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).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Your question reminds me of a historical event which Greenblatt revisits in "Will in the World:" the doctor to the Queen, a man named Lopez, was accused of making an attempt on the Elizabeth's life. Though there are very different things working in the Lopez story, including anti-Semitism, I believe there is the similar apprehension toward early modern medicine. I also wonder about the relative state of medicine, pre-Enlightenment and how discomfitting it was and is, in retrospective.
Post a Comment