Thomas Dekker: An analysis of dramatic structure 9783111391465, 9783111028965

Citation preview

STUDIES

IN ENGLISH Volume

XXXVIII

LITERATURE

THOMAS DEKKER AN ANALYSIS OF

DRAMATIC STRUCTURE

by

JAMES H. CONO VER

1969

MOUTON THE HAGUE · PARIS

© Copyright 1969 in The Netherlands. Mouton & Co. N.V., Publishers, The Hague. No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOG CARD NUMBER: 68-23806

Printed in The Netherlands by Mouton & Co., Printers, The Hague.

For

W.A.B.

PREFACE

To move from what is hoped to be reasonably objective analytic writing to a preface is, for the writer, something of a traumatic experience. This is especially true when he has been occupied in his selfless mode with the self contained world of dramas. It feels like the unmasking time for one of Dekker's characters - not destined for the fate of a Bartervile hopefully, perhaps for that of Orlando Friscobaldo. But the move is eased by the comfort of a pleasant ritual of thanks. I am no less indebted than others to a host of books, teachers, friends, and family. Let me call special attention to two, one unknown to me, one not known well enough. Fredson Thayer Bowers' edition of the dramatic works of Thomas Dekker is a tribute to new techniques and old dedication to scholarship. It is a great comfort to be able to trust implicitly the editions of the plays. Almost needless to say, when quoting from the plays I have retained the original punctuation and spelling, and have employed Bowers' act and scene divisions and his line numbers. The other man is Professor Wallace A. Bacon. To him must go much of the credit for what is good here and none of the blame for what is not. I would like also to express my appreciation to my school, college, and university for providing the time necessary to complete this manuscript. Ohio University December, 1967

J. H. C.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

7

INTRODUCTION

11

1.

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY, OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

18

The Lacy-Rose Action The Rafe-Jane Action The Simon Eyre Action Relationship of the Actions Unifying Devices

19 26 32 37 41

2.

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF O L D FORTUNATOS

.

.

The Fortunatus-Andelocia Action The Virtue-Vice Action The Orleans-Prince of Cyprus Action Relationship of the Actions Arrangement of Scenes Unifying Devices 3.

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE .

The Bellafront Action The Candido Action Relationship of the Actions Arrangement of Scenes Unifying Devices The Final Scene

51

53 66 68 69 70 75 .

.

82

84 100 102 104 107 109

10 4.

5.

6.

7.

TABLE OF CONTENTS T H E WHORE OF BABYLON

112

The Kings The Cardinals The Joint Plans The Morality Action Incidental Historical Events Relationship of the Actions Parallels and Contrasts

114 119 121 124 126 127 138

I F T H I S B E N O T A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL I S IN I T .

144

The Pluto Action The King of Naples Action The Priory Action The Bartervile Action Relationship of the Actions Arrangement of Scenes Unifying Devices

147 149 160 168 172 177 179

MATCH M E

IN LONDON

183

The Tormiella Action The Don John Action Relationship of the Actions Arrangement of Scenes Unifying Devices

184 200 203 205 207

A L L THINGS CONSIDERED

212

APPENDIX: SUMMARIES OF THE SIX PLAYS L I S T OF WORKS C I T E D

.

.

.

.

222 247

INTRODUCTION

Thomas Dekker, the Elizabethan dramatist, has been censured frequently for lacking the ability to provide adequate form for his plays. That criticism has become almost a tradition, in which writers take the acceptance of such opinions for granted, mention this lamentable shortcoming, and pass on to other matters. Few, however, have troubled themselves to express in detail any evidence to support the generalization. If nothing else Dekker was a successful, popular playwright who practised his craft over an extended period of years. Even his greatest detractors would label him a professional, a hack writer. In modern times such a person is normally characterized by an almost excessive ability to structure his works; he writes the wellmade play or television script, the neat, "pat" thing. If he has serious shortcomings they are in characterization, integrity of idea, or more purely literary values. And yet, says criticism, Dekker couldn't put together a plot. It is difficult to know just how much the playwright's general reputation has been affected by this alleged weakness. Despite the fact that the first reference to Dekker, in a 1598 publication, includes him in a list of those "best for Tragedie" along with Marlowe, Kyd, Shakespeare, and Jonson,1 his literary reputation has never been high. Gerald E. Bentley notes: The paucity of allusions to Dekker in seventeenth-century literature indicates that whatever his popular reputation may have been, his 1

Francis Meres, "Poetry", ed. Don Cameron Allen, University of Illinois Studies in Language and Literature, XVI (28 November, 1933), 78. The treatise is one section of Meres' Palladis Tamia.

12

INTRODUCTION

literary reputation was slight. I have found less than a dozen allusions.2 Dekker has had a few supporters. Lamb was of the opinion that Dekker had "poetry enough for anything".8 More recently, Bradbrook speaks of Dekker's "Lyric tenderness and gaiety" 4 and Ellis-Fermor maintains that "we seldom or never find miscalculation of a stage effect: everything that he wrote could be played. . . . " 6 These comments do not represent all of Dekker's admirers; they do reflect what are essentially minority opinions. When commenting upon specific shortcomings the critics regularly turn to structural matters. Even his ardent admirer, M. L. Hunt, maintained that "he nowhere exhibits skill in the invention of plots" and that his greatest faults are unevenness and "more considerable weakness of structure".6 When describing Dekker's structural techniques the critics unfailingly use such words as "reckless indifference", "awkward", and "lamentable".7 Richard Barker compares Middleton and Dekker as follows: "Middleton's plays are usually well constructed; Dekker's are not - they drift from episode to episode and are sometimes completely incoherent." 8 A recent major study of Dekker continues this theme, as Jones-Davies writes, "A cause de leur squelette fragile, de leur architecture diffuse, ses intrigues sont inégales, parfois, déconcertantes." 9 But few of these writers go beyond what they apparently take to be a statement of simple fact, and they, not unnaturally, concen2

The Jacobean and Caroline Stage (Oxford, 1956), ΠΙ, 245. Charles Lamb, Specimens of English Dramatic Poets, ed. Israel Gollancz (London, 1893), Π, 167. 4 Muriel Clara Bradbrook, The Growth and Structure of Elizabethan Comedy (London, 1955), p. 125. 5 Una Ellis-Fermor, The Jacobean Drama (London, 1936), p. 120. « Mary Leland Hunt, Thomas Dekker: A Study (New York, 1911), pp. 106 and 202. 7 Arthur Henry Bullen, Elizabethans (New York, 1924), p. 77; Ernest Rhys (ed.), Thomas Dekker (London, 1887), p. xxiv; and Kate Leila Gregg, "Thomas Dekker: A Study in Economic and Social Backgrounds", University of Washington Publications: language and Literature, II (July, 1924), 72. 8 Richard Hindry Barker, Thomas Middleton (New York, 1958), p. 198. • Marie Thérèse Jones-Davies, Un Peintre de la vie Londonienne: Thomas Dekker (Paris, 1958), II, 208-209. 5

INTRODUCTION

13

trate their attention on what they consider the playwright's positive achievements. In the chapters to follow an attempt is made to re-evaluate Thomas Dekker as a play-craftsman, to subject some of his plays to structural analysis. If the estimation of his abilities as a craftsman can be raised perhaps then his general reputation ought to rise, assuming his already acknowledged talents for characterization, lyricism, and comic effect. Dekker was a very active playwright - on critic estimates that he was involved in the writing of sixteen plays in one year 10 and, despite the fact that many of the plays have been lost, the Bowers edition contains twenty complete plays, four triumphs or entertainments, and Dekker's thirty line addition to Sir Thomas More. Of the twenty plays in the Bowers edition, a number are accepted or suspected collaborations. Some critics venture guesses, and others frame the same guesses as statements of fact, concerning the leading writer when several collaborated. Usually these theories support the "other" playwright when Dekker is involved. Theories concerning collaborations lean heavily on interpretation, normally interpretation of internal evidence. Even the most convincing cases based on internal evidence tend to prove only that a specific writer wrote the dialogue in a specific passage or made decisions about the relationship of the passage to other passages and incidents in the play. But if we are to be concerned with Thomas Dekker's structural abilities, the investigation must be limited to those plays in which Dekker was responsible for the plan - in other words, plays for which there is no suspicion of a collaborator. Means of determining authorship have developed and changed immensely in the last century. The largely intuitive, frequently brilliant, but too often erratic judgments of Fleay and others have been supplanted, or rather supplemented, by impressive techniques for examining and evaluating internal evidence of authorship. It should be noted, however, that i® Ashley H. Thorndike, Shakespeare's 347.

Theater

(New York, 1916), p.

14

INTRODUCTION

External evidence can and often does provide incontestable proof; internal evidence can only support hypotheses or corroborate external evidence. 11

External evidence in the form of title page attributions, entries in Henlowe's diary, and listing in the Stationers' Register determines the selection of most of the plays examined in this work. The determination of authorship is not, however, one of our purposes, and when there is considerable conflict of opinion among respected authorities concerning Dekker's responsibility for a specific play that play is excluded. Four plays have been accepted as Dekker's alone by all critics: The Pleasant Comedy of Old Fortunatus, The Whore of Babylon, If This Be Not a Good Play, the Devil Is in It, and Match Me in London. In addition there is good reason to include The Second Part of the Honest Whore. Part I of that play first appeared in print in 1604 with Dekker's name alone on the title page. None of the editions - there were five in the seventeenth century - listed any other author.12 But earlier in 1604 Henslowe entered in his diary a payment to "Thomas Deckers & Midelton" for their play The Honest Whore.13 The same play was included in the Stationers' Register in November of that year, without indication of author. Many critics have minimized Middleton's contribution; Fleay and Hunt alone consider him a full co-author.14 But the external evidence of the diary entry is such that Middleton must be allowed as a collaborator. The second part of the play was not printed until 1630, over twenty-five years after the original publication of The Honest Whore, but it was first entered on the Stationers' Register in 1608,15 so most authorities believe that it was written shortly after 1604. Frequently the two plays have been considered as one unit, 11

Samuel Schoenbaum, "Internal Evidence and the Attribution of Elizabethan Plays", Bulletin of the New York Public Library, IXI (February, 1961), 105. 12 A Bibliography of the English Printed Drama to the Restoration, comp. Walter W. Greg (London, 1939), I, 324-325. 13 Henslowe's Diary, ed. Walter W. Greg (London, 1904), I, 175. 14 Frederick Gard Fleay, A Biographical Chronicle of the English Drama: 1559-1642 (London, 1891), I, 131; Hunt, p. 95. 13 Greg, Bibliography, Π, 585-586.

INTRODUCTION

15

and thus the diary entry is made to apply somehow to both plays. The external evidence, however, does not support this view as there is no document connecting the sequel in any way with Middleton. On the contrary, in addition to the title page of the 1630 quarto, a Stationers' Register entry dated 29 June 1630 lists Dekker as sole author 16 and most scholars dealing with internal evidence support that belief.17 A combination of the external evidence and the best interpretations of internal evidence suggest that The Second Part of the Honest Whore should be included in the Dekker plays to be considered. The final play for which there is some question is The Shoemakers' Holiday or The Gentle Craft, printed anonymously in 1600 as having been performed by Henslowe's company, the Lord Admiral's Men. There is no original entry in the Stationers' Register, but there is a transfer of publication rights in 1610, and once again no author is listed.18 Henslowe, however, bought "the gentle craft" from Dekker in M y 1599,19 and for that reason Dekker's authorship has been almost universal accepted. Collaboration with Robert Wilson was once suggested, but the basis for the claim has been conclusively proven to be one of Collier's forgeries.20 Perhaps influenced by the forgery, Fleay also denied Dekker, considering it "likely that it had been intrusted to him by some other writer to sell it to Henslow".21 Tradition and all factual external evidence, however, attribute the play to Dekker. These plays, almost certainly characteristic examples of Dekker's abilities as a playwright, should expose the presence or absence of his structural craftsmanship. In a very broad sense the word "structure" can be defined as follows: »

Ibid., I, 38. Cf. Samuel Schoenbaum, "Middleton's Share in The Honest Whore, Parts I and Π", Notes and Queries, CXCVII (5 January, 1952), 3; and Algernon Charles Swinburne, The Age of Shakespeare (London, 1908), p. 75. u Greg, Bibliography, I, 282-283. " Greg, Diary, I, 110. " Fredson Thayer Bowers, "Thomas Dekker, Robert Wilson, and The Shoemaker¿ Holiday", MLN, LXIV (December, 1949), 519. 11 Fleay, I, 124. 17

16

INTRODUCTION

a concept including both content and form so far as they are organized for aesthetic purposes. The work of art is, then, considered as a whole system of signs, or structure of signs, serving a specific aesthetic purpose.22 Such a definition avoids the inhibiting rules that have been applied so often to dramatic composition. Pope criticized writers who compared Shakespeare to the Greek dramatists: "To judge therefore of Shakespeare by Aristotle's rides, is like trying a man by the Laws of one Country, who acted under those of another." 28 And R. S. Crane cautioned the critic of structure against bringing to the piece of literature a preconceived notion as to the form the work should have. Such erring critics, he wrote, have "been unable to see any structural principles in poems except those already contained in their preferred definitions and models".24 But it must be granted, however, that at least on one level there are some general principles to be followed in dramatic composition. The authors of the definition quoted above also note that "it could be scarcely denied that there is a substantial identity of 'structure' which has remained the same throughout the ages".25 In very simple terms a play is a form of communication between playwright and audience. Communication, in turn, requires a degree of clarity. Dekker's ability, or lack of it, to communicate a clear "story" is, then, a fitting area of investigation. The other general area to be examined is that of unity, and it is assumed, with Crane, "that literary artists usually aim at creating wholes".28 The various parts of the play, in other words, are expected to be mutually relevant, and the play is expected to be a complete thing. The implementation of this investigation involves the use of some more or less traditional terminology. Each plot or action within a play is examined and evaluated in terms of exposition, René Welleck and Austin Warren, Theory of Literature (New York, 1956), p. 129. 2S Alexander Pope, "Preface to Shakespeare", in Shakespeare Criticism: A Selection, 1623-1840, ed. D. Nichol Smith (London, 1958), p. 45. 24 Ronald Salmon Crane, The Languages of Criticism and the Structure of Poetry (Toronto, 1953), p. 146. 25 Welleck and Warren, p. 144. 26 Crane, p. 179. 22

INTRODUCTION

17

articulation, the playwright's use of available materials, crisis, and climax. Exposition involves the revelation of incidents which took place prior to the beginning of the play, of character relationships, and of time and place when that information is necessary to an understanding of the action. Articulation refers to the movement within a plot or action from incident to incident. It may or may not involve a cause to effect process, depending upon the play, and it frequently involves problems of elapsed time and chronology in general. The playwright's use of available materials suggests a discussion of point of attack, omitted incidents, and when relevant, treatment of sources. The terms crisis and climax are discussed in detail in the next chapter. Part of the discussion of each play takes the form of location, description, and evaluation of the crisis and climax, and a consideration of the degree to which the two points are related. There are, of course, other problems and procedures involved in clarifying and unifying a play. Some, as particularly appropriate to a given play, are discussed in the chapters to follow, but the study is, on the whole, limited to those listed above.

1 THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

If a critic were attempting to develop the thesis that Dekker's skills and techniques gradually developed over a period of years that critic would face great difficulties with The Shoemakers' Holiday, or The Gentle Craft. Although it is the earliest of Dekker's extant plays, it is very nearly the best of the whole body of work. As will be seen, the playwright has taken three contrasting sets of incidents and has interwoven them to produce an almost inseparable whole. This play, like Old Fortunatus and If It Be Not Good, is in part based upon a known source. It is a commonplace that Elizabethan dramatists - even the greatest - drew regularly upon both dramatic and non-dramatic literature for plot ideas. When such a source is known or suspected then it is profitable to investigate the playwright's use of the earlier work. It has been generally accepted that Shoemakers' Holiday is based upon Thomas Deloney's prose narrative, The Gentle Craft, which apparently was first registered in 1597,1 although the earliest edition now in existence is dated 1637.* This work is made up of three tales concerning, respectively, Saint Hugh, Crispin and Crispianus, and Simon Eyre. The three tales all involve shoemakers but are not related in any other way. For his play Dekker selected incidents and characters from the second and third stories, and recombined them to produce what is in all respects an entirely new work. The proce1

A Transcript of the Registers of the Company of Stationers of London; 1554-1640 A J)., ed. Edward Arber (London, 1876), ΙΠ, 29. 1 Wilfrid J. Halliday (ed.), Deloney's Gentle Craft (Oxford, 1928), p. 7. This work is bound with separate pagination after Dekker's Shoemaker's Holiday, ed. J. R. Sutherland (Oxford, 1928).

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

19

dure was not that of translating a narrative work directly into dramatic form, but of selection, combination, and expansion or compression. Only a few incidents, for example, are taken from the second tale, and those used are divided among several characters in the Dekker play. In the Deloney story two brothers who are princes are forced to hide, disguising themselves as shoemakers. One meets, woos, and secretly marries a princess. The other is called into the army and so distinguishes himself that eventually he can reveal his and his brother's identity. Dekker uses the disguise situation and the war context; he transforms the warrior prince into Rafe, a real, not pretended, shoemaker who is impressed and wounded in battle. In the Deloney story the disguises are assumed to save the lives of the princes, and the prince meets his wife-to-be after assuming the disguise; in the play, however, the disguise is employed by Lacy in order to further a love affair already in progress. Deloney's tale about Simon Eyre begins with Eyre as a youth and goes into considerable detail regarding the device by which the shoemaker makes his fortune. The story also includes a fairly elaborate minor action concerning a competition for the hand of a servant girl in the Eyre household. Dekker's play begins quite late in Eyre's career and only sketchily recounts the shoemaker's rise to fame. The servant girl in the narrative becomes Jane in the play and the competition for her hand is between a lowly shoemaker and a man of rank. As will be seen, Dekker's changes are extensive. Most significant is the way in which Deloney's entirely separate tales are fused into one play. The changes in social rank are also significant. Deloney's two young princes become in the play a noble and a shoemaker who are contrasted. The lower-class suitors for the maid become in the play a noble suitor and a shoemaker suitor. The importance of these competitions and contrasts between social rank will become more apparent in the detailed discussion of the play.

THE LACY-ROSE ACTION I.i The Earl of Lincoln and Sir Otley, Lord Mayor of London, discuss the romance between the Earl's nephew, Lacy, and Otley's daughter,

20

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

Rose. The two men voice to one another their mutual objections to the union, and reveal in asides other objections not so mutual. To separate the couple, Otley has sent Rose out of London to his country estate where Lacy cannot visit undetected, and Lincoln has secured from the King an army command for Lacy in the wars in France. Lacy and his cousin enter, and the older men wish them good fortune in the wars and exit. Lacy, however, arranges to have his cousin take over the army command until he, Lacy, can once more meet with Rose. I.ii Rose, in the country, sends her servant to London for news of Lacy. l.iii Lacy has discovered that Otley has "secrety conueyd my Rose from London" (I.iii.15), and he has disguised himself as a shoemaker to hide the fact that he is not with the army. In a soliloquy he expresses his hope to be employed in the shop of Simon Eyre. I.iv These hopes are fulfilled in this scene when Lacy, now known as Hans, is hired as a journeyman shoemaker. 3 II.i Hammon, a gentleman hunter, is told that the deer he is chasing has entered Otley's estate. //.zi Instead of the deer, however, Hammon encounters Rose. He is immediately smitten with her, and Otley welcomes the hunter as a possible rival for the absent Lacy. Although the indications are that Rose will remain faithful to Lacy, this new complication - a Paris for Juliet - is left unresolved at the end of the scene, providing a small amount of suspense. II .iv Up to this point Lincoln, Lacy's uncle, and Otley, Rose's father, have assumed that Lacy is in France, but Lincoln's spy (introduced as such in the first scene of the play) returns with news of Lacy's absence from the army. Lincoln now begins a search for Lacy. III.i The plot then returns to the Hammon complication. Rose, in her father's presence, refuses Hammon's suit. According to custom, however, Otley has the power to force his daughter to marry, but Hammon, a gentle gentleman, refuses Otley's offer, and this complication is removed from the plot. But Otley's anger and suspicions make him include Rose in the party to celebrate Eyre's appointment as Sheriff. III.Hi As his contribution to the celebration, Simon Eyre brings his journeymen shoemakers who perform a dance. Among the group is 3

Although the two scenes (l.iii and I.iv) are separated in Bowers' edition, the effect in the theatre would be one of conjunction. Lacy says "Here in Towerstreete, with Ayre the shooe-maker,/Meane I a while to worke. . . . " (l.iii.19-20). Four lines later he exits, and the stage is indeed empty, but Eyre immediately enters from his shop. The action, therefore, is continuous. Thirty-five lines later Lacy enters and is subsequently hired.

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

21

the disguised Lacy. He is spied out by Rose (but not, of course, by Otley) who then schemes with her maid to arrange a private meeting with Lacy. IV.i The scheme becomes apparent in this scene. Sybil, the maid, appears in Eyre's shop and specifically designates Hans (Lacy) to be sent to fit Rose with shoes. IV.iii Alone together at last Rose and Lacy plan to elope that night, but two elements of suspense are introduced into the scene: Otley enters, and Lacy's disguise is consequently put to a close test; and, Lincoln's imminent arrival is announced. As Otley goes to meet Lincoln the two lovers decide to run off immediately. IV.iv As Otley and Lincoln confer they are brought the news that Rose has run off with Hans, the shoemaker. Lincoln quickly deduces that Hans and Lacy are one person, but the threat to find the couple and prohibit the marriage is forestalled by a fellow shoemaker who gives Lincoln and Otley false information concerning the time and whereabouts of the wedding.4 V.i Rose and Lacy are next seen in Eyre's shop as he sends them off to be married. They fear some kind of danger but Eyre, now Lord Mayor of London, promises his protection. Although not stated, the fear is of the King's anger over Lacy's desertion from the French wars. V.ii The two disapproving relatives arrive at the wrong wedding, and after discovering the ruse, they set out to tell the King that Lacy has been a traitor so that the King will punish Lacy and divorce the couple. V.iv Successfully wedded, Lacy and Rose return once more to Simon Eyre, who is preparing to entertain the King, and Lacy specifically asks him to intercede with the King on their behalf. V.v Soon after the King pardons Lacy, Lincoln and Otley arrive and accuse Lacy of traitorous desertion, but the King has already pardoned that. Otley, however, demands as a father's right that the couple be separated. The King complies by divorcing them, but immediately declares them remarried. He stops Lincoln's objection to differences in social rank by reminding him that Lacy "stooped" to be a shoemaker, and quiets Otley's ambitions by knighting Lacy. This first plot to make an appearance in the play involves a fairly simple and traditional situation in which a hoped-for marriage is 4

Once more two separate scenes (IV.iii and IV.iv) are indicated by Bowers, although the action is continuous. Otley leaves the "room" to go to receive Lincoln; Rose and Lacy decide and then run off; and Otley and Lincoln re-enter.

22

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

temporarily thwarted. The point of attack is rather late, in that the couple has already met, fallen in love, apparently resolved to marry, and been faced with some complications. In a sense Dekker here departs from traditional Elizabethan practices. Madeleine Doran summarizes the differences of point of attack in classical and Elizabethan drama: The plot of a classical play typically begins in media res and follows the "artificial" order; the plot of an Elizabethan play normally follows the "natural" or historical order of events. 5

She goes on to say, Elizabethan drama . . . generally begins at the beginning and proceeds straight through in chronological order until the end. This means that the motivation of action is within rather than precedent to the action of the play.«

Because here these events have taken place prior to the opening of the play, Dekker can emphasize the effect of separation of the lovers by keeping them apart for much of the play. They do not see one another, in fact, until the play is half completed. The audience first sees, not one of the lovers, but the uncle and the father, who represent the primary obstacle the lovers must overcome in order to marry. Rose and Lacy have, in a sense, three objectives: they must meet once more to plan an elopement; they must marry; and, finally, they must secure approval of their marriage. The approval is necessary both for custom's sake and in order to gain their rightful inheritances. These elements of approval are not developed to any great extent in the play but they are implicit in the situation. All of the necessary exposition is handled in this first scene: the two young people love one another and wish to marry; their elders have taken action to prevent the union; and Lacy has been a shoemaker on the continent, a fact introduced by Lacy's uncle as an example of his wasteful and irresponsible nature, Lincoln's ostensible objection to the marriage. 4

Madeleine Doran, Endeavors of Art: A Study of Form in Elizabethan Drama (Madison, 1954), p. 259. • Ibid., p. 260.

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

23

Since the point of attack is late, the plot moves forward quickly at the outset as Lacy easily disposes of the first bar to their marriage, his service in France. This action, however, is the basis for the later complication, potential trouble with the King. Otley's action of hiding Rose outside of London puts her in the path of Hammon and a new complication is thus introduced. To a certain extent this breaks up what could be an overly-regular and too-smooth plot action, but it is disposed of through Rose's refusal and Hammon's gentlemanly unwillingness to force himself on Rose. Ironically, Otley's reaction to Rose's refusal serves to bring the two lovers together. The scene (IILiii) in which Rose and Lacy are brought together for the first time in the play, is the crisis or turning point in the action of the plot. Crisis is used here to refer to Bradley's "critical point". There is therefore felt to be a critical point in the action which proves also to be a turning point. It is critical sometimes in the sense that until it is reached, the conflict is not, so to speak, clenched; one of the two sets of forces might subside, or a reconciliation might somehow be effected; while, as soon as it is reached, we feel this can no longer be.?

The later scene when the lovers meet alone, are almost discovered by Otley and Lincoln, and run away together is exciting and dramatically effective, but it provides ironic incident rather than complication or change, and follows inevitably from the earlier scene. The attempt by Otley and Lincoln to stop the wedding itself is defeated from the outset, and thus is neither critical nor suspenseful, because they possess false information. The lovers' central problem has been to overcome the hindrances put in the way of their reunion, and, once they manage to meet, the rest must follow. The incidents or choices made by characters at the crisis produce or cause what Bradley as well as Freytag called the "catastrophe", referring to the final situation, the circumstances to which the action resolves at the end. Freytag described cata7 Andrew Cecil Bradley, Shakespearean Tragedy (New York, 1949), p. 51.

24

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

strophe as "the closing action . . . [that] the ancient stage called the exodus". He later noted that it "contains . . . the necessary consequences of the action and the characters [and that] the whole construction points toward the end. . . . " 8 Since both writers were primarily concerned with tragic drama the word catastrophe was particularly appropriate, but it is less so for non-tragic plays. Consequently, the word climax is here employed to refer to the final situation in a play or action of a play. The climax of this plot, the scene with the four principals and the King, brings all together for the first time. The King functions obviously in the role of a deus ex machina, who answers all objections and solves all problems. Although his presence and actions are fairly well motivated by Simon Eyre, the King is not as adroit an example of the deus ex machina device as those to be found in Honest Whore II and If It Be Not Good. The audience is prepared for his presence, but he is something of an intrusion at the end of the play, and he is by no means so thoroughly involved with the action as are his counterparts in the plays mentioned. He is - God-like - above the action. The King, as knotcutter, goes a bit beyond his traditional role; he could have merely made pronouncements and ended it there, but the scene is made more effective by his maneuverings. He allows the charges of "traitor" to begin and Lacy to be seized even though pardon has been given. Instead of refusing to divorce the couple, he first does so, then remarries them, and finally skillfully answers the objections of both Lincoln and Otley. All of these actions in the scene produced a kind of artificial, though effective, suspense and complication. Artificial, that is, in the sense that a serious ending would completely deny the mood and expectations so thoroughly established. And the King does at the end what he had planned to do throughout the scene. Actually, it is Simon Eyre's presence that promises a happy resolution. If there was ever a character in drama with whom it would be impossible to associate tragic or serious outcomes, it is Simon. As will be seen, everything he touches turns to success and 8

Gustav Freytag, Technique of the Drama, (Chicago, 1904), pp. 137 and 139.

trans. E. J. MacEwan

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

25

laughter. His promise of protection for Rose and Lacy is certain to be upheld. His function here, as will be demonstrated, is similar to that of Orlando Friscobaldo in Honest Whore II. Other than the deus ex machina device which resolves it, the plot is tightly knit and well motivated in a cause and effect pattern. Fortuitous events play no part in the working out of the problems, and since the motivation for each scene is to be found in the action of earlier scenes the events appear to be in a necessary and natural order. The only situation not prepared for in the play is the appearance of Firk, Lacy's clownish fellow shoemaker, in IV.iv at Otley's home, shortly after Rose and Lacy flee. His story and false account of the time and place of the wedding permits the ceremony to take place unmolested. He says that he has come to fit Rose with some shoes, but that was the reason Lacy had been summoned. Obviously Lacy has sent him to put them off the scent and that is the meaning of Firk's aside, "It is that Hauns [Lacy], He so gull these diggers" (IV.iv.82-83), and his later statement that "I came hither of purpose with shooes to sir Rogers worship, whilst Rose his daughter be coniecatcht by Hauns" (IV.iv. 145-146). The final area of investigation concerning this action involves potential, but undramatized situations implicit in the story. The potential does not refer to the source; it has already been noted that Dekker has made radical departures from the source, omitting a number of incidents to be found there.9 Potential here refers to situations which are either implied by the action of the play or are related but not dramatized. Most of the potential events of the story are dramatized, excepting those which occurred before the play opened - the initial meetings of Rose and Lacy, Otley's decision to separate the pair by sending Rose out of London, and Lincoln's similar decision concerning the army command for Lacy. From that point to the end little is omitted; perhaps the only incidents not dramatized are Lacy's discovery of Rose's absence, described by Lacy in I.iii, the wedding that takes place "off-stage" between V.i and V.ii, • In Deloney's narrative, for example, the lovers are reconciled to the girl's father by means of their child, the result of their secret marriage.

26

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

and the appeal to the King by Lacy and Eyre that precedes the last scene of the play. Otley revealed the fact that Rose had been sent out of London in his first conversation with Lincoln, so there would be little to gain by dramatizing Lacy's discovery of the fact. The wedding ceremony would require at least one new character, and the dramatization of it might produce a stronger climactic effect than is desirable prior to the true climax in the last scene. If it were a strong scene it would symbolize a culmination of the lovers' quest, an effect better saved for the last scene. The third omitted situation - the pleas to the King - would necessarily involve a recapitulation of many of the events known to the audience. Though such summaries at the end of a play have been effective at times, the practice is perhaps best avoided.

THE RAFE-JANE ACTION

This plot also concerns a relatively simple love story; only five scenes of the play are devoted to it. A married couple is separated by war and eventually reunited after some near-tragic occurrences. The forces at work here are not so traditional as those of the first plot, and the couple themselves are unconventional. The standard complication of parental disapproval is an important element in the Lacy-Rose plot; the elders' objections to youths' desires and the son's and daughter's successful struggle with the father have been dramatic staples since the Greek drama. These conflicts within the family unit have provided much of the material for both serious and comic literature. In this second plot, however, the lovers are in effect separated by social forces, first war and then class distinctions. The two people are, moreover, both members of the working class, and shoemakers and seamstresses had not often been the principals in a dramatic tale, much less a romantic and serious love story. I.i Unlike Rose and Lacy, Rafe and Jane are first seen together, and are then not united until the last scene concerned with their action. Prior to the opening of the play the newly married Rafe has been impressed for the army. Simon Eyre Rafe's employer, asks the com-

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

27

manding officer (Lacy) to discharge Rafe instead of taking him to France. The grounds are, as a fellow shoemaker says, "you doe more than you can answere, to press a man within a yeare and a day of his marriage" (I.i. 149150). Lacy regretfully refuses, however, and Rafe, in a very touching speech, asks Simon to be Jane's protector. As a parting gift, Rafe presents Jane with a pair of shoes he has made for her. Il.ii Some time later Rafe returns to Eyre's shop, apparently released from the army because of an injured leg; but he is met with the news that Jane has disappeared after some disagreement with Dame Eyre. Nothing explicit has prepared for this eventuality, unless the forbodings of the first scene and Dame Eyre's character can be made to account for it. So the situation is now reversed; Rafe has returned, but Jane is gone. Hl.iv Jane, now working as a seamstress, is being courted by a gentleman, Hammon. She is touched by his sincerity, and when her refusal because of Rafe is countered by Hammon's information that Rafe is dead she tells him, "If euer I wed man it shall be you" (IILiv. 122). The complication here is two-fold; Jane believes Rafe is dead, and her suitor is a man of much higher social position with its consequent power and influence. IV.ii The shoes which Rafe left with Jane provide the solution to a least part of the problem. Jane has apparently accepted Hammon's proposal. Hammond sends the old shoes to Eyre's shop so that a new pair of their size can be made for the wedding. The classical tokens of recognition reveal to Rafe the whereabouts of his Cinderella, and he plans to claim his wife from Hammon with the aid of his fellow shoemakers. V.ii This scene dramatizes the rescue of Jane by Rafe and the shoemakers. After a verbal skirmish between the shoemakers and Hammon's supporters Jane is given a choice between the two men, and Hammon offers Rafe twenty pounds to give up his claim; but neither answer is really in doubt and Hammon magnanimously makes a gift of the money. Like the Rose-Lacy action this plot begins at a critical point, the imminent separation of husband and wife. There is no leisurely development of character or earlier events; the couple is immediately thrust into the problem, and they begin to attempt its solution. While the army complication was immediately solved, apparently, in the other plot, here it prevails. Nor is it ever solved by the characters themselves, but runs its own course, outside the play, until Rafe is wounded.

28

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

Although there is considerable action in this brief plot, the two central characters are for the most part passive, somewhat at the mercy of the social forces mentioned above and of other characters. Most of the pleading for Rafe in the first scene comes from Eyre and the other shoemakers; Jane is put out of the household; Rafe does plan the shoemakers' interference with the wedding, but the other shoemakers actually conduct the affair. The action has its crisis in Hammon's revelation to Jane that Rafe has been killed. It is ironic in the sense that while this news "frees" Jane for Hammon, and thus would seem to separate the couple, it also provides the means for their ultimate reunion. Conceivably the lame Rafe might not have found Jane had she continued as a seamstress, but the imminent wedding provides the occasion for the recognition of the pair of shoes. The climax, of course, is in the decisions by Jane and Rafe to remain together despite Hammon's blandishments. As mentioned above neither answer is really in doubt, but the conflict between the shoemakers and the servants provides excitement. Rafe's last words on the matter Sirrah Hammon, Hammon, dost thou thinke a Shoe-maker is so base, to bee a bawde to his owne wife for commoditie, take thy golde, choake with it, were I not lame, I would make thee eate thy words. (V.iii. 82-85)

- could bring cheers from an audience of 'prentices. As Simon Eyre and the King were agents who contributed to the climax of the Rose-Lacy plot, the shoemakers, particularly Hodge and Firk, are instrumental in the climax of this plot. Their force, indeed almost a mob, provides the necessary support for Rafe's claim. They, in fact, voice his claim for him, functioning as junior editions of Simon Eyre. If this plot can be in part interpreted in social terms, this opposition of the mob of shoemakers to the group of the gentleman's household effectively presents the social conflict visually. The shoemakers triumph here, then again in opposition to Otley and Lincoln, and finally, gathering forces all along, they march off to their celebration to the sound of the pancake bell. The degree to which the events of the plot are effectively articu-

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

29

lated has already been touched upon. The least skillful link has to do with the surprising information that Jane no longer lives with the Eyres; most skillful is the Rafe's "death"-Jane's weddingJane's shoes-Jane's rescue sequence. Chance, however, plays a large, if not unreasonable, part in the plot, particularly in two instances: Hammon's possession of a casualty list and the fact that Jane's shoes are brought to Rafe himself. That Rafe is mistakenly listed among those considered dead is not in itself surprising since he was seriously wounded, and in a positive sense these elements of chance emphasize the passivity of the two characters, part of this plot's contribution to the total play to be discussed below. At one point Dekker seems to be aware of the amount of chance involved. After Rafe has been given the order to make shoes for the bride-to-be he says, "By this shoe said he, how am I amasde / At this strange accident?" (IV.ii.30-31). The arrangement of the incidents seems to be purposeful, and not overly complex. The sequence employs a cause and effect pattern, with a single exception - scenes Ill.ii and Ill.iv could be reversed. That is, with slight modifications to explain her absence from the shoemaker's household, Jane's scene with Hammon could precede Rafe's homecoming. This change would lessen the present weakness noted above of lack of preparation for Dame Eyre's statement to Rafe that Jane is gone. But it would have several negative effects; first, and least important, it would break up the rather neat arrangement of scenes whereby the two are together in the first and last scenes and alternate - Rafe, Jane, Rafe - in the middle three scenes. More significant, however, would be the change in the emotional tone in the scene in which Jane is told that Rafe has been killed. The scene would be at once highly pathetic, since the viewer would take the casualty list as fact, and melodramatic, since the basis for the emotional reactions would later prove to be false. The intensity of emotions would not be in keeping with the comic tone of the play as a whole. With Rafe's lameness Dekker already skirts the line, and an apparently real death would indeed violate the balance of the play. Since, by the arrangement of the scenes, the audience knows the report to be untrue, it can react sympathetically to Jane's

30

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

sorrow, but continue to hope for their eventual meeting. Moreover, the charges of chance brought above would pale in the face of such another element of surprise as suggested. To first kill off Rafe and then explain his death away as a battlefield mistake would be a much less desirable arrangement of scenes. Dekker has made the wise choice of suspense over surprise. The plot is simple and straightforward, progressing from separation to reunion. If it had been more fully dramatized, showing Rafe's attempts to get home, for example, it would have had the effect of two parts; that is, his success in reaching London would have been an early and false climax, since the return to Eyre's shop and reunion with Jane appear to be synonymous. Certainly, more could have been made of the plot; in addition to the scenes in France suggested above, two others are specifically described in the play itself. Jane and Dame Eyre, at some point between Li and IILii, argued and Jane was either put out of the house or left. Halstead notes the omission of this scene with apparent regret and suggests that it might have been a way to break the long hiatus in the plot.10 Its inclusion would have eliminated the gap, but it would have had a negative effect on the characters of Eyre and his wife. Rafe had asked Simon Eyre in I.i to care for Jane in his absence, and his failure to do so cannot be emphasized without seriously undercutting audience regard for Eyre. This, for example, is why Dame Eyre, rather than Simon, gives the bad news to Rafe, who is then packed off to eat and rest so that he is not allowed (by the playwright) to confront Simon Eyre as he enters. Furthermore, the omitted scene must have put most of the blame on Dame Eyre, if dramatized, in order to support Jane's character. Jane, as part of a romantic and pathetic story, cannot appear in the role of a scolding fishwife without considerable harm to our later sympathy for her. Dame Eyre's snobbish and social climbing ways are seen in the play only in comic terms. If the other side of the coin is displayed in a scene in which she lords it over poor Jane, a change of tone is introduced that must 10

William L. Halstead, "Thomas Dekker's Early Work for the Theatre" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1937), pp. 102-104.

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

31

affect the whole Simon Eyre story, and as her husband, Simon Eyre himself. The fact that the scene is related rather than dramatized gives it much less emphasis and impact, and permits Dame Eyre to put at least part of the blame on Jane, still without hurting Jane's character. The viewer can smilingly say to himself, "Oh, yes, Dame Eyre, I'm sure you suffered terribly from wicked Jane." But he must smile. The other scene referred to, but omitted in the play, is one in which Rafe fits Jane with the new shoes ordered by Hammon's servant. Rafe describes this situation at some length, and it is used to confirm the fact that it is indeed Jane who is about to marry Hammon. It is easy to understand why Dekker did not include the scene, but difficult to know why it is mentioned at all. Showing the couple together before the rescue would make the rescue itself anti-climactic, and would unnecessarily emphasize the unlikely fact that Jane does not recognize her husband. The latter would not, to be sure, be surprising in Elizabethan drama. But there is no need for the reference; the shoes are sufficient identification. The description does provide another element of pathos, and perhaps it was for this reason that it was included. One incident is implied by the general situation but not specifically described in the dialogue. That is, at the end of Ill.iv Jane sends Hammon off with the promise that, "If euer I wed man it shall be you" (III.iv.122). But Dekker omits the scene in which Jane actually accepts Hammon's proposal. The reasons for the omission are perhaps óbvious. The speech quoted gives sufficient indication of what is to happen, and Jane is not subjected to a direct acceptance of a proposal so soon after her husband's death. Such a scene would also be something of a repetition of the original proposal scene, and thus extraneous. Such a "fleshing out" would not be consistent with what might be considered an important and meritorius characteristic of the plot - its economy. The five scenes simply and quickly tell the whole story: departure for war, return from war and loss of wife; news of "death"; discovery of the shoes; and rescue and reunion. The effect is of speed and intensity; nothing is wasted. Each scene depicts an important and necessary incident. Alone

32

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

this methodfor this plotwould probably be too abrupt; its function within the complete play will be discussed later. THE SIMON EYRE ACTION

The plot to be considered finally is that concerned with Simon Eyre, if a plot it can be called in any traditional sense of that term. Simply stated, the scenes depict history's easiest success story, a rise from craftsman to Lord Mayor of London, with a related increase of personal wealth and influence. There are no true complications in the path of this progress, and very little of what is normally termed dramatic action, although a number of scenes in the total play are devoted to Eyre and his shop. Describing romantic comedy, C. F. T. Brooke notes that this type of play frequently lacks "the fundamental dramatic oonflict which forms regularly the backbone both of comedy and tragedy. . . . " 11 Harbage points to this lack when he expresses his amazement that Shoemakers' Holiday has the "power to sustain interest with a pennyworth of evil for a pound of good".12 Since Simon Eyre is something of an historical character it can be argued that his ultimate achievement was known from the outset to the original London audiences, and that this expectation softens the surprise, or rather astonishment, at his meteoric rise. The character in the play certainly has not stated or implied ambitions. On the other hand, that he feels no limitations is apparent in the refrain that he repeats with variations, "prince am I none, yet am I noblie born" (II.iii.42). The small amount of exposition needed for this plot is actually established in the first scene of the Rafe-Jane plot. Dekker simply and naturally has Simon introduce himself, family, and journeymen to Lacy in preparation for asking for Rafe's release from impressment. Enough is said in the scene to establish firmly Eyre's character. II

Charles Frederick Tucker Brooke, The Tudor Drama (Cambridge, Mass., 1911), p. 281. 11 Alfred Harbage, Shakespeare and the Rival Traditions (New York,

1952), p. 174.

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

33

I.iv The first scene actually devoted to Simon Eyre himself is the one in which the shoemaker shop is established as a locale and in which Lacy (Hans) is hired. Although the action is a necessary part of the Lacy-Rose plot it is also functional here. 18 H.iii Lacy introduces the "skipper" of a ship to Eyre and also loans Eyre enough money for a down-payment on the valuable cargo. The original proposals of the business deal have taken place prior to the scene, and only the closing of the deal is dramatized. Eyre has been made an alderman of London sometime prior to the scene. The two elements of Eyre's rise - financial and political — are not at this point related, but are jointed by proximity. Once again, after a disagreement with Dame Eyre, the journeymen threaten to quit but are pacified by Simon. III.i The next brief scene concerned with this plot is interlaced with one that is primarily concerned with the Rose-Lacy plot. The two elements mentioned above are joined as Otley (current Lord Mayor) reveals himself as Eyre's partner in the ship's cargo transaction which has yielded considerable profit. As a kind of reward he tells Eyre that he hopes to have him made Sheriff that very day. IILii The shoemakers and Simon's wife await the news of the hoped-for appointment, and Dekker indulges in some mild satire on Dame Eyre as a bourgeois nouveau riche. Eyre enters with the chain of office, and all prepare to dine with Otley to celebrate the new position. Hl.iii Nothing happens in this scene to further the action. Otley and the Eyres dine together and are entertained with a dance by the shoemakers. Although this takes up most of the scene it should perhaps be considered part of the Rose-Lacy plot. IV.i Scene IILii anticipated the celebration, scene IH.iii depicted it, and this scene is largely retrospect discussion of it by the journeymen. In passing, they mention the ill-health of several other aldermen, whose deaths would make Simon the Lord Mayor of London. V.i Eyre next appears as Lord Mayor; and once again the action itself has taken place off-stage. Here he promises to protect Lacy and Rose, and begins preparation for the Shrove Tuesday pancake feast that is to occupy the rest of the play. At this point Eyre has achieved 1S

Actually this is all that happens in the scene to serve the plot itself, but a certain amount of secondary complication is introduced that runs throughout the play. Both Eyre and his wife hesitate to hire the itinerant shoemaker, but the two journeymen insist, threatening to quit themselves if Eyre does not hire extra help. It is, perhaps, too much to suggest this as one of the earliest recorded instances of labor-management problems. The bickering between the journeymen and Dame Eyre occurs several times throughout the play as a minor conflict.

34

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

his complete personal success, and what follows could be considered anticlimactic if the plot is viewed solely as his success story. V.iii The King is seen enroute to Eyre's celebration where he expects to be amused by Simon's "woonted merriment . . . " (V.iii. 15). V.iv Eyre directs the turmoil of the feast in which a "hundred tables wil not feast the fourth part o f ' the apprentices of London (V.iv.11-12). He reassures Lacy that he will intercede for him with the King. V.v Simon has done so, and this scene begins with the King pardoning Lacy. After the Rose-Lacy action is completed the celebration continues. "Mad Simon" entertains the King and persuades him to grant marketing privileges to shoemakers in the newly constructed Leadenhall.

Unlike the other two plots whose points of attack were relatively late in their actions, this one begins quite early, though not so early as the source. Each achievement - alderman, wealth, sheriff, mayor, and founder of the marketing customs and Pancake Day is within the play. It is, as noted by Alexis Lange, almost epic in nature, certainly biographical.14 As a separate action it is highly episodic, and abrupt in its forward movement. It is even difficult to apply traditional plotdescriptive terms to the action. But part of the difficulty arises from the consideration of the plot as biographical, as being centrally concerned with a single man. In those terms the climax of the plot should be at the point at which Eyre becomes Lord Mayor, a scene not even dramatized. Actually the climax, though closely related to Simon Eyre, is in the establishment of the traditions of Shrove Tuesday and the use of Leadenhall, things Eyre did as Lord Mayor which had lasting public effect; the climax is not the personal achievement of an individual. The rank of Lord Mayor is, then, merely the final step toward the actual climax of the action. Working backwards from this climax to the critical point in the action is somewhat easier. The only actions taken by Eyre which could be said to influence the outcome of this plot are the hiring of Lacy and the purchase of the ship's cargo. It is the second of 14

"Critical Essay", The Later Contemporaries of Shakespeare, Vol. ΙΠ of Representative English Comedies, ed. Charles Mills Gayley (New York, 1914), 6.

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

35

these that actually provides the momentum which carries Eyre to the point at which he can institute the traditions. Apart from the crisis-climax relationship, the arrangement of incidents is purely chronological. A chain reaction results in the outcome, but the later incidents all refer to the first two. Each event can come only after the preceding one, but it does not occur because of this preceding one; there is one cause and a series of related effects. That is not to say that the plot oonsists of a series of surprises. The brief scene at Otley's house (Ill.i) prepares for the promotion to sheriff. Similarly, the journeymen shoemakers prepare us for the possibility that Eyre may become Lord Mayor by discussing the other aldermen, and Lacy tells Rose that Eyre can protect them because he is now Lord Mayor. The opportune deaths of the senior aldermen, which permit Eyre to attain his highest rank, do seem to constitute a gross element of luck in the plot. Realistically the situation might have occurred, and indeed Simon Eyre probably did "work his way up" in this fashion. Actually the objections to this final movement in his progress are objections to the timing of the deaths rather than to the deaths themselves. In studying this action apart from the total play there appears to be no realistic time lapse; now Eyre is Sheriff with seven aldermen between him and mayoralty, and instantly he is Lord Mayor and seven aldermen are dead. But the seven loom larger in analysis then they do in the context of the play. It must be remembered that none are characters in the play; they don't even have names. Their deaths are not mourned or regretted onstage or in the audience because in the context of the play they are not even human beings, but are nameless and actionless. The problem will be further softened when the plot is studied in relationship to the rest of the play. Because of the wide span of the plot a few pertinent scenes have been omitted. It was noted earlier that Dekker has not dramatized the initial offer by Lacy to aid Eyre in the purchase of the ship's cargo. The scene (ILiii) begins after most of the arrangements have been made. A recent writer describes the business deal as a "sharp practice of which the modern equivalent

36

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

would be obtaining credit by false trade references. . . . " Knights comments on this description:

15

L. C.

C e r t a i n l y the bargain b y which E y r e gains 'full three thousand p o u n d ' is not v e r y reputable, b u t there is no need t o m a k e m u c h of it, or to c o n n e c t it, as D r . Robertson does, with 'the w a v e o f speculation' which w a s then a f f e c t i n g all classes. D e k k e r merely intends t o s h o w that f o r t u n e is o n the side of the good-hearted t r a d e s m a n ; it is characteristic that he slurs over the issues without thinking very h a r d a b o u t them.16

The prose source for the play does describe this business deal in more detail than the play, and includes an element of deception that can be described as "sharp practice". The simplest description of the situation in the play, however, is that Eyre borrows money from Lacy to make an investment that later turns out to be profitable. By eliminating the "shady" details Dekker has not slurred "over the issues", but has created a new and honorable situation. Knights' slighting remark would be justified if Dekker had included the deception and had continued to portray Eyre in a complimentary fashion. Thus Knights is guilty of judging both Dekker and Eyre in terms of the prose source rather than the play itself. It would seem, as a matter of fact, that Dekker did think about the issues involved. In the prose source Dame Eyre advises her husband: B e not k n o w n that y o u b a r g a i n f o r y o u r o w n self, b u t tell h i m that y o u d o it in behalf of o n e of the chief aldermen in the city. 1 7

This subterfuge is to hide the fact that Eyre cannot pay the balance of the sale price until he sells part of the cargo. Later in the source Simon actually disguises himself as a ridi man. Dekker not only eliminates all of the damning details, he also makes Eyre a genuine alderman, who quite rightfully dresses himself in his gown of office to receive the ship's captain. Dekker, then, consciously purifies the character of the man he is displaying as a model of the rising middle class. Hector M . Robertson, Aspects of the Rise of Economic Individualism (Cambridge, Eng., 1933), pp. 190-191. 18 Lionel Charles Knights, Drama and Society in the Age of Jonson (New York, 1936), p. 237. 17 Halliday, p. 65. 15

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

37

A potential scene i n which Eyre becomes Lord Mayor and tells his household of it or celebrates it is also absent from the play. There are several reasons for this omission. First, the scene would be a repetition in kind of the scenes concerning the promotion to Sheriff; secondly, occurring so late in the action, it would harm the effect of the last scenes of the play by providing two climaxes, one for his personal triumph and one for his public deeds. All of these omissions, however, point to a rather peculiar aspect of the Simon Eyre action. There is a great deal of off-stage incident; there is also much amusing and energetic discussion onstage; but there is very little dramatized action directly related to the Eyre action. The great events in Simon's life - the acquisition of wealth, the attainment of the civic offices, and the construction of Leadenhall - are talked about, before and after the fact, but none are dramatized. Dekker very severely restricts the locale to the shoemaker shop where none of these incidents can take place, and whenever Simon leaves the shop he is accompanied by the troop of journeymen and apprentices. The effect of this technique is to emphasize the locale and the group. Simon is important as a character, but the whole group of shoemakers (including Simon, Rafe, and Lacy) is equally important to the meanings in the play.

