DOCSLIB.ORG

Download Thesis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Download Thesis This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from the King’s Research Portal at https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/ The roles of the malcontent on the early modern English stage Doorly, Jan Awarding institution: King's College London The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without proper acknowledgement. END USER LICENCE AGREEMENT Unless another licence is stated on the immediately following page this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work Under the following conditions: Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Non Commercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works - You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you receive permission from the author. Your fair dealings and other rights are in no way affected by the above. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 02. Oct. 2021 The roles of the malcontent on the early modern English stage Janet C. Doorly Submitted for Doctor of Philosophy in English Research King’s College London Introduction 6 Part 1 Theatre and metatheatre 16 Chapter 1 Subjectivity and spectatorship in the early modern playhouse 16 Subjectivity and the self 17 Early modern acting styles and theories 23 Emotion in the playhouse 29 Captivating the senses: Perception and interpretation of the malcontent 34 Verisimilitude and judgement 39 Chapter 2 Uses of the dramatic illusion 45 Metadrama and metatheatre 47 Theatrum mundi and dramatic illusion 52 Frames of interpretation 57 Metadramatic devices 60 Spectators as witnesses and judges 66 Part 2 Melancholia and the malcontent 72 Chapter 3 The shared iconography of melancholia 72 Early modern imagery of melancholia 73 Melancholy and malcontents in literature 81 Dramatic melancholy 84 Hamlet and melancholia 90 Chapter 4 Hamlet as metadramatic malcontent 96 Point of view 98 Hamlet as spectator 101 Hamlet as performer 108 Delaying revenge 112 Part 3 The staging of revenge 119 Chapter 5 Ethics, justice and value 119 Early modern ideas on vengeance 121 Ideas about revenge as a dramatic genre 126 Cycles of revenge 135 Motives and values 136 Chapter 6 Role-playing, ritual and satire 141 Role-play and disguise 143 Rituals and metadrama of revenge 149 Revenge tragedy as satire 156 Part 4 The malcontent in comedy and tragicomedy 163 Chapter 7 ‘Sweet and bitter fools’: The clown and the malcontent 163 Dramatizing discontent 163 A special prerogative: ‘As free as air’ 171 Encounters between clown and malcontent 178 Creating metatheatre for the Globe 183 Chapter 8 Shakespearean malcontents and the comic resolution 194 Jaques: ‘A kind of comic Hamlet’ 196 Jaques’s ‘strange eventful history’ 201 Malvolio and the casting out of folly 208 Conclusion 215 Bibliography of works cited 218 Abstract This thesis explores early modern audience response to the dramatic malcontent. Using a thematic approach, it builds an account that addresses the complex literary, social and political heritage of malcontent characters, and reveals the ways in which, by drawing on all the resources of early modern drama including its self- consciousness and the ambiguities of its social and moral status, these figures created relationships with their audiences that came to epitomize the potentialities of the theatre itself. Comic and tragic malcontents from Jaques in Shakespeare’s As You Like It (1599) to Bosola in Webster’s Duchess of Malfi (1613–1614) struck fascinating and unsettling poses on the early modern stage. The study examines the challenge embodied in such characters and the powerful and dynamic responses they elicited through their close engagement with contemporary spectators, in the light of research into staging practices, the cultural contexts in which the plays were received, and the types of audience response that can be inferred from the surviving play texts. Jaques’s speech beginning ‘All the world’s a stage’ resounded particularly satisfyingly at the newly opened Globe, its governing metaphor clearly echoing the early modern theatre’s self-consciousness about its own processes. A striking proponent of direct address to the audience, the malcontent comments on the action of the play not only from a specific position within the dramatic illusion, but also in varying degrees of exclusion from it, characteristically initiating other self-reflexive dramatic strategies such as disguise, masques, plays-within-the-play, and metaphorical language referring to the theatre or performance (in the tradition of ‘all the world’s a stage’). To the extent that he wins the admiration or sympathy of spectators through the quality of his performance, he creates the