The play begins and ends with memory, extending the characters depth by having them recall previous events or to dwell inside of themselves. Further Francisco recalls his memory of Isabella (4.1), invoking memory which he attempts unite with his imagination to include accurate memory but he can only recall his inaction and sadness.
What is the role of tradegy in this time period and where does memory lie in this plays ultimate importance? In what ways is Isabella's worship of Brachiano relevant to memory in the play? How are we to concieve of Lodovico's role and his memory of his past deeds in reference to the ones of the play?
What are we to make of Flamineo and is role in the plot? He seems most interesting to me in that while he is a criminal and I don't feel sympathy for him, in a lot of ways, he seems to genuinely care about Brachiano. Is this an accurate reading and if so, why does he do so?
On another note, I know there was a Shakespeare and Cognition class offered last semester. If there was anyone in it, could they offer some discussion on memory within the context of this play?
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Epicene
Throughout the play, people are frequently referred to as beings in the animal kingdom: dogs, goats, bulls, horses, and many types of birds. I found it fitting that in the end, through all of the transformations by disguise and cosmetics--men are referred to as insects, the lowest beings of all.
Jonson pairs this up with women and men constantly needing a means to make their appearance greater than those around them. For example, the coat of arms is used by showing a hierarchy through the colors on clothing--something a moth would give little regard to when tearing it a part, and, "ripping the linen."
It is amusing that while the men are being ridiculed for their trickery, women, who appear to rely on it in a day-to-day basis historically, essentially rise above.
Jonson pairs this up with women and men constantly needing a means to make their appearance greater than those around them. For example, the coat of arms is used by showing a hierarchy through the colors on clothing--something a moth would give little regard to when tearing it a part, and, "ripping the linen."
It is amusing that while the men are being ridiculed for their trickery, women, who appear to rely on it in a day-to-day basis historically, essentially rise above.
Playing the game
Morose, the scrooge-like uncle of Dauphine and neurotic defender of silence, is the butt of most of the practical jokes in the play Epicoene. With his determination to disinherit Dauphine, his eccentric need for an environment devoid of noise and his strange (and by today’s standards, sexist) expectations of obedience and silence from his spouse, Morose does appear to be in need of some vexation. By the close of the play, however, it feels a bit as though perhaps the sides were not altogether so clear cut. Morose did not want to give Dauphine any money because he did not think that his nephew had any love for him, and indeed, throughout the whole play, Dauphine was manipulating and torturing his uncle until he signed papers promising money to the gallant, upon which point, he was told:
“I’ll not trouble you till you trouble me with / your funeral, which I care not how soon it come” (5.4.200-201,
Morose’s mistrust in Dauphine was well placed and not at all unreasonable.
Furthermore, when Morose is about to receive information about how to get a divorce from the disguised Cutbeard and Otter, he explains his reasons for disliking noise:
“My father, in my / education, was wont to advise me that I should always collect and contain my mind, not suff’ring it to flow/ loosely; that I should look to what things were necessary to / the carriage of my life, and what not, embracing the one/ and eschewing the other. In short, that I should endear myself to rest and avoid turmoil, which now is grown to be another nature to me. “ (5.3.46-53)
By Morose’s explanation, he does not like noise, not because it is too loud or cacophonous, but because it is so often unnecessary and the cause of turmoil. He is seeking to avoid the feathers, bows and roses that would mask both his clothing and his true feelings. In other words, he is refusing to play the political and social games that all the collegiates and braveries are taking part in with their ‘fine taste’ in books, clothes, people and Latin. By not playing the game, he has become an outsider and the source of easy ridicule.
In considering the play with the order of the action taken in reverse, is Morose deserving of his fate? At the end of the play, is Dauphine actually the ‘very perfect gentleman’ that the other characters have made him out to be? Is Jonson suggesting that it is better to play ‘the game’ of social manipulation, flattery and pretending extremely well (as in Dauphine and Truewit’s cases) or is it better to avoid the whole situation as much as possible (as in Morose’s case)?
“I’ll not trouble you till you trouble me with / your funeral, which I care not how soon it come” (5.4.200-201,
Morose’s mistrust in Dauphine was well placed and not at all unreasonable.
Furthermore, when Morose is about to receive information about how to get a divorce from the disguised Cutbeard and Otter, he explains his reasons for disliking noise:
“My father, in my / education, was wont to advise me that I should always collect and contain my mind, not suff’ring it to flow/ loosely; that I should look to what things were necessary to / the carriage of my life, and what not, embracing the one/ and eschewing the other. In short, that I should endear myself to rest and avoid turmoil, which now is grown to be another nature to me. “ (5.3.46-53)
By Morose’s explanation, he does not like noise, not because it is too loud or cacophonous, but because it is so often unnecessary and the cause of turmoil. He is seeking to avoid the feathers, bows and roses that would mask both his clothing and his true feelings. In other words, he is refusing to play the political and social games that all the collegiates and braveries are taking part in with their ‘fine taste’ in books, clothes, people and Latin. By not playing the game, he has become an outsider and the source of easy ridicule.
In considering the play with the order of the action taken in reverse, is Morose deserving of his fate? At the end of the play, is Dauphine actually the ‘very perfect gentleman’ that the other characters have made him out to be? Is Jonson suggesting that it is better to play ‘the game’ of social manipulation, flattery and pretending extremely well (as in Dauphine and Truewit’s cases) or is it better to avoid the whole situation as much as possible (as in Morose’s case)?
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Epicene
1. In Greek mythology, the Amazons were viewed as a disruption to natural order. The need to restore this order resulted in the Amazonomachy, a battle between men and Amazons that ultimately subdued the Amazons and reestablished male dominance. The women in this play are aligned several times with the Amazons. When Epicene (still at this point believed to be a woman) first speaks out against Morose, he cries out “Oh, Amazonian impudence!” (3.5.39). Later, in reference to all the women in the play, he exclaims “O mankind generation!” (5.4.21). This reference to a generation of man-like women is also reminiscent of the Amazons, whose transgression against order was to enter the exclusively male realms of dominance and force. The women in this story, like the Amazons, attempt to invert sexual dominance, leading also to a kind of battle, in this case a verbal “battle of the sexes.” The chaos of the play, however, is completely restored to order when the play’s “Amazon,” Epicene, reveals that she is in fact a man. The final result of this disguise is that a man is ultimately responsible for the Dauphin’s victory over Morose, and the saving of female reputations. Why Jonson’s ironic choice to disguise a man as an Amazon? Why is the Amazonian persona used to further the agenda of a man rather than that of a woman? Why are the women “saved” and ultimately thus subjugated by this male Amazon? What is Jonson saying about gender roles? Is he championing male dominance, or is there something more complicated in the unsettling nature of this disguise?
2. The success of the devious plots designed by the Dauphin, Clerimont, and Truewit are reliant upon the acceptance and passing along of gossip. Truewit, for example, rightly predicts that once the women are told of the Dauphin’s great character, they will all believe it, and fall in love with him: “They know not why they do anything, but as they are informed, believe, judge, praise, condemn, love, hate, and---in emulation one of another---do all these things alike” (4.6.60-3). How does the power of gossip operate as a theme throughout the play? How does the relationship to gossip characterize each character? Is Jonson making any kind of judgment on gossip, or is he simply using it as a plot device?
2. The success of the devious plots designed by the Dauphin, Clerimont, and Truewit are reliant upon the acceptance and passing along of gossip. Truewit, for example, rightly predicts that once the women are told of the Dauphin’s great character, they will all believe it, and fall in love with him: “They know not why they do anything, but as they are informed, believe, judge, praise, condemn, love, hate, and---in emulation one of another---do all these things alike” (4.6.60-3). How does the power of gossip operate as a theme throughout the play? How does the relationship to gossip characterize each character? Is Jonson making any kind of judgment on gossip, or is he simply using it as a plot device?
Small Latin
Like the alchemy jargon in The Alchemist, the stream of Latin legalisms and theology in V.i of Epicoene seem intended to disarm the reader/audience member as much as the target character(here Morose). How far would Jonson have expected his audience to follow this linguistic turmoil? Is this a send-up of legalistic language, those who abuse it, or both? Is Jonson appealing to a reading public over a performance audience with this choice?