RELATIONSHIP OF THE ACTIONS

The tendency of Elizabethan playwrights to compose plays with multiple plots has generated a good deal of critical comment. It is no longer fashionable to criticize a play solely on the grounds that it encompasses several actions, but a discussion and evaluation of the nature and effects of such richness is still valid. Bradbrook defends sub-plots as follows: It is true that the Elizabethans sometimes built a play from two quite unconnected stories, but this happens far less frequently than it is usual to suppose. For the subplot was contrasted and not interwoven with the main action: it reflected upon it, either as a criticism or a contrast,

38

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

or a parallel illustration of the same moral worked out in another manner, a kind of echo or metaphor of the tragedy.18 She is, of course, speaking of tragedy here, and this fact no doubt explains the apparent disapproval of "interwoven" plots that is, comedy or farce is not to be too closely related to the tragic action. It is assumed that Bradbook does not object to interwoven plots when they are of similar mood. The two actions in King Lear, for example, are interwoven in the sense that characters freely cross from one action to the other. In addition, the actions are interdependent; Edmund's early triumph over Edgar puts the bastard son in a position to later order Cordelia's death. Interdependent and interwoven aotions may thus serve to unify a play. But the implied problem with tragedy is the effect of the mixture of moods within a play, and, as a matter of fact, Bradbrook goes on to discuss this problem in The Changeling and other plays. This problem can also present itself in essentially non-tragic dramas into which plots with serious moods are introduced. When the three plots of Shoemakers' Holiday are combined to make the total play there are a variety of inter-reactions, which produce changes in the nature and effect of the individual plots. All three plots, for example, are alike in their simplicity, their concentration on skeletal story. But the result of their combination is one of richness, variety, and even complexity; so much so that a modern reviewer has complained of its "baffling complexities of plot and subplot. . . . " 19 The Eyre plot moves forward smoothly, without complication. The other two plots, with their minor turns and hesitancies, provide the necessary dramatic conflict. That is not to say that the other plots exist in the play merely to make the Simon Eyre story theatrical. As will be seen, they have a more important function as well. One of the most important effects of the combination is in the play's time scheme. Mable Buland, in a study of Elizabethan playwrights' use of time, comments that in the play "Dekker has pro18

Muriel C. Bradbrook, Themes and Conventions of Elizabethan Tragedy (Cambridge, Eng., 1957), p. 46. 19 John Mason Brown, Two on the Aisle (New York, 1938), p. 202.

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

39

duced an effect of greater cohesion than properly belongs" to it.20 The objection implied is that the three plots cannot begin at the same time and end together if any attention is paid to a realistic calendar of events. But they do seem to, and this is due to the way in which they are joined. The principal culprit is the Eyre plot. As noted above, the plot out of context seems abrupt, the rise too rapid - and on a calendar it is. When scenes from the other two plots are interlaced with it, however, it seems as if there is a sufficient time lapse. Note particularly the time between the promotion to Sheriff and Eyre's next appearance as Lord Mayor. Simon is last onstage at Otley's home in Ill.iii; although his shoemakers are seen and he is mentioned frequently, he as a character does not reappear again until the first scene of the last act. Dramatically he has been gone a long time - sufficient time, in faot, to make his new position as Lord Mayor acceptable despite the seven aldermen. A similar effect appears in the Rafe-Jane plot. It was noted that the first two scenes of this plot concerned Rafe's departure and his return, an almost ludicrous juxtaposition. In the complete story, however, the two scenes are separated by eight scenes of the two other plots. So many scenes intrude that the character is practically forgotten and his return at this point gives the effect of a considerable time lapse, which serves its own and the Eyre plot purposes. If, of course, Rafe's character or the plot situation had been more complex, making greater demands on the memory, this break would cause confusion, but the only things the audience needs to recall are Rafe's marriage to Jane, his gift of the shoes, and the fact that he has been in the army. Separated, the three stories seem to have quite different and sometimes conflicting emotional tones or atmospheres. Rafe and Jane's story - with its overtones of war, Rafe's wound, and apparent death - is pathetic and, alone, almost somber. That of Rose and Lacy is a mixture in itself; there are elements of the romance combined with intrigue comedy, in which disguise and mistaken identity are employed. Simon Eyre's plot is part history, 10

Mable Buland, The Presentation of Time in the Elizabethan Drama (= Yale Studies in English, Vol. XLIV) (New York, 1912), 163.

40

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

part comedy in city manners, described by Hazelton Spencer as "depicted with a gusto so nearly Chaucerian that the combination is irresistible".21 The atmosphere of this last plot permeates the play as a whole, but enough of the romantic and pathetic moods survive in combination with the robust earthiness to produce an impression of completeness or depth of view. As Shakespeare, in the three Henry VI plays, developed a composite picture of chaos on three levels of English society - the army, the nobility, and the commonalty - Dekker here succeeds in producing a realistic spectrum of emotional tone. The variety of tone, and more particularly the scope of society depicted in the play are characteristic of Dekker. As will be seen, the same effects are also present in such plays as Honest Whore II and If It Be Not Good. It is the shoemaker milieu that predominates here, however, and despite the fact that the Eyre plot comprises a minority of the total play, Simon "is the comic center and the realistic center of the play".22 The Eyre action dominates first through the strength of the scenes themselves and the dynamism of Eyre's personality, and secondly through the fact that the two other plots both operate partly within the shoemaker locale. Furthermore, both the Lacy-Rose and the Rafe-Jane actions are actually modified in tone through contact with the shoemakers. A certain coldness that results in part from the fact that Rose and Lacy are not allowed courtship scenes, and from the intrigue comedy elements, is lessened by Lacy's associations with the shoemakers. More particularly, one scene in the Rafe-Jane action is strongly affected. Alone, Rafe's return wounded from the wars and his loss of Jane are too pathetic in relation to the total tone of the play. But he returns to the vitality of Eyre's shop, and his scene is preceded by the light satire on Dame Eyre's vanity and followed by Simon's triumphant return as Sheriff. In the midst of this his sorrow cannot dominate. In this context fears of real tragedy are impossible. 21

Elizabethan Plays (Boston, 1933), p. 632. John B. Moore, The Comic and the Realistic in English (Chicago, 1925), p. 179.

82

Drama

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

41

UNIFYING DEVICES

Dekker employs a series of devices to achieve unity in the play. The first of these involves parallels or direct comparisons of characters in separate actions. The most comprehensive of these similarities comes in part from the source of the play - that is, the occupation of shoemaker. Within the general classification there are variations; Eyre is the shopowner, Rafe is a journeyman, and Lacy, of course, is only an imitation shoemaker. As will be seen in later chapters Dekker makes frequent use of disguise as a plot device. Bradbrook notes that "Disguises generally mean a drop in social status, . . . " 2 S and here as elsewhere the playwright conforms to that pattern. The only exception in the plays to be studied is Gazetto in Match Me in London. As a shoemaker Lacy is protected from the spying eyes of his adversaries and he is free to move about in London. On this score the device is merely a plot expedient, but in this play there is something more than the easy assumption of another identity. Lacy did work as a shoemaker on the continent and he does so again here on Tower Street. His ability to pass as a craftsman is demonstrated among others of the craft; he is accepted by them and not just by Otley and Lincoln. This acceptance plays an important part in his action. He ultimately wins the King's pardon and intercession on two counts: as a lover, and as someone who has actually worked at this happy craft. His character has somehow improved through these associations. Even Otley, early in the play, considers this fact to be to Lacy's betterment. He says in an aside, "And yet your cosen Rowland might do well / Now he hath learn'd an occupation" (I.i.42-43). To work at a trade, in this play as well as in others written by Dekker, is a kind of virtue in itself, a mark of merit. Rafe, too, benefits by his associations with the shoemakers. In his troubles with Hammon his fellows "rally round", demonstrating a comradery and a group loyalty. There is a dear consciousness of class, with attendant antagonisms to other groups. a Muriel Clara Bradbrook, "Shakespeare and the Use of Disguise", Essays in Criticism, Π (April, 1952), 162.

42

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

Firk, for example, takes a positive delight in gulling Otley and Lincoln as he sends them off to the wrong wedding. Firk functions here in a manner not unlike that of the intrigue slave in Roman comedy, enjoying every moment of his wit; but he aids a fellow artisan rather than a profligate young master. The scene is replete with references to the trade: " . . . my profession is the Gentle Craft" (IV.iv.90-91), "no, shal I proue ludas to Hans? No, shall I crie treason to my corporation" (IV.iv.96-97), and "ha, ha, heres no craft in the Gentle Craft" (IV.iv, 144-145). A similar group spirit appears in the scene in which the shoemakers rescue Jane from Hammon and his followers. Hodge opens the scene with a speech to his troop of journeymen: My masters, as we are the braue bloods of the shooemakers, heires apparent to saint Hugh, and perpetuali benefactors to all good fellowes, thou shalt haue no wrong: were Hammon a king of spades he should not delue in thy close without thy sufferaunce. . . . (V.ii.1-5)

A few moments later he faces down Hammon's followers with, "My maisters and gentlemen, neuer draw your bird spittes, shoemakers are Steele to the backe, men euery inch of them, al spirite" (V.ii.30-32). A great part of this spirit emanates from Simon Eyre himself. In the first scene of the play, finding that the officers will not relent and cancel Rafe's impressment, he recommends Rafe to them with comparisons to Hector, Hercules, and Prince Arthur, among others, and urges Rafe to fight for the honour of the Gentle Craft, for the gentlemen Shoomakers, the couragious Cordwainers, the flower of saint Martins, the mad knaues of Bedlem, Fleetstreete, Towerstreete, and white Chappell, cracke me the crownes of the French knaues, a poxe on them, cracke them, fight, by the lord of Ludgate, fight my fine boy! (I.i. 211-216)

Throughout the play Eyre repeats his refrain, noted above, in which he distinguishes between nobility of rank and the true nobility of those born to be shoemakers. Almost all of these references throughout the play refer specifically to the shoemaker trade, but at one point the idea is extend-

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

43

ed to include all tradespeople. When Otley complains that Rose is interested only in courtiers, Eyre advises her: a Courtier, wash, go by, stand not vppon pisherie pasherie: those silken fellowes are but painted Images, outsides, outsides Rose, their inner linings are torne: no my fine mouse, marry me with a Gentleman Grocer like my Lord Maior your Father, a Grocer is a sweet trade, Plums, Plums: had I a sonne or Daughter should marrie out of the generation and bloud of the shoe-makers, he should packe: what, the Gentle trade is a liuing for a man through Europe, through the world. (III.iii.40-47)

The second parallel between characters in separate plots unites Rafe and Lacy even more closely - that is, their secondary occupation as soldiers. They are both, in the fashion suitable to their social class, impressed for the army. Lacy, of course, is to be Rafe's superior officer, but the army duty produces similar problems for the two men - separation from wife or sweetheart. Incidentally, a further link is provided by the fact that the official who impressed Rafe and the other Londoners is the Lord Mayor, Rose's father and Lacy's antagonist. The war or soldier element is something more than a device to link plots, however. A definite contrast is set up by the playwright in the characters' reactions to the situation and the effect the situation has upon the two characters. Certainly it is not accidental that the incident in which Lacy is told he must assume his army command is immediately followed by that in which Rafe, too, is ordered in, ironically by Lacy. Lacy, the gentleman and officer, has made arrangements (at this point only temporary) to avoid his service in order to seek out his sweetheart, yet it is he who tells Rafe that he must serve and be separated from his wife. The juxtaposition of these two scenes from the two plots seems to be intended to comment upon the unwarranted advantages of the privileged clase. Rafe is a passive element in the situation, while Lacy can manipulate events to his advantage. Rafe, too, is depicted later as suffering the real effects of war as he returns wounded, while Lacy is knighted to redeem the honor he lost in France by not being there. The foot soldier is maimed and the officer is titled. The final common "occupation" to be found in the play is the

44

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

Civic officer, the position of Lord Mayor of London which is held first by Otley and later, of course, by Simon Eyre. The only recognition of Otley's tenure of office, however, is in the statement mentioned above in which he is responsible for the impressment, and in the scene in which he tells Eyre he hopes to have him made sheriff. A variation of this pattern of parallel occupations is the way in which Hodge and Firk act as minor Simon Eyres. When Eyre becomes sheriff he deeds his shop to Hodge, and Firk moves up to Hodge's position of foreman; success for Simon Eyre is reflected within the ranks of the shoemakers. More significantly, however, the shoemakers (Eyre, Hodge, and Firk) function in similar ways in the two other plots of the play. Apart from the business transaction of the ship's cargo and his acceptance of the civic promotions, Eyre acts in the play primarily for others. He tries to aid Rafe at the outset, helps his employees, provides the feast for the apprentices, gains market advantages for shoemakers, builds Leadenhall, and contributes to the solution of Lacy's problems. In a limited fashion Firk and Hodge do the same thing. Firk tricks Otley and Lincoln, which allows Lacy and Rose to be married; and Firk and Hodge together are the principal agents in Jane's rescue from Hammon. Perhaps the most important device by which Dekker unites the three plots is the participation of characters in several actions of the play. Several of these have already been noted. Simon Eyre acts in the Rafe-Jane plot at the outset and later becomes an important character in the Lacy-Rose plot. The action that Eyre takes in favor of Lacy in his problem with the King is motivated in part by the aid Lacy gave to Eyre in the ship's cargo transaction. In a sense Lacy's aid helped make Eyre sufficiently influential to aid Lacy. It is somewhat ironic that the money loaned by Lacy to Simon was originally given to Lacy by Lincoln and Otley. These "twenty Portugese" allow Eyre to make the downpayment on the cargo, which Otley later shares. Otley's investment is greater than his proportionate returns, and Simon Eyre is an early example of a businessman profiting with borrowed money. Hammon also participates in two actions, functioning almost

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

45

identically in both. As a suitor for Rose he threatens to make the separation of Rose and Lacy permanent. Later the planned wedding with Jane threatens to do the same thing to Jane and Rafe. Finally there is Otley, who serves as an important character in the Rose-Lacy action as her father and a principal obstacle in the path of their marriage. In the Eyre plot he is the Lord Mayor and partner who promotes Simon Eyre to the position of Sheriff; and he is the Mayor who impresses Rafe and later mistakes Jane and Rafe for his own daughter and son-in-law. These character cross-pollinations serve the play in a fashion besides the linking of one plot to another. They tend to give a broader view of all the characters because they are portrayed in a variety of activities. Otley is seen not only in his principal role as father-objector, but also as a business man, as host to the Eyre family. Fortunately for himself and the play, Lacy becomes something more than the young man who deserts his army to search for his sweetheart. He becomes a useful member of an admirable group of men, enjoying their beer and aiding a most likeable fellow, Simon Eyre, in his rise to fame and fortune. Hammon alone is merely functional; but perhaps more interest in him would produce concern for his successive failures in his search for a wife. As a matter of fact, Harbage says that Hammon "lingers in our minds as a plaintive and appealing figure; we hope that he found a heart-free maiden at last". 24 The character's forlorn exit is, however, immediately followed by the entrance of Lincoln and Otley, and audience sympathy for Hammon should be quickly changed to glee at the upsetting of these nobles. Dekker also relates the separate actions by including incidents from two actions within one scene unit so that one plot blends into another. Partly because of the characters common to several plots, Dekker is able to present two actions simultaneously, or at least successively. This is a common practice for the last scene of a multiple plot play, but here the technique is brought near to a maximum effectiveness throughout the play. All in all eight scene units of the play include incidents of more than one plot. This number does not include those scenes (I.iii-iv; II.i-ii; IV.i-ii; u

Rival Traditions, p. 175.

46

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

and IV.iii-vi) between which the break appears to be primarily editorial rather than dramatic. A few examples will illustrate the technique. The long, continuous, first scene includes incidents of two plots and introduces the characters of the third plot. Here the characters who appear in two actions link the incidents like a chain. Lincoln and Otley talk; Lacy and his cousin Askew join the discussion; the first two depart, and in a short while the Eyre group enters to talk to Lacy and Askew; finally these two leave and the Eyre group remains to bid farewell to Rafe. Another scene, IILiii, employs a different technique. The party given by Otley is ostensibly to honor Simon Eyre as Sheriff, and as such contributes to Eyre's plot. But Eyre's contribution to the celebration, the dance of the shoemakers, provides the occasion for Lacy to find Rose, and for her to recognize him. One incident, then, contributes to two plots. A final example of scenes with two actions is V.ii, in which yet another variation is employed. Here, the two actions are not simultaneous, but successive and parallel. The wedding party, consisting of Hammond and the masked Jane, is accosted by Rafe and the shoemakers. After the debate the "attackers" are triumphant and Hammon leaves the field, and the "new" couple, Rafe and Jane, remain. At this point another group of "attackers" arrives, Lincoln, Otley, and their supporters, who think the couple to be Rose and Lacy. After a short parody of the first discussion the couple is unmasked and these "attackers" are in a sense repulsed. The cohesive devices discussed thus far might be subject to criticism because most of them are just that - devices. They display a high degree of skill in plotting, in manipulation of several intrigues, but they remain within the limited realm of technique. Unless a reason exists for uniting these apparently disparate actions the play is only an enjoyable exercise in technique. Reasons do exist, however, on a thematic level. The Rafe-Jane story is essentially one of the triumph of love over social obstacles. The original separation is brought about by the wars with France, and although there seems to be some regu-

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

47

lation prohibiting the impressment of a newly married man, Rafe, totally without influence or social position, is subject to the commands of those above him. That it is his position in society that forces him to serve is made quite clear in the play by the direct comparison of his plight with Lacy's solution of the same problem. Despite Lacy's promise to look after him - "Thou shalt not want, as I am a gentleman" (I.i.177) - Rafe's name appears on the casualty lists and he returns to London on crutches. Despite Simon Eyre's silent promise to care for Jane - "But gentle maister and my louing dame, / As you haue alwaies beene a friend to me, / So in my absence thinke vpon my wife" (I.i. 199-201) she is cast out of Eyre's household. Contrasted to the real pain they suffer are the more traditional romantic difficulties of Rose and Lacy, to whom they are linked by the simultaneously sympathetic and affluent Hammon. Jane, believing Rafe to be dead, is in no position to deny the urgings of Hammon. To refuse would be folly. Hammon specifically acknowledges their difference of position; "Thy wealth I know is little, my desires / Thirst not for gold" (III.iv.53-54), he says to Jane. Later he attempts to buy her from Rafe. But with the aid of the shoemakers Rafe overcomes these obstacles, and Jane, given a choice between the two men, states her feelings in very specific terms, "Thou art my husband and these humble weedes / Makes thee more beautiful than all his wealth" (V.ii.55-56). Although Lacy serves as a social contrast to Rafe, he too has problems which stem from differences in social rank. Lincoln and Otley, again and again, state their objections in these terms. Lincoln is most to the point in the last scene of the play when he objects to the King, "Her bloud is too too base" (V.v.101-102). Otley is at once more ambiguous and more realistic. To Lincoln he says, "Too meane is my poore girle for his high birth" (Li. 11), but to Eyre he reveals a prejudice against courtiers and a preference for the moneyed middle class - "There came of late, / A proper Gentleman of faire reuenewes, / Whom gladly I would call sonne in law" (III.iii.32-34). Clearly, to be of the working class is not enough, for when he is told that Rose has eloped he responds, "A fleming butter boxe, a shoomaker / Will she forget

48

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

her birth? Requite my care / With such ingratitude?" (IV.iv.4244). But the two young people do succeed in marrying, and the King speaks the central idea of this action, "Dost thou not know, that loue repects no bloud? / Cares not for difference of birth or state" (V.v. 104-105). This theme is a sub-division of the theme of the play as a whole. It is not only love that does not respect birth or state, but also success in general. Achievement, promotion, advancement of all kinds are pictured in the play. For several of the characters in the play Simon Eyre is instrumental to success. At one point, when Dame Eyre herself soolds the journeymen, Simon reminds her, "haue not I tane you from selling tripes in Eastcheape, and set you in my shop, and made you haile fellowe with Simon Eyre, the shoomaker?" (II.iii.60-62). Her reactions to success become a matter for satire. When Eyre sets out to buy the ship's cargo she has a premonition, "I do feele honour creepe vpon me, and which is more, a certaine rising in my flesh, but let that passe" (Il.iii. 133-135). And when Eyre becomes Sheriff her first concern is for suitable clothes - new shoes, farthingales, French hoods and periwigs. She takes on airs, asking Hans, "Hans pray thee tie my shooe" (III.ii.25), and passing out three penny gratuities to the workmen. The shoemakers, too, rise up the social scale; Hodge takes over Eyre's shop and Firk becomes foreman. Eyre tells them that opportunity is open to all, that "you shall liue to be Sheriues of London" (IILii. 137-138). They take his counsel to heart, and after the celebration at Otley's home Hodge spurs his workmen with, "plie your worke to day, we loytred yesterday, to it pell mei, that we may liue to be Lord Maiors, or Aldermen at least" (IV.i.2-4). Simon Eyre is, of course, the central example of the opportunities for success. As he rises from shoemaker to Alderman, rich man, Sheriff, and Lord Mayor he sings out his refrain "Prince am I none, yet am I princely born" on every occasion. Stoll, referring to the repeated description of "honest" Iago, says, "This various and appropriate repetition is both a simplifying and a

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

49

25

unifying device. . . . " Eyre's refrain performs a similar function in this play. Although one writer, concerned perhaps by the lack of complication in the Eyre action, maintains that the "main plot has to do with the love of young Lacy and the mayor's daughter",28 most critics consider the Eyre action to be central in the play.27 Some have gone to far as to suggest that the other plots were added for mere variety's sake28 or to strengthen an otherwise weak story. But if the Eyre action is indeed the main one, the structure of the play is not typical. Normally a play with several plots contains one plot that is obviously major and one or two others that are just as obviously subordinate to the first. To these plots the term "sub-plot" has been assigned. Sub-plots are usually physically subordinate as well. That is, less time and fewer lines are devoted to them than to the main plot. But here, the LacyRose plot is developed in more detail than the Eyre plot, which in turn is not much "longer" than the action concerned with Rafe and Jane.2" While the term sub-plot could be applied to the RafeJane action, it does not seem suitable for the Lacy-Rose action. More important than these quantitative arguments is the tightly interwoven effect revealed by the description and discussion in the preceding pages. The play is, as Creizenach says, one in which the actions are woven "closely and artistically together".30 They are woven so closely and are so mutually relevant that the structure is very nearly unique. The terms "main plot" and "subplot" just do not apply to this masterfully constructed drama. Rather superficially, some critics have considered the play to 25

Elmer Edgar Stoll, Shakespeare and Other Masters (Cambridge, Mass., 1940), p. 45. ' · Benjamin Brawley, A Short History of the English Drama (New York, 1921), p. 103. 27 Cf. Jones-Davies, I, 128; and Charles Frederick Tucker Brooke and Nathaniel Burton Paradise (eds.), English Drama, 1580-1642 (New York, 1933), p. 264. 18 Thomas Marc Parrott and Robert Hamilton Ball, A Short View of Elizabethan Drama (New York, 1943), p. 108. M Gayley, p. 6. M Wilhelm Creizenach, The English Drama in the Age of Shakespeare, trans. Cecile Hugon (Philadelphia, 1916), p. 256.

50

THE SHOEMAKERS' HOLIDAY OR THE GENTLE CRAFT

have a number of structural weaknesses: the multiplicity of apparently diverse actions; the simplicity of forward movement of the individual actions; the lack of real complication or conflict; and the contradictory time scheme and opportune deaths of the seven aldermen. It has been demonstrated here, however, that the individual actions are well articulated and that skillful devices have been employed to link the various actions and characters in a meaningful, coherent whole. In addition, the playwright seems to have been aware of the problems concerning the aldermen and time scheme, and has softened or disguised the problems somewhat. The other alleged weaknesses are in fact less weak than unique. Some of the structural procedures are unorthodox, outside of accepted practice, but they are both functional and highly effective in the play. Simplicity and multiplicity serve to further the basic meanings of the play - the exciting opportunities that were open to all irrespective of rank in this buoyant view of Elizabethan society. The result is a play that Fluchère properly calls "la comédie la plus entraînante de cette époque. . . . " 8 1

31

Henri Fluchère, "Thomas Dekker et le Drame Bourgeois", Cahiers du Sud, XX (June, 1933), 195.

2 THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

In Shoemakers' Holiday Dekker shaped a mass of incidents and three unrelated actions into a coherent and unified social comedy; in The Pleasant Comedy of Old Fortunatus, with an equally impressive amount of incidents and actions, the playwright was less successful. Although, as will be seen, there are a number of positive structural achievements in the play, it does not have a strongly unified final effect, and the sub-plot tends to dominate at the end, even though its tone contradicts that of the outcome of the main action. In Shoemakers' Holiday Dekker made skillful use of source materials. This aspect of the study of Old Fortunatus is somewhat more complicated, due to the fact that there are several possible sources. One of these is another Fortunatus play, now lost, that was performed by Henslowe's company at least as early as February 1596. At that point in his diary Henslowe recorded the receipts for plays presented in repertory, but, typical of this section of the diary, no playwrights are listed. There are six entries for a Fortunatus play in the spring of 1596; the first of these specifies the First part of Fortunatus while the rest of the entries refer only to Fortunatus.1 A second part is never recorded, but since these records were kept for only a limited period the omission does not argue that the second part did not exist. Hunt assumes, moreover, that both early plays were written by Dekker himself and that the extant play, the subject of this chapter, represents a fusion of the two, plus the necessary changes for the court performance.2 Halstead accepts the existence of two earlier 1 1

Greg, Diary, I, 28 and 30. Hunt, pp. 30-31.

52

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

plays, but questions Hunt's belief that they were necessarily written by Dekker.3 As a matter of fact, there is no real evidence to support either side of the argument. Other authorities go even farther, denying that a second part ever existed.4 All agree, however, that Old Fortunatus, as we know it, is thoroughly Dekker's. The original source, whether known by Dekker or not, does exist, and thus can be compared to Dekker's play. The adventures of Fortunatus and his sons are the subject of a Sixteenth Century prose romance first printed in German.5 In this Volksbuch, which includes some fifty incidents, the heroic central characters are portrayed in a sympathetic fashion. In his play, Dekker has used fewer than a fifth of these incidents, and has changed the tale from one of adventure and romance to one with tragic overtones. The prose narrative, described by Herford as an "incoherent string of adventures",® is typical of the medieval romance narrative in that it is relatively loose in form, and, epiclike, includes many years of adventures. It divides roughly into four parts: Fortunatus' life before he acquires the magic purse; Ms adventures with the purse; his adventures with the magic hat; his sons' adventures with their magic inheritance. As Herford notes, the Dekker play makes use of only three scenes from the first three-quarters of the narrative, concentrating on Andelocia's life. In the absence of a more immediate source, then, the Dekker play is sufficiently removed from the only known extant source to be considered entirely upon its own merits. More importantly, the comparison of the two works reveals once again Dekker's tendency to select only a few situations from a mass of incidents, without sacrificing, as will be seen, clarity of action. In this play, however, unlike Shoemakers' Holiday, the playwright only partial* Halstead, Dekker's Early Work, p. 150. * Cf. Greg, Diary, Π, 179; and Albert Feuillerat, The Composition of Shakespeare's Plays (New Haven, 1953), p. 18. 5 The Volksbuch has been printed in modern German as Fortunatus, ed. Hans Gunther ("Neudrucke deutscher Litteraturwerke des XVI and XVII Jahrhunderts", Vols. CXL-CXLI [Halle, 1914]). Charles H. Herford discusses the relationship between the Dekker play and the folktale in his Studies in the Literary Relations of England and Germany in the Sixteenth Century (Cambridge, Eng., 1886). « Herford, p. 212.

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

53

ly succeeds in bringing to the incidents a consistent point of view. The inconsistencies will be examined at length later in this chapter. THE FORTUNATUS-ANDELOCIA ACTION The action most closely associated with source, and the one which gives to the play its title is that concerned with Fortunatus and his son, Andelocia. It turns on the consequences of the choice made by Fortunatus and the uses Fortunatus and Andelocia make of the gift by Fortune. l.i The old man is first seen in the forest, lost, penniless, and starving, ironically debating with his echo.7 Fortune's entrance quickly establishes the basic outline of the story. She is accompanied by four kings who had been beneficiaries of her aid and who are now broken and degraded. It should be obvious to the viewer, if not to Fortunatus himself, that the price for good fortune is high and inevitable, that Fortunatus will fall to Fortune's footstool. Her warnings, both before and after the choice, are clear but unheeded. As the scene ends, the next is prepared for by Fortunatus' statement that he will share some of his new-found wealth with his sons. I.ii These sons, Andelocia and Ampedo, are introduced in the next scene in circumstances almost parallel with those of their father at the beginning of the play. Their talk, too, is of fasting and the inequities of fortune. Their contrasting natures - Andelocia's glib amorality and Ampedo's bitter and melancholy virtue - are established at once. As Fortune came to him, Fortunatus comes to his sons, bearing gifts of gold. The sons react characteristically; Andelocia greedily demands half of his servant's gift from Fortunatus, and the miserly Ampedo cautions his father against generosity. The scene ends with Fortunatus' description of the adventures he plans with the Turkish Emperor, Prester John, the Cham of Tartary, and the Sultan of Babylon. Chorus 8 Most of these adventures are not dramatized, however. The playwright makes use of the chorus device to summarize and describe Fortunatus' adventures and mishaps, referring again to the 7

Creizenach, page 349, noting that the echo device is "frequently resorted to by the Renaissance poets", considers Dekker's use of the device to be "particularly amusing". 8 Bowers does not provide scene numbers for the chorus speeches in the play. This speech follows the indication of Act II, but precedes the indication of Scene 1 of that act.

54

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

error of the choice of wealth. The Chorus then introduces the next scene, the meeting with the Sultan of Babylon. II.i The scene in Babylon parallels to a degree the first scene of the play. In I.i Fortunatas gained possession of the magic purse; in this scene he acquires the magic hat. There is some talk of Fortunatus' escapades with the purse, and he does promise to make a copy of it for the Sultan, but the main action is the trick that Fortunatus plays on the Sultan. The scene is linked with the next through Fortunatus* magic "wish" to be with his sons in Cyprus. H.ii The results of Fortunatus' largess to his sons are depicted in the opening of the scene. Andelocia, in gorgeous apparel, is told by his servant that he has squandered away all his gold. Andelocia must borrow from Ampedo. At this point Fortunatus arrives from Babylon, by the power of the magic hat, to tell his sons of his new possession. But at what he considers the apex of his life - "on Fortunes wings I ride,/ and now sit in the height of human pride" (II.ii.223-224) - Fortune, herself, enters to claim her due. His repentance comes too late, and, after urging his sons to hold their inheritance jointly and to conceal the sources of their powers, he dies and is spirited away by Fortune. In spite of Fortunatus' commands, Andelocia proceeds to divide the gifts, and Ampedo agrees, denying any responsibility for the action. Andelocia announces that he will visit the English court, where the Prince of Cyprus is wooing Agripyne, the daughter of the English king, Athelstane. Hl.i In England Andelocia continues his riotous ways, passing out gifts to everyone and promising to entertain the King and his court with a feast. He is immediately enamoured of Agripyne and assumes that he can buy her love, but he has been so lavish with his gifts that she and her father plan to steal his source of wealth. In a scene not dramatized Andelocia completes the violation of his father's death-bed instructions by revealing the magic powers of the purse. This results in the theft of the purse by Agripyne. The purse gone, Andelocia is forced to sneak out of England, planning to steal the magic hat from his brother to compensate for his own loss. Chorus The Chorus recounts the theft of the hat and Andelocia's renewed determination to regain the purse. He recoups his riches by stealing from jewelers in Genoa and then uses the jewels to gain access in England to the Princess. With the aid of the magic hat, he transports her to a wilderness. All of these actions are described by the Chorus. IV.i Once he has her in his power, however, he allows his lust for her once again to control him. He threatens to keep her from England, but offers her the world. When she says that she is dying of thirst he climbs an apple tree to pick some fruit. She complains of the sun and he throws down his magic hat to shade her. Naturally, though without

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

55

knowledge of the hat's magic properties, she wishes herself back to England. She now possesses both purse and hat. As after the original loss of the purse, Andelocia violently repents his misuse of the magic gifts. The apple trees are also enchanted, and the fruit he has eaten has caused horns to grow on his head. In depths of despair equalling that of his father in Li, Andelocia too is visited by Fortune, who is this time accompanied by Vice and Virtue, the planters of the two enchanted trees. Andelocia begs forgiveness, and, when promised aid in regarding the purse and hat, he vows to "gild my soule with none but thoughts diuine" (IV.i.217). Fortune says she will help him to England where his brother and servant await him. IV.ii Andelocia, disguised as a peddler, sells Vice's horn-growing apples to several members of the English court, including Agripyne, by playing on their greed and vanity. When Ampedo first confronts Andelocia to accuse him of the theft of the hat Andelocia quickly forgets his vow of virtue and tells him to go "hang your selfe" (IV.ii. 129). V.i Agripyne, Montrose, and Longaville have grown horns from eating Vice's apples and no physicians have been able to aid them. This time disguised as a French doctor, Andelocia cures the two men with Virtue's apples. When he spies the hat and purse he seizes Agripyne and spirits her away again with the two magic gifts to meet his brother and servant. All of the courtiers, including Montrose and Longaville, who realize that the French doctor is also the Irish peddler who duped them, rush out to search for Andelocia and the Princess. V.ii After teasing Agripyne for a while Andelocia sends her off to her father with one of Virtue's apples. By this time, however, he has completely repudiated his virtuous vows, and after returning the magic hat to Ampedo he goes off to dress himself in finery for more riotous living. Ampedo, disgusted by the results of the magic gifts, burns the magic hat just before Montrose and Longaville arrive to capture him. When the resplendent Andelocia returns they bind him, too. Ampedo dies and the two noblemen strangle Andelocia to gain possession of the magic purse. With his death the purse loses its magic properties, and each of the murderers believes the other has deceived him. As they struggle, the rest of the English court arrives to arrest them for murder. At this point Fortune, Vice, and Virtue arrive to claim the bodies of Fortunatus' sons. Virtue and Fortune pardon all except Montrose and Longaville, who are doomed by Vice to wander with tormented consciences. Fortune then restores the magic to the purse and presents it to the English king, cautioning him to use the wealth wisely, "England shall ne're be poore, if England striue,/ Rather by vertue, then by wealth to thriue" (V.ii.259-260).

56

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

The point of attack in this action is quite early. Fortunatas is first seen at his lowest state, completely destitute, lost and starving, and so utterly alone that he is reduced to talking with his echo and the tree under which he wishes to sleep. He is taken through the process of acquiring the magic purse and hat, and finally to death. His sons also begin at the point of starvation, receive wealth, then the magic gifts, great success, and again death. If Dekker had the Volksbuch materials he could indeed have begun even earlier with Fortunato' life prior to the meeting with Fortune. In fact, the Prince of Cyprus hints at this early life to King Athelstane: Of honourable bloud, and more renownd In forreine kingdomes (whither his proud spirit, Plum'd with ambitious fethers, caries him) Then in his natiue Countrie. But last day, The father and the sonnes were through their riots, Poore and disdainde of all, but now they glister, More bright than Midas: if some damned fiend Fed not his bags, this golden pride would end. (III.i.318-325)

Obviously, the playwright knew something of the materials in the first part of the Volksbuch, whether or not he knew the Volksbuch itself. He chose to dramatize the events beginning with Fortune's first appearance. Apparently Dekker's interest in the story centers on the effects of the magic gifts rather than on the life stories of the heroes. Other than the Prince's statement quoted above, no information or exposition of earlier events is given in the play, and none is needed. Fortune, in her discussion with the captive kings and with Fortunatus, does establish her past activities and her nature, which anticipate the outcome of the story. The general articulation of the plot is regular and clear enough. Each scene ends with a statement of intention that prepares for the next scene. The two chorus speeches at the beginnings of Acts II and IV efficiently summarize incidents which are not dramatized but which are necessary to the continuity of the action. With this kind of preparation a new locale and changes of characters never appear to be arbitrary or surprising despite the fact that many of

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

57

the events are magical, and some of the characters are supernatural. The effect might be described as similar to that attempted by Coleridge in his contributions to Lyrical Ballads.. The general process of construction is, however, one in which the action moves forward one step at a time. Each scene prepares for the next, but there is never preparation for incidents well in advance. With the exception of Fortunatus' plans referred to in the discussion of I.ii, the characters have no long-term objectives. They plan or consider only one activity at a time. Fortune predicts and prepares the listener for the play's outcome, but only in very general terms. Such a plan or process is faithful to the narrativeadventure source in that there is a continuous effect of surprise surprise, but not the shock of disbelief. For example, the viewer knows from the chorus speech at the beginning of Act II that the next scene (II.i) will be in Babylon, but not that Fortunatus will steal the Sultan's magic hat. The viewer knows that Andelocia is going to England (IILi), but not that he will attempt to seduce the Princess and lose his magic purse. This procedure is followed in the play almost without exception. It combines the charm of the adventure tale with the artistry of good dramatic construction. The technique does introduce a minor problem with the use of the two disguises late in the play. The other plays, with the exception of Match Me in London, which involve disguise situations, also include announcement of the intention to use the device, and usually the specific identity to be employed. Paul Krieder notes that Shakespeare creates a situation in which masquerade is implied, although details are not given, or he develops a clear definite explanation of the disguise which is to be adopted.» Andelocia, as the Irish peddler, is readily identifiable to the audience by means of the apples, but there is nothing to serve that end for the French doctor disguise. But surely any skillful actor, who has been appearing on stage almost from the beginning of the play, and whose voice and mannerisms have become familiar to an • Paul V. Kreider, Repetition pp. 7-8.

in Shakespeare's Plays (London, 1941),

58

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

audience, can identify himself to that audience no matter how complete the external change happens to be. The two chorus speeches, discussed as having summarizing functions, also serve to bridge the two wide time gaps in the action. Halstead believes the speeches to be signs that Dekker was condensing the two plays mentioned above and that the incidents related in the two chorus speeches are those incidents which appeared in the earlier dramas.10 Since the summarized incidents appear in the original source, the Volksbuch, the presence of the Chorus does not necessarily support the theory that two plays were condensed. That is, the Chorus may be summarizing incidents Dekker found in the prose narrative, rather than in the lost plays. It is a fact that the incidents are in the Volksbuch·, it is only conjecture that they also appeared in the lost play or plays. The speeches by the Chorus do, however, have two direct functions in the play as it now stands: to bridge time gaps, and to provide continuity of action. The play is composed of three units of events, each of which comprises a relatively short period of time. The first is the beginning of Fortunatas' career with Fortune's gift of the magic purse, I.i and ii. The second is concerned with the end of Fortunatus' life and the beginning of Andelocia's adventures, Il.i, ii, and IILi. The last unit includes the recovery of the magic gifts and the deaths of Ampedo and Andelocia. Each of these units is separated from the others by a considerable amount of time. The generalized nature of a chorus speech suggests or supports an impression of the passage of time. The Chorus also serves to connect the units. Particularly in the case of the Act IV chorus speech, the incidents mentioned are necessary as transitions from one unit to the next. Andelocia is last seen immediately after losing the purse to Agripyne. To see him next in the wilderness with purse, hat, and Agripyne would be intolerably confusing. The Chorus is introduced to relate the necessary intervening events: his return to Cyprus and theft of the hat; his use of the hat to acquire a wealth of jewels; his use of the jewels to gain access to Agripyne once again; and his use of the hat to kidnap her. »

Halstead, Dekkefs Early Work, p. 158.

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

59

In addition to these structural functions in the action the Chorus also operates in a fashion not unlike the Chorus in classical Greek drama - it tends to generalize the action and ideas with which the story is concerned. The second chorus speech begins: Gentels, if ere you haue beheld the passions, The combats of his soule who being a king, By some vsurping hand hath beene deposde From all his royalties: euen such a soule, Such eyes, such heart swolne big with sighes and teares, The star-crost sonne of Fortunatus weares. aV. 1-6) Alone, this statement could perhaps be described as merely an extended poetic comparison. The effect of generalization, however, is bolstered by the content of the first chorus speech: The world to the circumference of heauen, Is as a small point in Geometrie, Whose greatnes is so little, that a lesse Cannot be made: into that narrow roome, Your quicke imaginations we must charme, To turne that world: and (turn'd) againe to part it Into large kingdomes, and within one moment, . . . (being cald by some vnluckie starre,) (For happines neuer continues long,) .

.

. (Riches make all men proude).

.

. . (I.i. 1-18)

Marie Thérèse Jones-Davies describes the play as being unified by a fatal choice and its consequences, as having a linear construction. She further comments that the Dekker play would be a model of the type if it were not for the fact that it is double, divided by Fortunatus' death. 11 Does this indeed accurately describe the play? The idea of the fatal choice first appears early in the play. Clearly, in the first scene, Fortune is the typical blind and malicious dispenser of good luck. The Kings ask her, "how haue we offended thy proud eyes, / That thus we should be spurnd and 11

Jones-Davies, II, 173.

60

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

trod vpon" (I.i. 86-87), but the only reason she gives them is that "This world is Fortunes ball wherewith she sports" (I.i.101). According to her, Fortunatus' choice dooms him, not her whim, "But now goe dwell with cares and quickly die" (I.i.312). Fortune's other "minions" had apparently made the same kind of choice, and they attribute their falls to her malevolence alone, denying even the responsibility of the choice. For Fortunatus, however, it is the act of choosing incorrectly that dooms him, and once the choice has been made there is no alternative or hope. When Fortune comes to collect her due at the height of his power the element of inevitability is once again described: Thy Sunne like glorie hath aduanc'd her selfe Into the top of prides Meridian, And downe amaine it comes. . . . (II.ii.231-233)

And for all that has been depicted of Fortunatus' use of the gift this seems the only possible reason, but she continues with: Thou hast eaten Metals, and abusde my giftes, Hast plaid the Ruffian, wasted that in ryots, Which as a blessing I bestowed on thee. (II.ii.235-237)

This seems to suggest that his end would have been different if he had treated the gift in a different fashion, if he had not misused it. This misuse is not dramatized in the play except in his theft of the magic hat. He is seen providing generously for his sons, and the chorus speech merely mentions pride, without illustration or example. Fortune's gift was originally given to Fortunatus with the condition that it would be passed on to his sons and retain its magic for the duration of their lives. Though she has just told Fortunatus that he is to die in despair because he misused her gift, Fortune foretells similar deaths for the sons unconditionally, "No, foole, tis now too late; as death strikes thee, / So shall their ends sudden and wretched bee" (II.ii.251-252). His fatal choice is to be visited upon his sons.

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

61

When Andelocia dies, however, misuse of Fortune's gifts again appears to be the direct cause, not his father's fatal choice. Andelocia recognizes his sins: Fortune, forgiue me, I deserue thy hate, My seife haue made my selfe a reprobate: Vertue, forgiue me, for I haue transgrest Against thy lawes, my vowes are quite forgot, And therefore shame is faine to my sinnes lot. (V.ii.168-172)

Whereas Fortunatas died believing that a choice of wisdom rather than riches would have saved him, Andelocia equates the powers of the magic hat with wisdom or knowledge, and acknowledges a misuse of both gifts. In other words, he specifically recognizes his personal responsibility for his actions and his end. Fortunatus feared death; Andelocia, because of shame and remorse, welcomes it. The concern with responsiblity in the action has undergone a gradual change from beginning to end. As noted above, the captive Kings denied any control over their fates. Fortune had maliciously befriended them and then whimsically brought them to heel. At his death Fortunatus realized that he had chosen fatally, that he should have wished for wisdom rather than riches. Andelocia brings the idea to its fullest realization and comes closest to a tragic awareness of individual responsibility. He considers riches and knowledge amoral in themselves, fatal only when misused. Unfortunately the development of this concept in the action is irregular and at times quite vague. The contrasting tragic views are not brought together and compared. This lack of emphasis blurs the essentially serious nature of the play, and perhaps prompts one writer's comment that it "has very little of the medieval seriousness of purpose" characteristic of works employing the wheel of fortune.12 It is clear in the end that personal responsibility is paramount, but the stages by which this concept is reached, the alternative views, are obscured and under-developed. 18

Willard Farnham, The Medieval (Berkeley, 1936), p. 376.