disquieting effect of moral complicity. The malcontent’s persona thus has the potential to embody the many pleasures and potentialities of the theatre: generating ideas and plotlines, playing with language, highlighting contradictions and predicaments, operating as a would-be stage manager as well as actor, and representing his own ideal audience. Part 1 considers audience response in the light of early modern conceptions of subjectivity, spectatorship, and the standpoints from which ethical judgements may be formed. Ideas about the instability of the self and the plurality of roles one person 3 could play rendered spectators sensitive to performative aspects of the self, while the network of causes and effects depicted onstage drew attention to the problem of agency, and the apparent powerlessness of the spectator. The malcontent exploits the theatrum mundi metaphor to interrogate the characteristics of the genuine as opposed to the false, the natural as distinct from the constructed, and the current as contrasted with the historical, in the context of a theatrical illusion that may or may not have sought mimetic realism. As influential as contemporary ideas about subjectivity and spectatorship were the early modern tropes of melancholia, considered in Part 2. Cultural assumptions about the melancholic humour, especially its links with bereavement or injustice, and its association with both intellectualism and madness, framed audience expectations of the malcontent. Biting satire and political dissent were among the more dangerous attributes associated with melancholia, along with an intrinsically theatrical type of self-presentation and a tendency to create and act out plots against perceived adversaries. Wronged women were sometimes represented in a way that approximates to the dramatic malcontent, or even to the malcontent revenger, but female characters were usually depicted in a powerless state of grief rather than melancholia. A definitive portrait of the masculine melancholic in contemplation is found in Hamlet, the play that most famously persuades spectators they are being addressed by a character who stands both within and outside a dramatically and socially constituted role. The dominant issues in Hamlet are problems of justice and revenge. While the malcontent can hold the stage in comic, tragicomic, or tragic mode, the role is often associated with the obsessive revenger, the subject of Part 3. Building on the Senecan tradition, early modern drama appeared to set aside religious and legal prohibitions on personal revenge, yet these social frameworks contextualize the malcontent revenger’s appeals for justice. The audience faces the challenge of reconciling incompatible moral imperatives in the light of its judgement of the revenger’s career, while witnessing his ritualistic transformation from victim to perpetrator, a process that is quintessentially theatrical. The excesses of the revenger lend themselves to satire and black humour. But melancholia may also be expressed in the type of discontent or social alienation that can be given a lighter, comic cast (as in the case of Jaques). As detailed in Part 4, 4 comedy finds a place for the malcontent not only as an object of mockery but as a counterpart to comic harmony and joy, asserting a genuine melancholia that represents a satirical view of prevailing manners and ethics. As in all other genres, the energy of the malcontent characteristically emerges in the metatheatrical effects that are instrumental in creating the distinctive frisson of the early modern playhouse. The malcontent shares with the fool or clown – that other pungent commentator upon the human condition – the privilege of free speech, and likewise occupies a liminal position from which, in comedy, the tendency is to expound social theories and establish fresh perspectives rather than perform dramatic actions. The dialogue and unexpected kinship between malcontent and clown broaden audience sympathy and create an incisive, intensely dramatic critique of contemporary life, one that becomes emblematic of the range of possibilities inherent in theatre. 5 Introduction The dramatic malcontent embodies a challenge. Within the relatively safe space of the early modern playhouse, spectators bore witness as this character exposed intolerable grievances, while radical remedies
Load more

Recommended publications
  • King and Country: Shakespeare’S Great Cycle of Kings Richard II • Henry IV Part I Henry IV Part II • Henry V Royal Shakespeare Company