If the awarding of the 'better half of the garland' in the final scene marks Dauphine as the most successfully witty of the three wits by the apparent labourlessness of his scheme, would this play-garland actually hold the social credit or power in London that it does within the play? Dauphine's more reticent wit-style is opposed most drastically to Truewit's more visible and verbose wittiness. Although Truewit acknowledges Dauphine as the greater victor in the contest of wits and Dauphine has successfully won the inheritance by such wit, I wonder whether the privateness of his methods would gain him such social power in reality as it has in the play. Would a London so conscious of appearances give such credit to the privately witty man over the publicly witty one? Would they even get the chance? Similarly, how do such standards of publicity apply to the lady in her dressing chamber? Is there a double-standard of public exposure? Does the social credit gained by the witty man rely on the eventual public exposure of his methods, while on the other hand the social credit gained by the well-fashioned lady rely on her methods remaining hidden?
Ooo Epicene, I'm So Tired of Being Alone
Law in Jonson's play is something that can be subverted or used by characters for their own benefit. The legal machinations of the three gentlemen effectively obfuscate the individual, the landed relative Morose. Was this scheme a well-known contrivance from jokes, or other plays? Was the law considered something malleable by the trickster figures, or was it seen as a primary tool of such figures?
A metatheatric consideration in "Epicoene" and their implications on Jonson as a writer
In concealing and then revealing the masculine identity of "Epicoene", Dauphine certainly does -- within the world of the play -- emerge as a social and commercial "wit". But abandoning for the moment this fictive world and considering the text as an early modern dramaturgical blueprint, isn't Dauphine's moment of triumph more a mark of metatheatric foresight on the character's part, rather than simply commercial or social wiles? After all, if we presume an early modern theatrical audience for this text -- an audience for whom men in women's roles are the ideological and dramaturgical norm -- isn't the logical remark upon the "discovery" of the gender of "Epicoene" not "My goodness, it's a woman!" but, rather, "But aren't ALL the women men?" The confusion for the early modern audience, upon the revelation of "Epicoene's" gender, must have been far more than we -- as a modern audience -- can possibly imagine.
Jonson may have desired ardently that his text be received as a written work, but it is emergent from a dramatic milieu in which transgendered representation of women is considered normative. In this respect, then, how can the wo/man "Epicoene" be considered spectacular? And if we do accept such a proposition, are we merely further divorcing Jonson from the theatrical reality of his period? In other words, is the play Epicoene actually an attempt by the playwright to further establish his oeuvre as a published, and not performed, writer?
Jonson may have desired ardently that his text be received as a written work, but it is emergent from a dramatic milieu in which transgendered representation of women is considered normative. In this respect, then, how can the wo/man "Epicoene" be considered spectacular? And if we do accept such a proposition, are we merely further divorcing Jonson from the theatrical reality of his period? In other words, is the play Epicoene actually an attempt by the playwright to further establish his oeuvre as a published, and not performed, writer?
Are You There, Epicene?
In Jonson's play, Daw is spoofed for his lack of discriminating "sensibility." Despite the fact that Morose tries to protect his hearing, this gentlemen, too, is the center of satire for failing to intuit, or "sense," the gender of his bride. How do these concepts work with or against one another?
Epicene and audience/reader reception
In terms of the play’s commentary on gender, how should readers understand the character of Epicene? As a “woman,” Epicene’s character is used in several ways to expose faults in men; Morose’s absurdity is revealed through his attraction to and belief in Epicene’s silence, while La Foole and Daw open themselves to ridicule by claiming to know her/him sexually. Does the power of a (temporarily) female character to expose foolish men offset the misogynistic attitude of the play? Or does the fact that Epicene proves to be male make this impossible?
In his prologue to The Alchemist, Jonson distinguishes between his “understanding” viewers/readers and those who are but “pretenders.” Epicene is certainly concerned with this distinction as well; characters who feign knowledge (John Daw, for one) are punished by ridicule and audience members with little understanding of Latin (thank goodness for Norton footnotes) would have had more trouble catching some of the play’s jokes. I’m curious as to how familiar audience members would have been with the term “epicene”; did Jonson expect some of his more “understanding” viewers to guess Epicene’s true identity all along? How would this change one’s experience of watching the play?
In his prologue to The Alchemist, Jonson distinguishes between his “understanding” viewers/readers and those who are but “pretenders.” Epicene is certainly concerned with this distinction as well; characters who feign knowledge (John Daw, for one) are punished by ridicule and audience members with little understanding of Latin (thank goodness for Norton footnotes) would have had more trouble catching some of the play’s jokes. I’m curious as to how familiar audience members would have been with the term “epicene”; did Jonson expect some of his more “understanding” viewers to guess Epicene’s true identity all along? How would this change one’s experience of watching the play?
Betwixt and Between in Epicene
The Children of Her Majesty’s Revels performed in an adolescent transition from boy to manhood much as the Ladies Collegiate enact a quasi-middle position between rank of court and country gentlewomen, “an order between courtiers and country madams. (1.1.3-4) By means of economic status Mrs. Otter has transgressed her gender (natural order) by being referred to as “Captain Otter (1.4.30); she consequently emasculates her husband in the process. However, her audacity does not go unpunished because she is penalized by trumping Mr. Otter and through her possible alien connection, is therefore referred to as sexually promiscuous, “that gave rise entertainment. She entertains at home.” (1.4.28-29).
The signs of gender encroachment are in much evidence throughout the play. Surely if men and women can pass as each other there is no saying what other infringements upon the established order of things can ensue. If women attempt (and must?) to conceal the intricate preparations for becoming more lady like, what else could they likely plan to metamorphosize into? In Korda’s talk she comments on the invisibility of women’s work to perfect themselves; their poise, beauty and demeanor must be manufactured but in secret, but the means of production should be erased if the final outcome can be paraded. However, a women’s success at transformation and possibly false representation is contingent upon purchasing the devises (creams, potions, wigs, etc.)…all the boxes of the trades. In fact, she must make her way around the town and participate in the marketplace in order to shape herself. Ultimately, social and economic power is fully realized and rewarded through Dauphine’s ability to conceal rather than expose the steps and details of genre construction. Throughout, ambiguous and intermediate assignments of social rank, gender and economic status fuel the twists and turns of the play and which revolve around its ironic and final comic resolution.
Where is the Spectacle?
What is Jonson saying about the type of audience whom one would encounter in the theatre or en route or who would be watching Epicene during its performance?
Now? When there are so many masques, plays, Puritan preachings, mad folks, and other strange sights to be seen daily, private and public.” (2.2.33-35)
What do we come to the theatre for? To find love and beauty?
“In these places a man shall find whom to love, when to play with, whom to touch one, whom to hold ever.” (4.1.59-61)
invite into the Cockpit and kiss our hands all the play time and draw their weapons for our honors? (4.3.46-47)
The signs of gender encroachment are in much evidence throughout the play. Surely if men and women can pass as each other there is no saying what other infringements upon the established order of things can ensue. If women attempt (and must?) to conceal the intricate preparations for becoming more lady like, what else could they likely plan to metamorphosize into? In Korda’s talk she comments on the invisibility of women’s work to perfect themselves; their poise, beauty and demeanor must be manufactured but in secret, but the means of production should be erased if the final outcome can be paraded. However, a women’s success at transformation and possibly false representation is contingent upon purchasing the devises (creams, potions, wigs, etc.)…all the boxes of the trades. In fact, she must make her way around the town and participate in the marketplace in order to shape herself. Ultimately, social and economic power is fully realized and rewarded through Dauphine’s ability to conceal rather than expose the steps and details of genre construction. Throughout, ambiguous and intermediate assignments of social rank, gender and economic status fuel the twists and turns of the play and which revolve around its ironic and final comic resolution.
Where is the Spectacle?
What is Jonson saying about the type of audience whom one would encounter in the theatre or en route or who would be watching Epicene during its performance?
Now? When there are so many masques, plays, Puritan preachings, mad folks, and other strange sights to be seen daily, private and public.” (2.2.33-35)
What do we come to the theatre for? To find love and beauty?