Heritage

of Elizabethan

Tragedy

62

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

Rather than developing his theme logically and clearly, the playwright has produced a sense of confusion, an effect of change of direction or purpose. The second observation made by Jones-Davies noted above is that the structure is weakened by being composed of two parts: Fortunatus' adventures with the magic purse, and Andelocia's adventures with the purse and hat. That description implies that each part is in turn dramatized and then terminated, and that the first terminal cuts the action in two, giving the effect of two joined wholes rather than parts of one whole. This is not the case. Fortunatus appears in four scenes. The first and third of these scenes dramatize the acquisition of the two magic gifts; the second scene introduces the sons; and the last depicts his death and the passing on of the gifts to the sons. The rest of the action dramatizes Andelocia's use of the gifts. Jones-Davies' description is actually misleading, and is based on the theory that two plays were fused, rather than on an examination of the play itself. For one thing the peak or climax of the Fortunatus story is too early in the total structure of the play, and the causes or circumstances that lead to that point are under-developed. It has been noted that the excesses of which Fortunatus is accused by Fortune are not even dramatized. Even his death scene, which in the view that the action is double should be climactic, is de-emphasized. He dies in the middle of the scene, and once he is convinced that Fortune will prevail he devotes his remaining moments to an explanation of the magic purse and hat. The sons then discuss their inheritance and divide it, with a minimum of mourning for their father. The main action of the scene, therefore, consists in the transference of the gifts from father to sons, not in the father's death. The focus of the story is not divided; it is clearly on Andelocia. Although the scenes in which Fortunatus appears do contain effective theatrical incident they are essentially expository. In order to open the play after the sons have acquired the magic gifts, the playwright would have had to relate or narrate a considerable amount of antecedent action. Instead, he chose to dramatize much of that antecedent action, to depict rather than to narrate. Certainly it is a tenet of dramatic composition that exposition is

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

63

better when dramatized than when related. That choice, however, involves certain problems. Dekker has put Fortunatus in a position of undeserved emphasis and has created a kind of structural imbalance which makes the exposition appear to be a self-contained action itself. The action is not double, as Jones-Davies maintains; it is somewhat niisproportioned. But Dekker's decision seems to have been a wise one. One beneficial effect does accrue from this situation - that is, the attention to Fortunatus serves to generalize and to increase the number of examples of those who misuse Fortune's gifts. It was noted above that the Chorus has a similar generalizing function. In terms of time, the play has been discussed as being divided into three parts: Act I; Acts II and III; and Acts IV and V. The action, too, can be broken into three movements, but they do not correspond strictly to the time division. A strict correspondence would divide the play into three independent units. The movements of action are these: Act I through Act II.ii.314 is a kind of exposition, the gaining of the magic powers and the establishment of the conditions of their use; Act II.ii.315 through Act IV.i. I l l dramatizes Andelocia's first failure, in which he ignores particularly his father's warnings; Act IV.i. 112 through the end of the play is concerned with his misuse of his second chance with the gifts and his ultimate death. The points of crisis and climax correspond to these divisions of the action. Fortunatus' death-bed warnings and the passing on of the two magic gifts constitute the first crisis. The sons have, at this point, the alternatives of mutual use of the gifts and secrecy, or division of the gifts and failure to keep them secret. As noted above, however, different consequences to follow these alternatives are only apparent, since Fortune has already doomed the sons. But it is neither neglect of the warnings nor fated doom that brings Andelocia to his first downfall. The sons immediately break the first condition set by their father - joint possession of the hat and purse - and the second condition of secrecy is broken in a described rather than dramatized scene (after III.i.356). It is the symbolic eating of Vice's fruit which makes Andelocia lose both purse and hat, and which grows the horns on his head in

64

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

the wilderness. Once again a certain vagueness of plan weakens the play. The second crisis is clearer, and since it contributes directly to the climax of the action it should be considered the main crisis of the plot. It occurs at the end of Act IV.i. Andelocia resists Vice's temptations and eats the fruit of Virtue's tree, which rids him of the horns. Fortune instructs him in the means by which he may regain the magic gifts and cautions him, "But if thou lose our fauours once againe, / To taste her sweetes, those sweetes must prooue thy bane" (IV.i.224-225). This moment and the alternatives are clear enough, and Andelocia can begin afresh with potential for either vice or virtue. The climax, of course, is Andelocia's death, and it is brought about by his repudiation of his vows. Specifically he says: pleasure is my sweete mistris, I weare her loue in my Hat, and her soule in my heart: I haue sworne to bee merry, and in spite of Fortune and the blackebrowd destinies, ile neuer be sad. (V.ii.58-61) Such a statement motivates his death on the thematic level of the play. The murderers themselves are also provided with a motivation, a double motivation in fact. The two men desire to gain possession of the magic purse and hat, and since greed and ambition have already been established as part of their characters this would be sufficient motive. Dekker has, however, compounded the motive by letting these men be victims of Vice's fruit sold by Andelocia, so that revenge is added to greed. Certain potential incidents in the plot have been omitted. As noted, Fortunatas' life story has been restricted to the scenes in which he gains possession of the purse and hat, and passes them on to his sons. The effect of this selection is to place more emphasis on Andelocia and to relegate Fortunatus to an expository function in the play. Since the source, whether Volksbuch or two plays, has too many situations for a single play, such a concentration seems to be necessary and worthwhile. The incident in which Agripyne tempts Andelocia into divulging the secret of his wealth is also avoided, by means of a curious device. After the dance in IILi, the two young people withdraw,

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

65

leaving Athelstane to question the Prince of Cyprus about his countryman's background. The Prince withdraws and the King speculates on the possibilities of Agripyne's theft. Then, some fifty lines after Agripyne and Andelocia exited but within the same scene unit, a curtain is drawn revealing Andelocia asleep and the theft accomplished. The device is effective; it moves the plot forward swiftly and efficiently. If dramatized, Andelocia's weakening would necessarily require more time or lines than those used in the "cover-scene" with the Prince and King Athelstane. The device also permits the Elizabethan boy-actor to maintain a certain propriety of action within his female characterization. He is not called upon to tempt and seduce Andelocia before the eyes of the audience. The fact that the Chorus relates certain incidents at the beginning of Act IV allows the plot to move ahead quickly, and maintains a concentration on the scenes in which Agripyne appears. All of these omitted actions are incidents which merely clear the way for the next important incident, the loss of the hat. Ampedo presents a peculiar problem in the action of the story. The plot requires his death within the story in order to bring Fortune's gift to its predicted end. That is, the source of wealth was to stop with the death of Fortunatus' sons. In the Volksbuch his death is acceptable because Fortunatus and his sons are portrayed as folk-heroes whose deaths are due to the whims of Fortune. There is as much justification for Ampedo's death as there is for his brother's and father's. The play, however, has introduced an element of personal responsibility, and some care has been taken to demonstrate the causes behind Andelocia's death. Ampedo is certainly not an attractive character in the play; he is depicted as a contrast to his brother, but not a particularly desirable alternative. In the few scenes in which he appears he is a kind of professional practitioner of virtue who heightens his appearance of virtue by harping on Andelocia's failings. Even so, this aspect is not developed to the point that his death is justified. There is the hint that Andelocia is responsible for his brother's death, and certainly the fact that Ampedo's death immediately precedes his own end intensifies his own remorse. But this again

66

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

is not sufficiently developed. After the deaths, Virtue, somewhat weakly, attempts to explain Ampedo's end: The Idiots cap I once wore on my head, Did figure him, those that (like him) doe muffle Vertue in clouds, and care not how shee shine, lie make their glorie like to his decline: He made no vse of me, but like a miser, Lockt vp his wealth in rustie barres of sloth: His face was beautifull, but wore a maske, And in the worlds eyes seemd a Blackamore. So perish they that so keepe vertue poore. (V.ii.271-279)

It is difficult to imagine the story without the character of Ampedo, but his presence created a difficulty that the playwright did not solve. In conclusion, then, of this particular action, Fortunatus' adventures covered the world and his excesses took many forms. Andelocia, too, was guilty of a variety of sins against Virtue, but most are merely related as a general background. The crucial adventures with Agripyne are treated in detail. They are a kind of developed example of the type of activities in which the two men participated. In this sense the action is not in the least episodic, in the derogatory sense of that term. In the action Dekker has provided a glimpse of the wide range of incidents found in the German source. This glimpse is used as a general background for the detailed examination of a single part of Andelocia's life.

THE VIRTUE-VICE ACTION

The second action in the play is openly allegorical, consisting primarily of a contest for supremacy between the personifications of Vice and Virtue. It is marked by such formal and masque-like characteristics as a debate, symbolic trees which bear the fruits of Vice and Virtue, and hymns in praise of the two personified attributes. Authorities agree that additions to the play for a court performance consist, in large part, of the three scenes of this action. Bernard Spivack, for example, says that "Vice, Virtue,

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

67

and Fortune . . . are, in fact, the machinery of a moral masque which Dekker added to an older version of the play when he revised it for court performance." 18 Since the unrevised version of the play is not extant, such opinions, though logical, can be theoretical at best. The logic rests on two points. The masquelike scenes were more common in court drama than in plays written for the public theatres. Secondly, this action concludes with a direct tribute to Queen Elizabeth. I.iii Fortune, introduced earlier in the first plot discussed, escorts Vice and Virtue and their priests to a spot in the wilderness. Vice taunts Virtue for her lack of followers in the world, and the two decide to plant fruit trees and to dedicate the spot as a place of worship and conflict between the two. Fortune criticizes Virtue for her mean outward appearance and Vice challenges her opposite to a contest. Vice's fruit is to cause horns to grow on anyone who eats it, while Virtue's evil-tasting apples will have the power to remove the horns. IV.i As noted in the discussion of the Andelocia action, the first victim is attracted to the golden appearance of Vice's fruit. He eats, grows horns, and falls into a deep sleep. When awakened by the three allegorical characters he realizes that it was Vice's fruit that made him deformed, but he is still repulsed by Virtue's appearance. Fortune identifies Virtue to him and he eats the bitter but beneficial fruit she offers him, redeeming himself temporarily. The contest between Vice and Virtue is at a stalemate, but both are certain of their eventual victory. V.ii In the last scene Vice apparently triumphs. Andelocia, the specific area of their contest, has lapsed back into vice. Virtue, however, enters splendidly dressed, heading a triumphal procession. This time she debates with both Vice and Fortune, who offers to submit to the judgment of Athelstane's court. Virtue demands that Queen Elizabeth judge, and the selection alone of such a virtuous judge drives Vice from the field. Fortune, too, acknowledges Virtue's triumph, but Virtue maintains that she herself is but a shadow of the virtue that is Elizabeth. The action and the play end in a triumphant hymn to Virtue. The outcome of this simple action is forecast in its first scene. Virtue, though apparently subservient to Fortune, and weak compared to Vice, says: Wisedome I know hath with her blessed wings 15

Bernard Spivack, Shakespeare and the Allegory of Evil (New York, 1958), p. 310.

68

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATUS

Fled to some bosome: if I meete that brest, There ile erect my temple, and there rest. Fortune nor Vice, shall then ere haue the power, (By their loose eyes) to intice my Paramour; Then will I cast off this deformitie, And shine in glorie, and triumph to see You conquerd at my feete, that tread on me. (I.iii.80-87) She finds that haven in Elizabeth. As in the first action, there is here an element of confusion, of divided purpose. It appears that Andelocia is to be symbolic of the struggle between Vice and Virtue. In effect the two combatants chose their ground of battle and struggled, and then the loser denied that that had been the battleground. There is no relationship between the action of the plot and its outcome. This must be accounted a serious dramatic flaw even in the unrealistic atmosphere of the morality play.

THE ORLEANS-PRINCE OF CYPRUS ACTION

The third action of the play is a love contest between two suitors for Princess Agripyne. Unlike the Vice and Virtue plot there is some basis for this action in the Volksbuch source, although it is treated in a freer manner than was the Fortunatus-Andelocia action. Ill.i Orleans, who is one of a number of foreign soldiers detained as hostages at the English court, tells his friend, Galloway, of his unrequited love for Agripyne and his fears for the success of the Prince of Cyprus. The Princess and her royal suitor enter, and Orleans' love becomes obvious. She sends him off on an errand and laughs at all men in love. The Prince, therefore, unsuccessfully attempts to hide his feelings for her. Later her father assures the Prince of his ultimate success. IV.ii When Agripyne returns from the wilderness the Prince asks her for her decision. She agrees to abide by her father's wishes. Athelstane agrees to the marriage and announces that the wedding will take place within the week. V.i The Prince of Cyprus comes to view the two nobles' horns and discovers that the Princess, too, has grown horns. He cancels the wed-

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

69

ding and leaves to return to Cyprus. Orleans, however, remains constant despite the deformity, claiming to love an inner beauty. Athelstane and Agripyne agree to his suit on the condition that he remove her from the sight of the world.

This rudimentary action hardly deserves to be termed a plot. The first scene, longest of the three, promises a series of developments, none of which is exploited. Agripyne's pride in her power to bewitch men is punished by a deformity. Orleans' vow to love "nothing but deformitie" (III.i.68) is fulfilled when he remains faithful, but none of the conflict between the two men, or between the men and the woman, is dramatized. The end of the play, in which Agripyne is included in the general pardon, includes no mention of the outcome of this action - whether, for instance, Orleans will be allowed to keep the fruits of his constancy now that she is once more desirable to others. The playwright has dramatized enough to provoke curiosity and expectation, and too much to brush it aside and neglect it. The only solution to the complete absence of a climax for the action exists in the possibility of some pantomime or dumb show in the last scene. A pairing off of Orleans with Agripyne might satisfy part of this lack, but no indication of such a conclusion remains in the published play. The situation is similar to Truth's absence at the conclusion of Whore of Babylon, discussed in a later chapter.

RELATIONSHIP OF THE ACTIONS

The variety of actions, which could be described separately as an adventure-tragedy, a moral allegory, and a courtly romance, has prompted comment by various critics. Henry H. Adams stated "the basic story of the fall of Fortunatas and his sons is essentially a domestic tragedy, even though Dekker chose to call the play a comedy".14 Madeleine Doran considered it "primarily a fairy tale", but combined with a "right morality".15 This variety of opinion can be summed up by F. S. Boas' statement that, 14

Henry Hitch Adams, English Domestic York, 1943), p. 82. 15 Doran, p. 110.

or Homiletic

Tragedy (New

70

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

A 'pleasant comedy', is a singular title for a piece in which the three chief characters meet with a tragic doom. But it is difficult to classify a play which combines the allegorical figures of a morality, the music and pageantry of a masque, and the naif supernaturalism of a fairystory.18 The fact that a play is difficult to classify does not necessarily indicate shortcomings in the play. It may suggest, on the other hand, that the playwright has written a unique ajid highly imaginative work. The moods of the three actions, moreover, complement one another. There is in each action a degree of seriousness, and each has at least elements of the supernatural and magical. There are scattered moments of humor in both the Andelocia and the Orleans action, but the humor tends toward satire rather than farce or burlesque, blending more readily, therefore, with the basically serious nature of the play as a whole. The problem of contradictory tone that is encountered, as will be seen, in Honest Whore II is not present here. The combination results in what Ellis-Fermor terms, a "unity of atmosphere".17 ARRANGEMENT OF SCENES

There are in the play fewer problems of chronology than in Shoemakers' Holiday, partly because of Dekker's use of the Chorus as discussed above, and partly because one of the actions - the moral allegory - exists "outside" of reality and the demands of time. The addition of the Vice-Virtue and Orleans actions to the Andelocia action tends to support the Chorus in its function of providing an effect of elapsed time. For example, the first scene of the Vice-Virtue plot is introduced at one of the time unit junctions. As noted, the first two scenes of the play comprised a consecutive time unit, separated from Il.i. by a considerable period of chronological time. The Vice-Virtue scene helps the Chorus give the appearance of elapsed time between I.ii and Il.i. 14

Frederick S. Boas, An Introduction p. 151. 17 Ellis-Fermor, p. 121.

to Stuart Drama (London, 1948),

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

71

Later in the play the first Orleans scene separates the Fortunatas death scene in Cyprus from Andelocia's first appearance in the court of England, even though Orleans and Andelocia are here in the same scene unit. In addition, if there is no intermission in the performance at the end of Act II, the Orleans scene allows the actor who portrays Andelocia to change to a more sumptuous costume for the English court. The Satyrs who danced about Fortunatus' body in Il.ii probably were portrayed by the same dancers who in the next scene danced in court. Orleans provides them, too, with time for the costume change. Something of the same sort occurs in IV.ii and V.i. At the end of IV.i Andelocia is in the desert. He next enters disguised as an Irish peddler. The thirty or so lines between his two appearances which are devoted to the betrothal of the Prince of Cyprus and Agripyne are just about enough time for the actor to don the new costume and pick up his properties. At the end of that scene he exists as the Irish peddler, only to return in the next scene, V.i, as the French doctor. Between these appearances the Prince abandons Agripyne and Orleans reaffirms his love for her, all in eighty five lines. Once again Andelocia has little more than time to change disguises. The regularity with which the scenes of the Orleans plot provide for the necessities of the stage creates the suspicion that that is their prime function. All playwrights must deal with problems of this nature, and the Elizabethan playwright, writing plays with many short scenes and frequent costume and disguise changes, had more than his share. Such an explanation, for example, partially accounts for the Touchstone disgression on courtly quarreling at the end of As You Like It which provides the time for the actor playing Rosalind to change from his male costume into a wedding dress. But an explanation of the technical causes for a scene does not excuse the playwright for writing a weak or extraneous scene. Thomas Raysor, writing about such situations in Shakespeare, distinguishes "between those scenes which serve an essentially dramatic function and those which represent nothing more than a theatrical convention of handling time".18 The scenes in the Orleans action are interesting enough, 18

Thomas M. Raysor, "The Aesthetic Significance of Shakespeare's

72

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

but, as noted, are abandoned short of a proper climax or unraveling. They serve their theatrical, but not their dramatic, function. Besides solving chronology difficulties and accommodating stage effects, the arrangement of scenes shows other signs of skillful construction. The Andelocia and the Vice-Virtue actions are so arranged that one scene contains the crisis for both actions, IV.i. As discussed earlier, Andelocia's vow to make virtuous use of the magic gifts is the critical moment in his action. At the same time Vice and Virtue make the apparently critical decision to resolve their struggle in the person of Andelocia. This defeat is not, however, accepted by Virtue, and although the two actions have a common crisis they do not have a common climax. The two climaxes are not ordered according to the cause and effect pattern implied by the crisis, and thus the basic structure of the play is marred. Ideally, Andelocia's fall should cause Virtue's own fall, but in the last scene the pattern is changed. The causes of this breakdown may go back to the playwright's selection of his materials. The Andelocia story, for all its symbolic actions, deals with apparently realistic human individuals. The other action is an elemental struggle between abstractions. In a sense the latter does not exist in historical time and its ending has the effect of finality. Virtue triumphs over Fortune and Vice, not in an individual skirmish, but for all time. Hardin Craig describes the actions of figures in a morality play as follows: Abstractions cannot express dubieties of mind and struggles of conscience, for they are not human beings. Mankind in the abstract must behave positively and objectively in accordance with an embodied concept of human nature and human action. Therefore when Temptation invites Homo or Humanum Genus to yield, he does so without inward struggle, because his genus habitually does just that, and, when Repentance asks him to return to his better nature, this abstraction is suddenly and immediately in a state of repentance, leaving individual struggles to individual human beings. His course of life is also both formalized and predetermined. He is born in innocence, although conHandling of Time", Studies in Philology, XXXII (April, 1935), 208. Raysor elaborates on Shakespeare's techniques in these matters in "Intervals of Time in Shakespeare's Tragedies", Journal of English and Germanic Philology, XXXVII (January, 1938), pp. 21-47.

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATUS

73

ceived in sin, but his nature obliges him to yield to temptation and plunge into sin; from sin he may or may not emerge into salvation.18 Since Andelocia is an individual he may struggle with himself, though his actions in the play do conform pretty much to those of his genus described above. The materials of Dekker's story, however, dictate that the playwright must end Andelocia's life in violent despair. But there is just as much inevitability in the action of the personifications. Frank Ristine describes the inevitability, the rigjd pattern of the morality play as follows: In its serious theme and triumphant ending... the latter form carries on the preparation for the tragicomedy that the miracle play began. The moral conflict between the forces of good and evil gave plenty of opportunity for an action leading to a tragic catastrophe; but a happy turn of fortune saves the day, the end is crowned with a victory for virtue, and poetic justice is meted out to all.20 This is the tradition upon which Dekker drew for Virtue's triumph over Vice in his play. Vice and Virtue axe natural adversaries; they must conflict, but in ultimate moral terms Virtue must triumph finally, especially when they are in direct contact. As long as they each work separately on an individual, as do the Good and Evil Angels in Doctor Faustus, the outcome of the struggle can be regarded as temporary. Vice may triumph in an individual, but she may not, as she suggests, "driue thee [Virtue] from this world . . . " (I.iii. 15). Discussing the effect of the moralities, Harbage states, The morality tradition with its . . . conflict between the cardinal virtues and the deadly sins, would insure that in dramatic casts good would at least be represented. The force of the tradition remained strong to the end.21 He goes on to say of another play, "In Dekker's If It Be Not Good the Devil Is In It, the infernal powers may prevail over the Lord Prior but not over his coadjutor, the saintly Clement." 22 Having 19

Hardin Craig, English Religious Drama of the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1955), pp. 341-342. 2e Frank Humphrey Ristine, English Tragicomedy: Its Origin and History (New York, 1910), p. 15. 21 Harbage, Rival Traditions, p. 173. 22 Ibid.

74

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

committed himself to these two sets of circumstances, the source and the abstractions, Dekker must indeed end the play as he does. The order of the two climaxes, Andelocia's death and then Virtue's triumph, is also weak. Proportionately, it is the Andelocia story that is central in the play; it requires the most development, it occupies the most time, and it is the most interesting, dramatically. Consequently, the deaths of Fortunatas' sons should receive the emphasis at the end of the play, and the final mood of its action should dominate the end of the play. But the strength and despair of Andelocia's dying words O conscience hold thy sting, cease to afflict me. Be quicke, tormentors, I desire to die. No death is equall to my miserie. Cyprus, vaine world, and Vanitie farwell. Who builds his heauen on earth, is sure of hell. (V.ii.176-180) - are completely dissipated by what follows. In a few lines, Virtue, abetted by Queen Elizabeth, triumphs over both Fortune and Vice, and the ending of the play becomes a celebration of this victory. Bringing the play full cycle Virtue commands her worshippers to sing to her the song that was sung to Fortune in the first scene of the play. The song and play end with these joyful words: Hollyday with ioy we crie, And bend, and bend, and merily, Sing hymnes to Vertues deitie: Sing hymnes to Vertues deitie.

(V.ii.355-358)

Once again, however, the playwright had no choice in this order of events. Fortune and Vice must be presented after Andelocia's death in order to collect their due and to unravel the rest of the action. They could not be present if Virtue had already triumphed.

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

75

UNIFYING DEVICES

On perhaps the simplest level the three actions of the play have been united through the use of characters who act in more than one action. Fortune, for example, sets the Fortunatus-Andelocia action in motion, and also functions as a mediator between Vice and Virtue. Agripyne, too, appears in two actions - with Andelocia and also with Orleans and the Prince of Cyprus. In the play Dekker also has made considerable and effective use of what might be called devices of repetition which tend to give the work the appearance of an artistic whole by referring to earlier parts of the play. These references do not necessarily involve causes of events, but more frequently similarities between events. Empson, for example, considers dramatic irony to be "an intelligible way in which the reader can be reminded of the rest of the play while he is reading a single part of it. . . . " 23 Dekker uses repetitions of situations, music, and images in the same way. Patterns such as these that call attention to themselves can be considered structural elements of the play, in that they are cohesive. They tend to relate and unite elements that otherwise might be considered isolated and irrelevant. The source story itself produces the most obvious instance Andelocia's life as a repetition of his father's. Even details are similar. The two are both introduced as destitute, but they face their problems with wit and humor. Fortunatus jokes with his echo and then, though hungry and lost, addresses the tree undei which he plans to sleep, with the following words: All haile Signior tree, by your leaue ile sleepe vnder your leaues, I pray bow to me, and ile bend to you, for your backe and my browes must, I doubt, haue a game or two at Noddie erre I wake againe: downe great heart, downe. H e y ho, well, well. (I.i.59-63)

Equally hungry, Andelocia trades jests with his servant, Shadow, and reproves his brother for his lack of good humor: "come; come, leaue this broad brim fashions, because the world frownes vpon thee, wilt not thou smile vpon vs?" (I.ii.35-37). The sleeping incident noted in the first scene is repeated ** William Empson, Seven Types of Ambiguity

(London, 1930), p. 58.

76

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

throughout the play. Fortunatos awakes to find himself surrounded by Fortune and her crew. Andelocia, lost in the wilderness as his father was, awakes in IV.i to meet Fortune, Vice, Virtue, and their company. Variations of these identical incidents occur in Il.ii and Ill.i. In the first of these Andelocia and Ampedo apparently succumb to a sleeping spell during which Fortune removes Fortunatas' body; in III.i Agripyne drugs Andelocia in order to steal his magic purse. This device of the sleeping character is, of course, a convenient expedient for the playwright, but skillfully used, as they are here, the scenes seem to be echoes and shadows of earlier events. An even stronger pattern is established by the frequent employment of music, dance, and song throughout the play. There are thirteen separate occasions of this sort in six different scenes. Some kind of music and dance accompanies most of the entrances of Fortune and her fellows. Music is used to awaken first Fortunatas and later Andelocia, and it is used by Agripyne to aid in her theft of the purse. Act III begins like the opening of Twelfth Night as a lute player attempts to soothe Orleans' love-sickness. Later, the courtiers, including Agripyne and Andelocia, dance and then are entertained by a solo dance performed by the Spanish envoy. The song at the beginning and end of the play has already been mentioned. The impact and quality of effect of these elements in the play are difficult to estimate, but they cannot be ignored on the grounds that they are part of the changes or additions made for the court production. Even excluding the ViceVirtue scenes - and the wilderness scene must have existed in some form in the original - most of the incidents of music, dance, and song remain in the play. The extensive use of music, therefore, cannot be attributed to an attempt to make the play conform to the court masque. But beyond the fact that music is integral to the play and that it contributes a unifying pattern, it is difficult to generalize on its effect on the basic nature of the play. Several other patterns manifest themselves primarily on a verbal level in repeated images and words. One of these consists of a complex of images, statements, and situations involving related words: food, hunger, thirst, gluttony, and greed. The physical

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

77

states of being of hunger and thirst are experienced and discussed directly by Fortunatas, Andelocia, and Agripyne. Their opposites, the acts and occasions of eating and banqueting, also reappear throughout the play: Fortunatas eating nuts; the banquet Athelstane promises and the one Andelocia plans for the English court; and the eating of the magic apples by Agripyne, the nobles, and Andelocia. These physical activities also appear in much of the imagery of the play. As Fortunatas decides to choose wealth as his gift from Fortune, he says: Oh therefore make me rich: Not as the wretch, That onely serues leane banquets to his eye, Has Gold, yet starues: is famisht in his store: No, let me euer spend, be neuer poore. (I.i.293-296) In the next scene Andelocia uses a related image to describe his brother Ampedo: "The famine of Gold gnawes his couetous stomacke, more than the want of good victuals" (I.ii.33-34). As the play progresses the act of eating becomes associated with riot and with defiance of Virtue's laws. In Virtue's first scene she says, "Men are transformed to beastes, feasting with sinne . . ." (I.iii.98). Later, Fortune tells Andelocia that he saw Vice "when thy lickerish eye / Fed on the beautie of faire Agripyne . . ." (IV. i. 169-170). At the very moment when Andelocia, once more in possession of hat and purse, decides to continue his life of riot he associates such a life with laughter and fat, and his servant retorts, "And when we are fat, master, weele doe as all gluttons doe, laugh and lie downe" (V.ii.40-41). Later in the same scene, after Andelocia's death, Fortune pronounces the last word on the matter, "Those that will all deuowre, must all forgoe" (V.ii.217). References and images such as those quoted above appear in every scene of the play, providing a consistency of texture, a poetic unity, for the play. Another cluster of images and situations has to do with appearances, deformity, and transformation. On a literal level Andelocia makes use of two disguises - that of an Irish peddler and of a French doctor. These disguises have obvious plot functions, but, as Bradbrook notes, disguise for the Elizabethan also carried

78

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

the sense of "deformity".24 Other examples, however, communicate even more readily with the modern reader. The outward sign that the characters have followed Vice is the growth of horns that disfigures first Andelocia, and then Longaville, Montrose, and Agripyne. Ugly appearances here symbolize debased characters, but in other parts of the play the symbol of ugliness is reversed, and is meant to hide true virtue or quality. Virtue herself is described as naturally repulsive to those who look upon her, and she is contrasted with the seemingly attractive Vice. Both the purse and the hat are deceptive in appearance. Of the purse it is said, "The out-side mockes you, makes you thinke tis poore, / But entring it, you find eternali store" (III.i.366-367). When Andelocia first sees the magic hat he doubts its worth: Iewell? Call you this a Iewell? It's course Wooll, a bald fashion, and greasie to the brim; I haue bought a better Felt for a French crowne fortie times: Of what vertuous blocke is this Hat, I pray? (II.ii.299302)

Although Virtue for most of the play hides her beauty she does not allow her followers to do so. It is the failure to show his worth that dooms Ampedo. Virtue says of him, "His face was beautifull, but wore a maske . . . " (V.ii.277). The Orleans action is related to the rest of the play by means of these images and situations concerning appearance and deformity. Frustrated in his love for Agripyne, Orleans vows: . . . to be In loue with nothing but deformitie. O faire Deformitie, I muse all eyes Are not enamord of thee. . . . (III.i.67-70)

Ironically this vow is fulfilled when Agripyne becomes deformed. Orleans says, "Hees mad, whose eyes on painted cheekes doe doate" (V.i.43), and that "My loue lookes on her eyes, with eyes diuine, / I doate on the rich brightnes of her mind . . . " (V.i.5051). This use of appearance and deformity does not conform to any strict rule of logic. The apples which produce the horns are 24

Bradbrook, Essays in Criticism, p. 160.

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

79

both magic and symbolic. They are the means given Andelocia to regain the purse and hat, but Vice's apples and the horns are also symbolic of vice-like character, so that when Agripyne eats the apple and wears the horns it is to be assumed that she is not virtuous. But Orleans claims to love in her a beauty of mind that lies beneath the outward appearance of ugliness. Dekker seems to be making use of the typical fairy tale device in which the faithful lover with a kiss (in this case, constancy) redeems the ugly hag and turns her into a beautiful maiden. It is asking too much to require that all the details conform to strict logic. The emphasis here is on Orleans rather than Agripyne. He is to be rewarded for constancy and for his refusal to be deceived by appearances. If she benefits too, that is her good fortune. Such uses of imagery, of repeated motifs and situations, are indeed structural elements of the play. As was seen above, situations and themes are repeated and reinforced in the imagery of the play. Parts of the play, such as the Orleans action which at times appears to be extraneous, are connected to the rest and made meaningful through these verbal patterns. The Orleans action appeared to be merely a sequence of enriching incidents, but it actually contrasts usefully with the Andelocia action in which the central characters were deceived and blinded by appearances. A positive example is set against a negative one. The final structural pattern of the play is the way in which Dekker has worked back and forth from particular incidents to generalizations. In its broadest sense this effect appears in the relationship between Fortune and Fortunatus-Andelocia, and between Andelocia and the personified characters. The father and son are here particular examples of the way in which Fortune controls human lives. She has in her entourage a group of earlier victims, whose fates are briefly mentioned. Fortune describes her own powers, and then the play proceeds to demonstrate those powers as they affect the specific personages of Fortunatus and his son. Even Andelocia's life is approached by this technique. He, like his father, has had many adventures and has sinned many times against Virtue. The play suggests this scope but concentrates on the particular experiences involving Agripyne.

80

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

In the same way, though seriously marred by lack of correspondence at the climax, Vice and Virtue act out a generalized struggle and also present a particularized example in the person of Andelocia. These techniques tend to take the focus off the individuals, and tend to emphasize the generalizations the lives exemplify rather than the tragedies of the individuals. This sense of scope is supported in many of the details of the play. The four Kings with Fortune and her other victims have been mentioned already. Athelstane's court at times appears to represent the whole world. The Prince of Cyprus woos Agripyne, as does the French prisoner, Orleans. They are entertained by the Spanish envoy, and Andelocia deceives them first as an Irish peddler and later as a French doctor. In the last scene Fortune makes note of the diverse nationalities: . . . why on the heads Of Agripyne,

Montrosse

and

Longauyle,

(English, Scot, French) did Vice clap vgly homes, But to approue that English, French and Scot, And all the world els, kneele and honour Vice, But in no Countrie, Vertue is of price? (V.ii.286-291)

Such a scheme supports Dekker's order of the climax of the play as discussed earlier, though the criticism of the nature of the Vice-Virtue climax still stands. It is proper that a play which sets up a generalization and then proceeds to illustrate that generalization with a particular example should, at the end, turn once more to the generalization. The fault lies not in the fact that the play ends with the personifications of Fortune, Vice, and Virtue, but in the fact that Virtue's triumph contradicts the example in which Andelocia succumbed to Vice. The play is neither incoherent nor chaotic. The incidents are well articulated and the various actions are relevant to each other and to the whole. The playwright has worked from an apparently deliberate plan, and although many of the ingredients are in the realm of the supernatural and magical, he has shaped a work that is much more than a pleasant and exciting tale. Few of the incidents are extraneous or are introduced for theatrical effect

THE PLEASANT COMEDY OF OLD FORTUNATOS

81

or spectacle alone. Patterns of imagery give to the play a coherence of idea and effect. The weaknesses in the play, however, are serious. The Orleans action, despite its pertinence to the main scheme, is abandoned before it has been completely developed and consequently appears out of proportion to the rest of the play. It goes beyond the point of merely providing competition for Andelocia's suit, but it falls short of adequately reflecting and commenting on the main action. Even more seriously, the main climax of the play does not develop from the action that has gone before it, particularly the crisis which should produce it. In the conflict of Vice and Virtue in the life of Andelocia, Virtue's part has been under-developed. Vice's victory, though predictable, is too easy. Yet in the climax of the play Virtue wins, completely contradicting all that has transpired. Dekker has produced a witty compliment to Queen Elizabeth and to England, but has marred his play in the process. The playwright has demonstrated considerable technical skill in the manipulation and compression of a wide range of incidents and materials, and the play in performance would be, in all probability, interesting, exciting, and moving; but the last scene in particular violates a basic dramatic necessity. Old Fortunatus fails to leave what George Pierce Baker considers a necessary effect in drama - a "clear, final impression".25

85

The Development p. 148.

of Shakespeare as a Dramatist (New York, 1907).

3

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

To move from the allegory and magic of Old Fortunatus to The Second Part of the Honest Whore is to return to the three-dimensional characterizations and realism of London in Shoemakers' Holiday. The locale here is ostensibly Milan, but the Italian atmosphere is limited to a few character names; indeed, the last scene of the play takes place in Bridewell, transported, it would appear, brick by brick to Italy. Some of the problems, however, found in Old Fortunatus recur in this play, though Dekker has solved most of them. Once again the last scene - this time containing a prison-full of new characters - has prompted criticism. The two actions of the play also contrast so strongly in mood that a few critics have found the sub-plot offensive. Finally, the resolution of the main action, for some writers, contradicts the incidents in the body of the play. As will be seen, however, Dekker's play is much more skillfully constructed than these criticisms would imply. The usual problem of a source is replaced in this case by the relationship between Honest Whore I and Honest Whore II. The two plays have many characters in common, as well as the locale and certain basic situations. It can be assumed that Honest Whore II was written partly because the original was successful. There would be then some obligation on the part of the playwright to be faithful to the original, and, as a matter of fact, the only important character who does not reappear is the wife of the leading character in the sub-plot. Some of the basic situations in the Candido sub-plot are also variations of situations in Honest Whore I. The original play ends with a novel scene in the Bethlehem asylum

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

83

for the insane; the sequel, as noted, is resolved in the Bridewell House of Correction, populated with a crowd of prostitutes. Dekker adds, on the other hand, two important figures not present in the earlier play - Orlando Friscobaldo (the title character's father) and Lodovico Sforza, a member of the Duke's court. Basically, the sequel is an ironic reversal of the original play, with many important changes even more fundamental than the addition of characters. Honest Whore I opens with a funeral procession attended by the grief-mad Hippolito. Infelice, the "subject" of the funeral, is only the victim of a drug, however, and much of the subsequent action concerns the couple's (Hippolito and Infelice) efforts to marry despite the objections of the Duke. These elements of romance and tragicomedy are almost entirely absent from the sequel, as Dekker focuses his attention on the reformed prostitute, a nearly secondary character in Honest Whore I. The result of such changes is in many ways a stronger, more closely-knit play. All of the actions are variations of domestic difficulties, and even the sub-plot is more relevant in the sequel. Although this sequel is an ironic parallel to Honest Whore / , and a knowledge of the original play enriches the appreciation of certain actions in the sequel, the second play can be understood quite apart from the original. That is, certain ironies in this play are strengthened by memory of situations in the original, but the ironies are present independently, nonetheless. Dekker has not relied upon knowledge of the earlier play to provide expository material. Exposition must be a particular problem to an author of any kind of a sequel. The reason the second work is written is usually that the first was successful, and thus known. But he must also construct a work that is self-sufficient, and complete in itself. It would be very easy either to repeat too much of the original or to provide insufficient information. That Dekker has managed this problem with considerable skill will become apparent in the discussion which follows. As a matter of fact, at least one character, Hippolito, is probably psychologically more acceptable when his actions in the original play are not known in detail. The situation is somewhat

84

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

analogous to one in the so-called Theban trilogy by Sophocles. The character of Creon in those plays seems inconsistent when the plays are studied as a group, even though each play in succession assumes a knowledge of "historical" antecedent events, which only accidentally happen to have been dramatized at another time by the playwright. There is no more cause to accuse Dekker of inconsistency in this matter than there is so to accuse Sophocles. THE BELLAFRONT ACTION I.i As Hippolito, Infelice, and some courtiers are about to ride to the Duke's court, Bellafront presents a petition to Hippolito. She asks him to intercede for her husband, Matheo, who is about to be executed for killing a man. Aside, Lodovico, one of the courtiers, jestingly suggests to Infelice that she has cause to be jealous of Bellafront. Hippolito promises to aid Matheo. Despite the fact that his wife Infelice has impatiently left him behind, Hippolito lingers to ask Bellafront if she remembers him, and to ask after her father. She maintains that she has continued the reformation she owes to Hippolito, but that her father refuses to forgive her for her past life as a prostitute. Hippolito, before leaving to try to catch up with the others, offers to attempt a reconciliation between the father and daughter. In a brief aside he reveals that he is attracted to the woman: "The face I would not looke on! sure then 'twas rare, / When in despight of griefe, 'tis still thus faire" (I.i.161-162). l.ii When Hippolito belatedly arrives at the court, he encounters the father, Orlando Friscobaldo. He manages to soften Orlando's denial of his daughter by telling the old man that his erring daughter is dead, but, publicly at any rate, Orlando resumes his stern attitude when told that the news of the death is a hoax. As soon as Hippolito leaves, however, Orlando reveals to two servants that he will disguise himself and aid his destitute daughter.1 H.i Matheo, pardoned through Hippolito's intercession, returns to Bellafront, but prison does not seem to have reformed him. Pacheco 1

Psychologically, this disguise situation is among the best in Elizabethan drama, in that it is not at all an arbitrary theatrical effect. As an almost professionally gruff old man who has for seventeen years been adamant in his denial of his daughter, he is naturally hesitant to expose suddenly his truly generous nature. By disguising himself he can materially aid his daughter, and at the same time discover the permanence of her reformation, without jeopardizing his built-up defenses.

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

85

(Orlando), claiming to be a discharged servant of Orlando, offers to serve Matheo. Bellafront objects to Pacheco's defamation of her father's character, but Matheo hires him. Hippolito visits the household, and, in asides to Bellafront, refers to a letter and a diamond he has sent her. She puts him off, but Matheo is suspicious of his wife's faithfulness, accusing her of returning to her old trade. Matheo goes off to celebrate his release, but Pacheco remains to give Bellafront a purse left for her by Hippolito. He apologizes to her for criticizing Orlando (Himself), and she accepts the apology by asking him to return the purse, letter, and diamond to Hippolito. Her defense of her father and the return of these love-bribes convince Pacheco that she has truly reformed. III.i Pacheco returns the gifts, but to Infelice rather than to Hippolito himself. When Infelice presses him for more details of the love affair, Pacheco refers her to Bryan, the Irish footman. Bryan, loyal to Hippolito, denies any knowledge of messages or gifts, and is ordered out of the room, just as Hippolito enters. Inquiring about the scene he has witnessed, Hippolito is told by Infelice that she and the footman have been lovers. He, of course, is furious, and he launches into a tirade about female infidelity. When asked how the footman seduced her, Infelice hands to Hippolito the letter and gifts he, himself, had sent to Bellafront. He admits his guilt, and Infelice parodies his earlier speeches with a description of male infidelity. Hippolito assumes that it was Bryan who betrayed him, so he discharges the footman. The noble, however, vows to himself to continue his pursuit of Bellafront. IH.ii Pacheco brings Matheo home from his celebrations. The profligate has pawned his clothes for gambling money, and has lost that money as well. When Bellafront refuses her husband's suggestion that she return to her trade to provide money for him, he strips her gown from her to be pawned, sending it out with Pacheco. Lodovico visits Matheo and offers him help, as well as some new clothes. Once again Matheo assumes that Lodovico is being friendly because Bellafront has made advances. Pacheco follows his master out of the house. IV.i Matheo is showing off his new clothes to Bellafront when Orlando, her father, comes to call. Matheo vacillates between urging his wife to beg from her father, and insulting the old man. Orlando, too, is gruff and critical of his daughter and her household, as she tries to be both obedient to her husband and respectful to her father. Orlando accuses Matheo and the "absent" Pacheco of committing a robbery. After Orlando leaves, Matheo demands to be fed. When he finds that the meat is good (bought with pawn money held back for her by Pacheco) he again accuses her of selling herself. Orlando returns as Pacheco, and Matheo brags to him - untruthfully - of how he faced down the old man. He tells his servant that their theft is known,

86

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

b u t he proposes now to r o b Orlando. T h e t w o leave t o plan the robbery. Hippolito calls o n Bellafront, a n d continues his assault. H e reminds her that he once w o n her to virtue by debate, and now proposes t o reverse the change by the same methods. T h e y debate, and he claims t o win, but Bellafront runs out. Hippolito resolves t o continue his quest. 2 IV.ii Orlando has revealed himself to the Duke, Infelice's father. H e has told the Duke about Hippolito's attempted seduction, and about Matheo's theft. Orlando explains that the two m e n robbed were actually his own servants, and presumably the goods stolen were his, as well. T h e D u k e gives h i m a warrant, and empowers Orlando and Lodovico to arrest M a t h e o and also a n y persons involved in prostitution. A f t e r the men leave, the D u k e discusses Hippolito's behavior with Infelice and others of the court. Even though Orlando has assured t h e m to the contrary, Infelice continues to suspect Bellafront's guilt. T h e D u k e believes that if Bellafront is arrested as a prostitute, the shame will "cure" Hippolito; if she is not arrested in the general warrant, he believes that Hippolito will stay away f r o m her t o protect h e r reputation. IViii M a t h e o entertains some gallants at a party. I n the midst of the celebration a constable enters with the warrant, and arrests M a t h e o a n d some of the others. M a t h e o sends Pacheco t o get Bellafront to help him. T h e prisoners are taken off to Bridewell. V.i Lodovico encounters Hippolito o n the street and tells him, erroneously, that Bellafront has been arrested as a prostitute, and taken to Bridewell. A s Lodovico anticipated, Hippolito is very indignant, and h e rushes off to secure her release. V.ii T h e D u k e and his court have assembled at Bridewell to interrogate the prisoners. Infelice listens f r o m hiding. Bellafront pleads for h e r husband, but when M a t h e o is brought in, he defiantly admits his guilt, and also implicates his wife, to get even with Orlando, w h o m he blames for his arrest. Bellafront denies the accusation, but says that t h e servant, Pacheco, should share his master's fate. W h e n P a c h e c o clears Bellafront, M a t h e o admits that h e accused his wife because she h a d been unfaithful with Hippolito. Hippolito denies this, b u t Infelice 8

An interesting "audience participation" device seems to be implied in this passage. As he is about to begin, Hippolito says, You men that are to fight in the same warre, To which I'm prest, and pleade at the same barre, To winne a woman, if you wud haue me speed, Send all your wishes. (IV.i.255-258.) When Bellafront finishes she says, "Let the world iudge which of vs two haue won", and Hippolito answers, "I!" (IV.i.395-396). It is as if the actors appeal to the audience, and the playwright assumes that their viva voce will support the male debater.

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

87

enters to add her accusation. Finally, Pacheco reveals himself as Orlando, and vouches for Hippolito and Bellafront's innocence. The Duke gives Orlando the right to select Matheo's punishment. As Orlando is about to do so, Bellafront again pleads for her husband. The father relents, and forgives his daughter and son-in-law, promising to share his house and wealth with them.

A consideration of the point of attack of this action is limited somewhat by the existence of Honest Whore I. Quite naturally, the playwright would not re-dramatize any events included in that play. The only specific events not included in either play are the marriage of Matheo and Bellafront (anticipated in the original), and the brawl and arrest which led to Matheo's death sentence. If the first of these had been dramatized, the sequel would be too closely related to the original, in terms of time. At the end of the original, Hippolito and Infelice had only just been married, and Bellafront's reformation was still fresh and untried. The actions of characters in Honest Whore II, particularly those of Hippolito, require a lapse of time between the two plays. Hunt misreads one of Orlando's lines, and states that the two plays are separated by seventeen years.3 Hippolito asks Orlando how long it has been since he last saw his daughter, and Orlando replies, "Not seuenteene Summers" (I.ii.143). Orlando, however, is not a character in the original play, and there is no way of knowing whether the last time he saw his daughter and disowned her was before or during the action of Honest Whore I. She has been a prostitute for an undescribed length of time at the opening of the original play, and thus the last meeting could have taken place before the action of the original play, making the interval between the two plays less than seventeen years. The time between the plays is indefinite, though it may be considerable. Hippolito, for example, wonders whether Bellafront still remembers him, and another character refers to the change in her appearance. Dekker could have begun his play with Matheo's fight with Iacomo, which brought about his imprisonment, but that would have introduced problems concerning the character of Matheo. If the fight had been depicted in such a way as to justify Matheo 3

Hunt, p. 98.

88

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

placing the "guilt" upon Iacomo - the play would have opened with a sympathetic emphasis on Bellafront's husband, which contradicts the rest of the play. If Matheo were depicted as the villain - that is, if we were to see him commit a criminal action - Bellafront's loyalty, and Matheo's happy ending, would be suspect, and difficult to accept. It should be noted that the playwright dramatizes Matheo only in relation to Bellafront and her father. His drinking, gambling, and thefts (with one exception, IV.iii) are all related, rather than dramatized. They do occur, it is true, but for the audience to see them occur would blacken and emphasize him unnecessarily. As it is, the play opens at a critical point in the story - Matheo has been imprisoned and is about to die. This provides an opportunity to depict the faithful wife desperately pleading for her husband's life. It is a strong opening, and one which puts the focus on the central character, Bellafront. Certain matters of exposition have already been touched upon. As noted, Dekker does not rely upon audience knowledge of Honest Whore I. In the first scene of the action, he establishes all the character relationships: Hippolito is married to Infelice, the Duke's daughter; Bellafront is married to the imprisoned Matheo, an old friend of Hippolito; Hippolito once reformed Bellafront; even Bryan, the Irish footman, is introduced. In addition, most of the attitudes of the characters toward one another are established: Lodovico's mischievous nature is set as he plants the idea of jealousy in Infelice's mind; Hippolito reveals an extrafriendly interest in Bellafront; his relationship with his wife is subtly suggested by her impatience to depart, by his lack of concern with her impatience, and by the fact that she does leave without him; and finally, Orlando's enmity toward his daughter is revealed. The playwright, then, makes good use of this opening scene in the action. In a smooth, and seemingly uncontrived manner, he manages to include a great deal of necessary information, and to prepare the way for what is to follow. This skill carries over into the articulation of the rest of the events in the action, as each scene follows naturally from that which preceded it. In the first scene Hippolito promised two things: to secure Matheo's freedom, and to attempt to reconcile Orlando

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

89

with his daughter. Orlando, it was established, was accustomed to being about the court, and so when Hippolito arrives there, as he planned in the first scene, he meets the old man. By the end of that scene, Orlando reveals that he will go in disguise to his daughter. This intention, and Hippolito's promise to free Matheo, are fulfilled in the next scene of the action. This scene (Il.i) elaborates Hippolito's designs on Bellafront, and introduces Matheo's suspicions of his wife, both of which are the basis for the rest of the action of the plot. Psychologically, Matheo's distrust explains all his subsequent actions — his riotous activities, his attacks on Bellafront, and even his ultimate accusation in Bridewell. At the end of the scene (Il.i) Bellafront sends Pacheco to Hippolito, but Dekker skillfully upsets the expectations, without violating the continuity of the action. The playwright re-involves Infelice, and at the same time adds another complication for Bellafront (Infelice's jealousy), by sending Pacheco to the wife rather than to her husband, Hippolito. The aroused jealousy of the Duke's daughter and the Duke's own concern for his son-in-law combine to produce the situation of the warrant against prostitutes later in the play. As will be seen, this warrant is equally important to the sub-plot of the play. The next scene (Ill.ii) refers to Matheo's last exit, when he left to go out carousing. Here, he returns from a gambling session whether or not it is the one planned in Ill.ii is unimportant. Within the scene, and in its relation to the next (IV.i), Dekker uses clothing incidents as a connective. Matheo has lost his cloak and sword, and so he strips his wife of her gown to be pawned for money. A friend visits and sees Matheo semi-disrobed, and so offers him money to buy some new clothes. The next scene of the action opens, then, with Matheo showing off the new clothes to his wife. There are two incidents in this scene (IV.i) which are not prepared for in earlier scenes. The first, Orlando's appearance as himself, does not really require preparation. It is implicit in the basic situation of Orlando's disguise as Pacheco. His words and attitudes toward his daughter conform to the pattern established in I.ii, though this time the audience is aware of his true feelings

90

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

for Bellafront. Ironically, as Pacheco, he hides his true exterior, but reveals his feelings for her; as himself, he "disguises" his true feelings.4 The second incident in the scene is Orlando's announcement that he is aware of the theft by Matheo and Pacheco. This is the first that the audience has heard of it. At least one critic has commented on this point. The robbery of Orlando's men disguised as pedlars is not prepared for. This may be attributable to Dekker's deficiencies as a playwright; but it is not impossible that a scene in which Orlando laid his plot has dropped out. 5

It is possible that such a scene did exist at one time, though it is difficult to imagine where in the play it would be located. If there was such a scene it must have contained little else but this matter, since no other gaps appear in the action. On the other hand, the present condition of the manuscript may well represent what the playwright intended. Certainly there are sufficient references to the robbery to implant it in the audience's mind: Orlando's accusation and Matheo's retort occupy fifteen lines; later in the scene Matheo asks himself, "What Rogue should tell him of those two Pedlers?" (IV.i.178). When Pacheco enters, Matheo tells him, too, of Orlando's accusation, and the two plan to rob Orlando himself. These references do not alleviate the lack of preparation, but they do insure a remembrance of the situation. Such insurance would not be necessary if knowledge of the robbery had been planted beforehand. The references suggest, then, the possibility that Dekker consciously omitted the preparation, and that the preparation did not "drop out" without his knowledge. Hippolito's return to Bellafront in this scene is expected. Earlier, despite his wife's jealousy, he had said, "yet lie on, / lie on, stood armed Deuils staring in my face . .." (III.i.217-218). After Orlando's threat to Matheo in IV.i, it follows naturally 4 Dekker makes use of this type of ironic reversal in m.i. Just after she learns that her husband is unfaithful, Infelice "confesses" to Hippolito that she has been unfaithful with Bryan. Her false confession produces the desired result - his own confession. 5 Ernest H. C. Oliphant (ed.), Shakespeare and His Fellow Dramatists (New York, 1929), I, 894.