    2016 BAM Winter/Spring #KingandCountry Brooklyn Academy of Music Alan H. Fishman, Chairman of the Board William I. Campbell, Vice Chairman of the Board BAM, the Royal Shakespeare Company, and Adam E. Max, Vice Chairman of the Board The Ohio State University present Katy Clark, President Joseph V. Melillo, Executive Producer King and Country: Shakespeare’s Great Cycle of Kings Richard II • Henry IV Part I Henry IV Part II • Henry V Royal Shakespeare Company BAM Harvey Theater Mar 24—May 1 Season Sponsor: Directed by Gregory Doran Set design by Stephen Brimson Lewis Global Tour Premier Partner Lighting design by Tim Mitchell Music by Paul Englishby Leadership support for King and Country Sound design by Martin Slavin provided by the Jerome L. Greene Foundation. Movement by Michael Ashcroft Fights by Terry King Major support for Henry V provided by Mark Pigott KBE. Major support provided by Alan Jones & Ashley Garrett; Frederick Iseman; Katheryn C. Patterson & Thomas L. Kempner Jr.; and Jewish Communal Fund. Additional support provided by Mercedes T. Bass; and Robert & Teresa Lindsay. #KingandCountry Royal Shakespeare Company King and Country: Shakespeare’s Great Cycle of Kings BAM Harvey Theater RICHARD II—Mar 24, Apr 1, 5, 8, 12, 14, 19, 26 & 29 at 7:30pm; Apr 17 at 3pm HENRY IV PART I—Mar 26, Apr 6, 15 & 20 at 7:30pm; Apr 2, 9, 23, 27 & 30 at 2pm HENRY IV PART II—Mar 28, Apr 2, 7, 9, 21, 23, 27 & 30 at 7:30pm; Apr 16 at 2pm HENRY V—Mar 31, Apr 13, 16, 22 & 28 at 7:30pm; Apr 3, 10, 24 & May 1 at 3pm ADDITIONAL CREATIVE TEAM Company Voice
    [Show full text]
  • The Malcontent Malevoles Chamber
    A Digital Anthology of Early Modern English Drama emed.folger.edu Discover over four hundred early modern English plays that were professionally performed in London between 1576 and 1642. Browse plays written by Shakespeare’s contemporaries; explore the repertoires of London’s professional companies; and download plays for reading and research. This documentary edition has been edited to provide an accurate and transparent transcription of a single copy of the earliest surviving print edition of this play. Further material, including editorial policy and XML files of the play, is available on the EMED website. EMED texts are edited and encoded by Meaghan Brown, Michael Poston, and Elizabeth Williamson, and build on work done by the EEBO-TCP and the Shakespeare His Contemporaries project. This project is funded by a Humanities Collections and Reference Resources grant from the NEH’s Division of Preservation and Access. Plays distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. img: 1­a ismigg: :[ N1­/bA] sig: A2r ln 0001 THE ln 0002 MALCONTENT. ln 0003 By John Marston. ln 0004 1604. ln 0005 Printed at London by V. S. for William Aspley, ln 0006 and are to be sold at his shop in Paul’s ln 0007 Churchyard. img: 2­a ismigg: :A 22­vb sig: A3r ln 0001 BENJAMINO JONSONIO ln 0002 POETAE ln 0003 ELEGANTISSIMO ln 0004 GRAVISSIMO ln 0005 AMICO ln 0006 SUO CANDIDO ET CORDATO, ln 0007 JOHANNES MARSTON ln 0008 MUSARUM ALUMNUS ln 0009 ASPERAM HANC SUAM THALIAM ln 0010 D. D. img: 3­a sig: A3v ln 0001 To the Reader.
    [Show full text]
  • Book Review: TF Wharton (Ed). the Drama of John Marston. Cambridge
    112 Book Reviews unfair to criticize a researcher too harshly for a following a pre-existing set of selection criteria. At the same time it is reasonable to expect that a declared set of criteria should be rigorously maintained, and that the intellectual basis of those criteria should be clearly stated and take some account of the historical reality of the period under examination. The ambitious task undertaken by the REED project is to be applauded, and it is to be regretted that the present volume falls somewhat short of the standards set by the project as a whole. david hickman T.F. Wharton (ed). The Drama of John Marston: Critical Re-Visions. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Pp xiii, 233. For a dramatist with at least three canonically important works (The Dutch Courtesan, The Malcontent, and Antonio’s Revenge) contemporary critics have been especially chary of addressing John Marston’s plays. Of those three works, one (Antonio’s Revenge) finds general mention only as a spectacularized and stylized foil to Hamlet.1 Indeed, only a single work – The Dutch Courtesan – today receives attention approaching any degree of regularity: Susan Baker, Donna Hamilton, and Jean Howard have each written outstanding material- ist/feminist appraisals.2 This continuing paucity of critical regard is especially surprising given the astonishing generic range and inventiveness of Marston’s plays as well as their incisive representations of a particularly volatile period in early modern culture. Marston collaborated brilliantly with some of the most distinguished dramatists of the period (Ben Jonson and George Chapman on Eastward Ho!; John Webster on additions to The Malcontent) and also mis- chievously burlesqued the genres they themselves defined.
