Play Review for The Tempest

            Prior to experiencing the performance of The Tempest at the Globe theatre, I was concerned as to how the acting company would portray the characters especially the personas of Prospero and Caliban. Throughout my reading of The Tempest I regarded Prospero’s character with disdain and contemplated how this specific production would stage him. There are a variety of documented productions, including those directed by Peter Brooks (1957) and William Charles Macready (1838), casting Prospero as being either exceptionally abrasive or a romanticized paternal figure whose singular motivation is to guarantee the most benefits for his daughter Miranda. Contrary to my skepticism upon viewing the performance, Roger Allam’s portrayal of Prospero was both inspiring and amiable. Despite my preconceived opinions, I found myself favoring Roger Allam’s representation of Prospero--perhaps more so than any of the other actors and the characters they embodied. It is most probable that Prospero’s unanticipated amicability was a consequence of this particular production’s divergence from the master-slave dynamic that was exceedingly emphasized within the text between Prospero and the “poisonous slave” Caliban. Although this production casted Caliban with the intentions of reflecting the stereotypical characteristics often associated with the “savage native,” his interactions with Prospero throughout the performance endorsed a more confident and less begotten interpretation of Caliban as opposed to the submissive servant the play text encourages. The most notable occurrence of Caliban’s unexpected insurgence occurred early in the play whenever he is first introduced carrying logs to Prospero’s cell. Despite Prospero’s reiteration of derogatory remarks referring to Caliban’s unfortunate appearance and status as a slave, the manner in which each character delivered their respective lines illustrated a relationship that was not entirely reminiscent of the traditional expectations regarding the interactions between an assumed master and the individuals one considered to be their inferior subjects. Surprisingly it was Prospero’s daughter Miranda that was most successful in commanding the obedience of the derisive Caliban. In the same scene whenever an enraged Miranda approaches Caliban, he cowers and immediately falls to his knees emulating the subservient behavior one would expect a slave to perform. The absence of a prominent master-slave relationship effectively promotes Prospero as an approachable character and as a result, his subsequent interactions with Caliban and other characters are primarily characterized by his exasperated appearance and the frequent mockery that is evident in his exuberant responses.

            In addition to witnessing this production’s portrayal of characters such as Prospero and Caliban, I was predominantly curious as to how this particular company would incorporate special effects into significant scenes specifically, the manifestation of the tempest and the disappearing banquet table. Since its inception, special effects have been essential in promoting The Tempest. As the years progressed and the play was revised and reproduced, promises of new and innovated special effects contributed to the play’s success when promoting each subsequent performance. Considering the Globe’s traditional atmosphere and reputation in utilizing contemporary Shakespearean techniques, the concluding special effects were executed successfully. The simultaneous projections of the doomed sailors on stage in addition to the model ship tossing among the groundlings was especially interesting and effective in simulating the turbulence of Prospero’s vengeful storm. The sheeted metal used to generate the thunder, albeit exceptionally simple in design, was true to the materials that may have been available at the time of Shakespeare’s first performance. In conjunction with the Globe’s proximity to the airport and the coincidental sounds of airplanes flying overhead it was quite obvious that a storm was being staged.

            As the climax of the play’s plot the vanishing banquet table remains the most difficult scene to stage in The Tempest and despite a few reservations concerning the company’s costuming of Ariel as the harpy, the scene was exhilarating and well delivered. As mentioned above, the special effects prior to this scene were a reflection of the materials and techniques that may have been available in 1611; however, the vanishing table scene successfully embraced more modern special effects, such as pyrotechnics, to justify the table’s abrupt disappearance. Rather than simply lowering the table below stage, Prospero’s conjured inferno was especially effective in validating his character in lieu of his previous appearances that encouraged a positive image of Prospero as a likable personality. Additionally, the roaring flame that consumed the table and the food it supported paralleled the chaotic undertones achieved by Prospero’s conjuring of the violent storm. The only fault I experienced with this particular scene was the manner in which Ariel was portrayed as the harpy. In respect to delivery and overall embodiment of the role, Ariel’s harpy performance was effectively terrifying and convincing and surpassed the expectations promoted by the text; however, Ariel’s costume, complete with encumbering wings and awkward stilted feet, was rather distracting to behold. The wings themselves were separated from his body and required the aid of four other personnel in order to function properly and in conjunction with the ostentatious feet, Ariel dominated the stage causing me to neglect the reactions of Alonso, Sebastian, Antonio, and others. The scene may have been more effective had Ariel’s wings been more proportional and attached to his body as opposed to a separate entity and the clustering of unnecessary individuals on the stage. Contrary to the minor grievances I maintained concerning the costuming of Ariel’s disguised portrayal of the harpy, the scene was successful in reflecting the climactic actions that are perhaps lost when one only experiences this particular scene through an examination of Shakespeare’s text. For this reason, Ariel’s performance and the incorporated special effects must be judged as a success in respect to the overall achievement of the play’s engrossing plot.