“In these places a man shall find whom to love, when to play with, whom to touch one, whom to hold ever.” (4.1.59-61)
invite into the Cockpit and kiss our hands all the play time and draw their weapons for our honors? (4.3.46-47)
Truewit's Violent Entertainment
Truewit is the master entertainer in Epicoene. But it is worth exploring his means of and subject matter for entertaining his peers on stage as well as the audience. Truewit's highest moments of comedy, and indeed most of his speech, liberally reference and/or enact violent scenes. For example, his "playful" conversation with Morose in 3.5 during which they discuss what manner of revenge to have on Cutbeard, is a dizzying volley of ill-wishing. It begins simply enough with a curse for the plague, but then advances very quickly from physical ailments to economic hardship to metaphysical damnation to loss of reputation and finally to accidental murder resulting in being hanged. Over the course of this parade of vengeful thoughts, Morose gets carried away in Truewit's fantastical imaginations more than once. Along the way, the audience also gets carried away and by the end, Truewit finds it difficult to stop. It is not simply the style in which the conversation is versed, but also the gruesomeness of the images brought forth that is entertaining -- for Truewit (he very obviously enjoys speaking of these things) and for the audience (by the end we want Truewit to keep going, to see how much farther he can stretch, how much more grotesque he can be). This scene, combined with all of 4.5 (the scene in which he humiliates Daw and LaFoole by having them beaten), reveal Truewit as a man who entertains through violence. And, perhaps more intriguingly, who intuits that his audience (both on stage and off) thoroughly enjoy this kind of entertainment. Given what we know about the dual use of theaters for plays and bear-baiting, is Jonson using Truewit simply as a distraction away from the plot of the title character or is he saying something to and ABOUT his audience and their fascination for violence? Furthermore, how does Truewit's speech at 4.1.67-121 (his theory about women and "acceptable violence") complicate the question?
1.) Morose mentions "speaking and counterspeaking" when he relates the noises of the court that force him to flee. How might this idea of speech and counterspeech, or social dialogue, get at the deeper anxieties underlying the character's hatred of "noise"? What is the noise he's avoiding, actually? How does it relate to his function in the play, especially as a contrast to Truewit, Clerimont, and Dauphine?
2.) Dauphine exclaims of Truewit "Ay, you have many plots!" He later comments that "Thou think'st thou wert undone if every jest thou mak'st were not published." What is the driving force behind Truewit's plotting, and why -- besides the obvious genre expectation -- does he have so many? As Dauphine's latter line inquires, is there value to any of plots in the play if their conclusions are not publicly performed and accessible to the other characters?
2.) Dauphine exclaims of Truewit "Ay, you have many plots!" He later comments that "Thou think'st thou wert undone if every jest thou mak'st were not published." What is the driving force behind Truewit's plotting, and why -- besides the obvious genre expectation -- does he have so many? As Dauphine's latter line inquires, is there value to any of plots in the play if their conclusions are not publicly performed and accessible to the other characters?
Epiocene
Epiocene's central plot is driven by Morose's concern that his nephew will inherit his estate if he (Morose) cannot produce an heir. Dauphine's motives to thwart his uncle's plan to marry and have a child are clear. However, why is Morose so opposed to Dauphine as heir apparent? More generally, why was the transfer of wealth such a dominant concern in 1609?
Morose cannot stand noise of any kind, including listening to others talk. Yet, he talks incessantly himself. Why is this? What does it comment on?
Morose cannot stand noise of any kind, including listening to others talk. Yet, he talks incessantly himself. Why is this? What does it comment on?
Well, nobody's perfect.
Justum impedimentum
In most Renaissance comedies (and many tragedies), the audience is able to glean enjoyment out of the plot by being privy to all of the information. The audience sees everything that happens and uses this knowledge to follow the storyline. This is the essence of dramatic irony, and the audience understands the action in reference to specific truths or secrets of which many of the main characters are completely ignorant. In Epicene, however, the biggest secret of them all—that Epicene is really a boy in disguise—is withheld from all of the characters and all of the spectators. Everyone has been fooled by Dauphine. What would Jonson’s audiences have thought of this? The intro in our anthology states that the play had a mixed reaction. Why would Jonson choose to end his play in this almost deus ex machina fashion, calling into question the most essential suspension of disbelief for the early modern spectator (specifically, that when a boy in drag was on stage, audiences viewed him as a woman within the confines of the play)?
Epicene and (Re)masculization
Tim’s question called upon Judith Butler’s definitions about gender and performance, and how gender is “unperformed” in the final scene. In addition to the issues Tim brings up, I was struck by the ways in which Epicene is treated once he is revealed as a boy. Truewit, who finds out the same moment the audience does about Epicene’s true gender, notes to the ladies of the play, “let it not trouble you that you have discovered any mysteries to this young gentleman. He is almost of years, and will make a good visitant within this twelvemonth” (5.4.242-44). After five Acts of acting as a woman and bonding with the other ladies, Truewit re-masculates Epicene by emphasizing his upcoming virility and masculine sexuality, suggesting that as the ladies had previously enjoyed “her” company by forging a homosocial friendship, they might also enjoy “his” company in a more carnal sense. Epicene is still in a dress, albeit without the wig, and thus becomes a transvestitic object of desire for the women, whereas in the earlier acts he was desired by the men. What function does Truewit’s re-masculinization serve? Is the speaker’s (and Jonson’s) way of alleviating the anxiety of homoerotic desire that may be found in transvestism?
Collegiality and City entertainments in Epicoene
1) The collegiates and Mistress Otter function as a sort of silly female chorus in the play. They offer up empty opinions, bicker about who should be considered fashionable, and provide questionable advice to Epicoene on marriage. Their "wit " and advice seem crude against the gallants' sharper tongues. Movng beyond an obvious gender bias, can we draw some conclusions that might explain this behavior? What does it mean that they live away from their husbands? What do you think Jonson is revealing about the threat - or ineffectiveness- of women in numbers?
2) I'm interested in Truewit's observations on the profusity of women in public and how beneficial studying them can be in public. In IV.i54-6, he mentions court, tiltings, feast, plays and church as spaces or events he goes to observe women and become "proficient" at decoding them, but also at picking them up "to love... to play with...to touch... or to hold over." These public spaces, then, seem to act as a sort of shopping market where men can choose females and accompanying services just as he would choose a wig or other commodity. Keeping in mind the prostitutes - or purchasable women - we encountered last week, what does Truewit's speech about the public availability indicate about what can be bought and sold? Are the women in Epicoene commodified in the same way as the plays we read last week? What bearing does public space and entertainments have on the seeming commercial availability of women, at least in the eyes of the gallants of the play?
2) I'm interested in Truewit's observations on the profusity of women in public and how beneficial studying them can be in public. In IV.i54-6, he mentions court, tiltings, feast, plays and church as spaces or events he goes to observe women and become "proficient" at decoding them, but also at picking them up "to love... to play with...to touch... or to hold over." These public spaces, then, seem to act as a sort of shopping market where men can choose females and accompanying services just as he would choose a wig or other commodity. Keeping in mind the prostitutes - or purchasable women - we encountered last week, what does Truewit's speech about the public availability indicate about what can be bought and sold? Are the women in Epicoene commodified in the same way as the plays we read last week? What bearing does public space and entertainments have on the seeming commercial availability of women, at least in the eyes of the gallants of the play?
Gift Registry and Manifest Silence
1) Near the end of 3.6, around line 80, Madam Haughty upbraids Morose for not properly celebrating his wedding with a masque as well as not giving out the proper presents for the guests. Scathingly, she asks, "How much plate have you lost today--if you had but regarded your profit--what gifts, what friends, through your mere rusticity?" (3.6.85-87). While we may see this question of manners as somewhat ironic since so many characters in the play fail to act in a proper manner, I think it brings up an interesting issue. Is Morose treated unfairly, here and at the end of the play? There are so many other instances of transgression that go unpunished, Epicene, most notably, or the Collegiate ladies back-stabbing as they attempt to woo Dauphine. I think this passage is indicative of the sort of changes that this city comedy illustrates, but could this be a darker passage than it seems at first glance? What kinds of transgression and proprieties are punished? Which are not? Is there a connection?