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

91

that he reports the situation to the Duke in order to complete the scheme he has planned, and Matheo's arrest and arraignment come again as a natural consequence. The playwright also takes some pains to gather all the necessary people for the last scene in Bridewell. When Matheo is arrested, he tells Pacheco to "seeke out your Mistris, Sirra" (IV.iii. 137). And the playwright introduced a separate scene for Lodovico to trick Hippolito into attending the session at Bridewell. Associated with scene articulation and plot movement are the problems of chronological order and elapsed time. Muriel Bradbrook comments on Elizabethan treatment of time as follows: The Elizabethan audience were not trained to put two and two together in the matter of temporal sequence, and so these difficulties did not exist for them. The rapidity of decision and quick movement from plan to action so characteristic of this drama was not a matter of hurried time, but only of increasing the speed of the narrative and of heightening suspense and attention. The excitement justifies the logical contradictions.. . .· But even the mathematically minded modern can find little to criticize in the matter in this play. Buland seems to think Matheo is too quickly released from prison in Il.i, and that Hippolito's gift and letter to Bellafront (received before Il.i) follow too closely their first meeting in the play.7 Both of these small problems, however, are partially alleviated by the sub-plot, to be discussed later. From the discussion of scene articulation above it is apparent that Dekker has carefully worked out the progress and development of the various incidents which make up the action concerning Bellafront, Orlando, Hippolito, and Matheo. Some critics, nevertheless, have found fault with the way in which the action is resolved. Madeleine Doran views the play as one of the "problem play" genre, and, discussing those plays generally, writes: None of the plays is wholly satisfactory from a formal point of view, not so much because of the mingling of tones of satire, realistic comedy, romantic sentiment, and moral earnestness, but because of • 7

Bradbrook, Themes and Conventions, p. 14. Buland, p. 330.

92

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

the working out of a serious moral problem in an action built of improbable device and lucky coincidence. The result is only too often to make the solutions seem trivial or forced. 8

But, as demonstrated, the action is not built of improbable devices or lucky coincidences. With the possible exception of the robbery itself, all incidents have been carefully controlled. As Boas noted, the character of Orlando "holds in his hands all the main threads of the action. . . ." " His capabilities for doing so are demonstrated at the outset of the play - in his wit, his true concern for his daughter's happiness, and his ability to conceal his true feelings. Dekker has combined in him the traditional characters of the wily servant and the gruff, though loving father of the erring child. In her essay on disguise in Elizabethan drama, Bradbrook remarks that the "disguised protector" is an "old tradition. . . ." 10 Even Orlando's ability to disguise himself from his daughter is supported by the length of time since they last saw one another, and the pains taken with the disguise itself. After taking a coat from one of his servants, Orlando says, I should put on a worse suite too; perhaps I will. My Vizard is on, now to this maske. Say I should shaue off this Honor of an old man, or tye it vp shorter; Well, I will spoyle a good face for one. My beard being off, how should I looke? Euen like a Winter Cuckoo, or vnfeatherd Owle; Yet better lose this haire, then lose her soule. (I.ii.199204)

Few Elizabethan playwrights took such pains with a disguise situation. Orlando is joined, in the play, by another manipulator, Lodovico. He operates largely in the sub-plot, yet to be discussed, but he also contributes to this action. His character, as a wit, as a kind of likeable and helpful meddler, is established in the opening passages of the play. It is he who recognizes Bellafront when she first enters, and who identifies her and her relationship with Hippolito to the audience. It is he, too, who playfully suggests to Infelice that Hippolito and Bellafront bear watching. Although 8 9 10

Doran, p. 366. Boas, Stuart Drama, p. 155. Bradbrook, Essays in Criticism, p. 163.

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

93

his primary function is in the sub-plot, the character is reintroduced in Ill.ii as a friend of Matheo. Later the Duke seems to recognize that Lodovico and Orlando are the manipulators when he sends the two men out with the warrant. Again, it is Lodovico who, for love of mischief, tricks Hippolito into appearing at Bridewell to defend Bellafront. Lodovico does not, it is true, have any ultimate objectives to provide reasons for his actions, but his attitudes and character are so consistent that they are entirely acceptable. He performs as a kind of gay, though courtly imp, whose actions happen to serve the outcome of the play. The resolution or unraveling is favorably conditioned by the playwright in several other ways as well. Up to the last scene, Hippolito is depicted as being resolved in his pursuit of Bellafront. But he and others characterize his feelings for Bellafront as a kind of sickness, a madness prompted, in part, by the thrill of the chase, rather than as a sincere love. He says, "To be pursued in flight, quickens the race" (III.i.219), and "Strugling with mad men, madnes nothing tames . . ." (III.i.224). The debate scene is obviously a kind of contest. Even his wife and father-in-law suggest this possibility: INF:

DUKE:

And it may be my husband, Because when once this woman was vnmaskt, He leueld all her thoughts, and made them fit: Now he'd marre all agen, to try his wit. It may be so too, for to turne a Harlot Honest, it must be by strong Antidots, Tis rare, as to see Panthers change their spots. And when she's once a Starre (fixed) and shines bright, Tho 'twere impiety then to dim her light, Because we see such Tapers seldome burne, Yet 'tis the pride and glory of some men, To change her to a blazing Starre agen, And it may be, Hipollito does no more. (IV.ii.41-53)

The statement by Infelice conditions, too, her apparent reacceptance of Hippolito at the end of the play. She is not possessed by some corrosive demon of jealousy. Even the scene in which she discovers her husband's infidelity has been tempered by wit.

94

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

Pacheco reveals the truth to her by means of a humorously poetic metaphor, in which Hippolito is a hunter and a would-be landlord, and Bellafront is the quarry, in both senses of the word. Infelice, in turn, does not storm at her husband, or threaten him. She wittily tricks him into confessing, and Hippolito, seeing himself as gulled by his wife, actually chuckles at having fallen into the trap. "Nay, you may laugh", says Infelice (III.i.192). These are not the dark tones and forebodings of an impending tragedy, but the careful preparations for an amicable ending. Matheo is, by far, the darkest character in the play, and consequently his status at the end requires some investigation. It has been noted earlier that his acts of manslaughter, revelry, gambling, and drunkenness are related in the play, rather than dramatized. In addition to permitting the audience to focus more closely on Bellafront, this tends to soften the acts somewhat - they are unseen and unremembered much as are Dame Eyre's argument with, and dismissal of, Jane in Shoemakers' Holiday. But Matheo does behave vilely to his wife, and psychological explanations of these actions do not ease the problem of his end. Dekker hides this problem a bit for actual production of the play by burying the contradiction in the complexities and distractions of the last scene in Bridewell. Too, as Hunt notes, Dekker does not embarrass his character by giving him a turn-about repentance speech in that scene.11 Prior to this, the expectation has been set up that Matheo will be redeemed. In the scene in which he receives the warrant from the Duke, Orlando says, "but this shal hang him by 'th gills, till I pull him on shore" (IV.ii.13). Clearly, Orlando does not intend to demand punishment for Matheo. After Orlando reveals himself in Bridewell, the Duke says to Matheo, "Your Father has the true Phisicion plaid" (V.ii.191), and Matheo replies, "And I am now his Patient" (V.ii.192). Then he is silent for the three hundred lines remaining in the play. Like Dekker's Whore of Babylon, this play has a central character who is essentially passive - she resists the tests and temptations placed before her by others. In Honest Whore I, Bellafront, first as the spirited prostitute, and later as one desiring a new 11

Hunt, p. 99.

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

95

reputation, took a more active part in the action of the play. Here, she is long-suffering. For this reason the description of the action tends to emphasize her attackers and more active defenders. From that point of view it could be said that the action is concerned with the reformation of two rakes - Matheo and Hippolito - and the reawakened affection of the father. But the discussion above has already noted that the last scene does not emphasize a reformation of Matheo, and Hippolito's reunion with Infelice is only implied. Answering Matheo's accusation, Hippolito admits defeat of his attacks: I could sooner Shake the Appettine, and crumble Rockes to dust, Then (tho loues showre rayned downe) tempt her to lust. (V.ii.175-177)

No other attention is paid to his once-errant ways. Orlando's attitude toward his daughter changed in his first meeting with her, when he was disguised as Pacheco, but he seems to have thought of Bellafront's problems with Hippolito and Matheo as tests of her constancy. Discovering Hippolito's intentions, the old man says, "hold out still, wench" (II.i.263). The play, then, is Bellafront's, and the climax consists in the cessation of all the attacks, and society's complete acceptance of her reform, symbolized by her readmission to her father's household. Interestingly enough, Bellafront ends the play as she began it, pleading for mercy for her husband - two of the few positive actions she takes in the play. Empowered by the Duke to assign Matheo's punishment, Orlando threatens to have him hanged: the Law shall haue thy life, what, doest thou hold him? Let goe his hand: if thou dost not forsake him, a Fathers euerlasting blessing fall vpon both your heads. . . . (V.ii.474-476)

Orlando, Matheo, and the audience know that Bellafront will pass this last test, but it is this last sign of her reform and faithfulness that causes Orlando's jingling climactic words: My house shall be thine, My meate shall be thine, And so shall my wine,

96

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

But my money shall be mine, And yet when I die, (So thou doest not flie hie) Take all, yet good Matheo, mend. Thus for ioy weepes Orlando, and doth end. (V.ii.479-486)

This view of the play as structured about a series of tests of Bellafront's reformation seems to be supported by F. S. Boas.12 Such a theory, however, produces problems when the crisis of the action is considered. Every scene in which Bellafront is tested - and that is practically every scene in the action - is a kind of crisis, and since she successfully resists every temptation, there is no turning point, or change in direction. Once again, this problem is similar to one found in Whore of Babylon, and points, perhaps, to a pattern somewhat peculiar to Dekker. There is here, however, a solution to the problem. In Honest Whore /, Bellafront's conversion - the critical point in that action - took place in a debate between Bellafront and Hippolito. In this sequel Dekker has provided many scenes parallel to the original, including another debate.13 Hippolito's argumentative powers, of proven effectiveness, represent here the major test for Bellafront. Since Hippolito is successful in the original play, the natural expectation is that he will again succeed. Bradbrook discusses this scene and the Elizabethan attitude toward the faculty of reason: Because reason was the supreme and governing faculty, dramatic characters may occasionally show themselves open to persuasion in a way that appears highly artificial. Truth must prevail: and if the mind is convinced, then the will and action will follow the lead of reason. . . . In the second part, having lapsed into a sinful desire to possess her, Hippolito prepares to argue her out of her virtue again, and Bellefront agrees that if he can produce convincing reasons, she will yield.14 12

Boas, Stuart Drama, p. 156. Indeed, as James Holly Hanford notes on page 446 of "The Debate Element in the Elizabethan Drama", Anniversary Papers by Colleagues and Pupils of George Lyman Kittredge, eds. F. N. Robinson, E. S. Sheldon, and W. A. Neilson (Boston, 1913), the debate form, particularly when it involves "controversy of the sexes", is a popular carryover from medieval literature. 14 Muriel Clara Bradbrook, Shakespeare and Elizabethan Poetry (London, 1951), p. 97. 19

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

97

For the Elizabethan, then, the situation was doubly emphatic and critical. The persuasive powers of reason were a matter of dramatic tradition and Hippolito in Honest Whore I has demonstrated his skill in argumentation. Having survived that test, it is logical to anticipate that Bellafront will survive the rest, and, of course, she does. But the climax rests not so much in her eventual success as in a way in which the tests themselves can be brought to an end, with public and family acceptance of her reformation. Matheo's activities provide the key to that. When he stops his riotous life then her trials are ended. The crisis for Matheo's activities comes at the point at which he comes under Orlando's control - that is, when he robs the two peddlers he can be exposed by Orlando as the old man so chooses. As noted earlier, the actual incident takes place off stage, but audience knowledge of the situation first comes in IV.i, the same scene unit in which Bellafront debates with Hippolito. In addition, Orlando reveals the incident while he is confronting Bellafront for the first time as himself, another test for her. The father behaves as gruffly as he can to his daughter, but she, though torn between to loyalties, manages to remain faithful to both husband and father. She is respectful to her father, but asks him for money, in compliance with her husband's orders. The scene, then, contains two major tests of Bellafront's character, and the turning point for Matheo's actions, and so should be considered the critical scene in the action. In addition, it is a kind of obligatory confrontation scene obligatory in that both situations demand an eventual meeting between the principals. When Orlando disguises himself as Pacheco it is inevitable that the scene must come in which he removes that disguise. The assumption of a disguise sets up an anticipation of the removal of the disguise which will complete the process. Stoll describes this type of suspense: Suspense of form is the excited expectation not of the answer to a puzzle, or of the disclosure of a mystery, but - under the spell of illusion - of the rounding out of a harmony, like the rime to come at the end of a verse or the rest tone at the end of a song.15 More frequently than not, this type of expectation is fulfilled in 15

Stoll, Shakespeare, p. 13.

98

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

the last scene of a play, but Dekker twists the expectation in two ways. First, he allows Orlando to reveal himself at an earlier point in the action. But the character withholds his Pacheco identity, and the playwright saves that particular revelation for the last scene. This situation makes considerable demands upon the actor's talent, but the successful portrayal of two different characters in one scene unit increases the audience enjoyment of the ironies involved. The effect, for example, is much stronger than it would be if Orlando did not appear until the last scene, or even in an entirely separate scene. Hippolito and Bellafront, too, must eventually face one another. They meet in Il.i, but in the presence of her husband, hardly the opportune time for Hippolito to press his attack. Knowledge of the debate scene in the original play reinforces the anticipation of the eventual confrontation. For the most part, the potential scenes of this action have, been dramatized, and the exceptions involving Matheo have been discussed above. One other — the scene in which Infelice complains to her father, the Duke, of Hippolito's extra-marital interests - is referred to in IV.ii. The Duke says to his daughter, "Th' old Fellow sings that note thou didst before, / Onely his tunes are, that she is no Whore . . . " (IV.ii.35-36). Nothing would be gained by dramatizing the scene, and it would have had the harmful effect of increasing the sympathy for Infelice. The action is focused on Bellafront, rather than on the wronged wife; any additional interest in Infelice could only result in problems in absolving Hippolito at the end of the play. This omission, which furthers the ends of the play, must be accounted a mark of craftsmanship. Several scenes in the action deserve special comment. The first - really more an incident than a scene - occurs near the end of I.i. In it a scholar asks Hippolito's permission to dedicate a book to him. Hippolito gives him some money, and asks to read the book before deciding. No other reference is made to the situation in the play. Whether Dekker had a "private axe to grind" or wished to establish Hippolito as a kindly gentleman is not clear. He may have intended to give the entire first scene a more court-

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

99

like atmosphere by introducing another petitioner, in addition to Bellafront. In any case it seems a bit unnecessary, though hardly, with its fifteen lines of dialogue, a serious flaw in the play. One scene is similar to scenes in Shoemakers' Holiday and Match Me in London in which characters are discovered in conversations almost completed. Besides providing a measure of economy by reducing repetition of known events, such scenes tend to add to realism by suggesting more life activities "off stage". In this play IV.ii is also a continuation of an off stage discussion. Orlando has already explained the situation to the Duke, and has been promised the warrant. Since the audience has most of the information, an earlier beginning for the incident would involve considerable repetition, and would retard the increasing tempo at this late point in the play. The scene (Ill.ii) in which Matheo returns home with Pacheco from a gambling spree is, in a sense, extraneous. That is, with only minor adjustments in later scenes, the action would make sense and be complete without this scene. Lodovico is here introduced as a friend of Matheo's, and this fact makes the party scene (IV.iii) follow more naturally, but this seems slight as the basic purpose of the scene. Lodovico could be so introduced in several other scenes - II.i or IV.i. Other elements of the scene, however, are important to the action for reasons other than continuity. Bellafront is seen with Matheo in two other scenes in the play (II.i and IV.i), and in both there are examples of the husband's mistreatment of the wife, as in the scene in question. The first of those (II.i), however, is dominated by the Pacheco disguise situation, and by Hippolito's overtures to Bellafront. The later scenes focusses on Orlando's visit, and the debate between Bellafront and Hippolito. This scene (Ill.ii) is the only one which actually emphasizes the husband-wife relationship, and since this relationship is an important problem for Bellafront, the action requires such a scene. The impact of the incidents - the husband stripping the wife of her gown, and the most direct accusations of adultery - concentrates the attention on this particular aspect of Bellafront's problems. Besides these specially noted scenes, there is one other situ-

100

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

ation in the action which requires comment - the character groupings. The father, daughter, and errant husband relationship is duplicated. Orlando, Bellafront, and Matheo are matched with the Duke, Infelice, and Hippolito. The two fathers eventually join to solve their daughters' problems, each motivated by a desire to protect his daughter. The Duke, who in another play might have functioned as a deus ex machina character, is here well motivated, and is involved as more than an impersonal ruler arbitrating the disagreements of his subjects. He is actually drawn into the pattern of the play.

THE CANDIDO ACTION

This action, like the main plot, partially echoes Honest Whore I, and several of the incidents parallel scenes in the first play. The central character himself, however, is the only one retained. I.ii A few lines at the beginning of this scene introduce the action, though Candido does not appear at this point. Lodovico and several other courtiers remember that this is the day they have been invited to help Candido celebrate a new marriage. They recall his shrewish first wife, wonder about the new one, and resolve to provoke her to test her husband's famous patience. I.iii Candido welcomes the courtiers to the wedding feast, and jests with them about fashion in hats. Suddenly the bride cuffs one of her husband's apprentices for bringing her the wrong wine. Candido hurriedly makes excuses for her, and she leaves the party. Lodovico warns Candido that he must assert his rule over his wife before she becomes as much of a shrew as the last one was. Lodovico asks permission to disguise himself as an apprentice in order to coach Candido in this role of the husband-tyrant. Candido, always agreeable, accepts the idea, as long as "It will be but some iest, sir?" (I.iii. 122). II.iii Lodovico, now disguised, coaches Candido. They call in the wife, and Candido tells her to prepare a room for the new apprentice. She bridles at this, and Candido, urged on by Lodovico, berates her. She argues back, and they each take sticks to beat one another. She receives permission to strike the first blow in the "duel" with yardsticks, but her blow consists in kneeling before her husband. She vows to let him be her master. Candido admits to her that it was a jest, revealing Lodovico's identity. III.iii Lodovico and a courtier encounter Bots, a pander, and Mis-

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

101

tress Horseleech, a bawd, in front of Candido's shop. Bots agrees to procure Candido's wife for the courtier, while the others distract Candido. They introduce Horseleech to the shopkeeper as a gentlewoman. The wife, however, will have nothing to do with Bots, even though he offers her a jewel. But Bots tells the courtier that he has arranged a meeting, and demands his pay. Other courtiers enter with Bryan, the discharged footman. Bryan has agreed to test Candido's patience. He pretends to shop for some cloth, but Candido cannot decipher his Irish accent. The courtiers graciously misinterpret, and the Irishman pretends to grow angry at Candido's nonsensical answers. He rips a piece of cloth, but Candido remains patient, and maintains that customers often ask for damaged goods, so that "These are two remnants now, no losse at all" (III.iii.120). IV.ii Since Lodovico has been given a warrant by the Duke to arrest all associated with prostitution, he decides to get even with Bots and Horseleech for having tricked his friend concerning Candido's wife. He tells the other courtiers to meet him at Matheo's house. IV.üi Matheo has agreed to let Lodovico have a party at his house. The courtiers, Bots, and Horseleech arrive in answer to Lodovico's invitation. Matheo has asked Candido to come to bid on some pieces of cloth in Matheo's possession, so the courtiers decide to tease Candido once again. When he arrives he is fawned on and bullied by the bawd and the pander, much to his discomfort, but he remains courteous. As Candido inspects the cloth, a constable arrives and arrests Matheo, Bots, and Horseleech, in compliance with the warrant. Since Candido now has possession of the stolen goods, he, too, is arrested and taken off to Bridewell. V.ii The Duke and his court are at Bridewell to judge those brought in on the warrant. After Orlando reveals himself, the constable brings in Candido. The linen draper maintains his innocence, and the Duke puts off his decision until the others have been viewed. Bots is brought in. He denies the charge, and claims to have been a soldier. The Duke agrees to let Bots stand with the court, and says that if none of those yet to be examined identify Bots, he will go free. The first prostitute is questioned, but she does not notice Bots. The second speaks to him, but Bots retorts to the Duke, "Is there any Gentleman here, that knows not a Whore? . . . " (V.ii.349). Finally, however, the third prostitute, brought in with Mistress Horseleech, accuses both the bawd and the pander. The Duke doubles Bots' punishment and banishes him. The Duke decides that Candido has been the victim of circumstances and the tricks of the young courtiers. He congratulates him on his continued patience, and invites him to frequent the court so that "the world shal sing, / A Patient man's a Patterne for a King" (V.ii.496497).

102

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

As in the other action, Dekker has managed to make the Candido story independent of Honest Whore I. The first scene provides all the necessary exposition concerning Candido's past: occupation, reputation, character of last wife, and news of the new marriage. At the same time, the courtiers generally set up the pattern for the rest of the action - the continued tests of Candido's patience. Despite the fact that one of the courtiers (not Lodovico) later tries to have the wife seduced, the overall tone of geniality is established in this first scene of the action. Lodovico says: at any hand lets try what mettle is in his new Bride, if there be none, we'll put in some; troth it's a very noble Citizen, I pitty he should marry againe, lie walke along, for it is a good old fellow. (I.ii.12-15)

The testing of Candido is frankly episodic, or at least is composed of two distinct and independent parts: Candido's new wife, and his forced association with some of Milan's underworld. Within the units, however, the scenes are clearly, if simply, articulated. The second unit, as it becomes more closely connected with the other action, and involves Candido with more and more of Bridewell's natural inhabitants, tends to take Candido himself out of the central position. The attention returns to him at the end, however, to give him the final notice. Because of the episodic nature of the action, terms such as crisis and climax are difficult to apply. Perhaps, in a very crude way the wife's blow at the apprentice in I.iii, and Candido's acceptance of the stolen goods in IV.iii, are rudimentary crises. The climax is the Duke's recognition of Candido's meritorius patient nature. Though episodic, the action is unified by the fact that all incidents are essentially tests of that patience.

RELATIONSHIP OF THE ACTIONS

Critics have referred to the play as a morality and as a domestic tragedy.1® Another writer also sees the play in very serious terms. Allardyce Nicoli writes: " William John Courthope, A History of English Poetry (London, 1903), IV, 224; Doran, p. 146.

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

103

It will be noted that this is not a tragedy in the ordinary sense of the term, nor is it a tragi-comedy of the Beaumont and Fletcher sort; it lies in a sphere outside of these, the sphere of the problem play and of the drame u

Such attitudes toward the play produce some rather violent denunciations of the combination of the actions. One text states: Examples of tasteless combinations of the comic and tragic are numerous in the drama of the early Stuart period. One of the best examples is Thomas Dekker's The Honest Whore, Parts I and II, which to judge from the advertising titlepage, endeared itself to popular audiences by the tediously farcial humors of the sub-plot rather than by the serious study of the reformation of a woman with a past.18 Muriel Bradbrook sees Bellafront as another Isabella in Measure for Measure, forsaken and betrayed by her own family. She writes that Orlando "allows his daughter to be roughly handled by her husband before his face, and only intervenes when he draws a dagger on her".19 The play calls for Matheo to "handle" his wife in Ill.ii, when he takes her gown off to pawn it. This is not a gentle action, but neither is it a beating. Later, after having been taunted by Orlando, Matheo "Takes vp the stoole" (IV.i.l86.s.d.), presumably to strike his wife, but he is stopped by Pacheco. This is perhaps not the place to discuss the relative danger involved in the choice of a dagger or stool as a weapon, but it is a curious misreading. It cannot be denied that Matheo, in particular, is a "dark" character in the play; some of the ways in which his actions have been softened, as well as those of Hippolito and Infelice, have already been discussed. But there should be no doubt at any time in the play that Bellafront will be rewarded with happiness. Almost from the beginning, her person and her reputation are protected and controlled by old Orlando, whose personality and good will are amply suggested in his first speech in the play. My Noble Lord: my Lord Hipollito! the Dukes Sonne! his braue Daughters braue Husband! how does your honord Lordship! does your 17

Allardyce Nicoli, British Drama (New York, 1925), p. 199. Gerald Eades Bentley and Fred B. Millett, The Art of the Drama (New York, 1935), p. 144. " Bradbrook, Themes and Conventions, p. 67. 18

104

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

Nobility remember so poore a Gentleman as Signior Orlando Friscobaldo! old mad Orlando! (I.ii.32-35)

His disguise, itself, with its implied promise of an opportune revelation, conditions the audience to view the action with something less than apprehension. As one critic says, disguise "complicates and is at the same time capable of resolving. . . . " 20 To these conditioning factors, Dekker has added an essentially comic sub-plot, which has a more important function than merely providing a few laughs for the pit. The mood of this sub-plot affects the way in which the audience reacts to situations in the primary action. With Candido in the background it is difficult to take too seriously the threats to Bellafront. That is, a theatrical world of which Candido is a member is not likely to be resolved in chaos or tragedy. The Candido action is akin to what Crane describes as a device, vis-à-vis the audience, for . . . awakening or directing expectations, conditioning states of mind, and for suggesting in what light something is to be viewed. . . .21 The action as well as the mood of the sub-plot reflects upon the main action. As noted earlier, Bellafront's principal problem is her relationship with her husband. The first part of the Candido action also involves marital problems, and their solution preshadows the solution of Bellafront's problems. Candido, moreover, is continually referred to as the patient man. Patience and constancy are also the virtues demonstrated by Bellafront.

ARRANGEMENT OF SCENES

The opening sixty-eight Unes of the play contribute nothing to either action directly. Some courtiers assemble, talk of "my Lord" and "my Lady", question a footman about their time of departure, and then discuss the footman's nationality. It is true that the Irish footman and some of the courtiers later contribute to both actions, Victor Oscar Freeburg, Disguise Plots in Elizabethan Drama (New York, 1915), p. 6. 11 Crane, p. 163.

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

105

but they hardly need this point of emphasis in the play. They do establish the time of day (early morning) and the country, but these, too, are of minor importance. Is this opening scene employed merely to quiet a noisy audience, without endangering the important exposition that is to come? Perhaps that is part of its purpose, but not its sole function. Henri Fluchère's remarks about Inductions provide the key to this situation. But the most remarkable Inductions - and Shakespeare has used them freely - are those in which the tone, atmosphere and theme of the play are accented. Here, there is no dramatic realism but an episode, very variable in length, in which the author shows little concern about starting the action.22 The opening of Dekker's play is both more and less than the Induction described. It is less, in that nothing in these lines can be interpreted to reveal the theme of the play. It is more, in that there is a degree of realism. The characters figure in the later action, and the scene moves smoothly into the exposition and the opening situation. It will be remembered that the opening incident is Bellafront's plea for clemency for her husband, sentenced to death. Rather than plunge into this rather dark situation the playwright chose first to establish a much warmer, merrier atmosphere. The men greet one another, and comment on the fresh morning. FONT: LOD:

Here's a sweet morning, Gentlemen. Oh, a morning to tempt loue from his Ningle Ganimed, which is but to giue Dary Wenches greene gownes as they are going a milking; what, is thy Lord stirring yet? a.i.6-9)

The Irisman answers a moment later in his comic brogue, and after his exit the courtiers make a series of jokes about Irish men and women. When Bellafront enters, the men respond appropriately to the entrance of a pretty woman. Such an atmosphere effectively establishes the overall mood of the play. Since the sub-plot is largely episodic, Dekker was relatively free to insert the scenes at points most advantageous to the main M Henri Fluchère, Shakespeare, p. 123.

trans. G u y Hamilton (London, 1953),

106

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

action of the play. In terms of the number of lines, the sub-plot amounts to only about a quarter of the play, and its few scenes are distributed at fairly regular intervals throughout the play. Modern editors, interestingly enough, seem to have used the scenes to mark the ends of the acts, when they have divided the play in the traditional fashion. The arrangement or order of scenes of the two plots in two instances supports the chronological time structure of the play. It was noted earlier that one critic questions the believability of the time relationship between I.i and ii, and Il.i; Hippolito's promise to free Matheo and his awakened interest in Bellafront seem to require a greater time lapse than the play provides, according to that critic.28 The second scene (I.ii) seems to be the same day as the first; in that second scene Hippolito attempts to enlist Orlando's help in freeing Matheo, and the old man resolves to go to his daughter immediately in disguise. If he does go immediately, then Il.i would seem to follow I.ii without much time lapse, but Matheo has already been released, and Bellafront has already received tokens of Hippolito's love. Realistically, this would appear to be impossible, but the two scenes (I.ii and Il.i) are separated in the play by the Candido wedding scene, and, as Armbrister notes, "Occasionally a sub-plot . . . will serve as a bridge over a timegap in the principal action of the play".24 According to the courtiers in I.ii, this scene, too, is the same day as the others on either side of it, but the "intrusion" of the sub-plot scene gives the effect of a time lapse, even though one does not actually exist. By separating the two scenes, Dekker distracts the attention of his audience from the time contradictions. Under such circumstances the contradictions would probably not occur to anyone except a scholar studying the time relationships. A similar technique of arrangement occurs later in the play. Lodovico in Ill.ii gives Matheo money for some new clothes; in the next scene of that action (IV.i) Matheo shows off the new clothes, which have been made or purchased in the interim. In »

Bui and, p. 330. Victor Stradley Armbrister, The Origins and Functions of Subplots in Elizabethan Drama (Nashville, 1938), p. 17. 24

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

107

addition, he and Pacheco have also apparently committed the robbery "between" the two scenes. In this case there are no contradictions of time involved, but the introduction of the subplot scene provides an appearance of elapsed time, and, incidentally, gives the actor playing Matheo time to change costumes. Here, Candido's scene also serves to separate two similar scenes. Both Ill.ii and IV.i involve many of the same characters, and the same antagonisms. Unseparated, the scenes might appear repetitious, but the Candido scene provides a kind of variety, and makes Matheo's accusations of his wife a little less unrelenting. Certain ways in which the sub-plot reflects the action of the main plot are emphasized by the arrangement of scenes. In two consecutive scenes (I.iii and Liii) Orlando and Lodovico plan their disguises; in two others (Il.i and Il.ii) the disguises are successfully employed. In both instances the men choose to take the roles of servants. Within the latter of those two scenes (Il.ii) Dekker employs a comic surprise device, in which Candido's wife agreeably "turns the tables" on her husband by kneeling and vowing obedience to him. In the next scene (Ill.i) Infelice surprises us and her husband by kneeling to him. Though the scene is also, in a sense, comic, Infelice feigns the humility that was sincere in Candido's wife. Finally, two of the wives of the play Candido's and Matheo's - are subjected to attempted seductions in consecutive scenes; Bots unsuccessfully tempts to Candido's wife, and Hippolito debates the same idea with Bellafront.

UNIFYING DEVICES

Some of the scene relationships discussed above tend to unify the two actions of the play. Another device used to the same end is that of the character common to both plots. Lodovico is an instance of this sort. He is introduced in the first scene of the play, and from that point on he alternately works first in one action, and then in the other. Socially he seems to be midway between the Duke's family and the middle-class tradesman, Candido, and he can operate in both social spheres. Lodovico is supported in this

108

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

function by a group of courtiers. They ride to court with Infelice; they help Candido celebrate his wedding, and later join Bots in tempting Candido's wife; they agree with the Duke that Hippolito has been acting strangely; they participate in the party at which Matheo and Candido are arrested; and, finally, they are observers at Bridewell. Like Lodovico, they participate primarily in the sub-plot, though to a lesser degree than he. With him they serve as a continuous link between the two actions. They function as do the shoemakers in Shoemakers' Holiday. Bryan, the Irish footman, has a similar function in the play, though he appears in only three scenes - I.i, Ill.i, and Ill.iii. In the first he helps to establish the mood of the play, and performs as a comic utility character, Hippolito's servant; in the next, he is the "pawn" in the conflict between Hippolito and Infelice; and finally, the courtiers use him as another test of Candido's patience. Thus, a servant who could have been merely a protatic character is economically employed by the playwright in both actions. A play-goer or reader familiar with Dekker's other plays might well react with the thought, "And here's another of Dekker's stock dialect characters!" But for once the choice of character works for the play. As a low-comedy dialect character Bryan tempers the mood of the Infelice-Hippolito scene. The fact that Infelice chooses him as the imaginary rival at once magnifies Hippolito's reaction, and distinguishes the scene from a realistic and serious "problem play" situation.25 Moreover, his dialect is more than an independent comic device; it is functional in the scene with Candido. It provides a hindrance to communication between the men, which is basic to the situation. These unifying devices, and those discussed above, are something more than techniques used to unite independent actions. As Hazelton Spencer notes, "The subplot of humors is perhaps not entirely a concession to the groundlings. The patience of Candido affords a comic parallel to the fortitude of Bellafront." 28 It has 25

Elmer Edgar Stoll, on page 8 of Art and Artifice in Shakespeare (Cambridge, Eng., 1933), compares Hippolito's belief that Infelice could be unfaithful with Bryan to Othello's acceptance of the idea that Desdemona was unfaithful with Cassio. M Spencer, p. 668.

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

109

been noted that both actions have a similar scheme: a series of tests, all of which are successfully passed by the principal character. The actions, then, are thematically related in that they both involve an examination of such characteristics as patience, fortitude, and marital constancy. THE FINAL SCENE

The description of the two actions has revealed that they are united toward the end of the play. Orlando's request for the warrant to arrest Matheo is motivated by the old man's desire to teach his son-in-law a lesson, and to clear his daughter's name. But to get the warrant he has to appeal to the Duke, who is himself interested in his own daughter and son-in-law. The warrant, then, is extended to threaten Bellafront with arrest as a prostitute. The same warrant brings in Candido and the minor characters of his action. Consequently, the traditional gathering together of all actions in the last scene is, in this case, well prepared and motivated. There is, however, in the last scene, a problem of proportion. The characters Bots, Horseleech, and their associates receive an attention that is not entirely appropriate to their part in the play. Dekker has ordered this last scene in such a way that the play ends with an appropriate attention to the central characters, but they are almost lost in the crowd of prisoners brought in on the warrant. The last-minute rescue does not quite alleviate the problem. Hunt says of this play and of Honest Whore I: The closing scenes in each p a r t . . . are an appeal to the gallery, but to the present-day reader both are terrible rather than comic; and perhaps they were to Dekker, too. . . ,27

But to blame the scenes on the pit audience and to transport Dekker out of his own time are equally reprehensible. Harbage says of such matters: To assume that action and bloodshed (or farce and word play) were intended exclusively for the pit is simply not feasible. The disparate elements in the drama . . . are explainable on a sounder principle than that of dual appeal to social levels in the audience. The disparity may "

Hunt, pp. 100-101.

110

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

result from nothing more than a theatrical heightening of the actual contrast in life - between the constantly observable crudity of human action and refinement of human thought.28 In application to the play under discussion the key phrase is "theatrical heightening". It is true that the parade of prostitutes contributes directly to the exposure of Bots and Horseleech, and that their "fall" punishes them for their tricks on Candido. But more importantly, the "whores" are vital, lively, and interesting. With considerable skill, the playwright has introduced three effective character vignettes, which help to end the play in a strong, theatrical manner, appropriate in mood, if not in terms of action, to the play which has preceded that ending. Without these women and Bots, the last scene would emphasize the darker tones of accusation and recrimination. In defense of Dekker's ending Arthur Sherbo writes: Again, the obtrusion of these elements serves to counteract and weaken the sentimental effect of the fifth act with its reformations and its reconciliations. Had Dekker wished to emphasize the sentimental possibilities in the story of Bellafront and her father... he could have done so by cutting out the Candido subplot, the 'Bridewell' scene, all unnecessary characters, and all comedy and bawdry.29 The effect of the ending of the play is calculated; it does not represent some sort of "typical Elizabethan" tastelessness. Honest Whore II is rightfully considered one of Dekker's major accomplishments. In it he has combined interesting character studies, individual scenes of great merit, and a structure which bears examination even from the more exacting modern point of view. In many respects, it is related to Shoemakers' Holiday in terms of structural techniques. In both plays there are the mixture of tones, and the relating of actions by means of characters in common and by means of similarity in theme. Honest Whore II makes less use of interdependent actions. That is, it was argued that Rose and Lacy achieve their happy ending by means of Simon 28

Alfred Harbage, Shakespeare's Audience (New York, 1941), p. 144. ® Arthur Sherbo, English Sentimental Drama (East Lansing, 1957), p. 108. 2

THE SECOND PART OF THE HONEST WHORE

111

Eyre's success, which enables him to intercede for them. He, in turn, owes part of his success to Lacy's generosity. Candido has no such effect on Bellafront's action, nor does she on his. The handling of the unraveling in this play, however, is superior to that of Shoemakers' Holiday in one other matter. In that play, Dekker employed the conventional Deus ex machina device. Such a device has its counterpart here, in the combined characters of Orlando and the Duke, but they are involved in the action throughout, and provided with acceptable motivation. Dekker also overcomes what Henry Hitch Adams terms "the most difficult problem in dramatic construction" 30 - the static or passive hero - by providing Bellafront with an exceptionally effective and charming "intriguer" to act in her behalf. Orlando is rather like a substitute hero for whom the successful outcome is nearly as important as it is for his daughter. The sub-plot of the play is admittedly episodic, consisting of a series of trials of Candido's patience, and unified only by the consistency of his character and that of Lodovico, the manipulator. Perhaps because the scheme of a series of prank-like tests is intrinsically limited in its potential variations, the action tends to de-emphasize Candido himself toward the end, concentrating on a series of new characters. They are, however, all related by the arrests, and the action does return to its central character at the end. The primary problem in this play is in its degree of unity of tone or mood. Most critics seem to have considered the play to be a relatively serious study of the problems of a reformed prostitute, with strong sociological implications and ironic connotations, akin, perhaps, to Measure for Measure, but marred by a grossly comic sub-plot and a contrived happy ending. While it is agreed that Dekker took the characters and their problems seriously, this study demonstrates that by a careful arrangement of situations in both actions the playwright prepares thoroughly for an inevitable ending, and that the sub-plot is justified by its contribution and relevance to the main action. "Cyril Tourneur on Revenge", Journal of English and Germanic Philology, XLVin (January, 1949), 87.

4 THE WHORE OF BABYLON

It has been noted that Dekker was a prolific writer for the theatre. In his relatively lengthy career he wrote plays in most of the current Elizabethan genres, and, in their lists of lost plays written by Dekker, Chambers and Jones-Davies include over a dozen plays that were probably histories.1 But of the surviving plays only The Famous History of Sir Thomas Wyatt, written in collaboration with Webster, and The Whore of Babylon can be described as history plays. The latter play, the subject of this chapter, is very nearly a complete departure from the forms and styles to be found in history plays by Marlowe and Shakespeare. The experiment is not entirely successful. Moreover, the play does not compare favorably with the plays already examined here, particularly Shoemakers' Holiday and Honest Whore II. In Whore of Babylon, as in Shoemakers' Holiday, Dekker makes use of many incidents and events, but here he fails to pull them together and to provide a strong central and controlling force. The problems in the play are similar to those to be found in If It Be Not Good, but in that play they are more readily resolved. In writing Shoemakers' Holiday and Old Fortunatus, Dekker went to a single, though different source for each play, but for Whore of Babylon he sought materials in a variety of sources, creating, according to Riely, "a mosaic of historical allusions".2 1

Edmund Kerchever Chambers, The Elizabethan Stage (Oxford, 1923), m , 300-305; Jones-Davies, II, 339-416. * Marianne Gateson Riely, "The Whore of Babylon by Thomas Dekker: A Critical Edition" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1953), pp. 49 and 52.

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

113

The variety suggests that no single source exerted a shaping influence upon the play. The subject matter of the play is the conflict between Queen Elizabeth and Rome, particularly the plots against the Queen's life. Dekker masks the personalities and countries involved with allegorical names. A number of these are identified by marginal notes in the published play. For example, the Empress of Babylon represents the Roman Catholic Church, Titania is Queen Elizabeth, and Fairyland is England. Almost all of Babylon's adherents are so identified, but with the exception of Elizabeth none of the English faction is unmasked. Some of the allegorical allusions seem almost intentionally obscure. Late in the play, for example, Titania (Elizabeth) is urged to sign a death warrant for the Moon. The Moon is first referred to as "she" in terms that suggests Mary, Queen of Scots; later in the scene the pronoun changes to "he", and the account seems to refer to Essex. A number of the incidents in the play have their historical counterparts, and can be dated with some accuracy. Others may have been intended to refer to any one of several historical occurrences. The dumb show which opens the play, for example, clearly dramatizes the death of Queen Mary and the accession of Elizabeth in 1558. In Li the Empress of Babylon alludes to the five years of Mary's reign, and then to the fact that Titania's counterfeit Truth has written a book called Holy Spells. The book might be either the reinstated Book of Common Prayer or the Bishops' Bible, first published in 1568. Marianne Riely, the editor mentioned above, provides the following table of events in the order in which they appear in the play: 1558 — Accession of Elizabeth 1580 - Sending to England of seminary priests and Jesuits 1558-1584-Marriage negotiations 1582 - Parry pardoned for assault on Hugh Hare 1585 - Netherlands taken under Elizabeth's protection 1580-1589-Prince of Portugal negotiates with Elizabeth for aid 1571 -Campion's departure from England 1580 — Campion returns to England 1570 — Papal Bull arrives to England

114 1570-1571 1572 1594 1584 1588

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

- Ridolfi plot -Norfolk's execution -Lopez apprehended - Parry arrested - Armada 3

Dekker has treated these incidents with a certain freedom, particularly in terms of order. As can be seen above, for example, the defeat of the Armada is emphasized as the last incident in the play. In the statement to the reader, which precedes the published version of the play, Dekker acknowledges these discrepancies: And whereas I may, (by some more curious in censure, then sound in iudgement) be Critically taxed, that I falsifie the account of time, and set not down Occurrents, according to their true succession, let such (that are so nice of stomach) know, that I write as a Poet, not as an Historian, and that these two doe not Hue vnder one law.*

Altogether there are seven threats to Titania, all originating in Babylon: four to assassinate her, two to destroy her power, and one to kill her by black magic. The action of the play is the planning of the attempts, the actual attempts, and Fairyland's defense against them. That is, the play has one action, but that action has a number of forms. The individual forms, or individual attempts against Fairyland, do not comprise individual dramatic plots. There are, however, two factions in the court of Babylon, the King and the Cardinals. The two - political and the religious - can profitably be separated for discussion of the action of the play. THE KINGS I.i The Empress of Babylon informs her three subservient Kings 5 of the growth of Titania's power, and, by enumerating Fairyland's blasphemous acts, attempts to incite the Kings to take action against Titania. The Empress stirs the Kings to such a fury that they are ready to take arms against Fairyland. But the Empress cautions them that Fairy» Riely, p. 104. Bowers, Works of Dekker, Π, 497. The Kings are identified in the margins of the printed play as France (King 1), Rome and the Holy Roman Empire (King 2), and Spain (King 3).

4 5

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

115

land is impregnable, and suggests that they first attempt to cajole Titania into aligning herself with Babylon. I.ii Meanwhile in Fairyland, Titania discusses earlier attempts against her, but maintains that she does not wish to overthrow the Empress of Babylon. The three Kings enter disguised and, in a dumb show, dance with members of Titania's court. That completed, the Kings each propose marriage to Titania. Titania respectfully asks each of her counselors for his opinion. Each counselor advises her against an alliance by marriage, though each in a different way. 8 Pretending to accept one of the proposals, Titania says she will marry one of the Kings, on a certain day When When When When

a Court has no Parasite, truth speakes false, and falsehood right: Conscience goes in cloth of gold, Offices are giuen, not sold. . . . (I.ii.241-244) The three Kings, left alone, rage and plan revenge. King 3 sends the other two back to Babylon. He is to remain in Fairyland to attempt destruction from within. If his attempts fail, then he will return to lead an armed force against Fairyland. II.i Forewarned, Titania's counselors prepare to defend Fairyland from further attempts by Babylon to overthrow Titania. Titania holds court and receives, among others, Campeius, a scholar. The Queen distrusts him, and tells him that the favor he seeks has been given to another. The introduction of Campeius at this point seems arbitrary and episodic. He does not appear to be related to the main action of the play already outlined. But it must be assumed that he was immediately identified by the Elizabethan audience. Dekker has taken some care that the name Campeius (Campion) will stand out sharply; after a twenty line blank verse speech by another character, there is a change to a set of abrupt speeches, emphasizing the name by the contrasting rhythm. TITA:

His n a m e .

PARTH:

TITA: We heare so

Campeius: Deeply learned. (Il.i. 186)

Titania refuses the request by Campeius. 7 9 Except for a slightly less formal style and a higher degree of unanimity among the advisors here, the scene is somewhat reminiscent of the second scene in Gorboduc. 7 It is probable that this identified Edmund Campion for an Elizabethan audience, and the incident, which seems pointless to a modern reader, served to introduce a series of meanings and associations for Dekker's audience. An Elizabethan would anticipate Campion's treason; a modern reader is merely confused.

116

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

II.ii Rebuffed by Titania, Campeius becomes easy prey for King 3. The two meet, and King 3 convinces the scholar that he would be appreciated in Babylon.8 The King sends him off to visit Babylon to be recruited as a worker for the Empress. King 3 then confers with a conjurer who plans to kill Titania by burying her picture in unwholesome ground. As the picture rots Titania will sicken and die. The King urges him on, and then departs. In a dumb show the conjurer is surprised and taken by Titania's counselors as he is about to begin the black magic. IH.i The other two Kings, who have returned to Babylon, urge the Empress to take stronger action against Titania. The Empress agrees to order Titania's assassination, and receives two newly-won followers - Campeius and Ropus - sent to her by King 3. The two agree to use their skills of scholarship and medicine against the Fairy Queen. IV.Hi In Fairyland Titania notes that all her courtiers are unarmed, except for one silent gentleman. She speaks to him and he leaves in confusion. 9 Then she tells her courtiers that it was revealed to her that the gentleman intended to assassinate her. She asks her physician, Dr. Ropus, to make a tonic for her. A counselor enters with news that Campeius, who had been preaching dissention, has been arrested. As Titania is about to drink the prescription made by Ropus, another counselor rushes in with proof of Ropus' traitorous intentions. T h e doctor is arrested and taken away. At this point in the play the plots of the Kings merge with those of the Cardinals. The problem of exposition in a play such as this is both greater and smaller than in a frankly fictional drama: smaller for Dekker's immediate audience, but greater for the distant modern reader. Since most of the incidents and characters were familiar to the Elizabethan public, Dekker could count on his audience to supply a certain amount of background information. Even though he chose an allegorioal framework for the play, he did not expect it to mask much. In his prologue he says, . . . the weakest eye, (Through those thin vailes we hang betweene your sight, And this our peice) may reach the mistery: 10 * Taking no chances of misidentification, the playwright again emphasizes the name by repeating it four times in three lines of dialogue. • Riely, on page 216 of her edition, identifies this character as the Duke of Norfolk. 10 Bowers, Works of Dekker, Π, 499.

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

117

Thus, there could be no question of the identity of the Empress of Babylon as she entered under a canopy supported by four Cardinals, followed by priests and Kings. In production, even the Kings could be easily identified for the audience by costume. Such a device would be necessary, for there is no discernible differentiation between the three Kings in the dialogue. When they present themselves to Titania, in I.ii, they do remark on their individual countries, and still later, King 3 is associated most strongly with the Armada. For the Elizabethan audience, then, the only problem is to establish the time, and the Empress' remarks clearly indicate the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's reign. The device of the allegory allows Dekker to move back and forth between what he must have conceived to be historical incident and generalized incident - generalized, that is, in that the King of Spain does things himself (performing as an "undercover" agent) that in reality he would have ordered done by a representative. Such techniques and devices - of reliance on audience knowledge, and use of allegory, which relieves the playwright from even the loose strictures of Elizabethan history - allow for considerable concentration and simplification. If the audience understands the allusions and identifies the characters, the action moves with some clarity from incident to incident. The Kings at the end of Li announce the intention "with vs ioyne a league, / To wed her land to ours" (I.i. 111-112) - that they attempt to fulfill in I.ii. When that fails King 3's stated intention to remain in Fairyland while the others leave connects the second scene of the action to the third and fourth. In addition, the character of Campeius is worked smoothly into the pattern. He is motivated in his first scene, and reacts according to that motivation in the next. Here, as throughout the play, Dekker is relying upon his audience's recognition of the name, and their emotional reaction to it, based, not on anything in the play itself, but upon the emotions and attitudes brought into the theatre by the audience. This is a decided limitation on the play for the modern reader, who has few, if any, of the necessary associations to bring to the play. The activities for which the Kings alone are primarily respon-

118

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

sible are concentrated in the first two-thirds of the play. The marriage attempt begins and ends quickly in the first two scenes; two scenes later the threatened use of black magic is contained within one scene; the rest of the schemes, involving Campeius, Ropus, and the unidentified armed gentleman, are all resolved, unsuccessfully for Babylon, in IV.ii. The Campeius situation, though receiving the most detailed preparation and elaboration, is not given a dramatized ending. One of Titania's counselors describes Campeius' activities in Fairyland, and then abruptly ends with, "But now hee's tan'e" (IV.ii.97). Here Dekker is somewhat inhibited by historical fact, since Edmund Campion's crimes consisted of preaching and writing against the Anglican Church, things difficult to dramatize. Quite obviously, Dekker has omitted a number of possible incidents related to these schemes against Titania. He sacrifices detailed examination of a few situations for sketchy accounts of many situations. The mere number of attempts here, combined with those in the rest of the play, suggests that the playwright was interested in presenting a panorama of the Rome-England conflict. The mass and variety of attacks seem to be part of his intent in the play. In only two of the instances does Dekker dramatize Babylon's original enlistment of the tools of attack: the Empress incites the Kings, and King 3 recruits the disgruntled Campeius. In all four attempts against Titania and her power in this section of the play the playwright dramatizes or describes the acts themselves: the Kings attempt the alliance by marriage; the conjurer is caught in the act of black magic; the unidentified gentleman is faced down by Titania at the moment of attack; Ropus offers the poisoned drink; and Campeius' activities of subversion are described. The emphasis, then, is on the acts themselves, rather than on the conditions, circumstances, and personalities of the individual plotters. Naturally it would be impossible, within the limits of a single play, for Dekker to examine in detail the motivations, psychological and otherwise, of all these personalities. The Elizabethan audience might have accepted as sufficient the distant evil power of Babylon-Rome, but a modern audience, less directly

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

119

involved in the personality of Titania-Elizabeth and in the power struggle, would be more interested, perhaps, in the motivations. The play is weakened as it becomes removed in time from its subject matter, and is, perhaps, too topical for complete modern appreciation.