Puritanism as a topical allusion in The Alchemist

      The Alchemist by Ben Jonson, a contemporary and rival of William Shakespeare, is a prime example of Johnson's established tendency to contextualize a play’s setting within the modernity of seventeenth century London. Specifically situated in Blackfriars, the location in which the play was also first performed; The Alchemist is primarily dependent upon topical allusions that would have resonated with audience members of the time. Most notable of these allusions, is Jonson’s satirical critiques of Puritanism in the seventeenth century.

      Jonson’s assessment of Puritanism is particularly distinctive when one considers that the multitude of plays and literature criticizing religion were primarily devoted to commentary regarding the discrepancies and confrontation that existed between Protestantism and Catholicism throughout the Renaissance. The comedic aspects of The Alchemist are achieved through Jonson’s exploitation and identification of social mannerism that expose the hypocrisy and inevitable follies that are prominent in each individual regardless of social affluence. Jeanette D. Ferreira-Ross in her article entitled “Jonson’s Satire of Puritanism in The Alchemist,” asserts that Jonson’s allusions to Puritanism are intentional and are presented in such a way that exposes the sect’s inherent hypocrisies and criticizes what she refers to as “religious cant”. Ross implies that unlike other playwrights, Jonson was exceptionally opposed to familism and therefore constructed his rather blunt allusions in a way that could easily be identified within the context of Renaissance London. The play itself relies upon allusions to fully elucidate Jonson’s religious satire concerning the hypocrisy characterizing the Puritanical sect.<Ross>

    Examples of Jonson’s allusions and subsequent critique of Puritans are easily discernible throughout the play. Perhaps the most notable instance occurs in Act I scene one whenever Dol Common chides the inauspicious relationship between Subtle and Face: “Who shall take your word? A whore sonne, upstart, apocryphal captain, whom not a Puritan in Blackfriars will trust so much as for a feather!” Dol’s allusions to Puritans continue and become more poignant when she identifies Blackfriars as a Puritan district and exclaims, “Shall we go make a sort of sober, scurvy, precise neighbors, that scarce have smiled twice since the king came in, a feast of laughter at our follies?” Dol’s reference to the king serves a historical allusion to the conflict that prevailed between James I and the Puritans following the Hampton Court Conference in 1604 when the newly crowned King decline the Puritan’s advancements for aid.<Ross> The pinnacle of Jonson’s allusions and criticism is expressed in the characters of Ananias and Tribulation Wholesome, two Puritans who despite their supposed religious piety, consort with the blasphemous endeavors of Subtle as he cons various characters to invest in his false promises to produce the philosopher’s stone through alchemical experiments. Tribulation verbally acknowledges his own hypocrisy whenever he addresses Ananias’ doubts by responding: “Good Brother, we must bend unto all means, that may giver furtherance to the holy cause.” Generally speaking, the setting of The Alchemist in addition to the actual performance location at Blackfriars insinuates a variety of critical allusions and comedic jokes that would have resonated more with contemporary Renaissance playgoers as opposed to a modern audience today.

P.S On an unrelated note, if you have been following this blog and have read the post concerning the influence of Sir Philip Sidney’s Arcadia, it may interest you to know that The Alchemist was also dedicated to Lady Mary Wroth, sister to Sir Philip Sidney.

Westminster Abbey

     Considering the irrefutable intentions of Edward the Confessor to construct a monastery mimicking the likeness of those he observed whilst in exile, Westminster Abbey is largely recognized as an establishment committed to religious devotion and study. Despite Henry VIII’s reformation and other subsequent turmoil concerning the ambivalence associated with London’s religious affiliations throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Westminster Abbey survives and remains a place of worship to this day; however, contrary to any assumptions associating Westminster Abbey as an exclusively religious institution, the political symbolism promoted by the various monarchs, imbues the abbey with an additional function: a physical manifestation of the King/Queen’s divine power and influence.