2) Perhaps it is not so surprising that the first performance of this play did not elicit any applause from the spectators at its end. The last 50 lines or so seem to indicate a manifest silence on the part of all the characters save Dauphine and Truewit. No one speaks to defend themselves, Epicene is not allotted any input for his part in this ruse, and the reader is left with Truewit's voice as final authority. What sort of conclusions can we draw from this conclusion, especially considering that Truewit and Dauphine are culpable of just as many tricks or transgressions of manners? With all the talking that everyone, men and women alike, has been doing during the play, why give the final explanation to Truewit? He is the motivator behind most of the practical jokes, yet this precedence of finality seems indicative of a dark undercurrent of London life. Is the play only games for the amusement of Truewit, Dauphine, and Clerimont? Does any of what happened really matter to anyone (in the play)?
2) Perhaps it is not so surprising that the first performance of this play did not elicit any applause from the spectators at its end. The last 50 lines or so seem to indicate a manifest silence on the part of all the characters save Dauphine and Truewit. No one speaks to defend themselves, Epicene is not allotted any input for his part in this ruse, and the reader is left with Truewit's voice as final authority. What sort of conclusions can we draw from this conclusion, especially considering that Truewit and Dauphine are culpable of just as many tricks or transgressions of manners? With all the talking that everyone, men and women alike, has been doing during the play, why give the final explanation to Truewit? He is the motivator behind most of the practical jokes, yet this precedence of finality seems indicative of a dark undercurrent of London life. Is the play only games for the amusement of Truewit, Dauphine, and Clerimont? Does any of what happened really matter to anyone (in the play)?
Epicene or Epicoene?
I'm very interested in the ways that the commodification of beauty and nobility are undermined by the action of the play. It seems to me that Jonson is highlighting the emptiness and falseness of purchasing things that are traditonally associated with aethetic or cultural ideals. Is the purpose of this comic send-up to attack the Early Modern equivalent of 'new money'? If so, doesn't Jonson fall into this catagory himself? Is he attacking his own social station?
My second question focuses on the fairly explicit references in the first scene to Clerimont's homosexual relationship with his boy. Would this sort of direct treatment of nontraditional sexuality have been a shock to an Early Modern audience? Would it alienate Clerimont from that audience? Would the homosexual undertones, throughout the play, have disturbed the audience or would they have found it comical?
My second question focuses on the fairly explicit references in the first scene to Clerimont's homosexual relationship with his boy. Would this sort of direct treatment of nontraditional sexuality have been a shock to an Early Modern audience? Would it alienate Clerimont from that audience? Would the homosexual undertones, throughout the play, have disturbed the audience or would they have found it comical?
Copia and Artifice in Jonson's Epicoene
1) Many of Truewit’s speeches feature lingustic copia—almost logorrhea—that enables him to “list” numerous points of advice in a single speech; he usually employs this technique using long sentences in which semicolons set off each item in the series. Several of Truewit’s speeches fit the “copious” model: to Morose in II.ii (on the dangers of marriage); to Morose in III.v (advice on the wedding feast and cursing Cutbeard); and to Clarimont and Dauphine in IV.i (knowledge of the courtier). What is the effect of these speeches on different characters? How does copia affect the essential knowledge that Truewit is imparting? What do we make of Morose learning to “contain [his] mind, not suff’ring it to flow loosely” (V.iii.46-49) and how this outlook contrasts with Truewit’s?
2) Several characters in Epicoene comment on artifice, regarding both women and music. Clerimont assures Morose that the “music of all sorts” merely originates from “hair, rosin, and guts,” according to the “receipt” (III.vii.1-7). Truewit lists different ways that women can hide their imperfections with artifice (IV.i.31-42). During his invective against his wife, Otter figuratively dismantles her body in order to exhibit her artifice (IV.ii.83-93). All in all, artifice hides the disgusting or originates from the disgusting. Does Jonson condone or vilify artifice in Epicoene? What about Truewit? What about the role of artifice in the several
“plots” occurring in the play?
2) Several characters in Epicoene comment on artifice, regarding both women and music. Clerimont assures Morose that the “music of all sorts” merely originates from “hair, rosin, and guts,” according to the “receipt” (III.vii.1-7). Truewit lists different ways that women can hide their imperfections with artifice (IV.i.31-42). During his invective against his wife, Otter figuratively dismantles her body in order to exhibit her artifice (IV.ii.83-93). All in all, artifice hides the disgusting or originates from the disgusting. Does Jonson condone or vilify artifice in Epicoene? What about Truewit? What about the role of artifice in the several
“plots” occurring in the play?
Epicoene
How and why did ‘wit’ add to someone’s status and prestige? How did wit come to hold a position of power and influence? What could a character accomplish through wit that he or she could not accomplish otherwise? How and why did people’s perceptions of social value transform this facility into cultural capital? What commercial and societal shifts provoked the fascination with wit from the perspective of the characters in the play and the perspective of the audience?
The Social Logic of Ben Jonson's Epicoene
What effects did the vast increase in population have on the proximity and density of bodies during the Jacobean period, and how did this influence the difference between public and private spheres, as well as the overlap between public and private spheres? As these spheres are gendered, how did attitudes towards gender and a woman’s ‘place’ shift as the population grew?
Gallants?
Tim's jump into "performance of" questions leads me to think about how "gentleness" is performed in the play. What does it mean to be a "gentleman" in this play? Dauphine, as Professor Zucker's article suggests, is a "perfect" gentleman because we don't see the labor of his supreme plot, which he must have been constantly revising to keep up with Truewit's interference. Yet, his plot makes everyone look foolish, something for which Truewit's last speech attempts to make amends, and earlier, Dauphine shows himself capable of extreme ungenerosity / violence when he says Truewit should take John Daw's left arm during the kicking scene; Truewit's astonished reply is "How! Maim a man forever for a jest? What a conscience hast though?" (4.5.124). At other times, Epicoene is called by Truewit "a gentlewoman of very absolute behavior" ('absolute' glossed as 'perfect' in the New Mermaids edition) (3.4.37-8), something we come to learn must be untrue. And the term "gentlemen" is tossed around as a general address. What might Jonson's idea of gentleness be? Does the word retain meaning? Does its use here jibe with out own ideas of what a gentleman / gentlewoman should be?
Is Truewit a comic version of Othello's Iago? Obviously, there are major differences, e.g. no one dies because of Truewit. But if he performed his jests in Iago's world, someone might have. Both are arguably the cleverest persons onstage; both are great plot manipulators who draw attention to their plotting and draw the audience in by doing so; and both are ultimately undone by another clever (though perhaps not as clever) character. Does that complicate the idea of wit as something dangerous / Machiavellian? Does it complicate the definition of comedy that we have been working with? Does it shed any light on the fine line we often seem to be crossing into tragicomedy?
Is Truewit a comic version of Othello's Iago? Obviously, there are major differences, e.g. no one dies because of Truewit. But if he performed his jests in Iago's world, someone might have. Both are arguably the cleverest persons onstage; both are great plot manipulators who draw attention to their plotting and draw the audience in by doing so; and both are ultimately undone by another clever (though perhaps not as clever) character. Does that complicate the idea of wit as something dangerous / Machiavellian? Does it complicate the definition of comedy that we have been working with? Does it shed any light on the fine line we often seem to be crossing into tragicomedy?
"A boy."
Holly's question about gender and hermaphadotical relations makes me think in Judith Butler-ian terms about the character of Epicoene and gender representations in the play overall. How is gender constructed in Jonson's world? Is there gender essence, such that Epicoene is always a boy? (And, at the level of acting and a staged performance, his always-already being a boy actor anyway?). Or is it a matter of gender performance? Characters do, after all, express desire for Epicoene based on that character's behaved and performed gender. How is this distinction complicated by the charges against "real" women in the play? Otter rants against his wife, "All her teeth were made i'the Blackfriars, both her eyebrows i'the Strand, and her hair in Silver Street. Every part o'the town owns a piece of her" (4.2.93-6). We see Truewit express similar sentiments in Acts 1 and 4. Of course these women are "put together" at the level of cosmetic-purchasers and as boy actors. What purpose does Jonson's so blatantly pulling the peruke off of a central, settled stage convention serve then? When and how can gender be unperformed?
