'Tis Pity She's A Whore

by John Ford

Bizarre...bizarre. I feel this way based soley on the fact that the play revolves around incest. I don't think a play like this, without the incestous theme, would generate this same feeling of uncertainty. I am not sure who to feel sorry for, and the situation between the lovers is so unclear. In fact I think this is a theme throughout the entire play. No character, no action, no love is black and white.

For example, I found that several characters did not think independently from the people they were around. For example, Annabella seemed to adjust her thoughts and morals based on who could influence her more. Annabella succumbs to an incestous love because of her brother's great seduction. I do not get the feeling that Annabella ever felt the same things for her brother as he did for her. Perhaps I am wrong, but I think the play gave off a subtle feeling of inbalance in their love. Anna seems to be easily persuaded, as she is again, by the friar to fall out of love for her brother. Also, Anna was faced with limited choices and she obviously trusted her brother the most out of all of her choices. If Anna denied her brother's love she would be left with no one to trust, she either had to go with it or lose her brother entirely.

I think the Friar's arguments fail to persuade Giovanni because of his position in his society. He is not meant to be persuaded, therefore he won't allow it. Anna is more 'fragile' and more accepting of being persuaded. Also, she is in a much worse position than Giovanni because she is pregnant. Anna must make find someone else to Mary, and with the Friar's speech, perhaps she is relieved to be persuaded as she now has a 'good excuse' for marrying someone to hide her bastard and incestuous child.

The Changeling
by Thomas Middleton & William Rowley

First, before starting the last two plays, I do a bit of background research so that I know what to expect as I read the play. I have found this makes it SO much easier to understand and enjoy the drama...
here is an interesting analysis of the character's names that really helped me (brief, specific, to the point!) It's helpful to use as a character key at the beginning of the play, before you get a feel and a memory of the characters:
Dramatis Personae
Tomazo: Daalder cites William Power, "Middleton's Way with Names," Notes & Queries 205 (1960) regarding the reasoning for certain character names; some of the following interpretations are more convincing than others: e.g., "Tomazo" may allude to a doubting Thomas.
Alibius: "he who is elsewhere"
Franciscus: "Frenchman, a free and thus licentious man"
Deflores: "deflowerer;" most editors spell his name "De Flores," but I have retained the quarto spelling.
Beatrice: "she who makes happy" (ironic)
Joanna: "the Lord's grace" (ironic)
Diaphanta: 1) "the diaphanous one," 2) "the red hot one"
Isabella: "God has sworn," "yellowish white," bella = beauty
Alicant: Alicante is a port on the east coast of Spain, 75 miles south of Valencia

The Duchess of Malfi

by John Webster

Wow, thats refreshing. The play was long and it took me a while to organize the people in my head, but once I did I didn't put my book down.

I like discussion question # 9
As Ferdinand's punishments of the Duchess turn ever more cruel, what happens to Bosola?

Bosola's character is a neat one because the reader (and the audience) are able to hate him so much, especially because he is generally well liked (or at least used) by so many of the main characters in the play. I would Bosola, like the plays plot spins more and more out of control as the play progresses. This process also mimics Ferdinand's punishments of the Duchess. It is as if Ferdinands punishments are like "evil vitamins" for Bosola, giving him more and more energy and incentment to act cruel.
Bosola first appearance in the play sets the tone of his character, but at the same time, the first appearance of his character is much different than his final appearance. He begins almost like a 'joker' because he is obviously so bitter and sarcastic. By the end of the play, I would argue Bosola has no thoughts or even identity to himself. Everything he does he is told to do, and he does not question the cruelty of his actions.