THE CARDINALS The Cardinals, like the Kings, are at first a group of indistinguishable characters. They are unidentified except by number in the speech prefixes. Later in the play a single churchman takes the lead and is responsible for most of their machinations, personifying the attack of the church as King 3 personified the political attack. The Cardinal is identified in several scenes by the speech prefix "Como," and later, in V.ii, a letter of instructions to an assassin is noted in the margin to be "The very wordes of Cardinal Como his letter sent to Parry" (V.ii.135). I.i After the Empress has charged the Kings to seek Titania's downfall, the Cardinals express private dissatisfaction with what they consider to be mild attacks on Fairyland. Their plan is to revenge themselves by pulling down the church that supplanted them, and to enlist secretly any Babylonian sympathizers remaining in Fairyland. They send out priests to infiltrate their enemy's church. II.i Paridel is first introduced as a condemned man pleading with Titania for clemency.11 She pardons him, but that seems to make him even more bitter for having had to beg. Emboldened by this success, he requests and receives permission to travel abroad. III.ii Paridel discusses assassination plans with a Jesuit who represents Cardinal Como. Paridel has been encouraged, but he wants a general dispensation to cover his murderous plans. He is urged on by the priest and several others, but an Albanois (Scot) maintains that 11

Once again, as in the case of Campeius-Campion, Dekker tries to assure recognition of Dr. Parry by the audience. Again, following a passage made up of complete lines of relatively smooth blank verse, Titania asks: tita: Whats yonder man that kneeles? elf: Tis Paridel. ήτα: Out doctor? pari: The most wretched in your land. (Π.Ϊ.148-149)

120

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

the good end cannot justify evil means. Pandel remains undecided. IV.ii Paridel tells Titania that he has participated in plots against her, but that he did it only to discover the plans. She thanks him, but he fears that he is still suspected. V.i Paridel discusses his assassination plans with his cousin. The kinsman questions both the ethics of the case and the effectiveness of the plans.12 V.ii Once again Paridel has an audience with the Queen of Fairies. She says that she has been informed that he still plots against her, but Paridel denies it. Several times, when her back is turned, he begins to stab her, but he hesitates in awe. Finally he steels himself by reading Como's dispensation, "remissione di tutti li peccati ..." (V.ii. 136), but this time he is stayed by the entrance of some counselors and his cousin, who has revealed Paridel's plans to murder Titania. The activities of the Cardinals require, t o a lesser degree, the same conditions of audience knowledge as did those of the Kings. This action, however, moves from the general plans set forth in the opening scene to a concentration on a single attempt against Elizabeth, rather than to a series of attempts. The circumstances of Paridel's first scene parallel those of Campeius - with a variation. Campeius is rejected; Paridel is accepted. A t this point, as in the Campeius plot, there is no connection between the instrument (Paridel) and the master plotters (the Cardinals). The connection is formed in Ill.ii, when Paridel talks with the Cardinal's representatives. Paridel's character and activities are the most thoroughly developed in the play. The action is also the most complex. Every other plot against Titania in the play consists basically of two elements - plan and failure. The Campeius situation is elaborated to the extent that his first traitorous leanings are dramatized. But Campeius succumbs easily to the King of Spain's blandishments and the rest of the action moves simply. The Paridel action, however, is much more sophisticated. The man is pulled in different directions; h e is undecided and hesitant. At one point he appears to have made a decision, only to change it in the next scene. The final scene, in which h e attempts t o kill Titania, is also developed in detail for considerable theatrical " Riely, on page SO of her edition, identifies this character as Edmund NeviU.

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

121

effect. Again he wavers, almost surrendering to Titania's regal gaze; then, fortified by Cardinal Como's letter, he tries again, only to be stopped, with his arm raised to strike, by the dramatic entrance of Titania's rescuers. Of those noted, only the Pandel action can be discussed in terms of crisis and climax. The climax consists of Paridel's attempt on Titania's life and his capture. He is caught because he has talked too much, and finally to one who is not sympathetic with his cause. This tendency to talk too much has been thoroughly established in Ill.ii, the scene in which he discusses his plans with five different people. Ironically it is his confession to Titania, by which he hopes to gain her favor, that forces the issue and necessitates the attempt on her life. On the heels of four unsuccessful threats (the Moon, the armed gentleman, Campeius, and Dr. Ropus) Titania accepts Paridel's explanation with something less than enthusiasm. This coolness causes Paridel to remark, "O shallow foole, thou hast thy selfe vndone, / Shees hardned and thou melted at one sunne" (IV.ii. 177-178). His only safety is in her death. Despite its relative complexity, this action moves from scene to scene quite regularly, with due preparation and a minimum of confusion. In his first scene Paridel prepares for all the rest by revealing his dislike for Titania, and prepares for the next scene by requesting permission to go abroad, where he is next found. By the end of the second scene (Ill.ii) it is clear that he is considering an attempt on the Queen's life, and his appearance in Titania's court follows naturally enough from that.

THE JOINT PLANS

In addition to the separate attempts made by the King and the Cardinals, there is also one major action which they plan in conjunction - the Armada. When they first consider the sea invasion, other single assaults against Titania are still at work. 111.i After the Kings receive the Empress' permission to attempt attacks on Titania's life, Cardinal Como argues that her death alone will

122

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

not bring Fairyland into their sphere of influence. He suggests that an invasion fleet be prepared to strike as soon as Titania is killed. They agree to call King 3 home to prepare the fleet. IV.iii Cardinal Como and the two Kings tell King 3 of the preparations for the Armada, and go off to receive blessings from the Empress of Babylon. IV.iv With considerable pomp the Empress of Babylon and her seven-headed beast receive the Kings and Cardinals. King 3 reports Fairyland's crimes against the Empress. Cardinal Como reads off the list of ships and commanders that will make up the Armada. All kneel to the beast, and then go off to board ship. V.ii In Fairyland Titania receives intelligence reports that the Armada is coming. Her counselors go off to prepare to fight. V.iv On board ship the three Kings give one another various bits of news of the losing battle. They despair and prepare to retreat. V.v One of Titania's nobles shouts orders in the midst of the seabattle. V.vi Titania awaits in camp as the army expects a land invasion. She is brought the news of the sea victory, and is told by Time that he will magically transport her to Babylon to observe the return of the defeated Kings. The Empress furiously curses the Kings. They argue among themselves and with her, but finally they kneel once again to her.18 The Armada action is one of the most thoroughly developed of the play. Armed attacks on Fairyland are mentioned as possibilities in the first scene in Babylon, but this major physical attack does not take shape until several of the other attempts have failed, midway through the total play. In some sense these early failures force or cause this particular attack. The Kings have failed to maneuver Titania into a weakening marriage, and immediately after the dramatization of the conjurer's capture in Fairyland, Kings 1 and 2 are depicted as reporting their failure to the Empress. They set other plots (Campeius and Ropus) in motion, but Cardinal Como convinces them that Titania's death must be coordinated with the destruction of her whole kingdom. Hiere is, then, a logical development, and a cause and effect pattern at 15 Riely, in her edition of the play, divides this last scene in two, introducing a scene break after Time's offer to let Titania see the return to Babylon. An undivided scene, however, seems appropriate since it supports the magical, instantaneous transportation of Titania to Babylon. The lack of division is equally appropriate if the Babylon incident is considered a vision produced by Time.

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

123

work. After the King's failure to woo Titania, King 3 elected to remain in Fairyland to set plots in motion, but he anticipated possible failure, and the invasion that must follow as a consequence and last resort: . . . If the sweet bane I lay bee swallowed, oh! a Kingdome bursts, But if the poysoned hooke be spied, then leuy Eightie eight Legions, and take open armes, The Guidon shall be mine, Ile beare the Standard. (I.ii.280-284)

Once again the scenes progress smoothly and predictably according to announced intentions. At the end of Ill.i, Cardinal Como says, "call Satyran [King 3] home" (III.i.250), and in IV.iii the King returns. Como and the Kings are summoned by the Empress, and then we see them with her. She sends them off to sea; Titania receives word of their approach; and, the battle takes place. The sea battle presents something of a problem in analysis, just as it must be a considerable problem in production of the play. Dekker has concentrated the whole battle into twenty-five lines, mostly shouts by the Kings, describing the defeat. There are two stage directions: "The Sea fight" (Prefacing V.iv), and "Fiorimeli followed, by Captaines, Marriners and Gunners with Linstockes" (Prefacing V.v). These directions and the dialogue suggest the possibility of a good deal of physical activity, which would produce a stronger and longer effect than the small number of lines would indicate. The Kings and the Fairyland defenders refer to the fire ships that were used in the battle, "What Hulkes ar these, That are on fire?" (V.iv. 3-4). Many possibilities for theatrical spectacle exist in the two scenes. Thus, on the printed page the battle can be underestimated in importance and impact; the reader may receive an impression of an insignificant diminution of something elaborately prepared. Cardinal Como's thirty-six line description in an earlier scene of the mighty and glorious Armada anticipates a bigger show - unless we read between the lines for the potential speotacle. It is interesting to compare Dekker's treatment of the Armada to that found in Thomas Heywood's The Second Part of If You

124

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

Know Not Me You Know Nobody. The Heywood play exists in several versions, but in none is there a battle scene. In one scene the Spanish admirals sneeringly discuss the impending battle, describing, incidentally, their own strength. The scene ends with the news that the little English ships are approaching. The next scene is the equivalent of Dekker's V.vi. As the Queen awaits at Tilbury, three messengers arrive with news of the battle. These Greek-like messengers describe the situation in detail, and at length. Heywood, in other words, chose to narrate the battle, while Dekker chose to dramatize it.

THE MORALITY ACTION In addition to the action described above, based on Catholic plots against Queen Elizabeth, there is a minor action in the play involving the characters Time, Truth, and Plaine-dealing. Dumb show The play opens with a dumb show that depicts Truth in rags and asleep. A funeral procession enters, apparently that of Queen Mary. Truth awakens, and she and her father, Time, dress in brightly colored clothes. They enlighten the mourners and join Titania, giving to her a book. I.i The Cardinals discuss a spy they have sent to Fairyland. The spy, Plaine-dealing, has quit their cause and joined Titania's court. II.i Plaine-dealing reports to Titania his observations in her kingdom. He describes the activities in the taverns of her realm in a satirical and critical fashion. The Queen is pleased with his honesty, and sends him to live with Truth. III.iii Plaine-dealing questions Truth's identity because he thought he knew Truth in Babylon. She questions him about his travels and observations abroad and in Fairyland. He answers in much the same fashion as he did to Titania. Time enters and tells Truth and Plaindealing to follow him. IV.i They arrive at a cave out of which comes Falsehood (Babylon's Truth). She calls up various characters out of the ground. Time explains the evils of Babylon to Plaine-dealing. The dumb show characters march out, and Plaine-dealing realizes that in Babylon he thought Falsehood was Truth. Time, Truth, and Plaine-dealing run out to hunt down Falsehood and expose her.14 14

Dekker combines here several variations of dumb show technique.

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

125

V.iii The action joins the others discussed above. Truth and Plainedealing lead soldiers with drum and colors. Time enters and sends Truth out to fight for Titania, and tells Plaine-dealing to cleanse the army camps. Plaine-dealing responds with a description of some camp vices. V.vi Plaine-dealing tells Titania of the birth of a child in the army camp. There is much rejoicing, and Titania names the child Beria after the camp's location. Time describes the victory over the Armada, and offers to take Titania to observe the return to Babylon described above.

Once again, as in Old Fortunatus, there is the problem of the actions of morality characters. Here, as in the rest of the play, the outcome is never in question. The slight plot deals with the conflict between Truth and Falsehood, although the latter appears in only one scene, and that a dumb show. The two antagonists appear together in that scene (IV.i) but do not confront one another directly. The contest appears to take two forms: the persuasion of Plaine-dealing, and the direct combat between Truth and Falsehood. From the outset Truth is aligned with Titania, as is Plainedealing. But Plaine-dealing needs some small persuasion to extend his alliance to the character of Truth. He had been convinced (as had all the Fairies-English a few years back) that the real Truth dwelt in Babylon-Rome. As befits such a blunt and honest personification, he is open-minded, and the word of Titania, together with the scene displayed by Time, in which Falsehood reveals herself, is enough evidence to convince him. The crisis of this simple action is to be found in the scene in which Plaine-dealing sees through Falsehood. When Time and Truth tell him that the ugly thing he sees is what he took for Truth in Babylon, and urge him to chase her, he responds, As Frances Foster notes, dumb shows were sometimes used "to present events necessary to the plot, but not easily included in dialogue form. More and more the shows tended to be absorbed into the play proper, for although in their second stage they were introduced by a presenter who was outside the act, they were later taken in hand by the characters of the main play. . . . " "Dumb Show in Elizabethan Drama before 1620", Englische Studien, XLIV (1912), 16-17. Time is clearly a "presenter", but he interprets the dumb show for Plaine-dealing rather than for the audience directly.

126

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

With hue and crie, now I know her: this villanous drab is bawd, now I remember, to the Whore of Babylon·, and weele neuer leaue her, till shee be carted. . . . (IV.i.70-72) The rest of the scenes blend with the other actions of the play. There are, however, several passages in this action that seem to be completely extraneous - that is, Plaine-dealing's observations on Fairyland 'ordinaries' and army camp life. His comments were perhaps entertaining in a satiric fashion, and they are at most a minor flaw. They also have a function in relation to the other actions of the play. This function will be discussed later in the chapter.

INCIDENTAL HISTORICAL EVENTS

There are three incidents in the play which are not directly related to the actions discussed above. Two of them were indirectly related to Spanish activities historically, but they are not linked with King 3 in the play. II.i One of Titania's counselors requests her protection for some neighbors, who, through commerce, have grown to be much like Fairyland. Titania grants her protection. A marginal note identifies them as the Netherlands (II.i.234). Il.i Later in the same scene another counselor requests sanctuary for a young prince whose father has been killed. A stage direction a few lines later refers to this character as the Prince of Portugal (Il.i. 279). IV.ii The third incident has to do with the Moon, discussed in the introduction to this chapter. Titania's counselors tell her that the Moon has tried to compete with her in brightness, and that a jury of stars has voted to pull the Moon down, literally to kill her. Titania hesitates, argues mercy, but then relents, signing the proferred death warrant. A few scenes later, however, when Cardinal Como lists those who are to participate in the Armada, he includes a reference to the Moon, "And last that host of starres which from the Moone / Will fall to guide vs on . . . " (IV.iv.109-110). This statement comes amidst the list of forces, and would seem to be part of the play's allegory rather than a momentary flight of poetic fancy on the part of the churchman. Apparently there are good stars and bad stars in the allegory. At any rate, the passage in IV.ii could be interpreted to refer to either Mary Stuart or

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

127

Essex, but this later mention is too brief to help, and does not seem to indicate either of those persons. 15 All this is quite apart from the fact that the Moon should be dead at the time Babylon is counting on her aid.

These three incidents have no effect upon the actions of the rest of the play. They are never referred to again in the play, and they do not affect the England-Rome conflict. That does not mean, however, that they are entirely extraneous to the play. Like the plots against Elizabeth, these incidents were more meaningful to their original audience than they are to the modern reader (with the possible exception of the Moon incident). To us they seem abbreviated, almost pointless, but that is partly because they are relatively obscure. Their contribution will be discussed below in the consideration of the complete play.

RELATIONSHIP OF THE A O T O N S

Writing about this work in his study of the English history play, Irving Ribner notes that Dekker's use of morality figures in a history play is by no means unconventional. He does, however, object to the use of allegory: The Whore of Babylon attempts to substitute for the usual dramatic methods of the Tudor history play a type of allegory and a fairyland locale which were entirely alien to the genre. Its failure as a play must be attributed primarily to this ill-advised experiment. 18

Ribner displays a somewhat conservative attitude in the quoted passage. Experimentation with form and technique is probably a necessary artistic process; the "usual" methods need not be the only methods. Even if Ribner could demonstrate that "allegory and a fairyland locale" are incompatible with the history play he would not prove his point for this play. The allegory used by » Boas apparently ignores these contradictions, and says that "there is no doubt that Thomas Dekker . . . is alluding to Elizabeth's reluctance to sign the Earl's [Essex] doom. . . . " Frederick S. Boas, Queen Elizabeth in Drama and Related Studies (London, 1950), p. 22. w Irving Ribner, The English History Play in the Age of Shakespeare (Princeton, 1957), p. 288.

128

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

Dekker is little more than a change of names for the characters, most of whom represent historical figures rather than abstractions. A play does not fail because its characters have fictional names. The fairyland locale is as superficial as the allegorical names. The sea battle, for example, is not fought from pea-pods and with magic wands. One character describes the call to arms as follows: The drum that gaue the call, could not be heard For iustling armours; er'e the call was done, It was so ringd about with groues of pikes, That when they brake on both sides to giue way, The beating of the drum was thunders noise, Whilst coates of Steele clasht so on coates of Steele, Helmets on helmets that they strucke out fire, Which shewd like lightning. . . . (V.ii.181-188)

That is not to say that the play is successful; but its shortcomings are to be found in other areas than Dekker's decision to abandon "the usual dramatic methods of the Tudor history play. . . ." It must be granted, however, that Ribner is not alone in condemning the play because of the allegory. Schelling wrote: There is, however, something so unutterably preposterous to our present way of thinking in the cloaking of Burghley and Leicester under the names Fideli and Parthenophil. . . . The great horse of the Spenserian allegory had a pace beyond his [Dekker's] menage. 17

Without the allegorical curtain Dekker could hardly have written the play at all. Even after Elizabeth's death many of the real life counterparts of the characters were still alive and influential. It has been noted that the English, other than Elizabeth and the traitors, have not been given identity-revealing names. Whether or not Dekker has his facts straight, English lords would not care to be depicted as advocates for future traitors, as are Elfiron and Parthenophil for Pandel and Campeius in Il.i. Furthermore, the official censor frowned upon "disrespectful representation . . . of personages of rank. . . . " 18 This sort of explanation does not 17 Felix E. Schelling, The English Chronicle Play (New York, 1902), p. 240. 18 Virginia Crocheron Gildersleeve, Government Regulation of the Elizabethan Drama (New York, 1908), p. 90.

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

129

make the experiment successful, but it does make it purposeful. The changes of names and locale has a considerable effect upon historical time in the play. Such a change eliminates any necessity to follow an historical chronology of events. The playwright can and does change the order of incidents and the amount of time between incidents. Using Mary's death in the opening dumb show and Dr. Lopes' execution as the historical time limits, the play covers a period of at least thirty six years.19 Dekker, however, by producing a concentrated time effect of continuous action, intensifies the attacks on Elizabeth. Rome-Babylon appears to be unrelentingly evil and vicious, certainly a desirable effect for Dekker's purposes. Riely says that this effect is in part due to the relationship of the play to the morality play, in which each episode "has a contention scheme", a continuous series of direct clashes between the opposed forces. Later she notes: If one bears in mind the contention pattern as well as the usual chronicle history structure, it becomes evident that he nevertheless did not throw scenes haphazardly together, but worked with careful calculation of stage effect.20

Dekker's treatment of the two historical incidents involving Dr. Parry and Dr. Lopez is an example of the positive effect of manipulation of time, and also of emphasis. Historically, Dr. Parry's activities provide better dramatic material for the playwright than do those of Dr. Lopez. Dr Lopez' plots were and are obscure, but Dr. Parry did indeed expose plots to Elizabeth, and then proceeded to plot himself, only to be exposed in turn by a supposed friend. In the play the Parry action is told in much more detail than the Lopez action and it continues beyond the Lopez action to the stronger final position, despite the fact that historically Dr. Parry was arrested and executed almost ten years before the Lopez poison plot came to light. Dr. Lopez, as a matter of fact, was not accused until a number of years after the Armada battle. " As noted earlier the identification of Essex's execution (1601) with the Moon in the play is not certain. Such an identification would extend the time span to forty years. M Riely, pp. 55 and 58.

130

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

This freedom with time also permitted Dekker to use the Armada, the most immense of the efforts, in the final position in the play. As the greatest effort and the greatest defeat for the forces opposing Elizabeth, the Armada provides the strongest ending for the patriotic audience. Within the context of allegory the morality figures seem even more at home than usual in the Elizabethan play. Titania can grant an interview to Plaine-dealing, and be transported to Babylon by Time, whereas even an Elizabethan might question the dramatic propriety of Elizabeth's participation in such scenes. The morality figures do, in fact, mingle freely with the other characters of the play, and even when not actually present in the scenes, the personified characters are referred to frequently. In the opening scene the Empress talks of Truth and her father, Time, who are in Fairyland. Later in the same scene the Cardinals discuss Plainedealing and his counterpart, Double-dealing. When Titania's counselors make preparations for the defense of Fairyland they assign Providence to the navy and Courage to the council table, and when war does come, Truth literally leads the soldiers of Fairyland, and Time proclaims that, lie flie hence to the fleete of Babylon. And from their tacklings and their maine-mast tops, Time shal shoote vengeance through his bow of Steele, Wedge-like to split their Nauie to the keele. Ile cut their Princes downe as blades of grasse, As this glasse, so the Babilonian power, The higher shall runne out to fill the lower. (V.iii.56-62) In the description above of the action of the morality figures they seem slighted, almost extraneous to the main action of the play. Within the play as a whole, however, they become full characters, participants to be referred to by other characters, and direct, not symbolic, contributors to the outcome of the play. This is why they have no climax scene of their own; the climax of the play is theirs as well as Titania's. It is true, however, that the character of Truth, who figured so regularly in the action and dialogue of the play, who was indeed the central figure of the opening dumb

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

131

show, is peculiarly absent in the closing scenes of the play. Riely comments: She goes - to return no more, if we follow the stage directions of the quarto literally. But these are decidedly deficient at the end of the play, and I think Dekker intended her to be present with Time at the final triumph - her own triumph, after all.21

A theorized intention, however, does not compensate for the omission. Time's absence at the end must be accounted a flaw in the degree to which the play is complete and symmetrical. One scene of the morality action, V.iii, in which Plaine-dealing speaks at length of the evils of an army camp, may serve a purely technical function in the structure of the play. The scene is preceded by the one in which Titania gives orders for the defense against the Armada, and is followed by the sea battle scenes themselves. The separation provided at Plaine-dealing's speeches serves to give the impression that there has been time to carry out the defense orders. The tenor and subject matter of the scene are like that of Plaine-dealing's scenes throughout the play, and in that sense the scene is appropriate to the rest; but none of these speeches contribute or relate to the action itself. They do not, however, amount to enough to constitute a major weakness in the play's structure. The combination of the various actions of the play produces a number of other effects. Dekker has been commended frequently for his opening scenes. Jones-Davies characterizes them as good, often excellent.88 Alfred Harbage writes, "To watch Dekker getting a play under way is a lesson in craftsmanship."83 This play is no exception. The dumb show which opens the play, and the two scenes that follow, are highly theatrical in impact. The mimed funeral procession for Queen Mary is followed closely by the ceremonial entry of the Empress. »

Riely, p. 73. Jones-Davies, II, 177. » Alfred Harbage, "The Mystery of Perkin Warbeck", Studies in the English Renaissance Drama in Memory of Karl Julius Holzknecht, eds. Josephine Bennett, Oscar Cargill, and Vernon Hall, Jr. (New York, 1959), p. 137. a

132

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

Empresse of Babylon: her Canopie supported by four Cardinals: two persons in Pontificali roabes on either hand, the one bearing a sword, the other the keies: before her three Kings crowned, behinde her Friers,

etc. (Prefacing I.i)

She immediately launches into an emotion-arousing diatribe against Titania-Elizabeth, sets the basis for all the plots of the play, and gives orders for the first attack. Moments later the Cardinal's evil machinations provide another hissing-sequence for the Elizabethan audience. In the next scene the first Babylonian plots are upset and others set afoot. Once again Dekker has combined vivid and strongly contrasting theatrical spectacle with expository and character-delineating materials to open a play quickly and effectively. When the actions are combined it becomes apparent that the play as a whole is divided into three sections or movements, each introduced by a scene in the Court of Babylon: I.i; Ill.i; and IV.iv. The first scene sets the action for the play as a whole, and also the minor attacks Which take place in the first section. In Ill.i, after the defeat of the earlier plans, the Empress sends out the next group of assassins. In IV.iv, after most of the earlier plots have failed, the Empress blesses the leaders of the Armada. None of these units is entirely self-contained. That is to say, some situations or actions continue beyond the end of a specific unit. The threat of total war is present from the beginning, although not in the specific terms of the Armada. The Kings shout, All her bowers, Shall like burnt offerings purge away (in fire) Her lands pollution. OMN: Let's to armes. (I.i.94-96)

KING

2:

Campeius is recruited by King 3 in the first section, but is not caught until the end of the second. Pandel is sent out by the Empress at the beginning of the second unit, but does not make his attempt on Titania until the third. Thus, the playwright has given his play a repetitive pattern, and at the same time he has produced a continuous forward movement which unifies the action from beginning to end.

133

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

The various plots against Titania take on a calculated design in the total structure of the play. It was noted that they total seven in all. Five of these are briefly sketched, and concentrated in the first two-thirds of the play, culminating in the second scene of the fourth act. Against this background, and growing out of the failures of the early attempts, two examples of attack - one of personal violence and one of national attack - are developed more fully in the last third of the play. Visually, the attacks could be conceived to take the form of a pyramid or triangle. The broad base of the pyramid represents the beginning of the play. As successive threats are thwarted the concentration goes to two and finally one, the Armada. Pandel seems to sense this effect of the concentration of the personal attacks in his attempt on Titania.24 Here he describes his plot in a report to Titania: PARI:

With these (oh pardon me!) with these I held A polliticke league, the lines of all their treasons, (Drawne from one damned circle) met in mee, My heart became the Center, and the point Was this - I dare not tell it.

TITA: PARI:

Speake? T o kill y o u .

TITA: PARI:

How durst you (being our subiect) wade so far? Your eare of mercy. I became a spunge To drincke vp all their m i s c h i e f e . . . . (IV.ii.158-164)

This technique of the many threats evolving into two and then one, creates a structural weakness. It presents too many small crises throughout the play, all, quite naturally ending in the same way, in defeat for Babylon. Dekker has, with relative success, attempted to vary the type and form to maintain interest. There is also a progress toward more direct violence, which would seem to make the pattern more effective. To repeat the order once again, there is: first, the non-violent proposal of marriage; then, the death-at-a-distance by black magic; then, the silent gentle24

Historically Paridel-Parry appears to have been first an agent provocateur for the English, and later a double agent, actually plotting against Elizabeth. His confessions were well known to the Elizabethan public.

134

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

man who apparently never gets around to drawing his sword; then, the direct offer of poison; then, the raised weapon; and finally, the Armada. Thus, the danger to Titania and Fairyland becomes increasingly direct and violent, producing a gradually growing tension and excitement. These effects are achieved through the playwright's selection, order, and emphasis of the dramatized events. The location of the crisis and climax of the play becomes a problem when related to Dekker's apparent purposes in writing the play. The title of the play seems to direct the attention specifically to the Roman machinations and to the Empress of Babylon. Yet Dekker opens the address to the reader with a very direct statement to the contrary: The Generali scope of this Drammaticall Poem, is to set forth . . . the Greatnes, Magnanimity, Constancy, Clemency, and other incomparable Heroical vertues of our late Queene. And (on the contrary part) the inueterate malice, Treasons, Machinations, Vnderminings, and continual blody stratagems, of that Purple whore of Roome, to the taking away of our Princes Hues, and vtter extirpation of their Kingdomes.2S

The statement points to a basic element of the play - its duality. The play is not merely anti-Rome, it is also pro-Elizabeth. But a complimentary portrait, and especially one whose subject matter can permit no shadings away from pure virtue (a Queen Elizabeth with human weaknesses!) is intrinsically much less interesting, dramatically, than the melodramatic plottings of a strong villain. Here, moreover, the evil is active, and the good passive. The Empress and her cohorts are frankly out to upset Titania and her kingdom, but Titania graciously says, I seeke no fall of hirs, my Spirit wades In Clearer streames, her bloud I would not shed, T o gaine that triple wreath that binds her head, T h o mine shee would let forth, I know not why, Only through rancke lust after Souereigntie. (I.ii. 16-20)

That is why the description and discussion of the action above is »

Bowers, Works of Dekker, Π, 497.

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

135

almost entirely in terms of the plotters, rather than those plotted against. The active ones can be motivated, create plans, develop them, and then execute them; but Titania can only repel the attacks. As Bernard Spivack says: For it is the paradox of the allegorical play . . . that their theatrical achievement was at the opposite pole to their ethical intention. Proclaiming the moral superiority of virtue, the uniformly demonstrated the dramatic superiority of vice.2® The situation is somewhat analogous to the passivity of Bellafront in Honest Whore II and Tonniella in Match Me in London. But Dekker did attempt to portray both the evil of Babylon and the virtues of Titania. This attempt produces, in effect, two major crises and two major climaxes in the play. The crisis and climax of the Babylonian actions are most easily discerned of the two sets because they are related to action rather than character. If the Empress and her immediate cohorts are central in this particular action of the play they must be directly involved at the climax, and not merely represented by their hired assassins, or even the Armada. If it had been possible for the Empress, Cardinal Como, and the Kings to be captured or killed in the battle itself, that scene would have made a fitting climax for the action. But the playwright did not allow himself to move that far from history into allegory; he was using the allegory to hide some names and to re-arrange events. The climax of this action is the last scene of the play, the scene in which the Empress receives the news of the defeat of the last of her plans against Titania. All the principals appear in this scene. They fight among themselves, and there is a complete breakdown of their relationship. Cardinal Como is forced to beg the Kings to kneel to the Empress, and the Kings do so, but the homage that had been voluntarily and pious is now forced and fearful. The suggestion is that now even the Kings are aware of the Empress' true nature, and that they will never again function as a group. But it is the defeat of the Armada that makes this last scene possible. Therefore, the crisis in this action rests in the decision to send the Armada against Fairyland. In III.i the Empress be** Spivack, p. 123.

136

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

guiled Campeius and Ropus, and sent them out against Titania. Her words concerning these two men predict her reaction to the King's failure with the Armada: Fare you well: Our benediction goe along with you — [They exit.] Our malediction and your soules confusion Like shiuer'd towers fall on your luckelesse heads, And wedge you into earth low as the deepe Where are the damned, if our world you fire, Since desperately you'le ride and dare aspire. (Ill.i. 180-186) She then accepts Cardinal Como's suggestion to create the Armada, and the last great effort begins to move toward the climax. Because the part of the play dealing with Titania is little more than an actionless character study, the terms crisis and climax cannot, perhaps, be used in their usual sense. The climax is merely the last, and most triumphant, of her reactions or responses to the attacks of her enemies. Since she cannot personally deal with the Armada, as we have seen her personally deal with the attacks on her person, this climactic moment occurs immediately after the sea battle scenes, in the army camp Beria.27 Her 'heroic' enjoyment of this vigorous life and democratic equality with the soldiers constitute the final effect in this study of Titania's queenliness. This incident immediately precedes the last in the play, the scene in Babylon, which has been described as the climax of the Babylon conspiracy action. Dekker has used the powers of the Time figure to effectively juxtapose the two events and blend 27 A marginal note, V.ii.206, identifies Beria as Tilbury. Once again Dekker has used historical incident for his own purposes. Elizabeth spoke to her troops at Tilbury some days after the defeat of the sea force, as the English awaited a land invasion by Parma's army from across the channel - an invasion which did not take place. By juxtaposing this army camp scene with the sea scenes and by using the same character to win the sea victory and to report the complete victory over the enemy, Dekker compresses time and unifies the victory. Historically, Elizabeth's speech at Tilbury was anti-climatic in the negative and non-dramatic sense of the term.

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

137

them together into one scene unit. Titania and Time watch the scene, and Titania twice comments on it. Thus, both Titania and the Empress are brought together - visually, at any rate - in this last scene of the play. It is conceivable that the playwright could have written another scene in Fairyland with which to end the play. Some sort of victory celebration, with rewards for Titania's captains, might have been suitable. The actual arrangement, however, puts the emphasis at the end of the play on the Babylonian court. Dekker involved Titania-Elizabeth right up to the end, but he evidently recognized that the play was structurally oriented to the Roman conspiracies rather than to the Elizabethan portrait. The Titania study, in which there is no chain of actions, no change in character, only a continuing display of virtues, has no crisis as such. The second scene of the fourth act, however, seems to be some sort of focal point in the structure of the play. Here, Titania does just as she does in the rest of the play - she upsets Babylonian threats. But there is a concentration of these victories in this scene. She wisely orders the execution of the Moon; her omniscience thwarts an armed attack; Campeius is reported captured; the poison attempt fails; and a would-be assassin confesses his involvement with Babylon. The fact that Titania is successful here, in no way directly affects the rest of the play. Babylon has already begun to prepare the Armada, and its embarkation is not contingent upon the success or failure of the attempts in this scene. The Armada attack is supposed to coincide with her death, but as an attack against all of Fairyland, rather than just her person, it supersedes any of the assassination attempts. In this sense, then, the scene is not an orthodox crisis. More examples of Titania's power and wisdom are dramatized here than anywhere else in the play, but they do not influence the outcome. The scene which immediately precedes this one, however, does support the contention that this scene is some kind of a critical moment in the action. The scene juxtaposed is the scene in which Plaine-dealing is convinced of the falsity of Babylon's teachings the crisis of the morality action. Thus, we first see Babylon exposed in the morality level of the play, and then, immediately

138

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

following that, a concentration of Babylonian plots against Titania is exposed and defeated. This grouping of scenes serves to further relate the morality action to the rest of the play, and to mark a kind of crisis in the Titania action. PARALLELS AND CONTRASTS

In order to contrast the Empress and Titania, the playwright has employed a series of parallel scenes and situations in the play. These parallels also serve to link the two groups and to unify the play as a whole. Dekker also apparently considered the two parts to be evenly balanced. After explaining the two subjects of the play, he wrote: In sayling vpon which two contrary Seas, you may obserue, on how direct a line I haue steered my course: for of such a scantling are my words set downe, that neither the one party speaks too much, nor the other (in opposition) too little in their owne defence.28

Apart from the somewhat absurd contention that he is being fair to both parties, there is some truth to the statement; the Babylon court scenes amount to 806 lines, and the Fairyland court scenes amount to 895 lines. But as noted above, the Babylonian actions make better dramatic material than do Titania's virtues, and her defenses against the attacks do not involve enough materials to make up the full portrait the playwright apparently wanted to paint of Elizabeth. In particular, the playwright is without opportunity to display the warmer, kinder side of his late queen. In order to do so, Dekker went outside of the specific action of the Roman-Spanish conspiracies. In II.i, for example, Titania is told that a neighboring country requests help. She answers: . . . giue them our presence: In mysery all nations should be kin, And lend a brothers hand, vsher them in. Stood here my foes (distrest) thus would I grieue them, Not how they ha bin, but how I might relieue them. (II.i.257-261) 88

Bowers, Works of Dekker, Π, 497.

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

139

A few moments later àie is told of a young prince in need of protection. She responds: Pittie and we had talke before you came, She hath not taken yet her hand from ours, Nor shall shee part, vntill those higher powers Behold that Prince: good workes are theirs, not ou'rs; Goe: bid him trust his misery in our hands, Great trees I see do fall, when the shrub stands. (II.i.271-276) The playwright seems to be striving for similar effects later in the play. The Moon sequence, for example, is not directly related to the struggles with Babylon. Titania debates with her counselors over the choice between justice and mercy, and concludes: Yet if we needs must bow, we would incline To that where mercy lies, that scale's diuine; But so to saue were our owne breast to wound, Nay (which is more) our peoples: for their good, We must the Surgeon play, and let out blood. (IV.ii.26-30) Considering the stated purpose of the portrait of Elizabeth, all such incidents and passages are functional in the play. In each case the passage is part of a scene which deals more directly with the Babylon problem, so that the passages are not entirely isolated. They do, however, seem to be extraneous because the great majority of the scenes and passages in the play do deal with Titania's relationship to Babylon. The quoted passages are episodic, in the sense that they do not further the action of the play. They are functional only on the thematic level of the play. In themselves, perhaps, they do not constitute a major weakness in the structure of the play, but combined with the Plaine-dealing speeches discussed above, and the seeming gaps in continuity produced by the failure of the modern reader to grasp some of the allusions, these apparently extraneous passages give the impression that the play is disjointed and episodic. Such weaknesses have probably provided the basis for critical opinions that the play is "shapeless" and without "coherence".29 "

Hunt, pp. 46 and 36.

140

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

Most of the parallels and contrasts are related more directly to the action of the play as a whole than are those discussed above. Titania's non-aggressive attitude toward the Empress, for example, has been noted above. But the Empress advises the Kings as follows: Dissemble, flatter, stoope to licke the dust Shee goes vpon, and (like to serpents) creepe Vpon your bellies, in humilitie; And beg shee would but with vs ioyne a league. . . . (I.i.108-111) The two rulers' relationships with their counselors are also contrasted. The Empress commands hers to prostrate themselves before her seven-headed beast, but Titania, overhearing her counselors plan the defense of Fairyland, says: Wise pilots? firmest pillers? how it agrees, When Princes heads sleepe on their counsels knees: Deepe rooted is a state, and growes vp hie, When Prouidence, Zeale, and Integritie Husband it well. . . . (II.i.32-36) The first two scenes in the play - one in Babylon and one in Fairyland - are in direct contrast. Both begin with speeches by the female rulers describing the other's faults and their own glories. In one there is an atmosphere of violence and hate; in the other, there is reasonableness and righteousness, and mutual respect between the Queen and her subjects. In a similar fashion, the last two locales of the play involve a contrast between the two courts. In Fairyland there is joy and comradery. Titania is actually present in the war camp to lead her soldiers if need be. The soldiers respond accordingly. This atmosphere is heightened by a frank symbol of birth and regeneration. Plaine-dealing enters with news that a man-child has been born in camp, a healthy, Herculean infant whom Titania decides to name Beria in honor of the camp. When the scene shifts to Babylon the atmosphere changes accordingly, and the imagery of the Empress' speeches recalls the child in the preceding scene.

141

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

Earth, lie sucke all thy venóme to my brest, It cannot hurt me so as doe my sonnes, My disobedient, desperate, dampned sonnes, My heauy curse shall strike you.

(V.vi.114-117)

Cardinal Como responds, "Lift vp your sacred head: your children come, / Vpon their knees to take a mothers doome" (V.vi. 120121).

Partly because the play has been published only twice since the beginning of the seventeenth century, and partly because the subject matter is naturally repugnant to a world that conceals rather than prints its prejudices, Whore of Babylon has been the object of very little scholarship. Much of what has been said of the play seems to be strongly influenced by subjective reactions to the frankly anti-Roman attitudes expressed by the playwright. Critics have noted the generally uninspired verse and flatness or absence of characterization in the play. If it was the use of the allegorical names which induced Dekker to de-humanize the characters, then the allegory is indeed responsible for shortcomings in the play. While these aspects of dramatic composition are somewhat outside this study, it is difficult to read the play without noting, with Riely, that "what The Whore of Babylon lacks is characters who excite interest as people. . . . " Riely tempers this criticism by reminding the reader that Dekker's actors probably provided impersonations of people, many of whom were "known to some of his audience by sight, and to the rest by reputation".30 There is a limit, however, to the credit to be given Dekker for the actors' talents. Despite the fact that a topical and allegorical play may present insurmountable problems for the playwright - at least in relation to future audiences - some writers manage to compensate for these intrinsic shortcomings with a brilliance of imagination. An example of such a play is Thomas Middleton's A Game at Chess, about which Richard Barker has written, The whole play, in short, is a tour de force, which has even today *> Riely, pp. 74 and 65.

142

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

the interest of novelty. It resembles modern plays that catch the attention of an audience by using an unorthodox technique.31 Dekker employed an "unorthodox technique", but the play is uninspired. Some elements of the play's structure are sound, though by no means brilliantly so. Dekker has constructed an effective and theatrical opening and conclusion for the play. Despite the great number of plots originating in Babylon, most of the incidents in the play are clearly articulated, as each plot moves forward in a controlled fashion. The greatest achievement is the way in which Dekker shapes his materials toward a concentration at the end of the play. Many attacks are set in motion early in the play; they distill down to two, and finally to one. Unfortunately, some of the earlier examples of attacks are developed out of proportion to their early endings. Structurally, the play has three basic weaknesses as revealed in the analysis. The first, and perhaps most important, is the fact that the playwright was unable to integrate the materials intended to implement the two somewhat diverse purposes stated in the address to the reader - the Roman conspiracy and the portrait of Elizabeth. The first of these clearly dominates the action of the play; the attempt to fulfill the second apparently forced Dekker to introduce materials that are episodic. The audience in the theatre is not necessarily aware of the extra-dramatic statement by the playwright that precedes the play, and the play itself is so thoroughly oriented to the Babylonian plots that materials outside of that context must seem, and must be, appendages rather than integrated parts of the whole. Other passages in the play, specifically certain speeches by Plaine-dealing, are clearly extraneous. They add little to the play, and contribute nothing truly useful. Secondly, there are too many minor attacks on Titania. They provide a useful background, and support the playwright's thesis of the evil of Babylon, but many are developed and then cut short. It is not always clear which are to be subjected to further examination, and which are merely examples. The Campeius epi51

Barker, p. 147.

THE WHORE OF BABYLON

143

sode is an example of a detailed early development, followed by an abbreviated and only narrated ending; its promise does not seem fulfilled. The last of the weaknesses is perhaps more accurately a weakness in the modern reader. The play is extremely topical - so much so that a missed allusion creates an impression of faulty development and episodic structure. Dekker cannot be held entirely accountable for this problem, despite the fact that a high degree of topicality in a play usually shortens the effective life of that play. The fact remains, however, that much of the action is not clear for the modern reader. Thus, in Whore of Babylon, the weaknesses seem to outweigh the positive achievements.

5 I F THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, T H E DEVIL IS IN IT

Five years after the 1607 quarto of Whore of Babylon, another Dekker play with religious overtones was published. In this case, although one of the actions is concerned with the sinful fall of a Priory, the controversy over religion is not central. Dekker has included in If This Be Not a Good Play, the Devil Is in It more incidents and actions than any other play examined in this book. The moods range from farce to melodrama; but despite the great variety, the playwright controlled his materials, and produced a play that is essentially coherent and unified. That is not to say that the play is perfectly constructed; there are flaws, but the basic plan is sound. However, only a few writers commend the play. Boas withholds overall judgment of it, but finds some good scenes, interesting characters, and a few points of adroit theatre technique. 1 More recently, Jones-Davies notes Dekker's improvements on the sources of the play, and also says, If it be not Good, autre drame [besides The Wonder of a Kingdom] a trois intrigues parallèles, fait un dessin mieux équilibré. Les actions partent d'un point initial commun, et se développent à propos d'un thème unique (la corruption du monde par le diable); bien que parallèles, elles se renforcent et se complètent.2

The source referred to by Jones-Davies is a German and Danish prose tale, concerning a devil who disguises himself as a friar in an attempt to complete the subversion of a monastery. According to Herford, the first English version of the story was published 1

Stuart Drama, pp. 159-161. « Jones-Davies, I, 121-122 and Π, 174.

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

145

during the sixteenth century, although the earliest extant edition is dated 1620.® There is, however, a tradition of other sources for the play. An early authority noted, in his listing of Dekker's play, "See Machiavel's Novel of Belphegor".4 Although others have followed this theory Herford notes that the relationship between the Italian novella and Dekker's play is very slight and breaks down completely after the first incident of each work.5 In all three works - the play, the prose tale, and the novella - the first scene is in Hell. A meeting results in a devil being sent up to Earth in disguise. In the Italian work the formal forum is for the purpose of discovering whether the complaints of the male damned are true - that they are in Hell because of their wives. Belphegor is dispatched to Earth for a period of ten years to experience the problems of marriage. A similar meeting is held in the prose tale, but in that case a devil is sent to Earth to encourage an already dissolute monastery. Another source seems to be suggested by Bradbrook. She writes: Old Fortunatus and If it be not a good play are probably compressions

of two double plays . . . and the second gives an account of Friar Rush, who had formerly been shown in a double play.® The only Rush play recorded is a lost play entitled Friar Rush and the Proud Woman of Antwerp,7 Although Henslowe's entry seems to refer to one play, co-authored by Day and Haughton, one authority theorized that the entry refers to two plays. In various places, Fleay attributes The Proud Woman of Antwerp, as a separate play, first to Haughton and then to Chetile.8 Chambers does not mention Fleay's contradictory interpretations of the * Herford, p. 303. The tale has been reprinted as The History of Friar Rush, pages 409-440 in Early Prose Romances, edited by Henry Morley (London, 1889). 4 Gerard Langbaine, The Lives and Characters of the English Dramatick Poets (London, n.d.), p. 36. 8 Herford, p. 310. The translated novella has been reprinted as The Marriage of Belphegor, pages 391-401 in The Dramatic Works of John Wilson, edited by W. H. Logan and James Maidment (Edinburgh, 1874), • Bradbrook, Growth and Structure, p. 121. 7 Greg, Diary, II, 143. 8 Fleay, I, 70, 274, and 108.

146

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

diary entries, but takes the diary to mean that there was only one play, and that it was written "by Day and Haughton in 1601 and mended by Chetile in Jan. 1602".» In any event, it must be this situation which gives rise to Bradbrook's term "double play". But Dekker's play cannot be compared to the lost play or plays, and there is nothing in his play that suggests either a proud woman or Antwerp. Erminhild, in Dekker's play, is ashamed to return to her father after having been rejected by the young king, which is perhaps a kind of pride. But since her actions and words are unquestionably righteous, it would seem unlikely that a title would use the adjective "proud", which was seldom, if ever, an approbation. It is likely, however, that Dekker had some knowledge of the prose tale, The History of Friar Rush. Herford terms it the "wellknown prose History", and is of the opinion that it "was already in everyone's hands by 1584.. . . " 10 There are a number of points of similarity between the prose tale and that part of Dekker's play which deals with Friar Rush. Both Herford and Jones-Davies compare the two works in detail, and conclude that Dekker's changes are improvements on the tale.11 These changes are discussed below in relation to the Priory action. There is the likelihood that Dekker used another, as yet undiscovered prose source for the King of Naples action. Alphonso was actually the name of several of the kings of Naples. The following passage from William Painter's The Palace of Pleasure is not unlike a situation in Dekker's play: In the citie of Naples when king Alphonsus raigned, in whose time wantonnesse bare chiefest sway, . . . it chaunced vpon a shrouetide that the king went a masking into the city, Where euery man endeauored to intertained him the best he could.12

The remainder of the novella is, however, a typical double adultery tale which has no relationship to the play. The play can be described as having four actions, combined, as » Chambers, III, 266. 10 Herford, p. 303. 11 Herford, pp. 311-316; and Jones-Davies, I, 122. " Joseph Jacobs (ed.) (London, 1890), Π, 32.

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

147

Boas says, "in a series of dissolving views [of] supernatural and historical characters".13 The actions are a frame situation involving Pluto and lesser devils, the temptation and self-recovery of a young king, the almost total degeneration of a priory of monks, and the speedy damnation of a merchant.