    [Show full text]
  • The Moral Basis of Family Relationships in the Plays of Shakespeare and His Contemporaries: a Study in Renaissance Ideas
    The Moral Basis of Family Relationships in the plays of Shakespeare and his Contemporaries: a Study in Renaissance Ideas. A submission for the degree of doctor of philosophy by Stephen David Collins. The Department of History of The University of York. June, 2016. ABSTRACT. Families transact their relationships in a number of ways. Alongside and in tension with the emotional and practical dealings of family life are factors of an essentially moral nature such as loyalty, gratitude, obedience, and altruism. Morality depends on ideas about how one should behave, so that, for example, deciding whether or not to save a brother's life by going to bed with his judge involves an ethical accountancy drawing on ideas of right and wrong. It is such ideas that are the focus of this study. It seeks to recover some of ethical assumptions which were in circulation in early modern England and which inform the plays of the period. A number of plays which dramatise family relationships are analysed from the imagined perspectives of original audiences whose intellectual and moral worlds are explored through specific dramatic situations. Plays are discussed as far as possible in terms of their language and plots, rather than of character, and the study is eclectic in its use of sources, though drawing largely on the extensive didactic and polemical writing on the family surviving from the period. Three aspects of family relationships are discussed: first, the shifting one between parents and children, second, that between siblings, and, third, one version of marriage, that of the remarriage of the bereaved.
    [Show full text]
  • Playwright and Minister
    PLAYWRIGHT AND MAN OF GOD: RELIGION AND CONVENTION IN THE COMIC PLAYS OF JOHN MARSTON by Blagomir Georgiev Blagoev A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of English University of Toronto © Copyright by Blagomir Georgiev Blagoev (2010) PLAYWRIGHT AND MAN OF GOD: RELIGION AND CONVENTION IN THE COMIC PLAYS OF JOHN MARSTON Blagomir Georgiev Blagoev Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of English University of Toronto 2010 ABSTRACT John Marston’s literary legacy has inevitably existed in the larger-than-life shadows of his great contemporaries William Shakespeare and Ben Jonson. In the last two centuries, his works were hardly taken on their own terms but were perceived instead in overt or implicit comparison to Shakespeare’s or Jonson’s. As a result, Marston’s plays acquired the lasting but unfair image of haphazard concoctions whose cheap sensationalism and personal satire often got them in trouble with the authorities. This was the case until recently, especially with Marston’s comic drama. Following revisionist trends, this study sets out to restore some perspective: it offers a fresh reading of Marston’s comic plays and collaborations—Antonio and Mellida, What You Will, Jack Drum’s Entertainment, The Dutch Courtesan, The Malcontent, Parasitaster, Eastward Ho, and Histrio-Mastix—by pursuing a more nuanced contextualization with regard to religious context and archival evidence. The first central contention here is that instead of undermining political and religious authority, Marston’s comic drama can demonstrate consistent conformist and conservative affinities, which imply a seriously considered agenda. This study’s second main point is that the perceived failures of Marston’s comic plays—such as tragic ii elements, basic characterization, and sudden final reversals—can be plausibly read as deliberate effects, designed with this agenda in mind.
    [Show full text]
  • Identity, Disguise and Satire in Three
    IDENTITY, DISGUISE AND SATIRE IN THREE COMEDIES OF JOHN MARSTON by BARRY MALCOLM PEGG B.A., University of Keele, 1963 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of English We accept this thesis as conforming to the required, standard THE UNIVERSITY ,OF BB.2T.I SH COLUMBIA July, 1969 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 representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my r written permission. Department The University of British Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada ABSTRACT This thesis investigates the use of the conventions of disguise and deception in three comedies of John Marston (1576-1634)—What You Will. The Malcontent. and The Dutch Courtesan—in order to examine his handling of a convention for thematic purposes. The frequency of disguise in the theatre of the period may be explained by its appeal on more than one level. Its direct visual display of theatrical ingenuity was an immediate source of compelling interest for all spectators, whether in comedy or tragedy. On a more sophisticated level, the metaphysical implications of the discrepancy between ap• pearance and reality were explored thematically by the more thoughtful of the public-theatre playwrights, as well as the satiric playwrights of the private theatres, both of course making full use of the purely theatrical possibilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Revenge Tragedy | Eleanor Prosser (Essay Date 1967)
    Literary Criticism (1400-1800): Revenge Tragedy | Eleanor Prosser (essay date 1967) Revenge Tragedy | Eleanor Prosser (essay date 1967) ©2009 eNotes.com, Inc. or its Licensors. Please see copyright information at the end of this document. Eleanor Prosser (essay date 1967) SOURCE: Prosser, Eleanor. “Revenge on the English Stage, 1562-1607.” In Hamlet and Revenge, pp. 36-73. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1967. [In the following essay, Prosser examines a vast array of revenge tragedies in an effort to elucidate “the moral response of the Elizabethan audience to revenge itself.”] Although a study of the Elizabethan revenge play normally restricts itself to plays related to the “Kydian formula” as defined by Fredson Bowers, our concern in this chapter is with the moral response of the Elizabethan audience to revenge itself. If we can determine the audience's reaction to specific revenge motifs in any type of play (in a Biblical drama such as David and Bethsabe, a chronicle history such as Edward II, or a comedy such as The Dumb Knight, as well as in a revenge play proper such as The Spanish Tragedy), we should be better prepared to recognize established conventions. For an audience, a given convention evokes a given response: a bastard son who chafes at his inferior position is a dangerous fellow, whether he appears in Much Ado About Nothing or King Lear. We shall, accordingly, examine all plays produced between 1562 and 1607 in which revenge is a clearly defined motive.1 To understand the full impact of the revenge motif on the Elizabethan audience, we should probably start with the medieval drama.
