. Roughly, because the tendencies that characterize Jacobean theatre started before James I came to the throne (1603, died 1625) around the year 1599 – the year when the Lord Chamberlain’s Men relocated their theatre from Shoreditch to Southwark (on the southern bank of the Thames) and called it “The Globe”, the year when the private theatre of Paul’s boys was reopened, and a little later the Lord Chamberlain’s Men got hold of the Blackfriars theatre. These developments brought about an unprecedented avalanche of play‐writing and dramaturgical innovation that made the Jacobean period one of the most dynamic and spectacular periods in theatre history as we know it. The period also established a new generation of playwrights: the most prominent of whom are Ben Jonson, John Marston, George Chapman, Thomas Middleton, John Webster, Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher – who worked alongside, competed with, collaborated and learned from William Shakespeare – the major figure that continued to sway the English stage from the Elizabethan well into the Jacobean period. 1 Of course, at the beginning of the period the most successful playwright in London was Shakespeare. So far, his fame rested mainly on the series of history plays: the two tetralogies (Henry VI, Parts I‐III and Richard III; and Richard II, Henry IV, Parts I‐II and Henry V) and King John; and his witty romantic comedies that Queen Elizabeth reportedly liked so much: e.g. Love’s Labour’s Lost, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Much Ado About Nothing, As You Like It.
    [Show full text]
  • Censorship in Ben Jonson's Bartholomew Fair and a Tale of a Tub
    ABSTRACT “A man may have wit, and yet put off his hat” Censorship in Ben Jonson’s Bartholomew Fair and A Tale of a Tub Joshua J. Crain, M.A. Thesis Chairperson: Maurice A. Hunt, Ph.D. Ben Jonson’s career gives us an interesting window into English Renaissance censorship, since a number of his plays were scrutinized, altered, or suppressed by the authorities. In response to the critical consensus that Jonson’s negative view of censorship was mollified over time, this study looks at two comparatively later plays, Bartholomew Fair and A Tale of a Tub, for evidence of Jonson’s continued and even growing antipathy toward censorship. In particular, this study examines the Jonsonian trope of pretended obsequiousness as a pattern for understanding Jonson’s own behavior toward censorious authority. For instance, given the spirited defense of free speech in Bartholomew Fair, we have reason to doubt the sincerity of the Epilogue’s claim to submit to James’s censorship. Likewise, A Tale of a Tub, in both its composition history and thematic treatment of censorship, illustrates Jonson’s antagonistic attitudes toward court involvement in artistic production. "A man may have wit, and yet put off his hat" Censorship in Ben Jonson's Bartholomew Fair and A Tale of a Tub by Joshua J. Crain, B.A. A Thesis Approved by the Department of English Dianna M. Vitanza, Ph.D., Chairperson Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Baylor University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Approved by the Thesis Committee Maurice A.
    [Show full text]
  • From Foreign Enemy to Great Unifying Leader: Performances of King James VI and I Between 1599 and 1624 in the Works of Ben Jonson and William Shakespeare
    From Foreign Enemy to Great Unifying Leader: Performances of King James VI and I between 1599 and 1624 in the Works of Ben Jonson and William Shakespeare. Joshua Caldicott ‘[Players] are the abstract and brief chronicles of the time: after your death you were better have a bad epitaph than their ill report while you live’1 –Hamlet The period around the succession of King James VI and I of Scotland and England was a time of great tension, following the death of Queen Elizabeth I whose successor was in question throughout her forty five year reign. During this period, the works of Ben Jonson and William Shakespeare were incredibly successful, and both playwrights were fortunate to have an insight into the relationship between the monarch and his subjects performing both on the public stage and in the privacy of court. Though James, in contrast to his son Charles, is often remembered for not performing in court masques, he still appears (directly or indirectly) on the stages of the time: in Histories such as Henry V, in Tragedies such as Robert II and Macbeth, in Comedies such as Eastward Ho, and even in his Court Masques. Considering the plays as ‘chronicles of the time’, it is possible to map through his appearances in the works of Ben Jonson and William Shakespeare, how the perception of King James VI and I changes over time within England as he takes to the throne. Before James took the throne in 1603, there was great tension in England surrounding Elizabeth’s successor, and subsequently, some people may have already started to look North towards James, thus giving the opportunity for the playhouses to produce works like Jonson’s Robert II, that try to understand James’ position as royalty.