THE PLUTO ACTION l.i In Hell, Pluto, the overlord, is having labor troubles with his employees, particularly Charon, who complains of low wages: "Pluto, mend / My wages, or row thy selfe" (I.i.18-19). Despite the fact that Charon has had two recent raises (from a half-penny per soul to a penny, and then to three half-pence), he does not get enough business to make it worthwhile, and besides, the quality of the damned souls is very poor. Charon blames this hellish business slump on the laziness of the devils, whose duty it is to recruit future tenants. Pluto lines up his summoners and orders them up to Earth to get to work. To three devils - Rufman, Shacklesoule, and Lurchall - he gives specific assignments: Rufman is to attach himself to the court of the newly crowned King of Naples; Shacklesoule is to join "the Friery, / Bestfamde in Naples for strict orders . . . " (I.i.107-108); and Lurchall is to work with the merchants of Naples. Pluto appoints a meeting place in the grove of Naples, where they are all to make a progress report. IV.ii Sometime later, all the devils gather at the agreed-upon rendezvous. Each of the three named devils reports to Pluto-Lucifer 14 that he has made considerable progress in his specific assignment. Pluto urges them on, "Goe, ply your workes, our Sessions are at hand" (IV.ii.98). One other devil makes a general report for the rest of the devils at work; they have been successful with cheese-mongers, chandlers, butchers, tailors, rich men, and fashionable ladies. V.iv The last scene in the Pluto action, and in the play, drama"

Stuart Drama, p. 159. In the first and last scene of the action, the speeches of the chief devil have the prefix "Pluto", and that character is addressed by that name. Here, however, he is called "Lucifer". Bowers includes both names as separate characters in the dramatis personae, but from the action it seems fairly certain that the change from pagan to Christian, and back again to pagan terminology is a mistake, and that there is one character only. In the first scene, Pluto says, "remember/We all meete to heare how you prosper" (Li. 130-131). In this scene, Lurchall says to Lucifer, "Great Prince of diuels, thy hests I haue obayde . . . " aV.ii.68). The "behest" was given by Pluto, who therefore must be Lucifer as well. 14

148

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

tizes the devils' return to Hell with their victims. Along with one of the specified victims (Bartervile), the three devils have Ravillac, the assassin of the French king, and Guy Fawkes, a participant in the Gunpowder Plot. They torment the damned souls with torches, knives, snakes, and molten gold. Pluto, attended by Minos, Aeacus, and Rhadamanth, arrives for an arraignment of the new arrivals. Pluto asks after some specific mortals, and is told that some are now in Hell, and others still on Earth. When Pluto asks specifically for the Naples contingent, Rufman replies, Fat preyes for hell we all did meete, In Court, Citie, Countrey, Nay, in euery streete, In euery house, within-him, and without-him, Hee that wore best cloathes, had some Diuell about him. . . . (V. iv.216-219) Except for Bartervile, who tries to bribe his way out of Hell, the damned souls are deferred until the next sessions. As the merchant is dragged off to a lake of molten gold, a Puritan dashes in to "chastize and correct the foule Fiend" (V.iv.263). He is thrust out of Hell because Pluto fears the puritans would take control of his domain. The bailiff calls, "Oyes! Sessions is deferd, / Because of Puritanes, Hell cannot be cleerd" (V.iv.289-290). Pluto leads his cohorts out to celebrate their conquests. The mood of this frame action is that of satire and farce, and the mode is spectacular. Apart from costumes suitable to a corps of devils, the stage directions call for a series of special effects: hellish music, rain, thunder and lightning, fireworks, a burning torch, a handful of snakes, and a ladle of molten gold. As noted in the description of the action above, the foibles of many vocational groups (chandlers, butchers, tailors, and etc.) are briefly satirized, as well as the three specified divisions of society court, city, and church. In addition to such generalized objects of attack, the playwright has included a series of names of personages familiar to his audience. Besides those mentioned above, there are John Ward, the renegade pirate, and Moll Cutpurse, the swaggering subject of the Middleton-Dekker play, The Roaring Girl. This action is simple, clear, and straightforward. In the first scene Pluto announces a future meeting; at that meeting he reminds the devils that the "sessions" are soon to be held, and

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

149

says that if their efforts are successful, they will celebrate; the last scene is a dramatization of the "sessions" and the celebration. The dialogue of the first scene seems to limit the devils' endeavors to the three specified areas of society; that is, only the three are identified as goals. But it is possible that in production other devils are present and sent out, and the three are only singled out. At any rate, the scope is widened in the second scene (IV.ii) with the presence of the anonymous devils, who in turn justify, to a degree, the introduction of the other damned souls in the last scene. Though the three scenes are amusing and spectacular, they d o not have an essentially dramatic form. There is certainly nothing like a crisis, even though the action does come t o a climax in the last scene. The function of this frame situation will be discussed at greater length later in the chapter.

THE KING OF NAPLES ACTION The first, and most elaborate, of the three earthly actions is the one in which the young King is central. A bit of exposition is provided in the first scene of the frame situation. Pluto says, Hye thee to Naples, (Rufman), thou shalt finde A Prince there (newly crownde,) aptly inclinde To any bendings... (I.i.95-97) l.ii In Naples, the King is told that his bride-to-be will arrive soon. While waiting he attends to affairs of state, demonstrating mercy and good sense. There appear to be two factions in the court, one represented by the King's serious old uncles, Astolfo and Octavio, and the other by the witty and urbane counts, who bear names like Narcisso, Jovinelli, and Spendola. The King decides to assign to each day of the week (excepting Sunday) a specific kingly duty. As Octavio awkwardly but happily takes dictation on the planned schedule of activities, the young counts, apparently disappointed in their new ruler's dedication to his position, interject satiric comments. The King can think of duties for only five days, and at this point a strange courtier is introduced. He (Rufman the devil, disguised as Bohor) impresses the King as a well-traveled and flattering young man, and when he suggests that

150

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

the sixth day should be devoted to pleasure, he is enthusiastically welcomed.15 The King proclaims that on every Saturday, What man soeuer (strange or natiue borne,) Can feast our spleene, and heigthen our delight, He shall haue gold and be our fauorite. (I.ii.203-205) As the uncles mutter over this slip from virtue, Erminhild enters, and is lovingly welcomed by the young King. II.i The day for pleasure has arrived, and many await to compete for the King's favor. Octavio recommends kingly pleasures as prepared by the soldiers, scholars, and sailors of Naples. The leader of each of these groups is brought in, but the King and the counts make fun of the citizens, and send them out. Bohor has prepared a fireworks display that pleases the King, and he is entrusted with planning the future entertainments to begin the next day. III.i Apparently, the King has slighted Erminhild. Astolfo pleads for the young woman, but the licentious counts and Bohor persuade the young King to forego marriage, and to send her back to her father. Erminhild talks to the kindly uncles, who advise her to return to her father, hoping that he will enforce the marriage. She does not want an unwilling husband, and is ashamed to return home, so she plans to go into hiding. The uncles wonder if they would do better to abandon this King who "has lost all, but the name of King" (III.i.55). III.iii Several gentlemen bring suit against the King's collector of tribute (Bartervile), but the King unjustly finds for him. As the collector perjures himself, however, he is stricken down, and this is taken as proof that he lies. The King gives his office to Bohor and another courtier, who apparently will misuse it as much as their predecessor. Octavio sues for poor petitioners who wait outside for their scheduled day with the King. They claim that many of the courtiers owe them money, but the King threatens to "stop their throates . . . With halters" (III.iii.90). Without much hope, Octavio introduces a Sub-prior who asks the King's help in correcting a wayward Priory. Instead of helping, the King decides to seize the wealth of the religious order, and to bestow it on one of his courtiers. At this point, Astolfo brings word that Erminhild's father demands her return. If she is not returned, the Duke threatens to attack Naples. But the girl has disappeared. Meanwhile, Bohor has more entertainments prepared for the King. IV.iii Erminhild, having heard of the impending war, comes to the Sub-prior to ask his help. She gives him a letter and her ring to give to her father. Despite the King's actions, she still loves him, and 14

Somewhat whimsically, Rufman represents himself as a traveler from Helvetia.

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

151

hopes that proof of her safety will dissuade her father, the Duke, from harming the King. The Sub-prior promises to help, and gives her shelter. V.i On the battlefield, the King's forces seem to be losing. Word is brought to the King that his uncles have joined forces with the Duke of Calabria. All the common people have also abandoned the King, and now the courtiers want to save themselves. They decide to seek protection at the house of the merchant, Bartervile. Bohor, alone with the despairing King, urges the King to commit suicide, to take the Roman way. He promises that "it shall nere be said, / I liu'd a minute after you . . . " (V.i.62-63). But at the last minute, the King sees "hell iawne to swallow vs" (V.i.68), and decides to "looke more hye, / Forgiuenes heauen" (V.i.71-72). At this point a monk, who is on his way to Bartervile, runs in looking for safety from the battle. The King changes clothes with the monk, and tells Bohor that he will seek refuge in the Priory. After Bohor leaves, however, the King decides to continue the monk's mission to Bartervile. V.ii At the merchant's house, the King, in his disguise, hears Bartervile's confession that he is trying to escape indebtedness to the King, and wants refuge in the Priory. He promises to bequeath his fortune to the religious order, in return for disguise and protection. The King leaves to take the message to the Priory. V.iii The Duke of Calabria arrives at the Priory, demanding that the hidden King be given up. When the Duke threatens to punish the monks, the King reveals himself, and is told that Bohor betrayed his hiding place, and that the dissolute young courtiers have been hanged. As the Duke is about to revenge his daughter's supposed death, the Sub-prior gives the Duke her ring and letter, and then produces the woman herself. She pleads for the King's life, and he begs her forgiveness. The Duke is satisfied with this outcome, and peace is declared. The King instructs Bohor to take all the monks (excepting the Sub-prior, but including the still-disguised Bartervile) to the Priory walls to herald the end of the war. When they arrive at the top, the King instructs those below to set fire to the Priory. Bartervile shouts out his identity, but the devils also reveal themselves and take the merchant and the evil monks down to Hell. This action is the longest and most complex in the play. As a type of drama, it is probably most closely related to tragi-comedy, a form examined in detail by Madeleine Doran in Endeavors of Art. That author uses as a typical working definition: As a conventional form we usually mean by English renaissance tragicomedy the Beaumont-and-Fletcher sort of thing, typically represented

152

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

by either Philaster or A King and No King, the former more pathetic, the latter more melodramatic, but alike in the high rank of the principal characters, in a certain solemnity of sentiment, and in the clever management of plot so that a surprise recognition, or change of heart brings about a dramatic reversal from extreme peril to good fortune.1* The Dekker action generally conforms to this description, leaning perhaps to the melodramatic rather than to the pathetic. There are, too, certain marks of romance, and of Terentian Roman comedy: the lost daughter who is believed dead, and the tokens of identification. To all of these - the change of heart, the lost daughter, and the tokens - Dekker has brought a quality of reality, largely through careful preparation. Distinguishing between Shakespearean and Fletcherian comedies, Doran noted that the former made use of "sustained suspense", while the latter employed "late surprise". 17 Dekker follows Shakespeare in this respect. The young King does experience a change of heart, but this is managed smoothly in several ways. Instead of depicting the King as a profligate from the outset, miraculously changed in the last scene, Dekker first provides a picture of an almost model ruler. Near ecstasy, his uncle-scribe, while recording the young King's wise edicts, cries, " O for a pen of gold!" (I.ii.92). At the end, then, the King is not only returning to his true nature, but to a virtue already established early in the play. And instead of reverting suddenly in the last scene, the King shows signs of change in several earlier scenes. He successfully resists the temptation to commit suicide, and demonstrates a certain bravery. When the frightened monk enters in that scene, the exchange of clothes is motivated not by the King's need of a disguise, but by the monk's need of protection. The King says, To helpe destressed men, religion bindes me, Shouldst thou in this hot broiles, be met abroad, It will be iudgde you leaue your Priory, Carying gold and siluer with you. (V.i.87-90) That the King, too, can make good use of a disguise comes as an " "

Doran, pp. 186-187. Ibid., p. 338.

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

153

afterthought. Consequently, what could have been an abrupt change of heart at the end, becomes a gradual development of character. Similarly, the tokens of identification, and the return of the "dead" daughter in V.iii, are believable in Dekker's treatment. By re-introducing Erminhild in IV.iii, and putting her under the care of the good Sub-prior (who, it will be seen, can overcome even a devil), Dekker makes the reunion in the last scene of the action perfectly believable, a matter of suspenseful anticipation rather than surprise for the audience. It might be argued that the establishment of the King as at first virtuous does not really solve the problem of the character change; it only moves the problem to an earlier part of the play, making the fall from virtue as questionable as the sudden positive change. But the audience is more likely to accept a situation in which a good man cannot resist temptation than one in which a villain suddenly renounces evil. The point of attack is relatively early, and there are few antecedent incidents. By beginning the story at this point, Dekker produces a circular effect, in which circumstances at the beginning are nearly duplicated at the end. The young King is first seen on his coronation day, as he begins to demonstrate great promise as a ruler. Moreover, it is the day in which his bride-to-be arrives in Naples. Though the scene includes forshadowings of the fall, it ends with the King saying to Erminhild, We Twaine Will wed, and bed, and get a Prince shall raigne In Naples brauely, when wee both lye dead: Till then, Pleasures wings, to their full bredth be spread. (I.ii.255-258)

This sentiment is reiterated in the King's last speech in the play, and the circular effect is reinforced by the King's statement that Here we begin Our reigne anew, which golden threds shall spin, Iustice shall henceforth sit vpon our throne, And vertue be your Kings companion. Warre here resignes his black and horrid stage

154

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

To sportfull Hymen, God of Mariage. (V.iii.156-161)

There is a reference in I.ii to an earlier incident that could have been dramatized. As Erminhild enters, the King says, That entertainment which the Duke your Father, Lent royellie (late to mee,) I now can pay At a Kings charge. . . . (I.ii.248-250)

But to dramatize that would have destroyed the neat symmetry of the action, and would have emphasized the King's relationship to Erminhild. That relationship is important in the action, but it is only part of the King's life. The section seems to be concentrated on the King as a man and a ruler, rather than on the King and Erminhild as lovers. In addition, the frame situation conditions the point of attack somewhat. By involving the devil Rufman (Bohor) in the King's first scene, Dekker gets the plot moving with desirable dispatch. Perhaps it would have been possible to introduce Rufman at Erminhild's home, but the process of then attaching the devil to the King's coterie would have been unnecessarily complicated. Problems of exposition in the action are handled with simplicity and ease. As noted earlier, some exposition for the action was included in the first scene in Hell. Pluto not only mentions the geographical location, and the fact that the young man is newly crowned, but he also establishes the young man's susceptibility to outside influences. He is "aptly inclinde / To any bendings . . . " (I.i.96-97). Other necessary information, such as the imminent arrival of Erminhild, and the uncle-nephew relationship between Octavio, Astolfo, and the King, is easily introduced into the dialogue. The Duke of Calabria does not appear in the play until quite late in the action. This is not necessarily a weakness since there are frequent references to him, beginning as early as the first scene in Naples. Beginning in Ill.i, his presence or power is felt as a threat to the King. Astolfo urges Erminhild to "Send to the duke your father, let him inforce / Your plighted mariage" (III.i. 48-49). Though she refuses to send for him, the Duke, through a

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN ΓΓ

155

messenger, demands his daughter's return in Ill.iii, and his threat of war and actual invasion is a factor for the rest of the play. As the description above reveals, the general articulation of the action is quite smooth, and most events are anticipated in some way. In the opening scene, the King establishes certain activities appropriate to specific days of the week, and the court scenes that follow exemplify the ways in which he pursues those activities. In turn, we see him on his days of pleasure, as a judge, hearing the pleas of the poor, and even preparing for war, all activities established in I.ii. Dekker does not follow the plan to the point of dealing with all of the activities on separate days or in separate scenes. But the breakdown of the plan dramatizes the breakdown of the King's rule, particularly as the pursuit of pleasure seems to encroach upon the other, more meritorious activities. The King's abandonment of his virtuous plan prepares the way for the events later in the action. For example, the breakdown motivates the disillusionment of the uncles. Even the fact that they (Octavio and Astolfo) abandon the King in V.i is preceded by a discussion of this eventuality in IH.i and again in IILiii. The King also offends the people of Naples, specifically the soldiers, sailors, and scholars in Il.i. Thus, when the Duke's army invades, the King loses the support of the citizens whom he offended in the earlier part of the action. Without this support of the citizens and his uncles, the King falls before the Duke's forces. Although the incidents follow naturally from the format of the daily activities established in I.ii, they do not conform to the chain pattern used by Dekker in such plays as Shoemakers' Holiday and Old Fortunatus. In those plays, one incident provided the basis for the next, and the second one, in turn, necessarily preceded the third. Most of the second half of this action does have such a sequential pattern, but earlier scenes (Il.i and IILiii) seem to be ordered arbitrarily. It is true that the last incident in Ill.iii, in which the war preparations begin, must necessarily follow the rejection and disappearance of Erminhild that precipitate the war, but the rest of Ill.iii (the King as judge) would seem to be interchangeable with Il.i (the King at play). Each is a dramatization of a facet of the King's degeneration, but neither produces

156

IF T M S BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

or is the basis for the other. The King as judge, however, involves the character Bartervile, and it is the merchant's action which dictates the order of scenes here, making it a necessary order. The order will be discussed in more detail later in the chapter. The position of one scene in the second half of the King of Naples action could be changed without upsetting the logic of the sequence of events, but again there is good reason for its position. The scene referred to is IV.iii, in which Erminhild seeks the Subprior's aid. Since the war motivates her, the scene necessarily follows the first threat of war (IH.iii), but her scene could follow either V.i (the battle loss and suicide scene) or V.ii (Bartervile's confession to the disguised King), without violating temporal or logical sequence. There are several reasons for this arrangement of scenes. Perhaps least important is the fact that the character has been absent from the stage for a considerable length of time, and the insertion of her appearance at this point "spaces" her scenes a little more equally. More importantly, it was noted that Dekker is employing the techniques of suspense rather than those of surprise. If he is not going to surprise the audience by suddenly producing the lost girl in the last scene, he might as well make the best use of the suspense by letting it "work" on the audience for a time. That is, Erminhild's letter to her father, the Duke, and her continued love for the King are the conditions which save the King's Ufe in the last scene. Thus, it is really only a matter of timing, a matter of suspense for the audience. But by introducing these conditions fairly early (IV.iii), before the King is in actual danger, and when they do not seem so important, the playwright makes the solution less obvious toward the end. So the audience may have either partially forgotten the incident and be momentarily surprised when the Sub-prior steps forward, or they may say to themselves, "Oh, but it's been a long time since she saw the Sub-prior! Could something have happened to her? Will she arrive in time?" Thus, the playwright gets the benefit of both suspense and surprise. There is another matter of timing in the action, involving particularly the second half. In the action as a whole, there are no

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

157

"mistakes" in chronology, but the first four scenes of the action are pretty much independent as units. They have an order, but within certain limitations the intervals between the scenes are indeterminate; they could involve only a few days of time, or as much as several weeks. After Ill.iii, however, this rather leisurely pace changes, as the excitement and confusion of battle are reflected in scenes which follow quickly upon one another. As Erminhild talks to the Sub-prior, they hear "Drommes afar off marching" (IV.iii.7 s.d.). The scene in which the King considers suicide includes "allarums", and a frightened civilian running from the sack of the city; and the disguised King goes from the battlefield, to the merchant's house, to the Priory in quick succession, with the Duke's forces practically at his heels. The dissolute counts, who were arrested in V.ii, have been beheaded by V.iii. The playwright, then, has controlled the tempo of the action so as to contrast the slow, or at least imprecise time scheme of the first half to a quickened tempo in the second, bringing it to an exciting and theatrical close.18 The action has a somewhat complicated climax, partly because the ending involves the King as a public figure and as a private individual, in both physical and spiritual terms. Publicly, the climax includes the end to the threat to the King's life and the city of Naples. When Erminhild accepts the King's plea to be forgiven, the Duke renounces the war and his revenge, and the King answers in kind. CAL:

Twere madnes to wish stormes when faire windes blow: Will you your faith yet keepe?

KING:

CAL: KING: 18

Inuiolate.

Then here end all my warres. A n d all m y hate.

It could be argued, perhaps, that the execution of the counts mentioned above is a violation of logic, that their reported deaths follow too closely their arrest. But it is not the sort of thing that an audience is like to question in the theatre, as more important incidents hold their attention. Dekker had to cleanse the King's court, and the devils need the courtiers to take back to Hell. So he disposed of them quickly, offstage. As Fluchère says on page 108 of Shakespeare, "Time for the Elizabethans is a servant, not a tyrant".

158

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

The condition by which this is accomplished is not directly under the King's control. That is, it is Erminhild's return and her pleas which resolve the problem. For the King as an individual, the climax exists in his personal salvation, symbolized in the last scene of the action (V.iii) by Rufman's admission of defeat. On the walls of the burning Priory the devil announces, King, little doest thou know, whom (all this while) Thy court, this Couent, and this Barteruile, Haue entertaind: of hell, three Spirits we are. (V.iii. 131-133)

But, Rufman admits: "Thy seife hast burst those bandes / In which I once held thee: these are in our handes" (V.iii. 136-137). Thus, the King is personally responsible for his own salvation, and the turning point for that achievement is his decision against suicide in V.i. Apparently that decision does not, in itself, save him, since after that point Rufman still has hope of success. The King, parting with his supposed friend (Rufman-Bohor), suggests that they might never meet again. But the devil, in an aside, retorts, "Not meete, yes, I hope, you must not thus cheate hel" (V.i.98). The King, by renouncing suicide, has begun a progress toward renewed virtue, but it is not to be complete until he renounces his false friends, demonstrates personal courage, and begs to be forgiven. The two parts of this compound climax are closely related, however, and produce a unified effect in the last scene of the action. Perhaps more importantly, they are produced by a common crisis. All of the King's actions earlier in the play do contribute to the ending; it has been noted, for example, that by offending his uncles and specific groups of citizens, the King loses their support in the war. But it is the war itself that produces the conditions which lead to the climax of the play. Without the war the citizens might have remained only uneasy subjects, and without the war the false friends might have remained unexposed. So it is the situation that provokes the war that is critical, and that situation, of course, is the King's rejection of Erminhild. In the rejection scene (IILi) it should be noted that, while the re-

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

159

sponsibility is the King's, he is surrounded by his sycophants, who strongly urge him to abandon Erminhild. Ironically, then, Bohor and the counts counsel the action which lead to their own defeat and death. The only omitted situation in the action is related to this point of crisis.19 As the scene opens, Astolfo says to the King, I doe beseech your Highnes, yet turne backe And comfort the sad Lady, whose faire eyes Are worne away with weeping. (III.i.1-3)

Whether "turne backe" is to be taken literally, or merely figuratively, the fact remains that some time prior to this scene the King in some way offended Erminhild to her face, and that that situation has not been dramatized or even described. The audience knows only that the King's actions, refusal to see her, or whatever, have caused the young woman to weep. This omission and the vagueness of the offence have a positive effect upon the action as a whole and the King's character in particular. That is, the strength of this particular "sin" is diminished, and the King's reformation at the end becomes more acceptable than it would have been if the situation had been dramatized. The audience does not have the memory of a scene in which the King was directly cruel to the woman. The King instructs Astolfo to "send her home to the duke her father" (III.i.22), but he does not face her himself. The King exits with his courtiers and then Erminhild enters, saying she has "heard the storie, tell't not or'e againe, / Twere crueltie to wound men, being hälfe slaine" (III.i.31-32). Erminhild appears in four scenes; in the first and last the King is kind and loving to her; in the others the King is not present. Dekker does not blacken his central character more than absolutely necessary. The King of Naples action as a whole, then, has been skillfully dramatized and brought to a believable climax and ending. The playwright has made use of two related patterns in the action. He takes an apparently virtuous King, who is about to marry, through « One other potential scene (an earlier beginning at the Duke of Calabria's court) was discussed above in the treatment of exposition.

160

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

a series of falls from virtue, and then brings him back full circle to a happy ending, at which time the King is once again about to marry. Within this circular pattern Dekker sets up, by means of the announced program of daily activities, a series of situations in which the King's duties are dramatized. The King is examined in hie roles as judge, public benefactor, pleasure-seeker, lover, and soldier. The playwright has also manipulated dramatic time to give an impression of increased tempo toward the end of the action. THE PRIORY ACTION The second earthly action, in terms of order in the play, length, and complexity, is the action related to the known prose source, The History of Friar Rush. I.iii Shacklesoule, the devil, has gained admission to the Neapolitan Priory as a "Junior Novice" named Rush. In this first scene he is seen at work as an assistant to the cook, Scumbroth. When the meal begins, Rush "renders thanks" for a long list of delicacies not included on the menu, from wine, ale, and beer to buttered crab, prawns, and lobster thighs. As the cook says, "He has spoken treason to all our stomaches" (I.iii.39). By coupling these temptations to the restricted palates of the monks with a witty sophistry that makes use of the theory that a healthy soul must follow from a well-fed body, Rush persuades the Prior to order a new regime in the kitchen.20 Only the Sub-prior objects to this program of gluttony. When the Sub-prior tries to welcome two pilgrims to the house, the Prior once again supports Rush and his contention that to shelter pilgrims is to "nourish idle vagabonds . . . " (I.iii. 163). Alone, Rush tallies his achievements; he has overthrown charity with gluttony, and followed this with contention. Lechery, avarice, and murder are yet to come. To ensnare the Sub-prior, the only one who has withstood the temptations, Rush plans to "choake him with gold . . . " (I.iii.206).2i 84

Rush is, as Herford says on page 296, "the Luther of a dietetic Reformation. . . . " " The differences between the play and the possible source are interesting. In the prose tale the religious house falls into vice without the aid of the devil, who is sent to them "to keep them still in that state, and worse if it might be", according to page 411 of the reprint edited by Morley. There too, the Prior and the Sub-prior are at odds, but they appear to be equally sinful. Dekker transforms the situation into a conflict between the forces of good and evil.

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

161

ILiii As the monks go to tend their vineyards on a holy day, the Sub-prior tries to stop them by telling that two of the order have in a "drunken rage . . . stabd each other" (II.iii.5). He blames Rush for this, but the devil, to prove his hatred of sin, reveals that he has just seen Scumbroth and a woman "Kissing in our orchard . . . " (II.iii.22). This outrages even the Prior, but when he tells Rush to rebuke the sin, the devil replies, "Tho my Lord I'me bad, / I'me not giuen that way" (II.iii.28-29). The Sub-prior, shocked by the Prior's intention to work the vineyards on a holy day, prophesies that "of this Vine / Thy lustfull lips shall neuer tast the wine" (II.iii.53-54). And then he exits, threatening to complain to the King of Naples. Alone once again, Rush conjures up Glitterback, who brings gold with which to tempt the Subprior. Rush puts the gold in a spring where the good monk will discover it later that night. III.ii As the Sub-prior goes to the spring that night, he encounters Scumbroth who claims to be innocent of Rush's charges. The cook plans to revenge himself on Rush, not to kill him, "but He make him know what tis to boile a cooke in's owne grease" (III.ii.19-20).22 The Sub-prior calms him and sends him off. Dipping his pot for water, the Sub-prior comes up with the gold placed there by Glitterback and Rush. He distrusts the sources of such riches, however, and when Scumbroth re-enters, the Sub-prior leaves the gold with him on condition that he give half to the poor. The cook does not have his superior's qualms about worldly riches, so when Glitterback appears and urges him to spend it all, "And brauely I charge thee . . . " (Ill.ii. 151), he eagerly agrees to do so. Glitterback tells the cook that when he needs to replenish his supply he should go "To the blacke tree, that stands in Naples groue, / Clymbe boldly to the top, and keepe fast hold . . . " (Ill.ii. 171-172)23 111 Mi At this point the action temporarily joins with the King of Naples action discussed above. As he threatened in ILiii, the Subprior appeals to the King for aid in cleansing the Priory. But the King gives control of the Priory to a courtier, who plans to plunder it, thus destroying the order. IV.ii Scumbroth has already squandered all of his riches. Following the instructions Glitterback gave him, he climbs the tree in the grove of Naples. Now the Priory action temporarily joins the Pluto frame " Here Dekker transforms what was a literal action in the prose tale into a figure of speech in the play. Rush, in the tale, drowns the cook by throwing him into a kettle in the kitchen, and then takes over the cook's position in the Priory. The play continues to employ the character of Scumbroth. a The tree is the same one at which the devils are to assemble in IV.ii, according to the plan in I.i.

162

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

situation. Instead of receiving more gold, Scumbroth is a terrified witness to an assembly of devils. Their scene is interspersed with his farcial comments upon it. He recognizes Rush among the devils and realizes the source of the Priory's troubles.24 lV.iii Once again the action joins the King of Naples plot. Erminhild seeks out the Sub-prior for help, and he agrees to take her under his protection. IV.iv As the Sub-prior studies in his cell, Shacklesoule comes in his own form (not as Friar Rush) and tries to lure the Sub-prior into self-damnation. Three times he tempts the saintly monk, and three times he fails. Finally defeated, Shacklesoule says, "No way to conquer thee? Ile giue thee ore: / Ne're fishd I so, (yet lost a soule) before" (IV.iv.64-65). V.iii Scumbroth rushes in to tell the Sub-prior that the Prior has choked to death on a grape seed. The prior was testing the prophecy that he would not live to taste the wine. The cook cut the Prior's throat to find the seed, but he blames the death on Rush. Scumbroth mentions that the Sub-prior did not believe him when he told him that Rush is a devil. He runs out to watch some executions, saying, "I leaue you to the Gallowes" (V.iii.26). The action then re-unites with the rest of the play, Another house weele build and thee restore, To former virginitie: weepe not for these ruines, Thou shalt from vs haue honours. (V.iii. 154-156) Like the King of Naples action, this plot begins with virtuous characters who are shortly under attack by Pluto's representative. The central character here, however, consistently withstands the temptations, though the devil collects his "due" in the persons of the other members of the religious order. The Prior and the weaker monks fall so quickly into Rush's temptations that they lose dramatic interest and are dropped out of the action at a fairly early point. Moreover, the Prior's death and apparent damnation are merely related, and the other monks are treated as a group rather than as individuals at the close of the action. Once again there is an early point of attack. Since Dekker has 24

There is a similar scene in the prose tale. A farmer, searching for a lost cow, finds it half butchered. He hides in a hollow tree and observes a meeting of devils, one of whom he recognizes as a member of a nearby Priory. By re-involving the cook, instead of introducing the farmer, Dekker economizes on the number of characters and integrates the action more thoroughly.

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

163

made the Priory a virtuous place at the outset (in contrast to the prose work), there is little if anything of dramatic interest that could be dramatized before the first scene of this action. The nature of the situation, the place, and the men involved are such that no exposition is needed other than the fact that the Priory is "Best-famde in Naples for strict orders . . . " (I.i. 108). Whereas the virtue-to-vice-to-virtue pattern of the King of Naples action worked to the play's advantage, the similar situation here has at least one disadvantage. The Prior and the weaker monks succumb to Rush altogether too quickly if their earlier virtue is to be believed; but Dekker obscures this shortcoming. He does not give the emphasis of dramatization to the alleged virtue; he mentions that it is a "strict order", and immediately brings about his fall. For the most part, as the description of the action reveals, the scenes are pretty well articulated. At the end of the first scene (Liii), Rush soliloquizes about his plans for contention, lechery, avarice, and murder, and the scenes that follow in some way dramatize those plans. The hidden gold, the Prior's death, the Sub-prior's appeal to the King, and Scumbroth's presence at the meeting of the devils are all prepared for by specific references in earlier scenes. The degree to which one incident depends upon another earlier one varies in the Friar Rush action in a fashion similar to the King of Naples action. Most of the later scenes (Ill.ii, Ill.iii, IV.ii, and V.iii) are interdependent, but the incidents in Liii (the eating scene), Il.iii (the vineyard scene), and IV.iv (the Sub-prior's temptation) do not have such a relationship. They are examples of the way in which Rush breaks down the Priory, as the early scenes in the other aotion dramatized facets of the King's fall. The scene in the Sub-prior's cell will be discussed in more detail below. Again as in the other action, there is an indefinite, but noncontradictory, time relationship between the first two scenes in the action; the later scenes are caught up in the time schedule of the war. There are no problems or inconsistencies in the chronology of the action.

164

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

There are, however, problems concerning the crisis and climax, which are in part connected with the differences between the prose history and the play. The prose tale is a story about the pseudo-monk, and indeed it goes on to recount his other adventures after he leaves the Priory. But in the play there are three other rivals for attention: the Priory as a whole, since its destruction is the end of the action, and the Sub-prior and Scupibroth, who have been developed far beyond the suggestions of action and characterization in the prose work. The part of Scumbroth, it was noted, is expanded beyond the prose tale to include some entirely new activities, and also incorporates the role of the farmer who observed the assembly of devils. In the tale this last situation is critical, because the fanner reports Rush's true identity to the Prior, who in turn banishes the devil from the religious house. Commenting on Dekker's improvements, Jones-Davies maintains that the combination of the characters of cook and farmer produces an excellent dramatic irony, since, she says, the first victim of the devil becomes the instrument of the devil's discomforture.25 But this is not entirely consistent with the events in Dekker's play. The cook's observance of the devils' meeting may have some beneficial effect on Scumbroth himself, but it in no way upsets Rush's plans. Rush is unsuccessful with the Sub-prior, but only because of that man's moral strength. In the last scene of the action, Scumbroth says to the Sub-prior, I tolde you then, I saw Frier Rush spit fire amongst other Hel-cats, and yee woud not belieue me. Now I tell you, that the Pryor is choackt; will his choaking goe downe your throate? (V.iii.9-12)

According to Rush, he intended to make the cook "hang himselfe" (IV.ii.96). But this action is not carried out in the play, and if there are suggestions of it, they are ambiguous. With a stretch of the imagination, it could be assumed that since the cook cut the Prior's throat to see if he was dead Scumbroth committed murder and damned himself, and that the cook's last line in the play "I leaue you to the Gallowes" (V.iii.26) - is to be taken as a pre"

Jones-Davies, I, 122.

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

165

diction of his own violent end. But at most Scumbroth's fate is undeveloped and vague in the play. He participates in a series of comic situations and is used as a comic commentator on the action. He also helps to integrate the devil's assembly with the earthly action, by acting in that scene as a kind of representative of the mortals. If he temporarily escapes the fate of the rest of the sinful monks, it is perhaps because the death of an amusing clown would darken the mood of the ending. In some respects the Sub-prior is similar to Bellafront in Honest Whore II. Both characters stand firm against repeated attacks and temptations. They have no backslidings and they recognize no alternative courses of action. In one sense, the Sub-prior is very unsuccessful as a participant in this action. He is unable to persuade his fellow monks that they are falling from virtue; he mis-estimates Scumbroth's character in giving him the gold; his plea to the King has disastrous first results; and he fails to heed Scumbroth's warning about Friar Rush. Bernard Spivack discusses this problem in relation to the morality tradition, to which Dekker is in part indebted for this play. The moralities were put into motion by [the Vice's] aggression and sustained by their intrigue, leaving very little to the other side except to unpack its heart with words. While the virtues talked the vices acted. .. .2e If the Sub-prior is to represent Rush's direct opponent in the struggle for >the souls of the other members of the Priory, the action demonstrates the success of Rush and the failure of the Sub-prior. The King of Naples is surrounded at the end by some survivors in his society, but the Sub-prior stands alone before the burning ruins of the Priory. The Sub-prior as defender of the Priory has only failures; as defender of his own soul he has only successes. Neither pattern lends itself to description in dramatic terms. In addition, the Sub-prior's story reaches its climax rather early in the play, at the end of IV.iv. He thanks God for victory, and Rush-Shacklesoule says, "De giue thee ore . . ." (IV.iv.64). That his life is also saved at the end of the play is almost incidental - the struggle was for his soul. M

Spivack, p. 123.

166

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

The third element in the action that might be considered its subject is the Priory as a whole. Always excepting the Sub-prior, the members of the religious order fall quickly into Rush's selfdamnation trap, in the first scene of the action. They are such easy victims as to be almost undramatic, and this is reflected in the fact that they drop out of the play after ILiii, reappearing almost anonymously for the conflagration. They have been deemphasized to the point that the Prior's death, in fulfillment of the prophecy so carefully marked by the playwright in ILiii, takes place off-stage and is merely reported by Scumbroth.27 Perhaps the best description of the dramatic structure of this action is that it goes beyond any of the individuals involved to the fate of the religious order or even of religion itself. In Li Pluto sends the devil to the "Friery" (I.i. 107), not to a specific individual like the King, and when Rush reports at the assembly (IV.ii), he talks in terms of complete success. Octavio, reacting to the King's judgment which robs the Priory, says, "Woe to those dayes, / When to raise Vpstarts, the poore CHVRCH decayes" (III.iii.122-123). And a few lines later the Sub-prior exits saying, I feare RELIGIONS Fall: Alacke I see This world's a Cittie built by the most Hie, But kept by man, (GODS) greatest enemie. (III.iii.134-136)

From this expanded point of view, the action has a somewhat greater consistency than it has in terms of individuals. The devil's attack is on the religious order as a whole, and the individual fates within that whole can differ. But the Sub-prior's moral strength is symbolic for the whole, the mustard seed as it were, and the destruction of the Priory at the end provides for a phoenixlike rebirth. Thus, the spectacular destruction of the religious " This situation and a few other ellipses in the action do seem to support theories that the playwright made use of another, possibly dramatic source. The preparation for the Prior's death is quite explicit, and yet the fiery end in Dekker's play for the other monks would have been equally suitable for the Prior. The special death seems to suggest incidents not in this play and some other ending for the Priory as a whole. On the other hand, the situation also supports the contention that if there was another Friar Rush source, Dekker's changes go well beyond mere compression of events.

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

167

community as a climax is a cleansing process for the order, and the Sub-prior's final victory over Rush in IV.iv is the critical situation which provides for the future of that order. But the relationship between the Sub-prior's moral victory over Rush and the climax, in which he survives to carry on a rebuilt Priory, operates only on a thematic level in the action. The climax, that is, depends in part upon the King's knowledge of the Sub-prior's character. The King saves him and the King intends to rebuild the Priory. In the play the King has knowledge of the Sub-prior's virtue in only two instances: the scene in which the Sub-prior requests the King's aid (Ill.iii), and the fact that the Sub-prior protects Erminhild and communicates her message to the Duke. Since the second of these is later in the action, and in that sense only reinforces the first, and since it also has nothing to do with the rest of the Priory, the first is more properly the crisis for the action. One omitted incident has been noted in passing: the Prior's death. A dramatization of that scene would have singled that character out of the group and concentrated too much attention upon him, without adding anything of much value to the action. Other potential incidents, such as the fight between the two monks referred to in Il.iii, would have provided more examples of the sinfulness of the Priory, but that would have been merely redundant. With the exception of situations concerning the Subprior and Scumbroth, the playwright has dramatized only group actions - the change in eating habits, the renunciation of charity, and the zealous cultivation of the vines for wine. This attention to the group rather than to individuals supports the action as described above. Despite the success of the search for the basic movement and point of the action described above, it must be allowed that a "search" was necessary. The scenes in the action concentrate too much attention on individuals such as the Sub-prior and Scumbroth, to the detriment of the theme which seems to be concerned with the group or institution. Naturally, in drama, the playwright must externalize his ideas in terms of individual characters. But in this case there is something of a breakdown in the relationship of the actions of the characters to the expression of the

168

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

ideas. Perhaps it is too much to expect the devil Rush to express some disappointment at the end over the partial failure of his mission on earth, but as the action ends, the final impression given is that everyone has won, Rush, the Sub-prior, Scumbroth, and even the Priory.

THE ΒARTERVILE ACTION The final action in the play is the briefest and receives the least exposition in the frame situation. Pluto tells Lurchall, "Be thou a cittie-diuell" (I.i.115), and "Bring 'em all-in coach'd, the gates are wide enough" (I.i.124). In the action, however, Lurchall concentrates all of his attention upon one man, Bartervile. Lurchall is next discovered employed in Bartervile's office. His mission is not going to be very difficult because, the devil says, Bartervile is A Master, who more villenie has by hart, Then thou by rote; See him but play his owne part, And thou doest Hell good seruice. . . . (II.ii.12-14) Generally, then, the rest of the action involves the devil only to the extent that he encourages the merchant's natural inclinations. Bartervile hopes that a debtor, due to arrive, will be late and so forfeit his security, but the gentleman appears on time. When stalling is to no avail, Lurchall whispers a stratagem to his master. As the money is being counted, Bartervile throws in some of his own, refuses to give up the securities, and threaten to accuse the gentleman of theft if he tries to take back his money. The gentleman leaves, threatening a law suit. When Bartervile expresses a desire to avoid a court appearance in another case, Lurchall again comes up with an idea. Bartervile starts drinking from a bottle, and while the bottle is still at his lips, Lurchall sends a servant out to testify that Bartervile can not appear, because II.ii

if hee Were in that case thou leftst him, twere in vaine To hope he could liue, till thou camst back againe. (Il.ii. 177-179) III.iii Bartervile, who is also the King's collector of tribute, appears before the King's court to answer certain charges. In the first case

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

169

described above, the King arbitrarily finds for Bartervile. In another suit Lurchall urges Bartervile to swear he paid certain money; the merchant does so and then falls as if struck down for lying. After Bartervile revives, Lurchall's fellow devil Rufman intercedes for him with the King. The King pardons the merchant on condition that he make loans to the state to pay for an impending war. IV.i Safely at home, Bartervile tells Lurchall how he plans to protect himself and avoid giving the money to the King. He has disguised himself as a Turk, in which disguise he plans to masquerade as his own relative. Bartervile is to die and the 'Turk' as heir will cheat the merchant's creditors. If the King dies in the war, the Turk will say that he cannot pay the debts because the King died owing him money. If the King survives, Bartervile will excuse his disguise by saying that it was the only way he could protect himself and still be in a position to help the King. The merchant sends Lurchall to bring a monk to hear Bartervile's "death-bed confession". V.i As noted above, the King meets the monk on the battlefield, and takes over both his robe and his errand to Bartervile's house. The courtiers have already left to seek refuge with the merchant. V.ii Bartervile promises the courtiers to protect them by putting them in his cellar and later smuggling them out of the country.28 But after they have gone below, he sends Lurchall to the Duke of Calabria to betray the courtiers and collect a reward for their capture. The monk (the King) arrives, and under the secrecy of confession, Bartervile reveals his identity and asks for sanctuary at the Priory, promising to bequeath his fortune to the religious order. Lurchall returns with the Duke of Calabria and his forces. Bartervile reveals the courtiers' hiding place and then leaves for the Priory. The Duke sends some men into the cellar to arrest and then to execute the courtiers as Octavio brings in Rufman-Bohor under guard. Rufman promises to reveal the King's hiding place in exchange for his own life. V.iii Bartervile and Lurchall, disguised as monks, are welcomed at the Priory and are promised sanctuary. When the Duke and the rest of the characters arrive, Bartervile, in a series of asides to Lurchall, expresses his fear of capture. But the disguise seems to be effective, and the merchant and his helper go up onto the walls with the rest of the Priory to proclaim the peace. When the King orders the destruction of the Priory, Bartervile reveals himself and begs for his life, but the devils claim him for Hell. V.iv Before the court of devils, Bartervile first tries to bribe Pluto, and then offers to walk the world as a ghost to frighten misers, but The merchant has figuratively taken over the devil's work. He sends the sinful courtiers down into his cellar-hell. They will emerge only to be executed and sent to Hell itself. î8

170

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

all to no avail. Finally, he is dragged off to a lake of molten gold, crying 'My chaîne, Let me hang in chaînes, so it bee my Golde chaîne . . . " (V.iv.253-254). Bartervile, as a potential victim of the proselytizing devil, is the direct opposite of the Sub-prior. While the monk stood firm against the repeated attacks by Rush, the merchant was wavering at least even before Lurchall opened his offensive. The action, then, is an extended satire on the devious natures of moneylenders, represented by Bartervile, whose credo is, Nature sent man into the world, (alone,) Without all company, but to care fore one, And that ile doe. (IV.i.80-82) This is, Lurchall responds, "True Citie doctrine sir" (V.i.82). Again, the point of attack is conditioned by the first appearance of the summoner from the under-world, although in this action that appearance does not produce a change in the character's activities. Lurchall could have arrived at any point and he would have found Bartervile engaged in questionable activities. The action gets under way quickly as Lurchall takes advantage of the first situation to try to push the merchant along the road to perdition. Since the merchant conforms to a character type, there are few problems of exposition. Lurchall, in a brief aside, relates the fact that he is indentured to an unethical merchant. When the merchant enters, he demonstrates his lack of ethics. While going over some accounts, he reveals the fact that he is tribute collector for the King. He regrets, for example, the extent of prostitution in the city because that practice lowers the number of taxable weddings. In this scene because he is a new servant, and later because he is a highly trusted servant, Lurchall functions as a kind of confidant for Bartervile. He is the questioner and listener through whom Bartervile reveals his machinations to the audience. The incidents in the Bartervile action have a cause and effect pattern, as each scene lays the groundwork for the next. The money trick in the first scene (Il.ii) results in the court appearance in IILiii. Bartervile's perjury in that scene obligates him to promise

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

171

money to the King. To avoid payment of this and other debts, he assumes the disguise and seeks refuge finally in the Priory, where he dies and is taken to Hell. Hunt comments that "towards the end [this action] is needlessly complicated, . . . " 49 but does not elaborate. The tricks employed by Bartervile and Lurchall early in the action are complicated, but the complexity is itself part of the satire on business practices and businessmen. The betrayal of the courtiers is relatively simple to follow, as well as being typical of Bartervile's character. In addition to the effective irony involved in the situation in which one villain (Bartervile) betrays other villains (the courtiers), the same situation simply eliminates a block of characters whose presence would complicate the ending of the play. Perhaps Hunt has the Turkish disguise situation in mind, since the speed of events prevents Bartervile from employing that disguise as he intended. It is "needless" to the extent that since the King is not killed in battle, Bartervile has no use for this alternative plan. It is, however, an additional example of the merchant's wiles. The disguise is used at the beginning of V.ii, and the fact that Bartervile is so dressed prompts the monk's (the King's) questions. The merchant's answers reveal his treasonous activities to the King, who later punishes him with death. The device also provides a superb irony, since the disguised merchant braggingly reveals his identity to the disguised King, the person for whom the disguise is intended. The disguise also contributes to the outcome of the action. As in the two other actions in the play, there is a certain duality; Lurchall's objective is to encourage Bartervile to damn himself, but in order to get him to Hell, the merchant must be killed. Any one of Bartervile's actions is sufficient cause: he perjures himself, he commits treason, he commits murder for money by proxy, and in effect, by donning the guise of the Turk, he denies his religion. No one of these is emphasized as critical, though after the perjury Lurchall tells Pluto-Lucifer, "Damnation giues his soule but one turne more, / Cause he shall be enough" (IV.ii.76-77). Of the variety of sins which follow, none stands out as critical. On the external or mortal level, however, the situation is somewhat clear«· Hunt, p. 151.

172

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

er. The merchant dies because the King orders it; it is his offense to the King that is critical. At the end of the court scene (Ill.iii), Bartervile has been pardoned by the King, and has been given an opportunity to redeem himself by giving financial support to the war. At that point Bartervile has clear alternatives - to comply or not to comply. In typically devious fashion, he schemes to get the best of the situation whichever way the war goes. Consequently, the scene (IV.i) in whioh he makes this decision is the crisis for the action. It should be noted that Bartervile is completely responsible for this decision, and that Lurchall is almost an awed observer. The devil contributed actively to the earlier situations, but here he is reduced to a messenger. Hunt is critical of Lurchall's inactivity, saying he "has little to do but sit still and applaud his superior in v i l l a i n y . . . 3 0 But this same inactivity allows the villain to be responsible for his own end. The means to that end involve a certain amount of accident and coincidence. That is, the King's meeting with the frightened monk on the battlefield is coincidental, but not at all improbable. It is merely a theatrical convenience for the playwright. Because the action is relatively simple, consisting of a series of compounded and inter-related sins, and concentrated very strongly on one individual, it presents few problems for analysis. It has a consistency of tone or mood, and proceeds to an expected and logical end. Its relationship to the other actions in the play will be examined below.

RELATIONSHIP OF THE ACTIONS

All of the actions combined produce the wide range of tone or mood found in other plays by Dekker. Similar examples noted in this study include Shoemakers' Holiday and Honest Whore II. Here there are the broad, almost vulgar farce episodes involving Scumbroth and some of the other members of the Priory, the satirical situations involving Bartervile and some of the courtiers, the battlefield melodrama of the King's near suicide, the heroics »» Hunt, p. 51.