    [Show full text]
  • What Did John Marston Know About Shakespeare?
    i&notD about ^Ij^feegpeare? Patrick ^uckrtbge John Marston has been a shadowy but persistent presence in heterodox discussions ofthe Shakespeare autiiorship since the nineteenth century. It is hardly surprising that he should have something to offer to an investi­ gation of concealed Uterary and theafrical identities in London in the 1590s: he was living and working in the Inns of Court and around the theattes from about 1594, when he matticulated from Brasenose College, Oxford University, until 1606, when he left the Middle Temple. A cursory glance at Marston's poems and plays reveals an oddly persistent preoccupation with that popular but enigmatic body of work coming to be known as 'Shakespeare' through the 1590s, the most striking being The Metamorphosis ofPigmalion 's Image, his parody/pastiche ofVenus and Ado­ nis, and the links and parallels in character, situation and dialogue between Hamlet and Antonio's Revenge. Other tum-of-the-century plays of Marston' s —Antonio and Mellida, What You Will, The Dutch Courtesan, and The Malcontent—appear to exhibit a more generally ironic relationship to certain Shakespearean plays, such as Romeo and Juliet, Twelfth Night, Much Ado About Nothing, and Measure for Measure. As the author of two volumes of verse satires, Marston took a 'profes­ sional' interest in duplicity, hypocrisy, and imposture, ttaditional satiric targets that he would have seen as notably instantiated in the use of 'front-men' or 'stooges' for aristocratic writers. There are a few passages in the satires where he could be referring to such a practice: the allusion to those who ..
    [Show full text]
  • Disgusting John Marston: Sensationalism and the Limits of a Post-Modern Marston
    Disgusting John Marston: Sensationalism and the Limits of A Post-Modern Marston Georgia Brown, Queens’ College, Cambridge University [The conspirators] pluck out [PIERO’S] tongue and triumph over him. Antonio. I have’t, Pandulpho; the veins panting bleed, Trickling fresh gore about my fist. Bind fast! So, so. Ghost of Andrugio. Blest be thy hand. I taste the joys of heaven, Viewing my son triumph in his black blood. Balurdo. Down to the dungeon with him; I’ll dungeon with him; I’ll fool you! Sir Geoffrey will be Sir Geoffrey. I’ll tickle you! Antonio. Behold, black dog! [Holding up PIERO’S tongue.] Pandulpho. Grinn’st thou, thou snurling cur? Alberto. Eat thy black liver! Antonio. To thine anguish see A fool triumphant in thy misery. Vex him, Balurdo. Pandulpho. He weeps! Now do I glorify my hands. I had no vengeance if I had no tears. (Antonio’s Revenge 5.5.34-45)1 With its bloodlust, energy and violence, the murder of Piero at the climax of Antonio’s Revenge, exemplifies John Marston’s sensationalism, and its unstable, some would say incoherent, morality. This is, after all, the moment when the victims of Piero’s tyrannical regime finally impose justice and achieve some kind of redress, and yet these instruments of justice are themselves tainted by cruelty and the suspicion that revenge has become the means to achieve self-glorification. When the ghost of Andrugio hails his son, Antonio, “triumph[ing] in his black blood” (line 37), is the blood Piero’s, or Antonio’s, and do Andrugio’s words suggest kinship between the villain, Piero, and the hero, Antonio? Typically, for Marston’s sensationalism, this scene combines moral confusion with generic confusion.