    [Show full text]
  • This Is a Pre-Copyedited, Author-Produced PDF of an Article Accepted for Publication in Notes and Queries Following Peer Review
    This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Notes and Queries following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version [Notes and Queries (2009) 56 (4):566-574. doi: 10.1093/notesj/gjp197] is available online at: http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/content/56/4/566.extract. BEN JONSON’S ‘VILLANOUS GUY’ In Thomas Dekker’s Satiromastix the poet Horace is a blatant caricature of Ben Jonson. Throughout the play Captain Tucca, a character taken from Jonson’s Poetaster, is used to mercilessly criticise Jonson. In one scene Tucca mocks him for having been ‘a poore Iorneyman Player’ and then makes a reference to his involvement in the Isle of Dogs affair: Death of Hercules, he could neuer play that part well in's life, no Fulkes you could not: thou call'st Demetrius Iorneyman Poet, but thou putst vp a Supplication to be a poore Iorneyman Player, and hadst beene still so, but that thou couldst not set a good face vpon't: thou hast forgot how thou amblest (in leather pilch) by a play-wagon, in the highway, and took'st mad Ieronimoes part, to get seruice among the Mimickes: and when the Stagerites banisht thee into the Ile of Dogs, thou turn'dst Ban-dog (villanous Guy) & euer since bitest, therefore I aske if th'ast been at Parris-garden, because thou hast such a good mouth; thou baitst well, read, lege, saue thy selfe and read1. The general meaning of the words I have highlighted is reasonably clear. As Cyrus Hoy put it: ‘after his experience of The Isle of Dogs Horace (Jonson) turned satirist and has been snarling ever since’.2 The precise meaning, though, is open to question.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise and Fall of Elizabethan Theatre
    Syracuse University SURFACE Syracuse University Honors Program Capstone Syracuse University Honors Program Capstone Projects Projects Spring 5-1-2007 The Rise and Fall of Elizabethan Theatre Erin M. McLaughlin Follow this and additional works at: https://surface.syr.edu/honors_capstone Part of the Cultural History Commons, and the Other History Commons Recommended Citation McLaughlin, Erin M., "The Rise and Fall of Elizabethan Theatre" (2007). Syracuse University Honors Program Capstone Projects. 588. https://surface.syr.edu/honors_capstone/588 This Honors Capstone Project is brought to you for free and open access by the Syracuse University Honors Program Capstone Projects at SURFACE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Syracuse University Honors Program Capstone Projects by an authorized administrator of SURFACE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Rise and Fall of Elizabethan Theatre Erin M. McLaughlin Candidate for B.A. Degree in History with Honors April 2007 APPROVED Thesis Project Advisor: ____________________________ Christopher Kyle Honors Reader: __________________________________ Dympna Callaghan Honors Director: __________________________________ Samuel Gorovitz Date: ________April 26th 2007___________________ Abstract The emergence of plays and the theatre as a commercial industry in England peaked during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. However, during this time numerous laws were passed which threatened the existence of this increasingly popular form of entertainment. The Rise and Fall of Elizabethan Theatre brings together the social, political and economic situations of early modern England and highlights the effects each had on the emerging theatre scene. Through evaluation of primary sources and the works of theatre historians, The Rise and Fall of Elizabethan Theatre attempts to chart the reasons for the mixed reception towards playgoing in Elizabethan England.
    [Show full text]
  • Historiography in the Margins of Ben Jonson's Quarto Sejanus. by Brock
    The Polybian Text: Historiography in the Margins of Ben Jonson’s Quarto Sejanus. by Brock Cameron MacLeod. B.A., University of Victoria, 2001 M.A., Queen’s University, 2002 A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in the Department of English © Brock Cameron MacLeod, 2010 University of Victoria All rights reserved. This dissertation may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photo- copying or other means, without the permission of the author. Library and Archives Bibliothèque et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de l'édition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-80355-4 Our file Notre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-80355-4 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant à la Bibliothèque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par télécommunication ou par l'Internet, prêter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des thèses partout dans le loan, distrbute and sell theses monde, à des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non- support microforme, papier, électronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette thèse.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Lost Plays in Early Modern England Abstracts for SAA 2013 Toronto
    Lost Plays in Early Modern England Abstracts for SAA 2013 Toronto Professor Douglas Arrell Department: Theatre and Drama Affiliation: University of Winnipeg (H): 204-774-0453 (W): 204-774-0453 [email protected] “Heywood and the Hercules Plays” Earlier commentators suggested that the 1 and 2 Hercules presented by the Admiral’s Men in 1595-96 were the same as the Silver and Brazen Ages published by Heywood in 1613. This theory was rejected in 1931 by A M Clark, Heywood’s most important biographer, but there have been arguments for and against since. A number of factors suggest that Heywood did write 1 and 2 Hercules. Heywood was probably writing for the Admiral’s in 1595. His poem Oenone and Paris published in1594 contains two stanzas describing the Hercules-Omphale relationship that are clearly echoed in The Brazen Age. The role of Hercules strongly resembles that of Tamburlaine and could well have been written for Edward Alleyn. There are contradictions between the Golden and Silver Ages suggesting that the latter was written earlier, except for the first act. This act continues the Golden Age material and seems grafted on to the Silver Age. The rest of the Silver Age and the Brazen Age do not follow Caxton’s Recuyell of the Historyes of Troye (republished 1607), which strongly influenced Heywood’s Troia Britanica (1609) and the other Agesplays. The popularity of Shakespeare’s Venus and Adonis (1593) among upper-class readers may be reflected in the strongly Ovidian tone of the Silver and Brazen Ages, and the pattern of audience attendance of 1 and 2 Hercules may reflect a vogue among upper- class audience members.
