Middleton has been called a "realist" by some critics. Most the other city comedies that we've read have been dismissed as too unrealistic/ridiculous. What would you consider to be the realistic elements of this play (justifying these critics) in London 1613(ish)? [if you think that such critics are talking nonsense, why do you think "Chaste Maid.." is inaccurate]
- How about in a modern portrayal?
- Thinking on that, how might compare instances in this play to similar ones in the modern reality (ex. menage-a-trois, cultural capitol acquisition, jabs at education) In what cases are these considered "socially acceptable?"
I will save most of the staging concepts and theatrical elements for class discussion, but (without looking it up) consider what sort of theatre might be ideal for this performance and why. After pondering that, for class, have a look at the image (given in class on Tuesday) of The Swan Theatre. Think about what a stage house like this means for the players and the audience (where are they located in relation to each other). Consider moments in the play where Middleton inserts an "aside" - comments directed at the audience which the other characters cannot hear. Note particularly moments that might be particularly comical when an aside is somehow heard by another character (ex. see 1.1.104-107 [Sir Walter. Here you must pass for... you mumble, Davy.], 1.1.128-132[Yellowhammer. Bless us all!... cannot see the top of 'em.] - my lines are slightly different from the anthology, apologies) Think about what this does in the performance: a character delivers a side comment to the audience and his peer alerts him to having perceived such a comment. How might asides be taken differently depending on the sort of stage house used?
Your question about a modern portrayal is excellent- performing this play in a modern theatre would still, I believe, have a ridiculous feel to it, particularly given the lines that the Allwit's speak when they evict Whorehound. However, I can see a rewritten version being a lot like The Tudors, or Desperate Housewives. The concept of such an odd marriage is nothing new or controversial during current times. Just as with Knight of the Burning Pestle and most of the plays we have read this semester, the effect this play would have depends dramatically upon the type of audience occupying its pews.
ReplyDeleteGiven what I know about London as a center of finance and trade throughout history, it seems entirely probable that Middleton uses the play to hint at the corrupting influence of the capitalistic model Londoners found themselves drawn into on the so-called "virtuous" human morals, those that allow a pure and happy life regardless of economic stature.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the play, marriage is constantly regarded not as a formal and holy institution but as the exact opposite: simply another capitalistic business venture. One only needs to look to the relationship of the Allwits and Whorehound or to the relationship between Yellowtooth and his son, Tim, or his daughter, Moll, to see that marriage is regarded wholly as a tool for upward social mobility and wealth, just as a successful business would be.
Similarly, just as sex was once regarded as a sanctified action, it too is simply another outcome of supply and demand and not of love. The most striking example is Touchwood impregnating Lady Kix not because either of them feels strong feelings toward the other but simply because the Lady wants a baby and Touchwood has the means to produce one.
Furthering my belief that the characters and their motives are a critique on capitalistic society is their canny specialization, a pillar of privatized economics, which, different for each character, seems to mesh seamlessly with wants and desires of those within the play. Touchwood and Kix, Yellowtooth and Whorehound, Welsh lady and Tim (to an extent) and still others all seek to profit from the unique characteristics of each other, even while giving something up to the other in return.
This environment of avarice and overwhelming want, as it increases and the stakes at hand are higher, produces negative changes in characters such as Maudlin, who, to the surprise of many within the play including Whorehound, yanks Moll out of the water by her hair as she's trying to flee. Yellowtooth is also changed into an (even more?) uncaring father, hardly moved at all when he hears that Moll has "died".
All these ideas found in the play, reiterate the negative message that the only thing that matters is wealth and social gain, absolutely everything else is of secondary importance in the play.
By treating individuals and acts within widely revered institutions such as family and marriage as another form of money-making capital, one can only jump to the criticality of most everything in the play (excluding the end where emotional gain triumphs over economic wants), yet perhaps it's simply my 21st century social viewpoint muddying the overall picture.