Jonson takes the role of satirist to a new level with Epicoene. In the first Prologue, Jonson says he wishes to "not please the cooks' tastes, but the guests'" (9). Yet he complicates this metaphor by essentially saying, "I'm going to serve you many dishes," suggesting that the audience's tastes differ from his. Of course the audience realizes--with one pull on the peruke--how much Jonson's tastes differ. If satire is a feast, who else besides Jonson enjoys the bitter dessert? Which character's taste, if any, corresponds with Jonson's? If satire's aim is to inspire reform, what social group(s) feels the most shame and need for reform? Is the satire totalizing?
Jonson takes the role of satirist to a new level with Epicoene. In the first Prologue, Jonson says he wishes to "not please the cooks' tastes, but the guests'" (9). Yet he complicates this metaphor by essentially saying, "I'm going to serve you many dishes," suggesting that the audience's tastes differ from his. Of course the audience realizes--with one pull on the peruke--how much Jonson's tastes differ. If satire is a feast, who else besides Jonson enjoys the bitter dessert? Which character's taste, if any, corresponds with Jonson's? If satire's aim is to inspire reform, what social group(s) feels the most shame and need for reform? Is the satire totalizing?
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Epicoene
If women achieve some sort of tenuous status through the consumption of commodities (which are meant to aid in the performance of a "perfected" commodity, that is, their bodies), are we to take Truewit's insistence that they should only conduct their "dressing" in private as a preliminary argument for accepting Dauphine as a "perfect gentleman" because his "efforts at trickery are completely absent from the play, and . . . (his) social power thus appears to be an entirely laborless production" (Zucker)? His commentary seems to also suggest what is considered an appropriate means to acceptable feminine status and power, but as Prof. Zucker notes in his article, there is clearly anxiety expressed in the play about the "new possibilities for women in an expanding public sphere." With images of symbolic castration, Truewit's mention of "hermaphroditical authority" and Epicoene him/herself, how does the idea of hermaphrodite impact the possibilities for status and complicate gender divisions in attaining degrees of status? Does Dauphine's manipulation of a (nearly) man in his plot hearken back to more traditional roles of power (i.e. prior to a loss of identity and social function as discussed in the play's introduction)?
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Epicene and Gender
What is the nature of gender binaries represented in Epicene? How are Dauphine and Morose foils to one another while simultaneously engaged and embedded in this binary?
What is the nature of silence and how does silence relate to action/inaction in Epicene? Particularly if we think of Act 2, scenes 1 and 5.
In a lot of ways, I feel this play is both far more serious and yet comedic than the others we've read. The end is hilarious for the audience and Morose's humilation. Yet, it's also a very destructive ending with Truewit and Clerimont betrayed as well as Morose and Epicene. I wonder how the audience is supposed to react....
What is the nature of silence and how does silence relate to action/inaction in Epicene? Particularly if we think of Act 2, scenes 1 and 5.
In a lot of ways, I feel this play is both far more serious and yet comedic than the others we've read. The end is hilarious for the audience and Morose's humilation. Yet, it's also a very destructive ending with Truewit and Clerimont betrayed as well as Morose and Epicene. I wonder how the audience is supposed to react....
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Restoration and 18th Century Drama text book
Hi All, to those of you who purchased the book that incorrectly replaced the above, you can obtain a full refund. Nat at Amherst book is searching and hopefully ordering the right one. Will let you know when it is available.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
High Stepping Speak from A Chase Maid in Cheapside
There is much fanciful talk echoed by the characters throughout the play. Gibberish, grandiose speeches, confused Latin, misunderstood Welsh and illogical proofs serve to make fools of nearly everyone. It seems that Middleton is matching this contrivance to a type of false and unnatural greed of a pretentious society that was preoccupied with social advancement and was particularly ripe to make fun of.
The preoccupation with procreation is certainly illustrated in abundance in the many and various puns throughout the play. It is almost a comic hail storm of provocative word jousting to one up the other. Perhaps the over-zealous Puritanical oversight is creating this fierce counter attack on the senses or perhaps the barrage of sexual remarks are there to show another example of society’s extreme search for indulgence.
Is Change Strange? (Act IV, Sc III, p. 163) from the Honest Whore
Why, at this time and in this place, is there such preoccupation with madness—all representatives of society are crazy or deemed so—each in a different way. How is the transformation made possible for each (all) to move from this position to a more sane sensibility? Is it really just by honesty or is patience the highest virtue and therefore able to turn all things right. The noble (Duke), not the common person (Bellafronte) is the one who is the ultimate patron of the play’s transformative ending.
The Honest Whore
Candido’s final speech in The Honest Whore provides a useful summary of his character. In justifying his calmness, he claims that a tranquil spirit is:
…the perpetual prisoner’s liberty,
His walks and orchards: ‘tis the bond slave’s freedom,
And makes him seem proud of each iron chain,
As though he wore it more for state than pain:
It is the beggars’ music, and thus sings,
Although their bodies beg, their souls are kings.
Does Dekker support or mock Candido’s disposition? The soul-over-body aspect of his reasoning seems admirable, but Candido is ultimately depicted as a happy slave. Is this a positive alternative to ambition and excess, or is it the unfortunate fate of his complacency?
…the perpetual prisoner’s liberty,
His walks and orchards: ‘tis the bond slave’s freedom,
And makes him seem proud of each iron chain,
As though he wore it more for state than pain:
It is the beggars’ music, and thus sings,
Although their bodies beg, their souls are kings.
Does Dekker support or mock Candido’s disposition? The soul-over-body aspect of his reasoning seems admirable, but Candido is ultimately depicted as a happy slave. Is this a positive alternative to ambition and excess, or is it the unfortunate fate of his complacency?
Higher Education in A Chaste Maid
The Norton’s introduction to this play proposes that “the play’s look at education in Cambridge, seen from a London perspective, suggests that it amounts to exactly nothing.” Is this really what Middleton means to express through his ridicule of Tim’s self-promotion as a scholar? Is higher education mocked here, or is the blame on the “scholar” who seeks to learn only for self-aggrandizement? Going further, does the Tim plot as a whole have a greater function in the play? If Middleton does, in fact, intend to reveal that higher education fails to deliver what it promises, is it possible/useful to see this idea as parallel to the play’s mockery of “failed” religious practices (as expressed through the failure of Lent to regulate the consumption of meat, etc.)?
1.) How do the interactions of the various threesomes within A Chaste Maid in Cheapside complicate the stock characters of gallant, cuckold, etc.? (What effect, for example, does Allwit's knowing and complacent -- and even opportunistic -- cuckoldry have on the dynamic of the Sir Walter/Master Allwit/Mrs. Allwit triangle?) How do these various triangles illuminate the construction of masculinity and manhood within the play? Further, how might the various values placed on potency, authority, social status, material capital, education, and consumer clout reflect actual negotiations with social change and identity formation?
2.) In his diatribe against prostitutes in Act 2, Hippolito (quite problematically) declares that "The sin of many men is within you." Bellafront later echoes a more materially-oriented version of this statement when she declares that whores "breed rank diseases." How do narratives of both morality and social concerns inform the bleak view of prostitution within The Honest Whore? Is there also an implicit critique within Hippolito's speech of the prostitute as a failure in the commercial market? (For example, Hippolito states that "Like bears and apes, you're baited and show tricks / For money; but your bawd the sweetness licks" (II.i).)
2.) In his diatribe against prostitutes in Act 2, Hippolito (quite problematically) declares that "The sin of many men is within you." Bellafront later echoes a more materially-oriented version of this statement when she declares that whores "breed rank diseases." How do narratives of both morality and social concerns inform the bleak view of prostitution within The Honest Whore? Is there also an implicit critique within Hippolito's speech of the prostitute as a failure in the commercial market? (For example, Hippolito states that "Like bears and apes, you're baited and show tricks / For money; but your bawd the sweetness licks" (II.i).)
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Musings from the Pissing Conduit
A Chaste Maid in Cheapside
We have seen Jonson and Middleton each exploit Puritans in their satircal tableaus of urban life in London. How do their depictions differ, however? What is at stake for representations of gender in A Chaste Maid considering the Puritan ladies imbibe and carouse with the "gossips" and those that are not of the "faithful"?