    [Show full text]
  • Censorship, Collaboration, and the Construction of Authorship in Early
    Censorship, Collaboration, and the Construction of Authorship in Early Modern Theatre Gabriella Edelstein A thesis submitted to fulfil requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences The University of Sydney 2019 I certify that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my own work and that all the assistance received in preparing this thesis and its sources have been acknowledged. This thesis has not been submitted for any degree or other purposes. Gabriella Edelstein Abstract This thesis argues that censorship is central to early modern authorial self-construction and that the regulation of drama should be part of an understanding of dramatic collaboration. Over the last twenty years, literary scholarship has paid increasing attention to the collaborative processes involved in early modern theatrical production. Despite this interest, there has yet to be an account of how dramatic censorship operates as part of the collaborative model, or how censorship affected authorship. This thesis explores the relationship between authorship and political authority, so as to reconsider who is an author and why. By engaging with textual and literary analysis, this thesis reveals how plays were shaped by a culture of collaborative censorship. I have chosen four collaboratively written and censored plays so as to consider the relationship between writing and regulation. From this starting point, I examine the ways that authorship is constructed both within plays and outside of them in early modern as well as our own contemporary culture. I begin with a survey of censorship and collaboration criticism in my Introduction and offer a way of reading early modern drama through collaborative censorship.
    [Show full text]
  • Not to Be Altered”: Performanceʼs Efficacy and Audience Reaction In
    1RWWR%H$OWHUHGૻ3HUIRUPDQFH૷V(IILFDF\DQG$XGLHQFH 5HDFWLRQLQ7KH5RPDQ$FWRU (ULF'XQQXP Comparative Drama, Volume 46, Number 4, Winter 2012, pp. 517-543 (Article) 3XEOLVKHGE\:HVWHUQ0LFKLJDQ8QLYHUVLW\ DOI: 10.1353/cdr.2012.0046 For additional information about this article http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/cdr/summary/v046/46.4.dunnum.html Access provided by Campbell University (23 Jul 2015 16:41 GMT) “Not to Be Altered”: Performance’s Efficacy and Audience Reaction in The Roman Actor Eric Dunnum eaders of Philip Massinger’s hyper-self-reflectiveThe Roman Actor Rhave long noted, and then struggled to understand, Paris’s inability to use performance to enact change in his audience. In the first of three inset plays, The Cure for Avarice, Paris (one of the Roman actors suggested by the title) uses a performance to cure Philargus of his greed and miserliness. Like Hamlet before him, Paris intends to present “on the stage as in a mirror” a character like Philargus, so that he “[m]ay see his own deformity and loathe it” (2.1.98; 99).1 However, as critics have pointed out, Philargus, unlike Claudius, does not repent or even feel guilty.2 Richard A. Burt remarks, “the attempt fails miserably.…To be sure, Philargus does identify with the [staged] miser completely. But Philargus does not regard the miser critically.”3 Philargus does eventually disown his dramatic doppelganger, but only because the character repents. “An old fool, to be gulled thus! Had he died / As I resolve to do, not to be altered, / It had gone off twanging” (2.1.407–9).
    [Show full text]
  • Shakespeare and Paradigms of Early Modern Authorship Janet Clare University of Hull ([email protected])
    Journal of Early Modern Studies, vol. 1, n. 1 (2012), pp. 137-153 http://www.fupress.com/bsfm-jems Shakespeare and Paradigms of Early Modern Authorship Janet Clare University of Hull ([email protected]) Abstract This essay examines current thinking on early modern authorship within the com- petitive economies of the theatre and publishing industries. In the wake of Foucault’s seminal essay, ‘What is an Author?’, there has been much investigation of the status, the branding, the proprietary and moral rights of the author in the early modern period and claims made for the emergence and birth of the author. The essay argues that, while authors were increasingly alert to authorship being wrongly claimed, the late sixteenth to early seventeeth century was in England a moment of transition and uncertainty. Unlike Ben Jonson not all authors vigorously identified with and laid claim to their work. The author’s emergence was a slow and fluctuating process. Keywords: Authorship, Collaboration, Jonson, Plagiarism, Shakespeare. At the end of Poetaster, first performed in 1601, Ben Jonson appended a scene in which he appears on the stage in propria persona. The scene, as Jonson tells the reader in the published text of 1602, was meant as ‘an apology from the author’ and censored. ‘Apology’ here, of course, carries the meaning of defence, and in the following exchange between the Author, the sound critic, Nasutus, and the malicious one, Polyposus, the author defends Poetaster against those who have accused him of libel and stakes out his professional authority.1 Jonson affirms, disingenuously or not, that his intentions were innocent but the play ‘had the fault to be called mine’ (Jonson 1995, 265).
    [Show full text]