    [Show full text]
  • The Subjectivity of Revenge: Senecan Drama and the Discovery of the Tragic in Kyd and Shakespeare
    THE SUBJECTIVITY OF REVENGE: SENECAN DRAMA AND THE DISCOVERY OF THE TRAGIC IN KYD AND SHAKESPEARE JORDICORAL D.PHIL THE UNIVERSITY OF YORK DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH AND RELATED LITERATURE SEPTEMBER 2001 But all the time life, always one and the same, always incomprehensibly keeping its identity, fills the universe and is renewed at every moment in innumerable combinations and metamorphoses. You are anxious about whether you will rise from the dead or not, but you have risen already - you rose from the dead when you were born and you didn't notice it. Will you feel pain? Do the tissues feel their disintegration? In other words, what will happen to your consciousness. But what is consciousness? Let's see. To try consciously to go to sleep is a sure way of having insomnia, to try to be conscious of one's own digestion is a sure way to upset the stomach. Consciousness is a poison when we apply it to ourselves. Consciousness is a beam of light directed outwards, it lights up the way ahead of us so that we do not trip up. It's like the head-lamps on a railway engine - if you turned the beam inwards there would be a catastrophe. 'So what will happen to your consciousness? Your consciousness, yours, not anybody else's. Well, what are you? That's the crux of the matter. Let's try to find out. What is it about you that you have always known as yourself? What are you conscious of in yourself? Your kidneys? Your liver? Your blood vessels? - No.
    [Show full text]
  • John Marston at the `Mart of Woe': the Antonio Plays 14 Rick Bowers 2 John Marston: a Theatrical Perspective 27 W
    THE DRAMA OF JOHN MARSTON CRITICAL RE-VISIONS edited by T. F. W H A RTO N published by the press syndicate of the university of cambridge The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom cambridge university press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru, UK www.cup.cam.ac.uk 40 West 20th Street, New York, ny 10011±4211, USA www.cup.org 10 Stamford Road, Oakleigh, Melbourne 3166, Australia Ruiz de AlarcoÂn 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain # Cambridge University Press 2000 The book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2000 Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge Typeset in Baskerville 11/12.5pt System 3b2 [ce] A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress cataloguing in publication data The Drama of John Marston: Critical Re-Visions / edited by T. F. Wharton. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 0 521 65136 0 (hardback) 1. Marston, John, 1575±1634 ± Criticism and interpretation. i.Wharton,T.F. pr2697.d73 2000 822'.3 ± dc21 isbn 0 521 65136 0 hardback Contents Notes on contributors page ix Acknowledgements xi Note on the text xii Introduction 1 T. F. Wharton 1 John Marston at the `mart of woe': the Antonio plays 14 Rick Bowers 2 John Marston: a theatrical perspective 27 W. Reavley Gair 3 Varieties of fantasy in What You Will 45 Matthew Steggle 4 Safety in ®ction: Marston's recreational poetics 60 Patrick Buckridge 5 Insatiate punning in Marston's courtesan plays 82 Richard Scarr 6 Touching the self: masturbatory Marston 100 William W.
    [Show full text]
  • Metatheatrical Rivalry in John Marston's Antonio's Revenge
    3532 Early Theatre 22.1 (2019), 93–118 https://doi.org/10.12745/et.22.1.3691 Mitchell Macrae ‘[A]dore my topless villainy’: Metatheatrical Rivalry in John Marston’s Antonio’s Revenge Marston’s Antonio’s Revenge is a self-reflexive tragedy with characters who speak and act like characters familiar with the conventions of Elizabethan revenge plays. This article argues that Marston’s use of metatheatricality allegorizes the competitive nature of commercial theatres. As Marston’s characters seek to emulate and surpass their theatrical models, revenge becomes a medium for aesthetic achievement, a show- case for acting and rhetorical skill. The play expands the theatrum mundi trope, imagining the world not as a single stage but as a marketplace of rival stages wherein playwrights vie for applause and seek recognition for their theatrical brilliance. Despite Antonio’s Revenge declaring itself a serious tragedy, a ‘black-visaged [show]’ that seeks to ‘weigh massy in judicious scale’, the play’s metatheatricality has made the play difficult for scholars and critics to categorize (Prologue 20, 30).1 Characters in Antonio’s Revenge do not speak so much as they extemporize, riffing knowingly on the conventions of early modern revenge plays. The dialogue in the play often exaggerates the stock rhetoric of revenge tragedy to the point that John Marston’s play may seem indecorously tongue-in-cheek. Samuel Schoen- baum calls Marston’s work ‘bizarre — more eccentric than the art of any of his contemporaries’ and claims that ‘the essential incongruity of Marston’s work’ is its most ‘striking feature’.2 R.A.
    [Show full text]