The Honest Whore
The world of the play grows less and less stable as the action goes on. Sobriety and propriety are substituted with insanity, disguises, betrayal, and the space of the madhouse. As a follow up to Ann's query about Candido as a proto-capitalist, does sacrificing one's other interests and values for economic ones come to represent a kind of madness in the play? Does Candido go mad in part because of his desire to satisfy customers? Bethlem Monastery houses a large population who have been driven insane by lost wealth and fortune. As he is about to be taken away in 4.3, Candido muses on some apparent paradoxes:
Is change strange? 'Tis not
The fashion unless it alter! monarchs turn
To beggars, beggars creep into the nests
Of princes, masters serve their prentices,
Ladies their serving-men, men turn to women.
Change and rapid, radical flux, as Candido describes it here, occurs all over The Honest Whore. What sense can we make of it in relation to economic and social concerns in the play?
We have seen Jonson and Middleton each exploit Puritans in their satircal tableaus of urban life in London. How do their depictions differ, however? What is at stake for representations of gender in A Chaste Maid considering the Puritan ladies imbibe and carouse with the "gossips" and those that are not of the "faithful"?
The Honest Whore
The world of the play grows less and less stable as the action goes on. Sobriety and propriety are substituted with insanity, disguises, betrayal, and the space of the madhouse. As a follow up to Ann's query about Candido as a proto-capitalist, does sacrificing one's other interests and values for economic ones come to represent a kind of madness in the play? Does Candido go mad in part because of his desire to satisfy customers? Bethlem Monastery houses a large population who have been driven insane by lost wealth and fortune. As he is about to be taken away in 4.3, Candido muses on some apparent paradoxes:
Is change strange? 'Tis not
The fashion unless it alter! monarchs turn
To beggars, beggars creep into the nests
Of princes, masters serve their prentices,
Ladies their serving-men, men turn to women.
Change and rapid, radical flux, as Candido describes it here, occurs all over The Honest Whore. What sense can we make of it in relation to economic and social concerns in the play?
The boxes in The Honost Whore
In Act 2, scene 1, the description is more vivid compared to other scenes. When Roger enters, he places a number of objects down on the table. The way it is read, it appears that great care is being taken with the objects and that Roger places "all things in order". This image jumps out as there is a constant contrast of white and red--I assume portraying blood--but is there a meaning behind the white and red boxes. I did not recall a reference to them further along in the text, but each item is very carefully placed and described by the author.
Children in A Chaste Maid in Cheapside
It seems in each section of the play, children are both celebrated and portrayed as unwanted. They have both been abandoned in baskets of meat and, pre-birth, referred to as flowers. Beyond this, they are constantly either referred to as jewels or bastards--depending on whose children they are. But through this, I find it interesting that we see two teenage children from the same family, Moll and Tim, who are seen as unable to obtain, and too full of obtained desire--both are seen as jewels, however.
Medical Ethics and The Honest Whore
The doctor in I, The Honest Whore is an unethical character, to say the very least. His first act of aiding the Duke to fake Infelice's death is questionable, but far from abominable. However, his motives are clearly defined when he suggests poisoning Hipolito. In a city tormented by disease, plague being one of many ailments, what is London to think of a staged doctor who offers to kill for money? If one of the few public servants entrusted with the health of the city is no more than an assassin for hire, then who can be trusted? Putting these scenes at the very beginning of the play makes us acutely aware of the paranoia inherent during times of disease (particularly when these times correspond with economic strain).
"A Chaste Maid in Cheapside" and "The Honest Whore"
Paraphrasing a line from the Norton introduction to "Cheapside", sex is commodified through money throughout the play. In this alignment of sex and commerce, what might be represented by the many offspring cast as unwanted by-products of sex? (or at the opposite extreme, in the case of Sir Oliver and Lady Kix, wanted but unobtainable?)
What is the function of Hippolito tricking Bellafront into promising she would be his mistress and faithful only to him, only for Hippolito to respond "how many men / Have drunk this self-same protestation, / From that red 'ticing lip?"
What is the function of Hippolito tricking Bellafront into promising she would be his mistress and faithful only to him, only for Hippolito to respond "how many men / Have drunk this self-same protestation, / From that red 'ticing lip?"
London's Implied Citizens: The Commodity of Children in A Chaste Maid
Family serves as a microcosm of London economics in A Chaste Maid in Cheapside. More specifically, the unseen children of this play provide a unique space for social commentary on goods exchange. We are given a few instances of the effects of this structure by way of Tim, Moll and the Touchwood brothers. I am intrigued by the fates of the other children: the newborn abandoned by a wench who pretends it's mutton; Sir Walter's bastards by Allwit's wife; Touchwood Senior's legitimate and fatherless children, his several illegitimate children, and particularly the promising fetus of Oliver Kix's wife. How do these "implied" citizens of London affect the play's outcome? What can they reveal about the economic value of children - specifically with reference to the "proper" number of offspring to produce? Given how these children are described (in terms of monetary gain and loss), how does this reflect the value of adults? If we take a psychological slant here, what can be said of the self-worth and confidence of the parents (actual as well as hopeful) who refuse to challenge a system so enmeshed in the commodity of their children?
Questions, 9/18
1. Despite the moral laxity, ignorance, and general silliness which characterize many of the city dwellers in "A Chaste Maid in Cheapside," why is it only Sir Walter who, even after his passionate denunciation of his former lifestyle, ends the play in a worse situation than he began it? What is it about his character arc, and the shape of this comedy more broadly, which demands his expulsion, even while other flawed characters enjoy reintegration into familial and civic life?
2. Considering that Bellafront’s path towards “honest whore”-dom is only one of three main dramatic arcs in the play, and even seems to receive less attention than the other two stories, what are the implications of Dekker’s choice to title his piece as he did? How might that particular plotline, despite its apparently limited intersections with the others, inform how we perceive the other relationships and events played out on stage?
2. Considering that Bellafront’s path towards “honest whore”-dom is only one of three main dramatic arcs in the play, and even seems to receive less attention than the other two stories, what are the implications of Dekker’s choice to title his piece as he did? How might that particular plotline, despite its apparently limited intersections with the others, inform how we perceive the other relationships and events played out on stage?
The Honest Whore
In the end, the multiple plots are resolved by the "grace"-ful articulation of the Friar and by the clever reasoning of the Duke, the two "choral moments." This, of course, after the wild mixing of genres and the strange and illogical psychological motivations over the previous 80 pages. How do these final two speeches function against the tragicomic structure of the play? What motivated Dekker to use them to conclude this work?
Chaste Maid/Honest Whore
I'm thinking about a couple of things - In Chaste Maid: Tim's relationship with his tutor allows a satirical portrayal of the value of education and seems to point to Tim's immaturity. What caught my attention was his response to his mother about marrying the Welsh Gentlewoman: "Why, then, my tutor and I will about her as well as we can." Is the inclusion of his tutor a reflection of their (Tim and his tutor's) earlier exercises in debate, a further indication of his immaturity (he can't do anything without his close friend) or is it meant to suggest something else about their relationship, the nature of education and/or a wife's "purity?" This leads me to - The Honest Whore: I find the forced marriage between Matheo and Bellafront somewhat curious. It is suggested that their marriage will "make an honest woman" of Bellafront and yet, clearly from the plays we've read (and in real life!) being married doesn't necessarily make one "honest" (I'm thinking foremost of Mrs. Allwit). So, is this marriage just a dramatic move to tidy up loose ends (the pairing in marriage of those of relatively equal "purity" - Bellafront with Matheo, as Hippolito with Infelice) or is there something else going on here? Both Tim and Matheo end up being forced into marriage with "whores." So maybe I'm only thinking about one thing. . . Hmm.
A Chaste Maid in Cheapside
Combining the exponential growth of London as an urban center, the increasing importance of currency, and the centralization of the state government, the dependency of early modern citizens (on institutions, the government, and other individuals) seems to be more important than ever before. Presumably, 17th century individuals felt anxious about the new bonds and relationships that they had with one another and even with strangers.
How are these anxieties rehearsed in Middleton's play, symbolically or otherwise? Is there anything salvagable about Middleton's London?
How are these anxieties rehearsed in Middleton's play, symbolically or otherwise? Is there anything salvagable about Middleton's London?