Later Tragedies
A Woman Killed with Kindness
By, Thomas Heyward

Scene iii is a rather interesting scene. It seems to be the source of where the idea of competition and gaming begins for the play. I noticed througout the play several 'games' show up, but each games seems to have a larger and more important undertone (at least for one of the characters that take part in it)
As for Acton and Mountford in scene iii they play a game between their hawks. I believe it took place at Chevy Chase (ok...so who here didnt let their mind wander to National Lampoons Christmas Vacation....). The foot note says that Chevy Chase is "a field for hawking but with possible references to a ballad of that name about a border skirmish).
Both men refer to the hawks as 'she'
Sir Cha. "She takes her at the souse, and stikes her Down to the earth"
Wen: She hath....
Sir Fra: "Mine seized a fowl within her talents, and you saw her paws"

So what of the feminine pronouns? Well by refering to the hawks as she, I am reminded of a ot of competitive and typically male sports. Other things I can think of that are descrived in this manner are cars, when race car driving, or when talking about an engine..."she's got a dual hammie chrome pistol....blahblahblah" (that's made up car talk...but you get the idea)
Also, ships always seem to have a female stigma attached to them.
Why is this though? A couple ideas I came up with?
- Is it natural to do this in sport, and just sort of a tradition?
- Perhaps Hewwood is trying to show off a bit of the cologquial (but upper class) coloquial traditions of the time.
- Were females thought to bring better luck (I am thinking of the ship example here) so female references may be used for superstition sake?
- Maybe they see the female soul as more competitive or 'catty' so in a sport where it is one versus the other it may seem more appropriate to refer to the birds as female.
- I also wonder if this scene attempts to foreshadow what is to happen to Frankford's wife. Perhaps Frankfords fowl symbolizes Anne. Frankford describes how "the terrials of her legs were staines iwth blood" This may foeshadow how Anne's conscience will be stained with the blood of adultry. Also, Fankford's hawk dies in an unusual way. It is not shot (an echo of how Anne is not punished through murder) but that the hawk dies on the ground: Ann dies slowly and from untypical causes.

Bartholomew Fair
by Ben Johnson,

I read an interesting remark about this play by a modern critic. She said that Bartholomew Fair is to its audience what Seinfeld is to todays modern audience. A story about nothing, but still somehow funny!

I have come to a conclusion about comedies and Early Modern Drama in general. I find it very difficult to read these comedies! There plot is all over the place, there is not enough character development for me to remember the correct haracter traits as I read along, and I always seem to lose track of what is giong on. I try to concentrate but my mind seems to wonder. On the other hand the other plays we have read, such as the morality plays, were so straightforward to read. Sure they were boring but you were really only introduced to a couple characters.
Therefore I think it is a horribly awful thing to judge whether a play is good or bad based on reading it because no matter what your opinion will be slanted to how the experience was of reading the play. Perhaps the play was boring and lacked wit and smarts, but if your experience was relatively untraumatic and simple while reading it you may be inclined to say that the play is not so bad. On the other hand, a play such as Bartholomew Fair, I found rather difficult to read. As I was reading I was conscious that I was probably missing a lot of the jokes and I kept loosing track of the characters. My experience of reading the play was not great, but I am going to attempt to control my reader's bias and say that I think this play would probably be enjoyable to watch!

A Chaste Maid in Cheapside
By Thomas Middleton
....
well,
That was rought. I found this play very difficult to get through. Not because of its back-breaking intellectual allusions and sophisticated plot and characters. On the contrary I couldn't keep focused...I think I was bored. The play seemed all over the place, what was the plot exactly? You would think that with all those characters the author would at least be able to get one through clearly.
As professor Gants had warned, the humour was pretty low the entire way through. All of the humour seemed in someone sexual, not clearverly sexual though. In fact, by the end this humour was so predictable that the weird and rude comments didn't really phase. It almost got to the point that I noticed if he missed a spot that could have potentialy 'punned' on the word whore, or 'rump.'
I felt so distracted throughout the play, I think, because I could almost feel the author setting up a situation that he would be able to use a lot of sexual jokes in. All the situations and plots seemed pushed toward this one purpose rather than actually using some dialogue to push the play along...or even just creep it in some direction.
The authors intentions were pretty transparent, making the humour only cheaper and to the point of distracting. I think sexual humour can be funny, but only when it works it self into a dialogue, rather than working an entire dialogue around it.