Comparison of the Two Plays
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of English and American Studies English Language and Literature Eliška Poláčková Everyman and Homulus: analysis of their genetic relation Bachelor’s Diploma Thesis Supervisor: Mgr. Pavel Drábek, Ph.D. 2010 I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography. …………………………………………….. Eliška Poláčková Acknowledgement I would like to thank my supervisor Mgr. Pavel Drábek, Ph.D. for his patient and kind help, Prof. PhDr. Eva Stehlíková for useful advice, and Mgr. Markéta Polochová for unprecedented helpfulness and support. Table of Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 1 Morality Play and Its Representatives ........................................................................... 3 1.1 Morality Play .......................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Everyman ................................................................................................................ 5 1.3 Homulus .................................................................................................................. 7 2 Concept of Translation in The Middle Ages ................................................................. 9 3 Comparison of Everyman and Homulus ...................................................................... 11 3.1 Composition .......................................................................................................... 11 3.2 Plot ........................................................................................................................ 13 3.3 Language and Style ............................................................................................... 21 3.4 Characters ............................................................................................................. 27 3.5 Selected Motifs ..................................................................................................... 33 3.5.1 Classical Versus Medieval Literary Background .......................................... 33 3.5.2 Criticism of the Church .................................................................................. 35 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 39 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 41 Resumé ............................................................................................................................ 42 Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 43 Appendices: The English text of Everyman The Latin text of Homulus Introduction The aim of this bachelor thesis is to show, on the basis of close reading of two medieval plays, the specific character of the work of a translator in the Middle Ages or at the beginning of the early modern period, and the consequent implications concerning the use of words „translation‟ and „adaptation‟ while talking about a piece of literature originating at that time. The main argument of the thesis is that the notion of translation has a different meaning when it is applied to a medieval literary work, since the understanding of what it means to transfer a piece of text from one language to another differed immensely from our modern notions. Therefore, dealing with a medieval translation, one should bear in mind the specific role of its author, who does not only translate the words of the original text in the target language, but also adds to the theme of the work various motifs and elements according to his personal attitude. The two chosen plays, English morality play of Everyman (c1475) and its Latin translation Homulus (c1536), serve as a convenient example of this common medieval practice. The first chapter serves as a summary of background information concerning the two compared texts. It gives a brief overview of what a medieval morality play is, and provides basic information about the two plays. In the second chapter, elementary information concerning the concept of medieval translation is provided to the extent necessary for the purpose of the comparison. The comparison covers the remaining part of the thesis, being separated into several subchapters dealing with particular features of the two plays important for the argument presented. Thus, composition of the two plays, their plot, language and style, characters, and selected motives are discussed respectively in the third chapter, supported by textual evidence taken from both texts. 1 The English versions of Latin texts given in footnotes are my own translations. A special attention is given to a detailed comparison of the plotline of both plays, stressing the differences and additional elements employed by the pseudonymous author of Homulus, Christianus Ischyrius. The reason for such a detailed description is, above all, to give a reader non-proficient in Latin a chance to become acquainted with the plot of Homulus, since the play was translated only to German, the edition not being easily available in the Czech libraries. 2 1 Morality Play and Its Representatives 1.1 Morality Play Morality play is a distinctive genre of medieval drama that emerged in the 14th century in England, gaining almost immediately wide acceptance and becoming one of the most prolific literary genres not only in the Middle Ages but also in the following epoch. It has a more or less settled structure and highly ideological content pertaining to the central morality theme of the Church, the doctrine of man's salvation. The idea that only God can grant salvation to a man is expressed in the plays in a highly stylized and formal way: there is a more or less given set of allegorical characters, which can be categorized into several groups according to their purpose. They do not stand for particular human beings, but – on one side – represent a generalized figure representing mankind, and – on the other – a group of allegorical domestic virtues and vices who serve as a temptation for the man on his life-journey. The decisions of the main character “lack personal motivation or any inward struggle” (CRAIG 64) and the shifts in his behaviour are by no means motivated psychologically; on the contrary, the character of everyman1 acts to fulfil what is called the concept of human justice (CRAIG 67). The basic idea, delivered by morality plays, is that of man being a part of larger divine plan of salvation, in which he first has to be sinful, so that 1 The form “everyman” is used for denoting the character of mankind, regardless of whether it refers to the character of Everyman or Homulus. While talking about the particular character, the capitalized form of the name is used. 3 God could give him the privilege of forgiveness. It comes through a gradual and painful process of man's repentance, sometimes presented as a separate character. In the end, everyman understands what the permanent good is and learns to desire it, not the worldly pleasures. The genre probably originated in England as a form of popular literature at about the same time as the guild pageants (CRAIG 69, 70). The earliest recorded morality is thought to be the play Pater Noster, although Hardin Craig rather plausibly argues against its characterization as typical morality play (CRAIG 65). Be it so or not, later morality plays – such as The Pride of Life, Mankynd, The Castle of Perseverance, or Wisdom – bear distinct features of the genre (allegorical characters, the theme of salvation, similar structure) and can be divided into particular type forms according to age, sex and occupation of the main character (CRAIG 64). The development of the genre is closely connected to another form of medieval drama, the already-mentioned biblical pageant. Despite numerous differences between the two genres (e. g. “the morality does not dramatize biblical persons and episodes, but personifies the good and bad qualities of everyman and usually shows them in conflict” CAWLEY XXI), there are many similar features between the morality play and pageant; for example, both employ allegorical figures, and are influenced by the sermon and folk activities. The morality play undoubtedly started as a form of popular literature, and only later became the dominion of individual authors. Its development can be divided into two periods according to the time of the origin of the plays. The representatives of the first group (those mentioned above), which are called pre-Tudor moralities, are mostly of an anonymous authorship, while the later plays – the Tudor and Elizabethan moralities – can be assigned to particular authors. Wilson's Three Ladies of London or Medwall's 4 Nature (CRAIG 69) and other plays belong to the second group. The morality play had a great influence on the development of Elizabethan drama, especially in the use of staging methods (the use of balcony, mechanical effects and music) and “the freedom of medieval playwrights in „mingling kings and clowns‟” (CAWLEY XXIII). 1.2 Everyman Everyman, written in the late 15th century by an anonymous author, is considered to be the best example of English morality play because the doctrinal content is demonstrated in a masterly way through carefully constructed plotline,