Questions
A Chaste Maide in Cheapside
The gulls, cons, and opportunists in A Chaste Maid in Cheapside appear way, way less believable than those in the other plays we've so far read. The extreme case, of course, being the most bizarre of the menage a trios deux; the mutually opportunistic relationship between the Allwits and Sir Walter. Is Middleton bringing such incredible and uncommon extremes into his play merely to help it along comically, OR by pushing his characters into the margins of social life or human psychological endurance is Middleton giving himself an opportunity to criticize more gravely the character traits shared between the marginalized characters and the citizens of London? Could his London audience have laughed despite the serious satire aimed at them but just over their heads?
The Honest Whore
If we look at The Honest Whore as a play about salvation, which its penultimate passages lead us to believe it in fact is, then it is hard not to ask whether the motto virtue of patience which has lead Candido on his path toward successful salvation is in opposition to the virtues which might have made him a successful merchant. So, apart from patience, is there a particular set of virtues exclusive to those on a religious or redemptive path, incommensurable - or at least incongruous - with the set of virtues most often applied to the market? Could Candido perhaps have balanced his commercial life with his more religious one, or are the virtues of the latter altogether incompatible with successful commerce?
The gulls, cons, and opportunists in A Chaste Maid in Cheapside appear way, way less believable than those in the other plays we've so far read. The extreme case, of course, being the most bizarre of the menage a trios deux; the mutually opportunistic relationship between the Allwits and Sir Walter. Is Middleton bringing such incredible and uncommon extremes into his play merely to help it along comically, OR by pushing his characters into the margins of social life or human psychological endurance is Middleton giving himself an opportunity to criticize more gravely the character traits shared between the marginalized characters and the citizens of London? Could his London audience have laughed despite the serious satire aimed at them but just over their heads?
The Honest Whore
If we look at The Honest Whore as a play about salvation, which its penultimate passages lead us to believe it in fact is, then it is hard not to ask whether the motto virtue of patience which has lead Candido on his path toward successful salvation is in opposition to the virtues which might have made him a successful merchant. So, apart from patience, is there a particular set of virtues exclusive to those on a religious or redemptive path, incommensurable - or at least incongruous - with the set of virtues most often applied to the market? Could Candido perhaps have balanced his commercial life with his more religious one, or are the virtues of the latter altogether incompatible with successful commerce?
Lent and Leaky Vessels in Chaste Maid
Lent and Festivity
A Chaste Maid in Cheapside takes place during Lent, traditionally a time of repentance, fasting, and atonement for the past year’s sins. Given these concerns, the actions of the play seem quite removed from the conventional Lenten ideals; this is a play glorying in sexuality, consumption, and monetary/material concerns that seem to belong in the realm of the carnival, not the period of penance that follows. For example, in Act 3 scene 2 Mrs. Allwit lies in her bed, surrounded by the female characters and the Gossips, to celebrate her daughter’s christening. The scene in the Allwit’s home is quite festive, and the christening a chance for the women to glut themselves on food and drink, much to Allwit’s disgust (3.2.58-63). What does the play suggest about this celebration and the notion of festival? What about fertility or femininity and the festive? The scene with the Promoters? In addition, the character of Sir Walter seems to follow the arc of the Christian cycle, reveling in carnivalesque concerns like sex, fertility, and money only to later repent and refrain from his former pleasures (and suffer for them in debtor’s prison). What are we to make of his character, especially considering that although he renounces his sinful ways, in doing so he leaves a wake of children and mistresses with no promises of future support?
“Leaky vessels” in Chaste Maid
Much like The Alchemist, Middleton’s play contains many examples of the grotesque female body. Especially in 3.2, the women are associated with liquids, both with the wine they consume and bodily functions. Gail Kern Paster has written of the characterization of women as “leaky vessels,” unable or too weak to control bodily functions (urination, menstruation, lactation). In this scene, many references are maid to the women’s leakiness [e.g.,“she cannot lie dry in her bed” (3.2.114), “She wets as she kisses” (181), “They have drunk so hard in plate that some of them had need of other vessels” (200-01), “What’s here under the stools? / Nothing but wet…/ Is’t no worst, think’st thou?” (218-220)]. What is the meaning of this emphasis on females and leaking? Paster discusses talking and gossiping as “leaky” as well, which are also evidenced in the scene. What is the relationship between “wet” women throughout the play and the male characters, especially a character like Sir Oliver Kix, who is “dry” (infertile)? How does the wet/dry motif function in other areas of the text?
Maids, maids, Whores, Lawyers, and bees
The Honest Whore
In Act 3, scene 3, Bellafront sings a song wherein she mentions, "The lawyer's ill-got moneys, / That suck up poor bees' honeys." In Act 5, scene 1, George makes almost the exact same reference in song, "As out of wormwood bees suck honey, / As from poor clients lawyers firk money." What is the significance of these two strange references that appear far apart and at widely differing situations in the play? What conclusions may we draw about the attitude towards lawyers in the early 17th Century, especially in conjunction with commerce (as they seem to be in the practice of taking people's money)? What might we make of the metaphorical blend of bees and lawyers?
A Chaste Maid in Cheapside
Moll's maid, Susan, may not necessarily distinguish herself from any of the other stock characters in whose place she occupies. I can think of several characters like her in Renaissance drama, the servants or priests who help their employers or social betters, especially when the situation calls for secrecy or an elaborate ruse. However, in the last act, Touchwood Sr. says, "Of her kindness in this business to us, 'twould ask / an hour's discourse. In brief, 'twas she / That wrought it to this purpose cunningly" (V.iv.56-58). His words imply that the idea, and probably the execution of the plan, were Susan's. What might we make of this maid's ingenuity? Does her willingness to act against Moll's parents wishes present a problem for the Early Modern Viewer of the play? Are Susan's actions indicative of a trend of upwardly-mobile thinking by the servant class in an economically changing London?
In Act 3, scene 3, Bellafront sings a song wherein she mentions, "The lawyer's ill-got moneys, / That suck up poor bees' honeys." In Act 5, scene 1, George makes almost the exact same reference in song, "As out of wormwood bees suck honey, / As from poor clients lawyers firk money." What is the significance of these two strange references that appear far apart and at widely differing situations in the play? What conclusions may we draw about the attitude towards lawyers in the early 17th Century, especially in conjunction with commerce (as they seem to be in the practice of taking people's money)? What might we make of the metaphorical blend of bees and lawyers?
A Chaste Maid in Cheapside
Moll's maid, Susan, may not necessarily distinguish herself from any of the other stock characters in whose place she occupies. I can think of several characters like her in Renaissance drama, the servants or priests who help their employers or social betters, especially when the situation calls for secrecy or an elaborate ruse. However, in the last act, Touchwood Sr. says, "Of her kindness in this business to us, 'twould ask / an hour's discourse. In brief, 'twas she / That wrought it to this purpose cunningly" (V.iv.56-58). His words imply that the idea, and probably the execution of the plan, were Susan's. What might we make of this maid's ingenuity? Does her willingness to act against Moll's parents wishes present a problem for the Early Modern Viewer of the play? Are Susan's actions indicative of a trend of upwardly-mobile thinking by the servant class in an economically changing London?
Thoughts
On A Chaste Maid in Cheapside: Maudlin, like a number of other older female characters in Middleton's plays, is portrayed at the beginning of the play as a threat to the 'virtue' of younger female characters. Whether we are discussing Livia in Women Beware Women or Gratiana in The Revengers Tragedy, we can see a thread of older women who lead to the corruption of their female family members. But in the case of Maudlin, she actually helps to reclaim the virtue of younger female characters. How does this complicate Middleton's understanding of gender? Does he see women of compromized virtue as threats the fabric of social order (as in Women Beware Women) or as capable of reclaiming their virtue?
On The Honest Whore, Part the First: We talked about the elements of Carnival in The Alchemist and I'm interested in how those ideas relate to the swapping of clothes between the Candido and his Apprentice. Is this a Carnival moment? What about the Madhouse? Is the very fact that Candido is unable to control his wife set up a natural inversion of the traditional social structure?
On The Honest Whore, Part the First: We talked about the elements of Carnival in The Alchemist and I'm interested in how those ideas relate to the swapping of clothes between the Candido and his Apprentice. Is this a Carnival moment? What about the Madhouse? Is the very fact that Candido is unable to control his wife set up a natural inversion of the traditional social structure?