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

173

of the King's meeting with the Duke, the pathos of Erminhild's situation, and the spectacular effects of some of the devil scenes. This range of tone is related to the spectrum of society presented in the play. Earthly society is neatly encompassed by the three areas of court, city, and church. The attack of the devils is directed at all mankind, even though the devils seem to concentrate on individuals. Pluto tells Rufman, if the heart once wast The body feeles consumption; good or bad kings Breede Subiects like them: cleere streames flow from cleere springs. Turne therefore Naples to a puddle (I.i.100-103)

The individuals who face the devils' attack, in addition to being members of different parts of society, react in three contrasting ways. In a schematic view of the victims, the King is between the Sub-prior and Bartervile: the Sub-prior is unwavering; the King wavers and then recovers; and Bartervile falls immediately. Dramatically, the King is the most interesting of the three, since his character involves change and development. He is a kind of balance point or norm between the two extremes in this varied view of society. The relationship of the frame situation to the three parts of earthly society is a problem for which there are at least two possible but contradictory solutions. The frame may be just that — an amusing and effective device employed to unify three somewhat diverse actions, the play then being about the mortals; or the main action of the play is that established in the first scene, Pluto's efforts to increase Hell's population. In the latter instance, the three actions on earth are merely elaborate examples of the devils' efforts. The situation can be stated with questions involving traditional dramatic terms: Are the devils protagonists or antagonists? Is the audience to follow the success or failure erf the devils' objectives, or those of the mortals involved? Each situation has evidence to support it. For example, the devils, when outside of their "own" scenes (Li, IV.iii, and V.iv), tend to recede into the background, and although they have some

174

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

direct effect on the action, that influence is definitely limited. The mortals, for the most part, are creatures with free will. Rufman temporarily influences the King through pleasure, and he does manage to ensnare some already weak courtiers, but in the end the King himself controls his own fate. Rush easily creates dissension within the Priory and carries off most of the monks, but the strongest one survives and the Priory itself well be rebuilt. Lurchall is successful with Bartervile, but even the merchant remains directly responsible for his end, disastrous as it is for him. The situation is somewhat analogous to that of the Vice-Virtue action in Old Fortunatos in that in such an elemental struggle as this for men's souls, the form of the action is somewhat prescribed. The devils cannot capture a soul; they can only create situations or conditions favorable to themselves so that the soul falls of its own volition. Thus, the actions of the humans seem to be central in the play. As a matter of fact, two of the actions in the play could be separated from the devil context and remain pretty much whole. Only in the Priory action, with its direct temptation of the Subprior and the black magic of the gold, is the devil character absolutely necessary. As described, the devil in the Bartervile action is hardly distinguishable from a "wily slave" character. Rufman's actions, except for his skill with fireworks and the need for motivation for the suicide prompting scene, are not unlike the activities of some of the courtiers. On the other hand, the Pluto action does receive considerable emphasis. The Hell scenes begin and end the play, and thus are given positions of dramatic strength. In addition, the meeting scene in the midst of the play (TV.ii) pulls attention back to the frame situation, as if to remind the audience that Hell is the frame of reference, not Naples. And the individual devils appear in every scene of the play except IV.iii, the private interview between the Sub-prior and Erminhild. Spivack describes the audience-Vice relationship in morality plays as follows: It consists of the continuous rapport throughout the play between its most important evil personage and the audience, whom he enlightens

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

175

and amuses by conversing with them in a series of dramatic monologues . . . and sardonic asides.31

Dekker again seems to be indebted to this tradition. In almost every scene there are speeches with strong, ironic implications which remind the listener-reader of the devil's presence. For example, when Bartervile tricks the debtor, the gentleman says to him, "Dambde wretch, thou wilt goe quicke to hell I feare." And the merchant responds, "No sir, the diuell shall fetch me when I goe" (Il.ii. 149-150). His summoner stands at his elbow. Later in the scene, the gentleman says that "diuels on earth dwell, / And men are no where, all this world is hell" (Il.ii. 154-155). Rufman parodies this last idea as he urges the King to commit suicide. RUF: KING:

RUF: KING:

RUF:

Nay it shall nere be said, I liu'd a minute after you: here, here. I embrace thee noblest friend. Lets saile together. Content to braue Bohor: oh! but whither? whither? From hell, (this world,) from fiends (in shapes of men.) (V.i.62-66)

These ironies, which crop up in every scene, have the psychological effect of separating the listener-reader from the mortals in the play, of heightening audience objectivity. Empson writes of a similar effect produced by comic sub-plots: Also the device sets your judgment free because you need not identify yourself with any one of the characters;... a situation is repeated for quite different characters, and this puts the main interest in the situation not the characters.32

Dekker, of course, was not the only Elizabethan playwright to make use of frame situations. The Taming of the Shrew and The Knight of the Burning Pestle are well known examples. Dekker's use of the device, however, seems to be somewhat unusual. Robert M. Adams relates the device, as generally employed, to the painting technique called trompe-l'oeil, which he describes as follows: It is a device by which an artist mingles and contrasts different levels of representation. . . . The device is essentially that of the over31 Spivack, p. 119. 31 William Empson, Some Versions of Pastoral (London, 1950), p. 54.

176

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

stepped or obliterated frame; its effect is to surprise by the incongruity or to impress by the depth of representational levels; and though less frequent in literature than in the plastic arts, it does have an existence on the printed page. The usual effect of literary trompe-l'oeil is for comedy or burlesque; its usual setting is the drama.38 The general thesis is that the device, by creating several levels of reality, calls attention to the artificiality of one level, or, as in the case of the play-within-the-play in Hamlet, more directly relates the audience to the less artificial "reality". That is, Hamlet and the theatre audience are united in that they both watch the artificial inner play. Dekker's use of trompe-l'oeil is slightly different in that it does not set up an artificial reality in opposition to a true reality. The world of his play envelops both devils and men, all of whom share a common existence. Furthermore, elements of the last Hell scene, spectacular as it is, tend to suggest that the reality of the whole play and the reality of the audience are one thing. It was noted earlier in the chapter that the lost souls, collected by Pluto's summoners, include real people known to an Elizabethan audience: Dantziker the pirate, Ravillac the assassin, and Guy Fawkes the arsonist. Moll Cutpurse "plyes her taske and cannot come" (V.iv.112). In Dekker's time it was possible that she was in the theatre watching the play! The total effect of the play is, then, not unlike a Brechtian alienation. Brecht's device, in its simplest terms, prohibits the viewer from losing himself in an identification with characters in the play, and at the same time, ironically intensifies the reality of some of the actions of those characters. The presence of the devils, the Hell scenes, and the ironies, which set the audience apart from the human characters in the play, promote a critical and satirical objectivity, while the extension of the action into everyday Elizabethan life, forces the audience to compare life situations to the fictional situations. It must be admitted, however, that the objects of Dekker's satire are largely "safe", and extremely vulnerable. Knight's 55 Robert M. Adams, "Trompe-L'Œil in Shakespeare and Keats", The Sewanee Review, LXI (April-June, 1953), 238.

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

177

general condemnation of the satire in Dekker's plays seems appropriate here: His satire . . . either deals in generalities, or else it presents particulars drawn from the life of this time without grasping their full significance and implications. It does not penetrate below the surface.94

Such things as usury, treason, and priestly over-indulgences were not likely to lie too heavily on the consciences of members of the audience.

ARRANGEMENT OF SCENES

The effect of the position of the devil scenes in relation to the rest of the play has been touched upon already; it has been noted also that the scenes after Ill.iii (the threat of war), are ordered in terms of the time schedule of the war. Another effect of the arrangement of scenes, however, concerns the relationship between the King of Naples and the Bartervile actions. It was indicated earlier that the King's activities in Ill.iii could be inter-changed with activities in II.i, but that the Bartervile action forces the order found in the play. This can best be understood graphically. Of the three groups below, the first is that employed by Dekker. The others are possible variations. Court introduction I.ii Priory introduction I.iii Court pleasure scene II.i Bartervile introduction Il.ii Priory vineyard scene Il.iii Court rejection of Erminhild III.i Priory night scene Ill.ii Court judgment scene Ill.iii variation # 1 Court introduction Priory introduction Bartervile introduction Court pleasure scene Priory vineyard scene *

Knights, p. 233.

variation # 2 Court introduction Priory introduction Bartervile introduction Priory vineyard scene Priory night scene

178

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

Court rejection of Erminhild Priory night scene Court judgment scene

Court judgment scene Court rejection of Erminhild Court pleasure scene

Other arrangements are possible, but these are representative. Both variations introduce the Bartervile action at an earlier point, so that all introductory scenes precede additional scenes in other actions. In the first variation, the result is to separate Bartervile's first two appearances by four scenes, creating dangers that the audience may forget necessary details. The second variation assumes that the news of impending war could as easily end the pleasure scene as the judgment scene. The result, in this instance, is to separate too greatly the first two court scenes, and to bunch together scenes of one action. Dekker's order achieves both maximum intelligibility, by keeping scenes of one action close to one another, and the greatest variety, by alternating actions. His arrangement, which at first sight seems somewhat arbitrary, is actually a most effective ordering of the incidents of the three actions. Dekker's arrangement of the scenes of the three actions creates no problems of time, nor does it violate the controlled tempo discussed above. Time is indefinite in scenes I.ii ¡through II.ii. Though the first two devils, in the court and church, are seen on what appears to be their first day on Earth, Lurdhall's first scene with Bartervile depicts him already at work, and not necessarily on the first day of his employment. Consequently, the time lapses between I.iii and II.i, Il.i and II.ii, and ILii and Il.iii are indefinite. The next three scenes (ILiii, III.i, and IILii) apparently take place on the same day, as Rush in the first of the three scenes makes plans for that night, and the night scene takes place in IILii. The time lapses between that day and the next is short, since the Sub-prior, in Il.iii, plans the visit to the court that takes place in IILiii. The scene in which Bartervile decides to cheat the King takes place within a day or so of the court judgment scene, since at that time the invasion by the Duke erf Calabria was imminent. Bartervile's decision and the rest of the earthly action (IV.i through V.iii) take place in one fast-moving day. That day ends in what can be considered the climax of the

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

179

play, the fiery destruction of the Priory. That incident is the culmination of the events in the Priory and Bartervile actions, and is for the King a symbolic act, in which he destroys his past, and promises a brighter future for himself and all Naples. The devils, of course, have another scene in Hell after this point, but even for them the Hell scene is anti-climactic. It completes the frame for the Earth actions, provides a very regularly balanced scene structure, and extends the actions beyond the confines of the play, but all of the dramatic action is actually completed in the preceding scene. Because the last scene has these other worthwile functions, it is probably improper to term it, as one critic does, "purely extraneous".35 The scene has so much excitement and spectacle that it sustains interest, and does not dwindle away in elaborate unravelings and explanations usually associated with anticlimactic scenes. That term normally carries negative connotations which do not seem to apply here. In a very narrow sense, the action would be complete without the scene, but it would not necessarily be better. Because the war situation directly controls and produces this climax, the crisis which produces the war can properly be termed the major crisis of the play. That incident, as noted earlier, is the rejection of Erminhild in Ill.i. A later scene, IILiii, includes the crises for two of the actions, and is the first scene in which the three plots meet, but at that point the war is inevitable, and the two lesser plots are swept up in the events of the third, remaining essential parts of the King of Naples action to the end.

U N I F Y I N G DEVICES

It is this co-mingling of plots midway through the play, along with the devils and the frame situation, that gives the play its unity. The three independent actions join at IILiii, and then move forward almost as one.3· The two devils present in that scene 35

Russell Potter, "Three Jacobean Devil Plays", Studies in Philology, XXVIII (October, 1931), 202. " This is also another argument in favor of Dekker's arrangement of incidents. If the court judgment scene were earlier in the play, the plots

180

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

actually join forces, unifying the actions. Rufman and Lurchall exchange words over the prostrate merchant, and a few lines later Rufman intercedes with the King for his brother devil's victim. The war situation, as noted, then becomes central in the action, and most of the subsequent scenes involve characters of the several plots. The King of Naples action, since it produces the war, is the central action. To varying degrees, the actions are interdependent. That is, the King is directly involved in the progress and outcome of the two other actions. Though the Priory action only provides another example of the King's sins, and does not affect his action directly, the Sub-Prior does perform a necessary function in the central action by shielding and then revealing Erminhild. The Sub-prior's act of protection, however, is not part of the Priory action as a whole. The King's reform affects the Priory, in that the newly virtuous King purges the religious community. But the King's reformation is in no way dependent upon the destruction of the Priory. The Priory does, of course, become a haven for characters in all of the actions. The skill with which Dekker gathers the characters together for that scene (V.iii) is comparable to similar scenes in Shoemakers' Holiday and Honest Whore II. The Bartervile action is also dependent upon the King and his war,butBartervilehas only minor influence upon the other actions. Like the monks, he provides another example of the King's decadence, but that is the bulk of his influence on the action. The merchant does help to eliminate the courtiers, but his refusal to lend money, for example, is not developed to the point that it influences the outcome of the war. Such a development would have added to the effect of degeneracy in the King's "circle," and would have further motivated the loss of the war, but it would have been in the nature of an addition rather than a necessity. The most formal unifying device is the frame situation, with its scenes at the beginning, middle, and end, and its devils who appear in all of the actions. This device can be viewed as artificial and external, as imposed upon the play from without, but the -would join, separate, and then join again, instead of converging into a single movement after this point.

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

181

interpretation expressed earlier in the chapter argues that the frame is an integral part of the whole play. If It Be Not Good is a typically Dekkerian play, with an abundance of incidents, attention to a complete society, sensational theatrical devices, and fundamentally good humored tone. The number of incidents and actions in the play creates, at times, a crowded effect. There is, however, a clarity of articulation and plotting which eliminates many potential confusions. In addition, the abundance seems to be purposeful. The variety exists for more than its own sake; society as a whole is the subject of the play. And that scope is suggested not only by the three areas of court, church and market-place, but by the sheer number of characters, the range of activities, and the spectrum of moods. Although the choice of characters to implement the ideas seems purposeful, producing, as it does, a range in human reaction to temptation, some characters present nearly insoluble problems for the playwright. The unrelieved goodness of the Sub-prior, and the endless villainy of Bartervile can be expressed only in somewhat static, non-dramatic terms. The Sub-prior in particular, like Bellafront, is essentially a static character. Interestingly enough, this inactivity is tempered by his involvement in another action in the play, illustrating the skill with which Dekker has used the multiple actions. Bartervile, a distant cousin, perhaps, to the title character in The Jew of Malta, escapes criticism through the ingenious and amusing machinations he employs. Each "trick of the trade" is surpassed by another until he reaches the heights of irony - the usurer disguised as a Turk seeking the protection of the church. Dekker's treatment of Scumbroth at the end is less successful. The cook's last appearance contributes nothing to the action, since the Prior's separate death is really extraneous. The scene serves only to raise once again the question of the cook's fate. Dekker would probably have done better to let Scumbroth disappear (in fright, perhaps) after the meeting with the devils. The central problem in the play, however, is connected with the relationship of the frame situation to the three Naples actions. If the frame does not have the function of irony and extension as

182

IF THIS BE NOT A GOOD PLAY, THE DEVIL IS IN IT

discussed above, then it must be criticised as an external and somewhat artificial unifying device. In these terms, this cohesive element is imposed upon the action from outside, and does not arise naturally from the action. The last scene in Hell would then be truly anti-climactic in the negative sense. It is argued here, however, that the frame is an integral part of the play, which concentrates the attention upon the sinful aspects of society as a whole, rather than upon individuals, and which, by adding a continuous element of irony to the activities of the mortals, prohibits audience involvement with the humans depicted on the stage. This task is not at all points equally achieved. Too often the reader-viewer can become concerned with the ends of individuals like the King and the Sub-prior, rather than with the commentary on human affairs.

6 MATCH ME IN LONDON

No two plays considered here are farther apart in tone and technique than If It Be Not Good and Match Me in London. Although the latter play includes many of Dekker's typical devices, it seems to represent an attempt at polish, at smoothness, almost as if the playwright were trying to eliminate those Elizabethan "excesses" so frequently condemned by post-seventeenth century critics. As will be seen, however, this superficial sheen only partially obscures some basic structural weaknesses. Most critics see in the work a conscious indebtedness to Fletcherian tragicomedy. Whatever the stylistic influences, it appears that there are no, or only slight, source influences. Bradbrook, however, states that the play is "closely related to the plot of Middleton's Women Beware Women, with a happy end instead of a tragic one".1 The main plot of Middleton's play seems to be based upon the lives of Bianca Capello and Francesco de'Medici; Dekker, too, makes use of a few incidents from the love affair. In each play a young girl elopes with her lover against her parents' wishes, and the ruler of the city to which they flee falls in love with the girl. Middleton, besides accepting the Italian setting, continues with the basic incidents of the much-publicized historical affair, including even the tragic ending with its mistaken poisonings. Women Beware Women was first published in 1657,2 many years after Middleton's death, and there are no known references to a production of the play. The date of composition is unknown, although most scholars, including Bentley, would prefer 1

Bradbrook, Growth and Structure, p. 231, n. 16. » Greg, Bibliography, Π, 888.

184

MATCH ME IN LONDON

to date the play late in Middleton's career because of the work's maturity.8 In any case, Bradbrook's phrase "closely related" is only partially accurate, the differences between the two being much more basic than a "happy end" as opposed to a "tragic one". Dekker may have been influenced by historical accounts, but those influences do not seem to go much beyond the common situation mentioned above. Jones-Davies considers the play to be made up of three "intrigues": Prince John versus the King; Tormiella and Cordolente versus Malevento and Gazetto; and Tormiella versus the King.4 But since those men (Malevento, Gazetto, and the King) all conspire to separate the lovers, it seems more reasonable to consider the lovers' efforts to stay united as one complex action, rather than two. This study, then, describes the play in terms of two actions; the first, the Tormiella action, is basically a love story, and the second concerns Prince John's efforts to usurp his brother's throne. T H E TORMIELLA ACTION Li A s a bell tolls midnight, Malevento discovers that his d a u g h t e r Tormiella is not at home. Concerned that she jeopardizes her reputation and an impending marriage, he awakens his servant Bilbo. Malevento fears that "Sheele follow her kind, turne Monster . . . " (I.i.72); in other words, she is a "typically" deceitful female. H e sends his servant to Gazetto's lodging to see if the fiance has taken pre-nuptial liberties. l.ii But Tormiella is with Cordolente, her lover. A s they are about t o separate f o r the evening, they are m e t by Bilbo, w h o has already roused a now-jealous Gazetto. Since she will b e unable t o satisfy the questions of her father and fiance, Tormiella a n d Cordolente decide t o leave C o r d o b a and hide in Seville. Bilbo, w h o has agreed to help t h e lovers, meets the pursuing Gazetto in f r o n t of Malevento's house. T h e father admits that the daughter is still absent, and the t w o m e n plan to leave C o r d o b a in the morning t o search for the girl in Seville. I.iv In Seville, the King of Spain is approached by L a d y Dildom a n , his procuress. She describes a newly married girl w h o h a s recently arrived in the city and whose h u s b a n d is a shopkeeper. T h e * 4

Bentley, Jacobean and Caroline, IV, 906-907. Jones-Davies, Π, 176.

MATCH ME IN LONDON

185

King plans to disguise himself in order to visit the shop and observe the girl for himself. 11.i In a notions shop, Bilbo talks to another employee. He, too, has run away from Malevento, and has taken work in the shop operated by Cordolente and Tormiella. As they talk, Malevento enters searching for his daughter. Out of pity for the father, Bilbo reveals that she is now his employer. Cordolente enters and persuades his father-in-law to give his blessing to the marriage. Since Tormiella is not in at the moment, Cordolente takes Malevento out to a business appointment. When the new bride returns, Bilbo tells her that her father and husband have met and "they are going very louingly together" (II.i.96-97). Now Gazetto, disguised as Lupo, arrives, also searching for the runaways. He recognizes Tormiella and goes off to plot, saying, "Th'art mine; thankes vengeance; thou at last art come, / (Tho with wolly feet) be quick now and strike home" (II.i.131-132). The disguised King and Lady Dildoman now arrive, and under the pretense of shopping, the King looks Tormiella over. Pretending that they have goods to show her, they persuade Tormiella to go with them to Dildoman's 'house'." II.ii At her home, Dildoman unsuccessfully tries to paint an attractive picture of a life of vice. When Tormiella realizes that all is not as it should be, and that her husband is not coming, she tries to leave. The disguised King starts to stop her, and she threatens to appeal to the King. He reveals his identity and adds royal temptations. He says that he will not force her, but that he will send for her, and if she refuses to come to court, she will be endangering her husband and friends. II.iii On her way home, Tormiella is accosted by the disguised Gazetto. After she escapes him, he says, "Though dead, from vengeance earth thee shall not saue, / Hyaena like, lie eate into the Graue" (II.iii.3-4). //./ν Cordolente and Malevento return to the shop before Tormiella. When a servant tells Cordolente that she has gone out with a lady, the young husband is concerned. The father, however, is pleased and reassures Cordolente that Tormiella is as "louing as the Moone, / Is to the Sea". The young man cautiously hopes "she'l proue more constant" than the moon (Il.iv. 16-17). At this point she returns, but "passes over the stage" without speaking. Before the two men can question her, a carriage arrives, and some gentlewomen ask to be directed to Tormiella's chambers. A few moments later Tormiella, masked and disguised in rich clothes, leaves in the carriage. III.ii The King and Queen, surrounded by courtiers and ladies, argue about, as the Queen puts it, "others in the Troupe [who] will be taken for Queenes sooner then I" (III.ii.25-26). The Queen grasps

186

MATCH ME IN LONDON

Tormiella's hand and takes her from the King's presence. Gazetto, still disguised, gains admittance to the King, and impress him with his bold cynicism and guile. The King decides that such a villain would be useful and employs him. Later in the scene, the Queen returns to say that Tormiella has fled from the court. The King begins to storm, and the Queen reveals that she said so only to test him, "I fear'd the Sea was dangerous, and did sound it, / Mischiefe but hälfe vp, is with ease confounded" (III.ii.204-205). IH.iii Apparently, she intends to "confound" the mischief by killing Tormiella. She locks her in the royal chambers and threatens her with knives, but Tormiella pleads with her, maintaining that she was forced to come to court and that she is still innocent of adultery. At last she wins the Queen's confidence, and as the Queen asks her not to reveal the threats, the King bursts into the room. He sees the knives and sends the Queen from the room, but Tormiella protects the Queen by denying that she was threatened. The King tries to woo her, not, he says, to be a wanton, but to take some day the Queen's place. But Tormiella will not "call any King my Husband, but mine owne" (III.iii.94). He reveals that he has summoned her husband and father to court and intends to "lay / Honours on both their backs" (IH.iii. 101) but that he will destroy them if she still refuses him. IV.i The King welcomes Tormiella's family and offers titles, one of which the father eagerly accepts. Cordolente, however, bitterly refuses to be bribed, and jealously turns away from Tormiella. The King banishes the young husband from court and Tormiella's presence, "neuer to see her more" (IV.i.70). Alone with the dejected husband, Gazetto (as Lupo) taunts him, advising him that "now like a booke call'd in, shee'l sell better then euer she did" (IV.i.82). IV.iv Cordolente, disguised as a shoemaker, visits Tormiella in court. While fitting her, he reveals his identity, and she starts to make plans for an escape. The King interrupts them, sends the "shoemaker" out, and then jealously tells Tormiella to go to her chambers. The Queen sends a jewel to the King by one of her men, Martines. The King asks to be alone with the man, and then questions him about a plot against the King's life. Ostensibly to compare his handwriting to a captured secret message, the King directs Martines to write a complimentary close and his signature on a blank sheet of paper. He takes the paper from him and pretends to be persuaded by Martines' protestations of innocence, instructing him to "meet mee some hälfe houre hence / I'th priuy Gallery with two naked Poniards" (IV.iv.104105). After he goes, ¿he King calls in Gazetto and dictates a love letter to the Queen over Martines' signature. IV.ν Martines nervously awaits the King at the appointed meeting place. When the courtiers with the King see the weapons, they im-

MATCH ME IN LONDON

187

mediately suspect treason and move to protect the King. But the King "bravely" orders them to leave him alone with the man. He tells Martines that the other business is now unimportant, asking him to deliver a letter to the Queen. He "realizes" that he forgot to address and seal the folded letter, and asks Martines to do it for him, using the man's own seal. The King then gathers his courtiers and sets out to follow the suspected man. IV.vi As the Queen upbraids Martines for the audacious letter, the King and his followers break into the room. The King seizes the letter, forces Martines to identify his own signature and seal, and shows it to the others. After Martines and the Queen are taken off to prison, the King talks privately with Gazetto, ordering him to kill the Queen and Cordolente. Alone, Gazetto resolves to murder Cordolente, since that furthers his own revenge, but to spare the Queen. V.i Malevento tells the King that Tormiella "has lost her vse of reason and runne mad" (V.i.2). As the King reacts violently to that news, Gazetto enters to say that the Queen is dead. The King apparently becomes partially insane himself, raving and at one point seeing the Queen at his elbow. Gazetto receives permission to try to cure Tormiella, but the King publicly vows to marry her, mad or not. V.ii Gazetto, still disguised, talks to Tormiella, who acts as though she were insane. Apparently suspecting that she only feigns madness, Gazetto tricks her into revealing her sanity by saying that he is a messenger from her husband, Cordolente. She stops acting and gives him letters in which are her plans for escape. Gazetto suggests a device which involves tying her up. After she is bound, he reveals himself as her ex-suitor and prepares to kill her. To protect herself, she swears to murder the King on their wedding night. The King enters, and when he hears that Tormiella is cured, he sends her off to prepare for the wedding. Cordolente enters, apparently still disguised as the shoemaker. Gazetto tells him that the King and Tormiella plan to kill him and to be married. He promises to help Cordolente to hide in the church so that he can kill Tormiella during the wedding ceremony. V.iii In a dumb show, the wedding procession begins. Cordolente attempts to kill Tormiella, but she throws herself into his arms and protects him from the King, who orders Cordolente removed from the church. As they resume the ceremony, they are frightened by thunder and lightning. Afraid to go on in the face of these portents, they leave the church. V.iv As Cordolente tells Gazetto that he could not kill because "charmes of Diuinity pull'd backe mine Arme . . . " (V..iv.ll), they are summoned to the King.

188

MATCH ME IN LONDON

V.v Tormiella has told the King that Gazetto had forced her to swear she would kill him. When Gazetto enters and reveals his identity, the King begins to realize his own evil and mourns his dead Queen. Gazetto admits that she still lives, and she is summoned. The King reunites Tormiella and Cordolente, and chides Malevento for accepting the bribe of a title. The Queen enters and everyone is forgiven - the King because he has reformed and the Queen still loves him, and Gazetto because he did not kill the Queen. On a number of counts this action is similar to that of Honest Whore II. There is the maligned city wife who is at once distrusted by her husband and subject to seduction attempts by a member of the nobility whose wife and father-in-law naturally object to those overtures. The honored Orlando Friscobaldo is transmuted to the Matheo-like Malevento who is willing to sell his daughter to the highest bidder. The play is similar to Honest Whore II in other matters as well. Dekker again opens his play at a critical moment for the principal characters, setting at once a mood of darkness and excitement, and posing a problem for the lovers. W. J. Lawrence discusses the frequent use of bells in Elizabethan drama as fulfilling the need "to procure atmosphere suggestively by careful attention to the illusion of sounds".5 Although he does not mention this particular play, it is certainly an example of exploitation of bells for their theatrical value. As the play opens, Malevento enters, searching for his daughter. Suddenly a bell begins to toll midnight, and he stops to count each stroke. He nervously reflects upon the evils of this hour of the night, and then shouts for his servant. The frightened servant runs in, shouting, "Theeues, Theeues, Theeues, where are they Master?" (I.i.9). This, in turn, frightens Malevento, "Where are they Bilbol What Theefe seest thou?" (Li. 10). There is in the scene a peculiar mixture of an almost comic reaction of the characters to an ominous atmosphere. Jones-Davies compares another aspect of the play to Othello a comparison suggested perhaps by this opening scene of tolling 5

William John Lawrence, Those Nut-Cracking Elizabethans (London, 1935), p. 84. • Jones-Davies, Π, 176.

MATCH ME IN LONDON

189

bells and a father arousing his household to search for a missing daughter. The Middleton play, Women Beware Women, begins quietly at a later point in the story, introducing the runaways at the home of the bridegroom's mother. Dekker's play has an earlier point of attack, partially so that the father and the jilted suitor, characters who do not appear in the Middleton play, can be introduced. Since Gazette's actions and their motivation are so important to the rest of the play, it is appropriate to provide a situation for him at the outset. The playwright could have begun even earlier, with a betrothal scene between Tormiella and Gazetto, for example. The theatricality of this midnight assignation speaks for Dekker's choice, however, and in addition, the situation has the advantage of depicting the lovers together, something that does not reoccur until late in the play. Like Jane and Rafe in Shoemakers' Holiday, the two are first established as a couple and then separated for the bulk of the remaining action. This effect is heightened by the fact that they do not share a scene even when they are still living as man and wife. Tormiella is attending a wedding when her father talks with Cordolente, and later she merely passes over the stage without speaking to her husband. Dekker has employed, then, the fairly early point of attack characteristic of much of Elizabethan drama and has also begun his play at an exciting and theatrical moment. In the two Cordoba scenes, Dekker also establishes two themes or motifs that permeate the rest of the action. Tormiella's father, her betrothed, and her lover are all quick to suspect the worst in women. As Bilbo leaves to search for her, the father cries out Oh haplesse Creatures! There is in women a Deuill from her birth, Of bad ones we haue sholes, of good a dearth. (I.i.79-81) The lover Cordolente's first words in the play reveal his jealous and suspicious nature: No more my Tormiella, night hath borne, Thy vowes to heauen, where they are fyl'd by this Eyther one day to crowne thy constant Soule

190

MATCH ME IN LONDON

Or (if thou spot it with foule periury,) For euer to condemne thee.

(I.ii.1-5)

These attitudes of doubt are repeated throughout the play, and as in Malevento's speech quoted above, they are regularly extended to include all women. When Cordolente discovers that Tormiella has gone off in the coach with the courtiers, he bursts out with another general condemnation, "These her oathes, vowes, protestations, damnations; a Serpent kist the first woman, and euer since the whole sexe haue giuen sucke to Adders" (II.iv.105-107). Later when Gazetto asks him if he would still swear that Tormiella is chaste, Cordolente responds with, "Ha; sweare; not I, no man durst euer sweare for his wife but Adam . . ." (IV.i.9495). Despite the fact that the only truly constant characters are Tormiella and the Queen, this attitude toward women is expressed in the very last lines of the play. The King says, Come Tormiella, well were that City blest, That with but, Two such women should excell, But there's so few good, th'ast no Paralell. (V.v.86-88) The second motif that runs throughout the play is that of revenge, expressed and embodied primarily by Gazetto. This too is established in the Cordoba scenes. Alone, the enraged Gazetto says, lustful maiden! Hot Spanish vengeance followes thee, which flyes Like three forkt Lightning, whom it smites, he dyes. (I.ii.111-113) Almost every scene in which he appears ends with a refrain-like statement concerning revenge. After the dejected Cordolente exits in IV.i, Gazetto gleefully says to himself, lie tickle at thy tortures, dance at thy stumbling, Play with thee, and then paw thee, 'shalt make me merry: The Crowne of blacke deeds that are hatcht in Hell Is to out-line and laugh, and all's play'd well. (TV.i. 100-103) These themes - the distrust of women and the fulfillment of

MATCH ME IN LONDON

191

revenge - are, consequently, clearly marked in the opening scenes of the play. The normal expository function of opening scenes is met partially by the use of the servant Bilbo, who is just a bit more than a protatic character. In the opening scene, he is a convenient listener as Malevento searches for his daughter, and in the course of the conversation they reveal that she is in some way engaged to Gazetto, and that she has had surrepetitious suitors as well. Bilbo is employed as the messenger, and it is he who forewarns the lovers.7 Dekker employs the same character for similar purposes in the shop scenes in Seville. The first of those scenes opens with the almost traditional discussion between servants which provides information about their masters. Later in the shop scenes, Bilbo also acts as a kind of messenger character, keeping the various characters informed of incidents that have taken place in their absence. He appears later in a brief scene at court which will be discussed separately. As the description of the Tormiella action reveals, the articulation of the incidents is regular and quite simple, as one scene normally ends with an indication of what is to follow. The appearance of the couple and their pursuers in Seville, for example, is preceded by an announcement, in I.ii, that that city is their destination. The King and Dildoman appear in the shop as they had planned; Tormiella is summoned as the King threatened; and Cordolente and Malevento appear in court as the King promised. Completely unexpected turns in the plot are kept to a minimum as Dekker employs only a few surprises. Even the fact that the Queen still lives is prepared for by Gazetto, who in a peculiar speech asks himself Why should I vexe a Soule did neuer greeue me? The Queenes an honest Lady: should I kill her It were as if I pull'd a Temple downe And from the ruines of that built vp a stewes, She liues (IV.vi.68-72) 7

Although he does not deliver the typical long message when he enters, Bilbo is at this point somewhat reminiscent of the Roman Comedy character of the "running slave", discussed by George E. Duckworth on page 106 of The Nature of Roman Comedy (Princeton, 1952).

192

MATCH ME IN LONDON

Greg, listing indications that the play might be a revision of an older play, notes that "no explanation is ever given as to how Tormiella was ever inveigled away from home". 8 That a critic says such a thing, suggests, perhaps, that the play is weak in this respect, even if an explanation can be found in the text. On the other hand, the play was written for performance and conceivably allows for techniques of pointing and emphasis that may not be immediately apparent to the reader. In this case, however, the explanation in the dialogue is clearer than Greg's comment suggests. In II.ii, after Tormiella has denounced Dildoman and the "man" who accompanies her, the King reveals his identity in a powerful and frightening speech, quoted only part below: Heare me, thou striu'st with Thunder, yet this hand That can shake Kingdomes downe, thrusts into thine, The Scepters, if proud fool, thou let'st them fall Thou beat'st thy selfe in peeces on a rocke That shall for euer ruine thee and thine, Thy Husband, and all opposites that dare With vs to cope. . . . When I send, come: if not, withstand thy good; Goe, get you home now, this is all, farewell. (II.ii.72-87) Is it surprising that Tormiella answers the summons a short time later? There are only two plot turns that are completely unexpected, besides Cordolente's appearance in the shoemaker disguise. He is so distraught over the King's command never to see Tormiella again that his attempt to do so in disguise does not come as a great surprise. Tormiella's feigned madness is reported to the King by Malevento in V.i, and then depicted in the following scene. Madness is one of the frequently used melodramatic devices of the Elizabethan drama, and when it is pretended instead of real, it is akin to the disguise technique. Bradbrook defines disguise as it is used in Elizabethan drama as •

Greg, Diary, Π, 173.

MATCH ME IN LONDON

193

the substitution, overlaying or metamorphosis of dramatic identity whereby one character sustains two roles. This may involve deliberate or involuntary masquerade, mistaken or concealed identity, madness or possession.®

Dekker used both real and pretended madness in Honest Whore I, as did Shakespeare in Hamlet, and Middleton in The Challenging. In addition, madness is regularly associated with the revenge play. In this play, it would have been a simple matter to let Tormiella announce, in an aside, her intention to pretend insanity, but the playwright chose not to share this information with his audience. By doing so, he heightens the sympathy for the girl, and intensifies the horror of the intended marriage between the King and the madwoman. If the audience were to have foreknowledge of the pretense, the impact of the King's plan would be lessened. Other playwrights, such as Webster, Marston, or Tourner, probably would have exploited the potentials of the situation, but Dekker is limited by his overall scheme which includes a bloodless and happy ending. The problem of the ending of the play is difficult enough, so it is well that the playwright did not magnify the difficulties by dwelling on this matter. The other unexpected incident - the divine intervention in V.iii - will be discussed as part of the climax to the action. One other problem in the play is not so easily explained. Gazetto, as a scheming revenger, seems to be skillfully manipulating the other characters into situations in which they will do his work for him. In the last scene, after he has been exposed, Gazetto admits that were not my hands ty'd by your preuention It should goe forward yet, my plot lay there (King) to haue her kill thee, this Cuckold her, Then had I made him Hawkes-meate. (V.v.20-23)

It all sound like a very neat intrigue, except that if Cordolente had followed his instructions the plot would have fallen apart. The sequence is wrong; a Tormiella murdered at the wedding could hardly commit murder on the wedding night! Perhaps the best •

Bradbrook, Essays in Criticism, p. 160.

194

MATCH ME IN LONDON

explanation for the situation is that Gazetto does not really operate from a pre-conceived plan as he boasts above, but that he takes advantage of situations as they arise, setting as many plots in motion as he can, hoping that some will succeed. Dekker deals somewhat more successfully with the overall movement of the action than he does with some of the problems discussed above. The first, established in the opening scenes, is the attempted punishment for running away with Cordolente. The "weathercock" father readily switches his alliance first from Gazetto to Cordolente, and then to the King, leaving the revenge to Gazetto alone, who tries to enlist the aid of Cordolente, the second "rejected" lover. The second threat, suggested by Dildoman to the King, is to Tormiella's virtue. After Il.ii, the King rejects the bawd's aid, but continues on his own until he employs Gazetto to help him. The joined efforts of the King and Gazetto create the basic irony of the play, in that the two men are working together toward different ends. They do not trust one another, as the following passage attests: KING:

Heap'd vp honours Are schedules to thine enterprise annext, Doe it and mount -

GAZ:

[Aside] To th' Gallowes.

KING:

[Aside]

Thy selfe goes next. (IV. vi.65-67)

But each thinks he can control the other. Within this framework of the two long-term and constant objectives, the villains (the active character«^ adapt their schemes to the changing circumstances. The King brings Tormiella to court, hoping to win her over. When it becomes apparent that she will not become his mistress, he plots to eliminate the Queen, hoping that Tormiella will accept a marriage and the throne. Gazetto, hoping to revenge himself on the King as well as Tormiella, ingratiates himself with the King in order to be in on the scheming so that he can manipulate it according to his own purposes. In some respects, Dekker's play is similar to Marston's The Malcontent. Bowers, in his work on revenge tragedy, describes Marston's play follows:

195

MATCH ME IN LONDON

The play contains an intriguing, unsuspected revenger, a variation on the device of the disposal of accomplices, emphasis on the torture of the victim's mind, the lust of the supposed murderer for the wife of the supposed victim, and finally the deceit of the masque in which the revengers secure their opportunity. 10

Dekker's play conforms to this description, with the substitution of the wedding ceremony for the masque. The play also follow's Marston's format in the use of a "tangled web of revenges" which work "against one another", and in the use of the "villainous favorite who intrigues to oust his villain master".11 But in The Malcontent, the disguised revenger is also the hero of the piece, and his machinations are successful at the end of the play. Briefly, in The Malcontent, the Duke of Genoa has been deposed. In order to gain revenge, he disguises himself, taking the name Malevole. He temporarily joins forces with Mendoza, a villain in the court, who enlists Malevole to assassinate Pietro, the usurping duke. Malevole pretends to do so, and Mendoza, thinking Pietro is dead, assumes the duke's title. Then the repentant Pietro helps Malevole overthrow Mendoza. Thus, Marston employs a good revenger (Malevole), who pits one evil force (Pietro) against another (Mendoza), and in the end the good force defeats and banishes both evil forces. Dekker's revenger (Gazetto) is not the hero, and though he does enlist the aid of the first victim (Cordolente) to try to bring down the King and Tormiella, the efforts are not successful. Thus, Dekker's principal intriguer is an evil force, who pits the good (Tormiella and Cordolente) against another evil force (the King) and hopes for their mutual destruction. But in order to reach the desired happy ending, Dekker cannot allow this hope to be fulfilled. Unfortunately, he had not learned what Bowers calls "the important lesson of a strong opposing force moving against the revenger".12 Because he has not made use of an active good force (Tormiella and Cordolente, though "good", are following evil instructions), the playwright has to resort to the arbitrary device of divine intervention to cut the knot 10

Fredson Thayer Bowers, Elizabethan 1940), pp. 130-131. 11 Ibid., pp. 131-132. 11 Ibid., p. 267.

Revenge

Tragedy

(Princeton,

196

MATCH ME IN LONDON

at the end. This situation is involved in the climax of the action. The dumb show near the end of the play is actually the peak of the action; after that point there are only explanations and unravelings. As a device, the dumb show is here quite theatrical. It opens with "Hoboyes", and then in the quiet of mime, depicts the pomp of the wedding, the attempted assassination, and Tormiella's pleas for Cordolente's safety. As the wedding resumes, the prolonged silence is sharply broken with thunder and lightning, an effect of violent contrast which must have considerable impact in performance. But despite the fact that the scene is packed with incidents, it is essentially negative in effect. That is, Cordolente fails in his attempt, and then the wedding itself is interrupted and halted by the deus ex machina device. The effect is not terminal, but one of hesitation. Gazetto does not appear to be defeated; the description says he "laughs at all . . ." (V.iii.8). The action then continues with an eighteen line scene in which Cordolente explains his failure to Gazetto, and then with the final court scene. The King asks, Has heauen left chiding yet, there's in thy voice A thunder that worse frights mee, didst thou sweare In bed to kill me, had I married thee? (V.v.1-3) Apparently, the divine disapproval, though it frightened him, does not alone deter the King. As a motivation for his reform, it must be combined with Tormiella's revelation and also the news that the Queen still lives. The climax is the return of the various characters to their proper states of marriage and social standing; Tormiella is reunited with Cordolente and the Queen forgives the King. Malevento is reduced to a private citizen in his proper environment - the city; and Gazetto is unmasked and purged of his desire for revenge. Since this all starts in the dumb show scene and extends through most of the last scene in the action, there is a kind of dissipation of the climactic effect which weakens the end of the play, and there is nothing theatrical to compensate for the "talk" that is necessary. Moreover, the explanations are repetitious for the reader-audience. The audience knows that Tormiella vowed to kill the King, that Lupo is Gazetto, and that the Queen is not

MATCH ME IN LONDON

197

dead. The characters must learn these things, but they do so at the expense of audience interest. As Granville-Barker comments, however, "A final, and often a fairly elaborate, unraveling of confusions is, of course, a commonplace of Elizabethan stagecraft." He writes, at this point, of Cymbeline, and goes on to note that in that play the audience has prior knowledge of the information to be revealed in the elaborate last scene. Our interest must be kept alive, therefore, by the strategy of its bringing about, and . . . the more frankly we are shown how the thing is done, the better. . . . Not only is the tangle of the story straightened; the characters are brought into harmony, and we, too, are reconciled to faith in their happiness. . . . The action is kept alive by a series of surprises — there are eighteen of them. . . . We, who are not surprised, find our interest in watching for each turn to come. .. .13

Specifically, Shakespeare holds interest through such turns as Imogen's temporary refusal to plead for Lucius, and the incident in which Posthumous strikes Imogen. Dekker's play lacks these moments of theatricality. His characters cannot command the audience sympathy or happy concern that do Imogen, or even Belarius. Perhaps if the playwright had compressed it all into the church scene, substituting Tormiella's revelation of her plans to murder the King for her mimed pleas for Cordolente, and placing the Queen in church as a disguised member of the congregation, the ending would have sufficient impact. But he did not, and Hunt's criticism of the play, that it does not "work up to an ingenious climax",14 seems to be valid. Because of the compounded and extended nature of the climax, it is difficult to point to one situation, incident, or decision that is the primary crisis in the action. It is particularly difficult to determine the antecedent situation that produces a deus ex machina device, although such support for Tormiella is foreshadowed as early as II.ii. She says, Spaine has a King. If from his royall throne Iustice bee driuen 18

Harley Granville-Barker, Prefaces to Shakespeare (Princeton, 1952), I, 489-490. M Hunt, pp. 163-164.

198

MATCH ME IN LONDON

I shall find right, at the Kings hands of Heauen. (II.ii.63-65) Apparently, the wedding ceremony is the key to the problem; to reach such a situation the King had to dispose of his wife, and without the planned wedding, Cordolente would not have been provoked to attempt to kill Tormiella. Perhaps, too, it is the sacrilegious ceremony that finally prompts heaven's intervention. But Tormiella must agree to go through with a public ceremony, and when the King first suggests it, she responds, What tree euer stood, Long and deepe rooted, that was set in blood; I will not be your whore to weare your Crowne, Nor call any King my Husband, but mine owne. (III.iii.91-94) It is Gazetto who, through threats, forces her to agree to the ceremony, and it is also he who, by failing to murder the Queen, provides the condition for the "happy" ending. The critical situation then is the point at which the two forces working against Tormiella join, even though those forces have different objectives. When the King says, "This fellow lie fitly cast i'th Villaines mold, / I find him crafty, enuious, poore, and bold . . . " (IILii. 87-88), and employs Gazetto, he has doomed his own plans to failure. Later situations, such as Gazetto's failure to kill the Queen, and Tormiella's agreement to marry the King, are necessary for the climax of the play, but they are dependent upon the King's misplaced confidence in Gazetto. The action as a whole is quite complete; that is, almost all of the potential incidents in the story have been dramatized. Tormiella's arrival at the court, however, the Queen's reaction to this new member of her entourage, and the King's first attentions to Tormiella in court are not dramatized, or even described as incidents which took place. This hiatus between Tormiella's departure for court (Il.iv), and the scene in which the King and Queen argue over her presence (IILii), is bridged by a scene in the other action to be discussed below. The only other possible incidents not dramatized are Gazetto's visit to the Queen (if he does so) and the discovery by the Queen's father that she is not dead as was reported.

MATCH ME IN LONDON

199

Gazetto reports in V.i that the Queen is dead and that her last words were, Commend me to the King And tell him this, mine honour is not wrack'd, Though his Loue bee. (V.i.13-15) But since he is lying about her death, it is probable that he is also lying about her statement. In any event, a scene in which Gazetto displayed softness and mercy would be harmful to his character. His decision not to kill the Queen is difficult enough to accept without the additional emphasis of dramatization. A meeting in prison between the Queen and her father would add little to the audience's knowledge. Gazetto says in a soliloquy that he will not kill her, and there is no reason to disbelieve such a statement under those conditions. Such a scene in prison would also necessitate some plans for future action, since Valasco, the father, knows about the impending wedding. And any such plans would be extraneous, since they would be made unnecessary by the last scene of the play. There is, however, one scene in the play that could be termed extraneous. Separating the scene in which Cordolente and Malevento first appear in court (IV.i) and a scene in the other action (IV.iii), there is a short (sixty-five lines) scene between Bilbo and a court "Coxecombe". The two men make no reference to the other actions of the play; the dialogue consists of some comic comparisons of the city and the court, as each attacks the other's habitat. Jones-Davies suggests that "II est possible que Dekker, voulant introduire ime détente comique, reprit ici la scène d'une de ses anciennes pièces." 15 Such a theory is supported by the fact that the quarto provides no entrance for Bilbo, but names a "Clowne, and Coxecombe", and then gives Bilbo's first speech to "CZo".ie It is certainly possible that the scene does represent a reworking of a scene from an earlier play, but it functions here as a bit more than "comic relief'. There is in the play a minor or secondary theme concerned with the conflict between the middle class and the nobility - the city and the court - which is a varia15

16

Jones-Davies, II, 392. Bowers, Works of Dekker,

ΠΙ, 319, nn. 1 and 2.

200

MATCH ME IN LONDON

tion on the straggle between Tormiella and the King. In II.iv, when the courtiers and ladies come to take Tormiella away, the courtiers remain onstage to divert her family while the women disguise her. Cordolente and Malevento cross verbal swords with the fops in a sarcastic conflict between city and court. In other scenes, each group makes light of the other. The King's brother makes such statements as, "cloath her / (As Citizens doe their wiues) beyond their worth" (III.i.105-106), and when Malevento accepts an appointment as Vice-Admiral of the Navy, Cordolente comments, "Oh spitefull Comedy, he's not a Courtier of hälfe an houres standing, and he's made a Vice already" (IV.i.20-21). When the King strips Malevento of that honor in the last scene, the citizen responds, "I shall find company i'th City I warrant; I am not the first hath giuen vp my Cloake of honour" (V.v.6061). These scenes and comments, which run throughout the play, indirectly support and extend the primary struggle between individuals. The scene in question contributes to that extension. THE DON JOHN ACTION

The secondary action in the play, though involving some of the same characters, is political in nature, having to do with Don John's attempts to usurp his brother's crown. IMi D o n John is awakened in the morning by a servant. Alone, Don John apparently looks at some documents in which certain citizens of Portugal offer to help him overthrow his brother, the King of Spain. H e decides that he must also have the support of the people and particularly of Valasco, the Queen's father. A courtier interrupts to summon him to court. I.iv A t court, the King tells Valasco of a terrifying vision he has had during the night. The ruler interprets the vision as a threat, and accuses Valasco of plotting with D o n John against him. Valasco denies it, but when Don John arrives, the King tells him that Valasco has exposed a plot involving the Prince. Both men again deny it, but the King has achieved his goal of setting them at odds, and as D o n John leaves, he makes a veiled threat to Valasco. The King tells Valasco to write to the Prince to purge "all humors / That are corrupt within you" (I.iv.92-93). Valasco retorts that he will do more than that, he will "to him in person" (I.iv.94).