Chaste Maid in Cheapside and Honest Whore
A Chaste Maid in Cheapside
After realizing that he has married a prostitute in V.iv, Tim tries to make sense of his embarrassing situation with one of his rather silly exercises in logic. Since Tim’s logic doesn’t really change his feelings about the situation, Maudlin and the Welsh Gentlewoman suggest that marriage has transformed the whore to a “chaste maid.” However, abandoning both logic and marriage, Tim decides that he will accept his new wife due to her wit, a resolution that suddenly renders Tim unusually witty and jovial (allusion to the “meretrix/merry tricks” pun and the dirty joke). There are several other relationships and plot threads that address themes of wit and marriage. What is the connection between the two themes and why is it important in this play?
1 Honest Whore
“Madness” carries several valences in the play: anger, insanity, and fashionable London behaviors. The actions of gallants and the transformations that occur in London are seen as a sort of fashionable madness. Viola desperately wants Candido to become “mad” at someone for wronging him. Finally, there are actual madmen—and an insane asylum—in the play. What are the implications of the play’s multi-valent “madness”? Why is it telling that the play concludes in a madhouse?
After realizing that he has married a prostitute in V.iv, Tim tries to make sense of his embarrassing situation with one of his rather silly exercises in logic. Since Tim’s logic doesn’t really change his feelings about the situation, Maudlin and the Welsh Gentlewoman suggest that marriage has transformed the whore to a “chaste maid.” However, abandoning both logic and marriage, Tim decides that he will accept his new wife due to her wit, a resolution that suddenly renders Tim unusually witty and jovial (allusion to the “meretrix/merry tricks” pun and the dirty joke). There are several other relationships and plot threads that address themes of wit and marriage. What is the connection between the two themes and why is it important in this play?
1 Honest Whore
“Madness” carries several valences in the play: anger, insanity, and fashionable London behaviors. The actions of gallants and the transformations that occur in London are seen as a sort of fashionable madness. Viola desperately wants Candido to become “mad” at someone for wronging him. Finally, there are actual madmen—and an insane asylum—in the play. What are the implications of the play’s multi-valent “madness”? Why is it telling that the play concludes in a madhouse?
A Chaste Maid in Cheapside
In “A Chaste Maid in Cheapside,” Thomas Middleton fills his play with sexual humor, puns, references to sexually transmitted diseases, and the insatiable sexual appetites of some of his characters. Sexuality seems a cause for laughter, but also a source of anxiety over disease and the body. How does Middleton break the binaries of health/sickness and sex/purity? Why and how does he mix different conceptions of sexuality, virility, sterility/impotence, and sickness?
The Honest Whore
In “The Honest Whore,” Thomas Dekker presents a sympathetic, and even empathetic, depiction of Bellafront the Harlot. She is neither stigmatized nor demonized in the play, but is something of a hero. Why does Dekker offer such a portrait of this character? What were the historic social, political, and economic reasons for Dekker’s characterization? Furthermore, did Dekker have personal reasons for portraying Bellafront as he did?
Marriage in "Chaste Maid"
In all four of the play’s plots, the action is centered around the most extreme form of capitalism: the commercial exchange of sex and the commoditization of the human body (throughout the play, children are seen as a means towards securing wealth rather than progeny; in I.i, the Welsh woman is referred to as “ewe mutton” and Tim suggests his sister be “sold to fishwives” in IV.iii; even an infant is – in the otherwise extraneous “Promoter” sequence of II.ii – conflated with a piece of veal or mutton). From the very start of the play, married women and their wittol husbands arrange the exchange of bodies for social preferment and wealth. And yet, at the very end of the play, it is suggested that the Welsh woman’s sexual “dishonesty” might be “cured” by her being married: “Sir, if your logic cannot prove me honest, / There’s a thing call’d marriage, and that makes me honest.” (V.iv) Is this merely tongue in cheek? All of the examples of marriage before hers depict blatant marital dishonesty. Are we meant to take her at her word and believe that this particular marriage will somehow establish “normative” sexual behavior (where all the other marriages have not only failed to do so, but have actually been means to further transgressive sexual behavior)? Or is this Middleton setting us up for a final laugh at the naïve and unsuspecting bride-to-be’s expense?
Setting of "The Honest Whore"
Geographical accuracy, or at least consistency, is clearly not one of Dekker’s main concerns. Though ostensibly set in Milan, this “City Comedy” imports many English characters (George, Roger, Mistress Fingerlock), English jokes and slang, English locations (Bethlehem), English customs (the apprentices, “clubs”, the clothing fashions), and even references to English theatre (Comedy of Errors, implications of Romeo and Juliet and Hamlet). Given the fact that the play is clearly about
The Honest Whore
Bodily decay is emphasized quite a bit in Dekker's play. Hippolito constantly conjures images of Infelice's rotting corpse being taken over by worms and he also mentions flesh-eating venereal diseaese in his several critiques of prostitution. Can we connect this emphasis on decaying flesh with prostitution - or the plying of "fleshy" wares - i which the play is so interested? Does the fact of human flesh - perhaps most as it is manifested in the hymen of a midenhead - usurp all other truths in this play?
Chaste Maid in Cheapside
This play brings together three different worlds and the concepts of success:
a) London and the sale of commodities (The Yellowhammers, the Allwits, the Touchwoods, and other citizens)
b) The Country and the prestige of landownership (Sir Walter and his "Welsh gentlewoman")
c) The University and the pretension of education (Tim and his tutor)
The push seems to be to bring these worlds together through marriage and bartering using wives, daughters and whores in order to enjoy the benefits of all three worlds. Considering the chaos that ensues and the success of of the play's matches, is it possible for these world's to fuse successfully? Does the play posit marriage - or something else - as the solution tht can bring these worlds together?
a) London and the sale of commodities (The Yellowhammers, the Allwits, the Touchwoods, and other citizens)
b) The Country and the prestige of landownership (Sir Walter and his "Welsh gentlewoman")
c) The University and the pretension of education (Tim and his tutor)
The push seems to be to bring these worlds together through marriage and bartering using wives, daughters and whores in order to enjoy the benefits of all three worlds. Considering the chaos that ensues and the success of of the play's matches, is it possible for these world's to fuse successfully? Does the play posit marriage - or something else - as the solution tht can bring these worlds together?
Monday, September 17, 2007
The Honest Whore
Is Candido, the patient draper, a proto-capitalist (content to sell his wares any way they get sold and save a buck by wearing a tablecloth instead of paying a fine, all of which he does without reference to his own dignity)? Or is he a proto-hippie (content to see his neighbors as basically good and life as easier without all that strife)? Something else entirely? Does the play ultimately support or undermine him?
Chaste Maid of Cheapside
In this play, children seem to be cast as the unfortunate outcome of conubial bliss (the Touchwood Srs.), as the even more unfortunate outcome of prostitution (again, Touchwood Sr), as commodities (Moll). But when Sir Walter appears to be dying, Allwit suggests that seeing his bastard children will revive him and the whole town seems interested in the newest baby's christening. Do children have more than commercial value in the world of this play?
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
A Space for Questions
Welcome, 791K-ers. I've created this blog so that we can all see one another's discussion questions each week. Instead of emailing them to me by Tuesday night, you should post them here. This can also be a space for continuing class discussion or exploring topics we don't get a chance to cover when we meet.
Ground rules:
1. Please be respectful of one another's ideas and questions here. We should all feel free to ask what we think needs asking. That's not to say you can't disagree with one another. Nor does it mean you can't enjoy yourself here. But do so professionally and intelligently.
2. Post under your own name. You may have a whole internet life as JacobeanJoJoButterfly, but here you will be who you are in class. Again: professionalism is the word.
That's it. Looking forward to reading more great questions next week on Dekker and Middleton.
Ground rules:
1. Please be respectful of one another's ideas and questions here. We should all feel free to ask what we think needs asking. That's not to say you can't disagree with one another. Nor does it mean you can't enjoy yourself here. But do so professionally and intelligently.
2. Post under your own name. You may have a whole internet life as JacobeanJoJoButterfly, but here you will be who you are in class. Again: professionalism is the word.
That's it. Looking forward to reading more great questions next week on Dekker and Middleton.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)