MATCH ME IN LONDON

201

Hl.i Don John questions a doctor about poisons, and then orders him to poison Valasco. The doctor agrees, but only after the Prince threatens to kill him. As he had promised the King, Valasco visits Don John, and the two men discuss their differences. They come to a kind of uneasy truce just as another courtier stops by and gives Valasco some grapes as a present. After both John and Valasco have eaten some of the grapes, the Prince complains of dizziness, and says that they have been poisoned. He calls in the doctor for an "antidote". Though suspicious, Valasco drinks his share of the antidote and immediately collapses. Don John instructs the physician to take the body to his home, saying as the doctor leaves, "Thou art next, for none must liue that can betray" (III.i.212). IH.ii The doctor gains access to the King and tells him that on Don John's instructions he was to poison Valasco, but that he gave him a sleeping potion instead. The King sends for the victim and the accused. A few minutes later, Valasco arrives, and after corroborating the doctor's story, he is told to stand where the Prince will see him when he enters. Don John arrives, is startled by the revived "corpse", and then tries to explain the incident away as a trick on the doctor. Valasco and Don John accuse each other of treason, so the King sends both of them to confinement in their quarters. IV.iii Don John's servant tells him that Valasco has been freed, and was seen talking to the King. The King arrives and shows Don John documents which expose his dealings with Portugal. He accuses him of treason, and leaves Valasco to carry out the sentence of death. Valasco escorts the Prince out to "die in priuate" (IV.iii.81). IV.iv Before others of the court, Valasco reports to the King that Don John has been executed. V.v As the play ends, Valasco brings Don John into the King's presence. The Prince says that he is sorry now for his "poore Ambitions" (V.v.69), and the King responds, "Be as you speake, we are friends, it was our will / To let you know, we can, or saue, or kill" (V.V..72-73). Despite the fact that the Portuguese support for Don John is part of the background of the action, and proves to be his undoing, it is nevertheless secondary to the power struggle among the three men, a struggle that involves a series of real and apparent shifts of alliance. Don John plans to make Valasco an ally, but the King anticipates this move and divides the two. The Prince apparently accepts Valasco's overtures of friendship, and then tries to incite him against the King. When this fails, he tries to kill him. Then, each tries to align himself with the King by accusing the

202

MATCH ME IN LONDON

other of treason. The King decides to believe Valasco, punishes Don John, and at the end all are reconciled. Since there are only the three men involved, the exposition of character relationships is a relatively simple matter. Don John, in the short soliloquy in the first scene of the action (I.ii), manages to introduce these relationships (including the fact that Valasco is the Queen's father), the Portuguese plot, and his hopes for an alliance with Valasco. The Portuguese element then drops out of the action until it is employed to trip up Don John. Each scene moves simply to the next with devices such as the Prince's summons to court in I.iii, and Valasco's plans to visit the Prince, established in I.iii, and Valasco's plans to visit the Prince, established in I.iv. Dekker has even prepared the way for the presence of the doctor, in Ill.i, by an exchange in the preceding scene. The King asks, KING: Are you not troubled with some paine i'th head? Your Night-cap shewes you are? JOHN: Yes wonderously, A kind of Megrim Sir. (I.iv.62-64) The preparation for the doctor's substitution of a sleeping potion for poison is managed indirectly, through an emphasis on the doctor's unwillingness to follow Don John's orders. For example, as Valasco enters, the doctor says, "Oh my Lord, I am beaten to these things" (III.i.63). This kind of character motivation, however, is not extended to explain or anticipate the final situation the mercy of the King to his envious brother. The fact that Don John is still alive at the end of the play comes as a complete and arbitrary surprise. There is nothing in the action that precedes it, or in the characterization of the King, either to prepare for or explain the outcome. Everything, in fact, supports the execution as both believable and proper for the characters and the situation. The supposed death occurs early in the whole play (between IV.iii and iv), and is de-emphasized by the fact that it is not dramatized. Consequently, the playwright did not have to be concerned that a "death" would mar his otherwise bloodless ending. Even more damaging is the fact that the surprise technique is wasted; it is difficult to believe that an audience would care much either way.

MATCH ME IN LONDON

203

Neither the King nor his brother is portrayed in a way which would prompt any sympathy or concern in the audience, and of the three men, only Valasco "deserves" any vindication. The fact that this ending is arbitrary makes it difficult, if not impossible, to single out a critical event earlier in the action that conditions or leads to the climax. There is, however, an earlier point in the action that could be termed a climax for Don John's activities - the King's certain knowledge of his brother's treason. But that occurs became, as the King says, a Kings arme thou seest Has a long reach, as farre as Portugall Can we fetch treason backe hatcht here by you. (IV.iii.36-38)

This example of the affectiveness of the King's spy system is weak at best, as a critical situation, because it is so far removed from the action of the play. And it is not directly connected with the action as dramatized. The incidents in the plot have to do with the conflict between Don John and Valasco, and Valasco has no association with the Portuguese plot exposure. If somehow he had gained access to secret documents, and had given them to the King as a revenge for Don John's murder attempt, the action and its outcome would have had more coherence. The Don John action, then, is well developed and articulated, progressing smoothly from one interesting situation to another, but it stops short of an appropriate or logical ending. A link, some key incident which would connect the climax to the rest of the action, is missing.

RELATIONSHIP OF THE ACTIONS

Despite the fact that the actions of the two plots are quite different - the one concerned with lust and revenge, and the other with politically motivated "in-fighting" - the play as a whole has a consistency of tone not found in any other play in the study, with the possible exception of Whore of Babylon. There are only a few excursions into the ribaldry and vulgarity that have offended

204

MATCH ME IN LONDON

some of Dekker's critics. There seems, however, to have been some kind of relationship between those things in other plays and the vitality and excitement also found in those plays. There are no Firks here, but neither are there any Simons or Janes; there are no Bots, but neither are there any Orlando Friscobaldos. A dignified restraint seems to have had its correlative in a stultified imagination. A unity of tone has degenerated into a consistent tonelessness. This consistency pervades the entire play, despite the fact that the playwright has once again depicted several levels of society. Servants, apprentices, shopkeepers, nobility, and royalty are all directly involved in the actions. As in both parts of Honest Whore, some elements of conflict in the play are produced by an "improper" relationship between characters of several levels of society. The King here disguises himself in order to move "down" to participate in the shop scene (Il.i), and later he violates conventional behavior by raising Tormiella and her father to court status, so that he can more conveniently woo her. In three of the plays (Shoemakers' Holiday, Honest Whore II, and If It Be Not Good), the social classes are kept separated, at least in part, throughout the play. The shoemaker's shop is a continuing milieu, as are the linen draper's shop and the priory. In this play, however, the street and Cordolente's shop cease to be locales of action at a relatively early point in the play, and the characters who naturally belong in those surroundings are drawn into the atmosphere of the court, remaining there for the rest of the play. This technique has two effects. The separated locales of the other plays require an alternation from one to the other that creates a kind of richness and variety of texture that is lacking in this play. In addition, Dekker has eliminated the necessity for the rather special, but sometimes slightly artificial, closing scene which encompasses the varied characters. The final scene in this play seems more natural than some of the others, and less manipulation is needed to bring the characters together. But the absence of the admittedly artificial pancake day celebration, the parade of prostitutes, and the destruction of the priory also emphasizes the "flatness" and the explanatory nature of this ending. While this ending

MATCH ME IN LONDON

205

may be more dramatically consistent than some of the others, it is less theatrically effective. ARRANGEMENT OF SCENES

As noted earlier, however, the beginning of the play does not lack effective theatrical devices. The Cordoba night scene with torches and tolling bells contrasts nicely with the relative quiet of the morning "dressing scene" that opens the second action. That scene is in turn followed by another morning scene, in which the King relates the terrors of the recent night. Asked if the vision spoke, the King replies with a vivid description: No; but with broad eyes, Glassie and fierie stair'd vpon me thus, As blacke, as is a Soule new dipt in Hell; The t'other was all white a beard and haire Snowie like Portugall, and me thought his looke: But had no armes. (I.iv.2-7)

Thus, in the opening scenes of the play, Dekker manages to include all of the necessary information about character relationships and past events within a context of striking scenes which flow smoothly from one to the next. The transition between the basically unrelated Cordoba scenes (Li and ii) and Don John's chambers (I.iii) is particularly interesting. In many ways the scenes could not be more unlike in mood, character types, and incident. But the playwright uses time here as a transitional device, moving from night to early morning, and producing an effect of continuity. Later it is discovered that the morning dramatized actually occurs three days after the night scenes, but the desired effect has been achieved. A chronological arrangement of the scenes will aid in the demonstration of Dekker's manipulation of time: Tormiella Action

Don John Action

I.i I.ii (interval) I.iii

206

MATCH ME IN LONDON

I.iv II.i Il.ii Il.iii Il.iv (interval) IILii

I.iv

IILi (no interval) Ill.ii

Between the first two scenes in which Tormiella and Cordolente appear (I.ii and II.i), the couple travels from Cordoba to Seville, marries, and sets up shop. The scenes of the other action which intervene serve to give the impression of a passage of time, even though those intervening scenes actually take place on the same day as II.i. As noted earlier, the Tormiella action seems to require an interval of at least a day between the last shop scene (Il.iv) and the first scene in which Tormiella appears in court (Ill.ii), although there is no specific reference to time passage or intervening events. But some time must have passed, and the insertion of the scene from the Don John action provides an effect of separation. This effect takes place despite the fact that the Don John action seems to exclude an interval at this same point. The drugged Valasco, as the Queen's father and an important personage in his own right, could hardly disappear from court for any length of time, so it seems that the "poisoning" and the doctor's revelation of it occur in the same day. This is another example of the much-discussed double time effect, in which one action, upon examination, operates on a different time schedule than does another in the same play. Dekker is careful, however, to avoid references to passage of time that might call attention to the contradictory situation. He makes use of a violation of "clock time" to produce an appropriate effect of dramatic time. There is one other effect of the arrangement of scenes. The scene in which Cordolente is banished from court (IV.i), and the one in which he returns disguised as a shoemaker (IV.iv), are consecutive incidents in the Tormiella action, but Dekker separates them with the Bilbo-coxecombe incident (IV.ii) and the arrest of Don John (IV.iii). Without the separation, the juxtaposi-

MATCH ME IN LONDON

207

tìon of the two scenes would have produced an abrupt, overlyepisodic effect, and the change in Cordolente's attitude, from the bitterness of the first scene to the remorse and loneliness of the second, would have been less acceptable. The incidents of the secondary action, though not causally connected to incidents in the primary action, and thus not restricted to specific locations within the play, are introduced at points at which they serve the purposes of the play as a whole. With the exception of the handful of lines in the last scene of the play, the Don John action is completed in IV.iii, a relatively early point in the total play. This situation, coupled with the fact that all the late scenes take place at court, produces an effect of concentration in the last quarter of the play, in which all of the incidents pertain to Tormiella and the King's efforts to win her. UNIFYING DEVICES

The fact that the secondary plot does drop out of the play, and is relatively short compared to the main action, simplifies the problem of unity. The playwright does make use of several devices to further connect the two. The King, of course, participates actively in both actions. Except for the fact that he demonstrates skill at intrigue in both situations, there is nothing about his participation in one that affects the other, but his presence in both strengthens the impression that the two belong together. Valasco acts in the main plot only insofar as he is the injured Queen's father. He is present in some scenes devoted exclusively to the main action, but does not participate beyond expressing concern for his daughter's welfare. There are two scene units in the play, in addition to the last, which include incidents from both actions. The first, I.iv, is concerned primarily with the Don John plot, but ends with the interview between the King and Lady Dildoman. The two parts of the scene are not related in a causal sense. The King and several courtiers, however, are present in both, blending the two parts together.

208

MATCH ME IN LONDON

The second scene (Ill.ii) is even more adroitly constructed to serve both actions, and to produce a unified effect. It begins with the argument between the King and Queen which results in the Queen's exit, with Tormiella attending her. Then the doctor confesses the poison plot against the Queen's father, to which the King responds, "Would it had beene the Daughter . . . " (III.ii.52). After the explanation of the ruse, the King sends for the two men, and to occupy the time necessary for them to come, Dekker interjects the situation in which Gazetto becomes the King's henchman. Valasco and Don John arrive, accuse one another, and are sent off to confinement. Then the Queen returns to tell her husband that "Your woman's fled . . ." (Ill.ii. 189). In his fury the King answers his wife: I haue hotter newes for you, Your Fathers head lies here, art thou still shooting Thy stings into my sides! (Ill.ii. 191-193)

As can be seen, the juxtaposed incidents produce a unified and continuous effect as well as providing necessary passages of time. The references in one action to incidents in the other create a unity and suggest a causality that is not really present. References to the main action are also found in scenes devoted exclusively to incidents in the Don John plot. When Valasco visits Don John (Ill.i), he tells the Prince of Tormiella's presence in court, and the Prince tries to use the situation to persuade Valasco to join him against the King. Later (IV.iii) Don John, restricted to his quarters, asks his servant, "And what say the people about my committing to mine owne house?" (IV.iii.7). In the course of relating court reactions, the servant adds the other topical gossip about the King and Tormiella. These references to the main action are only that - references - but they serve to create the impression that both actions are integral elements of a single thing. A more fundamental technique that tends to unify the two actions is a similarity or echoing of situations throughout the play. There are, for example, real and imaginary threats to the King in both situations, beginning with the night vision described in I.iv, and ending with the very real threat against his life by Gazetto

MATCH ME IN LONDON

209

through Tormiella. Even more basic, perhaps, is the recurrent situation in which one character misinterprets the actions and motives of another character. Cordolente, Malevento, the Queen, Dildoman, and the King himself cannot believe that Tormiella will remain faithful to her husband in the face of the offered temptations. Interestingly enough, only the Queen - the other woman of importance - is persuaded before the end of the play. In the secondary action, both Don John and the King mis-estimate Valasco's loyalties. Balancing these examples of mistrust of another are a series of situations in which a character misplaces his trust. Don John "trusts" the doctor's fear of death, and also goes too far in trying to tempt Valasco. This trust of the wrong person is mirrored in the main action in several ways. The King employs Gazetto, the man who would like to see him dead. And Gazetto in turn employs Tormiella and Cordolente, two of the few virtuous people in the play, to commit murder. This pattern of distrust and misplaced trust more than anything else in the play justifies the more arbitrary unifying devices, by providing them with a reason for being. Dekker has not, however, employed the techniques of interdependence found in other plays, notably Shoemakers' Holiday, Honest Whore II, and If It Be Not Good. In all of those plays, the incidents and outcomes of one action are at least in part dependent upon those of another action. Nothing of the sort operates in this play, except, of course, that if the King is killed in one action, he ceases to participate in the other. That would be quite another play. The playwright does have one unexploited opportunity that would have more thoroughly integrated the actions. Since the King employs Gazetto as a "villain", there is no reason to restrict his activities to the Tormiella action. If Gazetto had been the instrument of Don John's exposure, Dekker could have cleared up that omission in the secondary plot and firmly united the two actions. It is perhaps useless to speculate on "what might have been", but this does seem to be a rather obvious missed opportunity. Because of the lack of a clearly marked crisis in the Don John

210

MATCH ME IN LONDON

action, a discussion of the relationship of the crises is impossible. The two actions come to a common close, but only because the news of the King's mercy to Don John is arbitrarily withheld until the last scene of the play. That mercy, it is true, would seem uncharacteristic of the King, if exposed before his reformation in the last scene. In the same way, the mercy makes the reformation a little more believable. Despite the fact that the play is chronologically the last in this study, it does not represent Dekker's highest achievements in the technical construction of a play. There are many refinements of technique in the play that are commendable, however. Incidents in both actions move forward smoothly with a minimum of confusion and a great deal of clarity. The two actions of the play are arranged so as to complement one another, both in mirrored situations and in such adroit technical details as compensation for time and incident gaps. Once again Dekker has written an efficient and theatrical opening for his play that excites and holds interest. By eliminating emphasis upon the low comedy of lower class characters, he has managed to avoid the typically Elizabethan division of plots according to social standing. Normally it is difficult, if not impossible, to integrate completely the extremes of society into one action - cats may only look at kings. Patient Grissell can exist only in somewhat romantic and mythical surroundings. Here, through the King's lust for Tormiella, the upper and middle levels meet in believable situations. To do this, however, Dekker has had to sacrifice much of the richness and variety that usually marks his work and that of many other Elizabethan dramatists. The merits of the play have persuaded several of the critics and anthologizers that the work is indeed one of Dekker's best. But smoothness, though admirable, may be only a superficial achievement. The flaws here are truly basic. The secondary plot, though only perhaps a quarter of the whole play, receives a detailed examination in its early and middle scenes, but is then abandoned, without a relevant crisis, and with an extremely arbitrary conclusion.

211

MATCH ME IN LONDON

The major plot, too, dwindles out in an ineffective final scene, invoking a deus ex machina to stop the progress of the intrigues, but not to solve them. The solutions exist in somewhat tedious explanations and character reformations. The root of this problem of the ending lies in part in the previously quoted observation that such a play literally requires a strong force to oppose the intriguers.17 The active characters in the play are all essentially destructive, and yet the play ends on a positive note. A possible solution to the impasse would be a situation in which the evil intriguers defeat each other or "outsmart" themselves. But failing this, and without positive forces within the play, Dekker is forced to employ the less than satisfactory deus ex machina and character reformation devices. Closely related to this problem is the expectation set up in the course of the action. Besides the self-described revenger, the play includes many of the characteristics of the revenge play - night scenes, visions, lust-adultery, disguise, poison, insanity, and ghosts.18 The mood throughout is dark, but the outcome violates that mood. Bowers' comments on Fletcher and Massinger's Thierry and Theodoret apply almost equally well to this play: With all the smoke in their plot, there is no fire; the dramatists fail by promising in the exposition what is not delivered in the catastrophe. This unfulfilled promise makes for a lack of satisfaction with the 19 play

Dekker, himself, sums up the play in the last speeches of Gazetto and Tormiella. GAZ:

I had not the heart to hurt a woman, if I had, your little face had beene mall'd ere this, but my Angers out, forgiue me.

TORMI:

With all my heart.

17 19

(V.v.78-80)

Bowers, Revenge Tragedy, p. 287.

Valasco fears yet another device, in addition to the sleeping potion poison. When he confronts Don John, the "victim" cries, "Keepe backe, hee'l poyson my gloue else" (IH.ii.149). After he is told of the Queen's death and Tormiella's insanity, the King starts, and says "Ha! the Queene! was she not at my elbow?" (V.i.38). 19 Bowers, Revenge Tragedy, p. 169.

7 ALL THINGS CONSIDERED

Almost incidentally, the foregoing analysis has demonstrated two important characteristics of the body of dramatic compositions by Thomas Dekker. The first, a positive aspect, is Dekker's sense of theatre, his ability to "put on a good show". In each of the plays examined there are exciting and stirring scenes, which exploit to the fullest the potentials of the Elizabethan stage and dramatic forms. Ironically, this feature of the playwright's talent has regularly received from critics the misnomer of "appeal to the pit". But what canon of dramatic literature disbars excitement, humor, and entertainment? So-called low comedy may offend individual readers and viewers, but even vulgarity can serve a useful, even necessary function in a play. In a time which witnesses Brecht, Genet, and Albee such a cavil hardly need be recognized. Such elements of composition are truly dramatic flaws only when they are clearly extraneous and a violation of the work as a whole. The second feature of the group of plays is the peculiar lack of development of growth. Granted that only six plays have been examined and that Dekker wrote a great number over a considerable period of time. But the fact remains that the early works even including Old Fortunatos, are clearly superior, and the very first, Shoemakersf Holiday, is perhaps the best of all. What accounts for such a lack of development? A definitive answer, perhaps, will never be found, but the likeliest explanation probably consists of a number of factors. The term "Elizabethan period" has been employed to embrace Dekker's total creative lifetime, a period of nearly forty years. There were, however, many changes during that time - changes in dramatic forms, audience tastes, and production techniques, the latter allied in part to the radical

ALL THINGS CONSIDERED

213

move from open-air to indoor theatres. Dekker's affinities were all with playwrights and modes early in the period, with men like Kyd, Greene, Heywood, Marlowe, and even Shakespeare. But Dekker lived and wrote beyond his time and, apparently, he was unable to adapt completely to changing tastes. That is not to say that he did not try; Match Me in London is an example of an unsuccessful attempt to be fashionable. Then too, it could be that Dekker extended himself beyond his talents, and in the process of extension, dissipated the abilities he did possess. For some reason, Dekker seems to have been in continual financial difficulties, for which he appears to have spent a number of years in debtor's prison. The pace of composition, of prose pamphlets as well as plays, may have stifled artistic growth. Oddly enough, it seems likely that Dekker's reputation would be greater if all but Shoemakers' Holiday, Old Fortunatus, both parts of Honest Whore, and the delightful Gull's Hornbook had been lost. The primary concern here, however, has been to examine each of the six plays as theatre pieces not as social or personal documents. The problems of exposition are conditioned and to some degree lessened for Dekker and all Elizabethan playwrights by the characteristic early point of attack. It is a simple proposition: an early point of attack presupposes few antecedent incidents. Because of this, Dekker seldom resorts to some of the now more hackneyed devices of exposition. But when he does employ the servant-listener as in Match Me in London or the "hangers-on" as in Honest Whore II, he manages to combine the exposition with effective dramatic incident. In the first instance, the servant Bilbo is aroused at midnight, answers questions that arise naturally out of the situation, and is sent out to participate in the search for Tormiella. The courtiers, in the opening scene of Honest Whore II, include one (Lodovico) who later becomes a very active participant in the play; that scene unit also introduces Bellafront in the dramatic appeal for Matheo's life, a situation that drops out of the play early in the first act, but not until it has provided a striking opening for the play. Because it is a sequel, this play involves the most complicated problems of exposition of the six

214

ALL THINGS CONSIDERED

plays. On all counts the playwright relates the necessary antecedent incidents and the current character relationships in an effective manner and with considerable economy. Apart from their expository functions, Dekker's opening scenes normally manage to start the plays theatrically. They range from the whimsical "dialogue" between Fortunatus and the forest, to the satire of the Hell scene in If It Be Not Good, and the dumb show funeral and coronation in Whore of Babylon. After these skillful beginnings, the playwright normally achieves a high degree of clarity in the articulation of incidents in the actions. Characters frequently reveal their immediate plans and destinations, leading the audience smoothly from one scene unit to the next. In Old Fortunatus this technique is strengthened by the Chorus, who compresses time and connects one scene to the next. Only on infrequent occasions does the playwright use the soliloquy or the extended aside as a connective. There are examples of this technique, however, in Lacy's first appearance in his shoemaker disguise and in If It Be Not Good, in which the devils and Scumbroth related intervening incidents directly to the audience. Such devices were accepted conventions in the period and are flaws only when excessive or mechanically obvious. In the last example, moreover, the devils, as chorus-like commentators, are especially comfortable with the device. There are a few awkward movements of action. The off-stage robbery, so important to Honest Whore II, is one such - too complex, perhaps, to be dramatized, but too important to be neglected. The allegorical and topical Whore of Babylon presents specialized problems in this respect. Dekker, it must be admitted, wrote the play for an audience that could be expected to recognize many of the characters and silently to supply many of the missing connectives that so confuse more remote readers. But some of the actions in this play are underdeveloped in that they seem to promise more than they fulfill. Dekker stumbles in the same way in Old Fortunatus and Match Me in London. The Orleans action is incomplete despite an elaborate beginning, and the scheming Prince in Match Me in London drops out midway through the play, only to be resurrected for the final scene.

ALL THINGS CONSIDERED

215

That the various actions of Whore of Babylon contribute to the whole in a purposeful manner cannot be questioned, however. Bearing in mind Dekker's purpose of presenting contrasting dramatic pictures of Titania and the Empress, it is clear that all of Babylon's attacks and Fairyland's defenses are relevant. This is generally the case in the six plays. The multiple actions are functional in most of the plays, particularly in Shoemakers' Holiday, Honest Whore II, and If It Be Not Good, despite the fact that all three concern themselves with several levels of society. This interest in a total society and the individual's change of status in society seems to be characteristic of Dekker. The only play which does not at least touch upon such things is Whore of Babylon. It is this element of social change, in fact, that makes the three actions in Shoemakers' Holiday mutually relevant. The secondary action in Honest Whore II, with its tests of Candido, provides an amusing counterpart to the tests to which Bellafront is subjected, and even the Bots incident in the final scene of that play contributes another variation of the device. The attacks and temptations of the devils are a common denominator for the social levels of If It Be Not Good. Each group or character reacts to those temptations in a way that contrasts with and complements the others. The playwright is not consistent in the degree to which one action serves or adds to another, however. The Orleans sub-plot in Old Fortunatus, for example, contributes little to the play as a whole, and the Don John action mars Match Me in London in the same way. On a purely technical level, minor actions sometimes contribute by creating impressions of lapsed time and by providing time in which actors can change costumes. Whether the actions are relevant to the whole or not, Dekker does manage to link them to one another with consistent success. A secondary plot seldom seems to be existing in a world of its own. He is most successful when, in such plays as Shoemakers' Holiday and If It Be Not Good, the actions are interdependent. Simon Eyre and the two couples affect each other to the extent that the end of action depends upon characters and usually incidents of another action. For example, the celebration of Eyre's

216

ALL THINGS CONSIDERED

promotion to Sheriff provides the occasion for the reunion of Lacy and Rose, and Eyre's election to the position of Lord Mayor permits him to intercede for Lacy at the end of the play. In If It Be Not Good the effect is the same, although the design is somewhat different. The King of Naples assumes a more central importance than does Simon in the last scenes, returning to virtue and using his powers as a ruler to resolve the other actions. The incidents in his action (war, for example) affect the other actions more than other incidents affect his action. Other linking devices involve characters common to several actions and scene units in which incidents of several actions occur, even though there is no causal relationship. Andelocia in Old Fortunatus, for example, is both the principal character in the major action and the pawn in the struggle between Vice and Virtue. The two actions in Match Me in London have no interdependency but the King participates in each of them. The same play provides an example of a scene (IILii) in which the two actions alternate effectively. Similar scenes, such as the one in which the King acts as judge in If It Be Not Good, can be found in most of the plays. Honest Whore II provides an example of the way in which Dekker uses groups of characters to relate actions. The courtiers, headed by Lodovico, provide a background against which both actions are performed. The shoemakers and the devils in two other plays have a similar function. Despite the fact that actions are normally thematically related and structurally linked in Dekker's plays, some of the works have been criticized as confusing and crowded; even Shoemakers' Holiday has been so labeled. Whore of Babylon is, however, a much more like candidate for such a criticism. Explanations of the topical references and Dekker's purposes notwithstanding, the play remains an unmanageable mass of incidents and aborted actions. If It Be Not Good is also considered to be overloaded with actions and characters. There are some weaknesses in the play, but there is also an effective and meaningful arrangement of scenes and a frame situation that contributes a great deal more to the play than critics usually suggest. Perhaps the question of whether the play is crowded and excessive or varied and rich

ALL THINGS CONSIDERED

217

can be decided only by individual tastes, but the analysis here seems to indicate the positive point of view. Dekker is probably least consistently successful with his management of the basic structural relationship of the crisis to the climax. In Shoemakers' Holiday and Honest Whore II, for example, the ending does grow naturally from a critical situation, and both the crisis and the climax are consistent with the play as a whole, but in other plays the endings are seriously marred in this respect. Old Fortunatus, for all its poetry and interesting incident, has an ending that does not correspond to the incidents which precede it either in substance or mood. Virtue's triumph does not evolve from Andelocia's death, and the excitement and joy of her victory contradict the mood of the play as a whole. In Match Me in London the defeat of the King and his character transformation have no basis in the action, and the mass forgivings at the end violate the expectations that have been set up throughout the play. Despite the fact that Dekker does have trouble with the degree to which the endings correspond to the actions, he frequently produces extremely theatrical final scenes that nearly match the opening scenes in effectiveness. The Pancake Day celebration, the parade of prostitutes in Bridewell, and the brimstone spectacle in Hell are all characteristic of Dekker and reveal a strong sense of theatre. Those critics who write off these scenes as excrescences and as sops thrown to the groundlings probably prefer the quiet horror of the last moments of Ghosts. But it should be remembered that Ibsen also wrote somewhat "noisier" endings, as in The Master Builder and Rosmersholm. In addition to these signature-like final scenes, there are three other techniques that should be commented upon, even though they are by no means peculiar to Dekker alone. Some kind of disguise is found in each of the six plays; Lacy, Andelocia, Orlando Friscobaldo, the King of Spain (in Whore of Babylon), the three devils, Bartervile, the King of Naples, and Gazetto all use at least one disguise. The device is frequently employed for ironic ends, and is particularly effective in Honest Whore II. Orlando moves back and forth from one identity to the other, revealing

218

ALL THINGS CONSIDERED

himself as he pleases to whom he pleases. In that play, as well as in If It Be Not Good and Match Me in London, the disguise is so central to the situation that the revealed identity is an important element of the climax. But although these revelations help to resolve situations, the disguises do not as a rule create the situations in the first place - that being a relatively arbitrary and artificial means of introducing complication in a plot. For example, in Twelfth Night, although the mood and situation do support Viola's decision to disguise herself, it is true that she could solve most of the problems at a fairly early point in the action by merely taking off her cap and shaking out her curls. Considering Dekker's plays individually, the disguise techniques are skillfully employed, but when the plays are taken as a group, and the extent to which he relies upon the technique becomes apparent, it is valid to suggest that the device is over-used. Surprise, on the contrary, is used sparingly in the plays studied. Identities and plans of disguised characters are always revealed to the audience in advance, and plot turns are seldom totally unexpected. The fact that Erminhild has taken refuge with the Sub-prior, for example, is clearly established. The only use of the technique at a significant point is at the ending of Match Me in London, and there it is mismanaged. Dekker elects to reveal to the audience that the Queen is not to be murdered, but keeps from them the fact that Don John is also still alive. If pleasant shock and surprise are the objects in this "happy" ending, then the Queen would be the logical choice for the surprise, since the audience might be emotionally involved in her fate. Dekker should have attended to Shakespeare's treatment of Hermione in Winter's Tale. In addition, Dekker dissipates the small amount of theatrically inherent in this situation. When Valasco ushers in the Queen and Don John in the last scene, the attention naturally goes to the woman as the King greets her and asks to be forgiven. Meanwhile the "surprisingly-alive" Prince stands around waiting to announce his remorse. Dekker does use a variation of surprise - character reversal several times, however. Matheo in Honest Whore II and the King in Match Me in London undergo personality transformations in

ALL THINGS CONSIDERED

219

the last scene. The Matheo situation is handled with some adroitness. The King, on the other hand, cannot be removed from center stage as Matheo is and the use of the convention is weak. These transformations do not compare in skill with the change of the King in If It Be Not Good, in which there is a gradual foreshadowing of the last scene. The final technique, the deus ex machina, is used with more frequency than is surprise. Dekker employs variations of it in all six of the plays. The King (or Queen, as Elizabeth in Old Fortunatas) is a judge-arbiter in most situations. His presence, though justified to some degree, is most arbitrary in Shoemakers' Holiday and Old Fortunatus; in the other plays he is much more involved in the action and is thus more acceptable. The divine intervention in the wedding dumb show in Match Me in London is less satisfactory than even the appeal to Queen Elizabeth in Old Fortunatus, since the romance-fairy tale is a more congenial context for the device than is the relatively realistic tragi-comedy. Many of the weaknessess mentioned above are minor, but there is one that seriously affects several of the plays. For all his sense of the theatre, Dekker frequently selects essentially non-dramatic characters or situations for his plays. Jones-Davies writes, "En écrivant ce mot 'patience', nous touchons à l'essence de l'art de Dekker, portraitiste." She goes on to say, On pourrait croire, à priori, qu'en étudiant la patience, Dekker soit enclin à peindre des figures d'une plate passivité, des images de moralité, froides, uniformes. . . . [But] le discours final du bon drapier de The Honest Whore prouve que la patience tant prisée de l'auteur est une vertu chrétienne active, impliquant souffrance et charité.1

In this section Jones-Davies is discussing characterization, not dramatic structure, and her observations are accurate for the most part. But the key word here is the adjective active. She is trying to distinguish the patience of Dekker's characters from a smugness and egotism, and quite properly so. In a different application the word active is not appropriate, however. Patience, though perhaps une vertu chrétienne, is not a very effective or workable dramatic virtue. It implies a certain satisfaction with the status quo, an in1

Jones-Davies, Π, 206 and 207.

220

ALL THINGS CONSIDERED

ability or lack of desire to act, a tendency to be courageously longsuffering. Action (not necessarily physical) and change are basic in drama, and one does not have to be a disciple of Brunetière in order to see the virtues in theories of conflict when those theories are liberally interpreted. Too frequently, Dekker uses a patient, relatively inactive character as one half of his conflict, giving his villains, in effect, no opposition at all. This produces two problems: first, too much attention or interest is drawn to the antagonists, and second, the situation creates resolution problems if the protagonist is to be successful at the end. Shakespeare, for example, faced the first of these problems in Othello. On a purely external level, the opposing forces are Othello and Iago. A count of lines and scenes in the play reveals, quite naturally, that throughout the first half of the play the emphasis is definitely upon the active schemer, and it is not until Othello begins to be affected by the plots and insinuations that the focus goes to the title character. The interest is on the dripping water until the rock begins to crack and disintegrate. Dekker does not quite cope with this problem of the natural interest in the active character in Whore of Babylon or Match Me In London. He does not provide a sufficiently strong or interesting positive force to compete with the evil. Titania wards off her attackers and is actively supported by the morality characters, but she never quite achieves a position of dramatic dominance. Tormiella is, in a sense, central in Match Me in London, but she refuses to "take center stage". Match Me in London is also an example of a play in which the resolution is faulty due to the absence of an active positive force. As discussed above, the two villains of the piece (the King and Gazetto) have no effective opposition, and rather than letting them defeat each other, Dekker brings in divinity to support Tormiella. Only when he adds a strong co-protagonist, like Orlando Friscobaldo in Honest Whore II, to support the patient protagonist, or when he moves the patient character out of the center of the action and substitutes a changing or active character, like the King instead of Erminhild in If It Be Not Good, does Dekker construct a completely effective action. The problem does not arise in Old

ALL THINGS CONSIDERED

221

Fortunatus, and Shoemakers' Holiday is the complete reversal of the situations described above. Simon Eyre, it is true, has no opposition, but with his bustle and gaiety he always gives at least the appearance of activity and his ultimate success is consistent with the lack of conflict. Consistency, however, is not characteristic of Dekker in the structure of the plays investigated in this study. The plays range from the almost complete success of Shoemakers' Holiday and Honest Whore II to the seriously marred Whore of Babylon and Match Me in London. But to say that he is uneven in his achievements is not to say that he has no structural ability. His shortcomings are, for the most part, shared by many of his more regularly complimented contemporaries. Dekker, as Bradbrook says, should "be judged by his happiest efforts",2 and there are among the six several very "happy efforts".

1

Growth and Structure, p. 122.

APPENDIX: SUMMARIES OF THE SIX PLAYS

The following pages contain summaries of each of the six plays examined in this study. Much of the material is, of course a repetition of the action summaries to be found within the body of the study, but it was felt that the reader could more easily refer to these summaries separated from the discusssion. In the chapters, the actions are separated and considered individually. This scheme has been followed in the appendix. Each action has been assigned a specific column on the page, but the incidents are spaced so as to reproduce the actual sequence to be found in the play.

appendix: summaries of the six plays

223

& ce

s •S Λ 'S oü

a p p e n d i x :

s u m m a r i e s

o f

* "

M

g li

«Η

« o

I

•

6α 0 a « e

I»

2

§ — o

-S b

s

ω

H 52 β 1

f

•s S

8

•3 M U υ 43

a - s

a ° J

p l a y s

I

κ o

§e S ω

s i x

M

i te

t h e

i

o fa

8 >

i >

S

I

A P P E N D I X :

S U M M A R I E S

O F

T H E

S I X

227

P L A Y S

ζ/3

·

2 I

S I

O -•Ν

«O

G

* O

•C PLI

^ • S C . O

Ό Α RT

Β

S

Λ>

I

S 0 ce

Υ

«

0

S> -a ¿2 •8 S

t> ο •J3 « g υ Ή ih o -Ç 43 TS u Λ

si «> υ 2M ao υ '§ o -§

le !=1 m

ε « U

κ

S

.

Ί

s

2 ε.

s«J «43-s.t¿d 1u OQ ε -y 2 8

•5 u >

•a C«OωM-sO> !3

o •S CA «

3 a Ό ω 2 TT" Λ I

δ Ό

sa M o

•6k 2 o Ό o J3 f i ~ S g c 'S ce ω g « § ωcoo «cOo a

d Ό co u'Sή3 'S ce •e •O 2 S3 ^ o υ « »tí

η X>

Ζ

d ce >» "5 sαge 8sο

ο 6 ω 0 J¿ 2 ce

cΟιe

«Μ 'S Ι ΰ

ω ·α Κ ce

4> « 'S

ο. β 3 1> O •8 *Μ JS Ό ο " ο •a . 3 a '•β § c1 'S ce a-g Ο Ο ο m g υ co *»>

dε

IS ω « ^ Λ α —


5 .S CO * u ce §

•S ^

d

Ό (β

y d u

t> Ç 43 Λ S H .a «s *s 2 -y CL, ce o 'S S -S ω co CO .2 . oO . sä s cfí •tj ** d o O ** .ο U υ S Ή 60 8 Λ 3 S ΰ ! 1 " « « rf öo *5 o Νa ω ^ ω tí

o η Ό d ce

Λ

ω'Sced

.os

a C, o s o υ W 1) l S ^ O 11 τι ω O &o

Ό ι> co

Ί

ce d 3

Ο

α

1 s

ο Ό d ce

232

appendix: summaries o f t h e six p l a y s

cd

ä

«

·ο« o χ

»N ΪΛ O ·

tí ε

S 'S

"δ

m

a

Cd J3

a ω TD tí I

«Η

CL,

1

m

o α ¡ 3 cd

0 •Ό 1 ω α

il «

cd' • a s Ρ

fr

Ι o

· 3 fe

'. S 3

^ ο

o

•2 ο

ο

£

Ih

.3 ω

ÇL â

2 · § Ό 00

β 'g

~~ J Ul S . ' Ρ ω

n i » O tao «m S

o

t)0

S

I "

«

CL ^ ce

.1

Λ ο «

O M

Λ 1) au Ό o" α λ > ω 2 - S Ä ce ce ^

r

i l •5

Μ ^

ω

u

Sd

H

s

Ih O > ce M α

ë Ä O m

t

Cu co Ή

s λ

238

APPENDIX: SUMMARIES OF THE SIX PLAYS

a

Λ 4) Λ A

appendix: summaries of the six plays υ

239

Ο cd « Μ

O

9 Λ

s a*

^ S

o

s

.o •ä o

«

O Q

»

C 4 ω

•a s

o

-Sä è S t.

•a -3 Λ C υ c o S 3

δ β * a Λ M

ω1

ω Ό Ό öß O

e

a

ω .

^ 'S •S ω •i_> ç o 3 S 99 -»->

m 3 η-I

m

M

£ ε o « o Χ

£

o £

í O β« I.a

S

£ §a «

s •c O H υ & · § .sa I * o ·§ o ' V) α M 05 Λ ω ω &Ό « S 'β

«

£

·° I

ω

•3

υ υ o 3

>

Λ O 3 C/3

JS Ö D U c Ό • Ι 5 ω

ñ Γ^

ce •8 I , -, Eb

ci

'S t ω S Έ o ™ S M ω -C ω Η

240

APPENDIX: SUMMARIES OF THE SIX PLAYS

S -¡2 O Χ

.o

S K

ω o -» e o Q

Β o o

«s

S

JU

s

s X> υ θ

o Η

υ te

s 3 60 M

I S

J3 "o

•S

ω «

Ή

s

ω

¡

ω

I

1-f

α, 1 09 CO ο a -s

•g α |S > Οι >9

£ >

ο β

s

á

'S

e .o

•c 0

ce υ

a

*

1

í>

73 S

242

APPENDIX: SUMMARIES OF THE SIX PLAYS

s

•S

O Χ

e

·§

s

O Q

•Ä O Χ .G

! E-»

:a

APPENDIX: SUMMARIES OF THE SIX PLAYS

S 0 §

s

1

.5 « O R

S

s

243

244

s

«O 0 ^ C

1

S O Q

«I

Q

cd ω S o

••3

%

o £ IM «I 0 Ä 1

δ

& cd

Λ. M

245

υ ε ε ω o C/3 β ε ω > ¿3 •a CO M υUt O ο M

s β •s Χι

α ¡2 υ £ χ» α e ω s α g O 2

to s •β cd S

O

i . δ Ü «β » αg CU) 09 a ε υ « a Χ o -s Η

>>

8

>

;a

246

APPENDIX: SUMMARIES OF THE SIX PLAYS

.8 O «9 13

.a •D «

3 Υ

s

Ω Λ

G

e

«O O X Ε •S S O Q

S •2

O G O

8 ¿3 O

t

LIST OF WORKS CITED

BOOKS Adams, Henry Hitch, English Domestic or Homiletic Tragedy (New York, 1943). Armbrister, Victor Stradley, The Origins and Functions of Subplots in Elizabethan Drama (Nashville, 1938). Baker, George Pierce, The Development of Shakespeare as a Dramatist (New York, 1907). Barker, Richard Hindry, Thomas Middleton (New York, 1958). Bentley, Gerald Eades, The Jacobean and Caroline Stage, Vol. ΙΠ (Oxford, 1956). and Fred B. Millett, The Art of the Drama (New York, 1935). A Bibliography of the English Printed Drama to the Restoration, compiled by Walter W. Greg, 3 vols. (London, 1939-1957). Boas, Frederick S., An Introduction to Stuart Drama (London, 1948). , Queen Elizabeth in Drama and Related Studies (London, 1950). Bowers, Fredson Thayer, Elizabethan Revenge Tragedy (Princeton, 1940). Bradbrook, Muriel Clara, The Growth and Structure of Elizabethan Comedy (London, 1955). , Shakespeare and Elizabethan Poetry (London, 1951). , Themes and Conventions of Elizabethan Tragedy (Cambridge, Eng., 1957). Bradley, Andrew Cecil, Shakespearean Tragedy (New York, 1949). Brawley, Benjamin, A Short History of the English Drama (New York, 1921). Brooke, Charles Frederick Tucker, The Tudor Drama (Cambridge, Mass., 1911). and Nathaniel Burton Paradise (eds.), English Drama: 1580-1642 (New York, 1933). Brown, John Mason, Two on the Aisle (New York, 1938). Buland, Mable, The Presentation of Time in the Elizabethan Drama (New York, 1912). Bullen, Arthur Henry, Elizabethans (New York, 1924). Chambers, Edmund Kerchever, The Elizabethan Stage, Vol. ΠΙ (Oxford, 1923).

248

LIST OF WORKS CITED

Courthope, William John, A History of English Poetry, Vol. IV (London, 1903). Craig, Hardin, English Religious Drama of the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1955). Crane, Ronald Salmon, The Languages of Criticism and the Structure of Poetry (Toronto, 1953). Creizenach, Wilhelm, The English Drama in the Age of Shakespeare, translated by Cecile Hugon (Philadelphia, 1916). Dekker, Thomas, The Dramatic Works of Thomas Dekker, edited by Fredson Thayer Bowers, 4 Vols. (Cambridge, Eng., 1953-1961). Deloney, Thomas, Deloney's Gentle Craft, edited by Wilfrid J. Halliday (Oxford, 1928). Bound after Dekker's Shoemaker's Holiday, edited by J. R. Sutherland (Oxford, 1928). Doran, Madeleine, Endeavors of Art: A Study of Form in Elizabethan Drama (Madison, 1954). Duckworth, George E., The Nature of Roman Comedy (Princeton, 1952). Ellis-Fermor, Una M., The Jacobean Drama (London, 1936). Empson, William, Seven Types of Ambiguity (London, 1930). , Some Versions of Pastoral (London, 1950). Farnham, Willard, The Medieval Heritage of Elizabethan Tragedy (Berkeley, 1936). Feuillerat, Albert, The Composition of Shakespeare's Plays (New Haven, 1953). Fleay, Frederick Gard, A Biographical Chronicle of the English Drama: 1559-1642, 2 vols. (London, 1891). Fluchère, Henri, Shakespeare, translated by Guy Hamilton (London, 1953^ Fortunatus, edited by Hans Gunther for Neudrucke deutscher Litteraturwerke des xvi. und xvii. Jahrhunderts, Vols. CXL-CXLI (Halle, 1914). Freeburg, Victor Oscar, Disguise Plots in Elizabethan Drama (New York, 1915). Freytag, Gustav, Technique of the Drama, translated by E. J. MacEwan (Chicago, 1904). Gildersleeve, Virginia Crocheron, Government Regulation of the Elizabethan Drama (New York, 1908). Granville-Barker, Harley, Prefaces to Shakespeare, Vol. I (Princeton, 1952). Harbage, Alfred, Shakespeare and the Rival Traditions (New York, 1952). , Shakespeare's Audience (New York, 1941). Henslowe, Philip, Henslowe's Diary, edited by Walter W. Greg, 2 vols. (London, 1904-1908). Herford, Charles Harold, Studies in the Literary Relations of England and Germany in the Sixteenth Century (Cambridge, Eng., 1886). The History of Friar Rush, edited by Henry Morley in Early Prose Romances (London, 1889). Hunt, Mary Leland, Thomas Dekker: a Study (New York, 1911). Jones-Davies, Marie Thérèse, Un Peintre de la vie Londonienne: Thomas Dekker, 2 vols. (Paris, 1958). Knights, Lionel Charles, Drama and Society in the Age of Jonson (New York, 1936).

LIST OF WORKS CITED

249

Kreider, Paul V., Repetition in Shakespeare's Plays (London, 1941). Lamb, Charles, Specimens of English Dramatic Poets, edited by Israel Gollancz, Vol. Π (London, 1893). Langbaine, Gerard, An Account of the English Dramatick Poets (Oxford, 1691). Lawrence, William John, Those Nut-Cracking Elizabethans (London, 1935). Machiavelli, Niccolo, The Marriage of Belphegor, edited by W. H. Logan and James Maidment in The Dramatic Works of John Wilson (Edinburgh, 1874). Moore, John B., The Comic and the Realistic in English Drama (Chicago, 1925). Nicoli, Allardyce, British Drama (New York, 1925). Oliphant, Ernest Henry Clark (ed.), Shakespeare and His Fellow Dramatists, Vol. I (New York, 1929). Painter, William, The Palace of Pleasure, edited by Joseph Jacobs, Vol. II (London, 1890). Parrott, Thomas Marc and Robert Hamilton Ball, A Short View of Elizabethan Drama (New York, 1943). Rhys, Ernest (ed.), Thomas Dekker (London, 1887). Ribner, Irving, The English History Play in the Age of Shakespeare (Princeton, 1957). Ristine, Frank Humphrey, English Tragicomedy: Its Origin and History (New York, 1910). Robertson, Hector M., Aspects of the Rise of Economic Individualism (Cambridge, Eng., 1933). Schelling, Felix E., The English Chronicle Play (New York, 1902). Sherbo, Arthur, English Sentimental Drama (East Lansing, 1957). Spencer, Hazelton (ed.), Elizabethan Plays (Boston, 1933). Spivack, Bernard, Shakespeare and the Allegory of Evil (New York, 1958). Stoll, Elmer Edgar, Art and Artifice in Shakespeare (Cambridge, Eng., 1933). , Shakespeare and Other Masters (Cambridge, Mass., 1940). Swinburne, Algernon Charles, The Age of Shakespeare (London, 1908). Thorndike, Ashley H., Shakespeare's Theater (New York, 1916). A Transcript of the Registers of the Company of Stationers of London; 1554-1640 A.D. Edited by Edward Arber. Vol. ΠΙ (London, 1876). Wellek, René and Austin Warren, Theory of Literature (New York, 1956).

ARTICLES A N D PERIODICALS Adams, Henry Hitch, "Cyril Tourneur on Revenge", The Journal of English and Germanic Philology, X L V m (January, 1949), 72-87. Adams, Robert M., "Trompe-L'Œil in Shakespeare and Keats", The Sewanee Review, LXI (April-June, 1953), 238-255. Bowers, Fredson Thayer, "Thomas Dekker, Robert Wilson, and The Shoe-

250

LIST OF WORKS CITED

maker's Holiday", Modern Language Notes, LXIV (December, 1949), 517-519. Bradbrook, Muriel Clara, "Shakespeare and the Use of Disguise in Elizabethan Drama", Essays in Criticism, Π (April, 1952), 159-168. Fluchère, Henri, "Thomas Dekker et le Drame Bourgeois", Cahiers du Sud, XX (June, 1933), 192-196. Foster, Frances Α., "Dumb Show in Elizabethan Drama before 1620", Englische Studien, XLIV (1912), 8-17. Gregg, Kate Leila, "Thomas Dekker: a Study in Economic and Social Backgrounds", University of Washington Publications in Language and Literature, II (July, 1924), 55-112. Hanford, James Holly, "The Debate Element in the Elizabethan Drama", Anniversary Papers by Colleagues and Pupils of George Lyman Kittredge, edited by Fred N . Robinson, Edward S. Sheldon, and William A. Neilson. (Boston, 1913). pp. 445-456. Harbage, Alfred, "The Mystery of Perkin Warbeck", Studies in the English Renaissance Drama in Memory of Karl Julius Holzknecht, edited by Josephine W. Bennett, Oscar Cargill, and Vernon Hall, Jr. (New York, 1959), pp. 125-141. Meres, Francis, "Francis Mere's Treatise 'Poetry'; A Critical Edition", by Don Cameron Allen. University of Illinois Studies in Language and Literature, XVI (28 November, 1933), 345-500. Pope, Alexander, "Preface to Shakespeare's Works", Shakespeare Criticism, edited by Nichol Smith (Oxford, 1936), pp. 47-57. Potter, Russell, "Three Jacobean Devil Plays", Studies in Philology, X X V n i (October, 1931), 730-736. Raysor, Thomas M., "The Aesthetic Significance of Shakespeare's Handling of Time", Studies in Philology, ΧΧΧΠ (April, 1935), 197-209. , "Intervals of Time in Shakespeare's Tragedies", Journal of English and Germanic Philology, XXXVII (January, 1938), 21-47. Schoenbaum, Samuel, "Internal Evidence and the Attribution of Elizabethan Plays", Bulletin of the New York Public Library, LXV (February, 1961), 102-124. , "Middleton's Share in Honest Whore, Parts I and Π", Notes and Queries, C X C V n (5 January, 1952), 3-4.

UNPUBLISHED MATERIAL Halstead, William L., "Thomas Dekker's Early Work for the Theatre: A Study, in the Problems of Dekker's Technique of Composition and Collaboration to December 22, 1600." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1937. Riely, Märianne Gateson, "The Whore of Babylon by Thomas Dekker: A Critical Edition", unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1953.