    Although religious services are still conducted inside the Cathedral, Westminster Abbey also functions as a ceremonial institution. Following the Norman invasion and the Battle of Hastings, Edward’s monastery became the setting for royal coronations. William the Conquer was crowned Christmas day 1066 inside the abbey and since that day, the precedent has dictated that all of London’s coronations (with the exception of Edward V and Edward VIII) be conducted within Westminster. From a political perspective, the coronation ceremonies would have greatly validated the crowned monarch’s authority and synonymously associate themselves with God’s divine blessings and authority.Westminster Abbey

Situated inside the abbey, is the coronation chair commissioned by Edward I to enclose the Stone of Scone that was stolen during an earlier invasion of Scotland in 1296. Our tour guide David, who was excellent and enormously informative, revealed that the chair constitutes a symbolic representation of England’s power. According to him, whenever a king or queen sits in the coronation chair, they are essentially sitting on all of Scotland.

     The original architecture of Edward’s monastic abbey remained un-compromised for two centuries up until Henry III, often referred to as The Builder King, rebuilt the abbey and ordered renovations to incorporate Gothic and Romanesque architecture. The end result maintained some facets of Edward’s original monastery, but the transformation yielded a building that was no longer a modest abbey but a regal cathedral worthy of accommodating the various ceremonies accustomed to England’s monarchy. More additions to Westminster Abbey were eventually constructed including, the Lady Chapel commissioned by Henry VII in 1516.Westminster Abbey The expansions conducted  by Henry III and Henry VII encouraged future monarchs to reflect their own religious and political fluency by commissioning additional expansions and renovations that encourage a seamless synthesis of varying styles and architecture that exemplify the royal prerogative and autonomy. Most noticeable, is the classicism promoted by Elizabeth I during the Renaissance. When one considers the humble origins of Westminster Abbey, it becomes easier to insinuate and examine the potential parallels existing between the rapid pace in which additions to the cathedral were constructed, and the increase in the relatively absolute powers possessed by England’s monarchs throughout the abbey’s tumultuous history. The various ceremonies including coronations, weddings, and funerals, do not necessarily compromise the religious iconography represented by Westminster Abbey but rather serves as a medium in which a tangible portrayal of the monarch's political status can be exemplified.

The British Library: Sir Philip Sidney's Arcadia

Today, our London excursion brought me to one of the places I was most looking forward to experiencing: The British Library. Aside from the original manuscript of Beowulf and a collection of original notes and sketches by Leonardo Da Vinci, the library resembles a museum featuring various "treasures" of literary accomplishment from around the world. 

One such literary artifact on display, was Sir Phillip Sidney's original Arcadia manuscript. Although I have never had the pleasure of reading Sidney's most expansive work, my previous exposure to his poetry, the manifesto entitled "The Defense of Poesy," and the general accolades identifying Sidney as one of the most influential figures of the eighteenth century, were quite sufficient in encouraging me to further research the historical relevance and effect of the novel Arcadia. 

Comprised of pastoral and romantic literary elements, Sydney's Arcadia, was composed and dedicated to his younger sister Mary Herbert, the Countess of Pembroke. As a literary work, Sidney's novel is not unlike other pastoral romances written at the time; however, the radically idealistic portrayal of pastoral life characterizing Arcadia reveal the existence of Sidney's subliminal cultural and political commentary concerning the values and leadership of London in the late sixteenth to early seventeenth centuries. This commentary provides an invaluable insight into motivations and ideologies valued during the Renaissance and Enlightenment.

One value scholars identify in Arcadia, is the relationship between virtue and its significant influence on the mannerisms of those who inhabited London during the Renaissance. Blair Worden asserts that virtue was associated with common morality in addition to religious piety and  the possession of divinely bestowed powers and authority. Those who applied virtue through moral deeds and divine circumstances, were associated with the educated elite whose charge was to embrace and share their virtuosity to improve the life of others and "change the world." Within the context of the Enlightenment and the ideology of humanism it inspired, Sidney's Arcadia, constitutes a rather traditional perception of human nature which did not entirely agree with the philosophies advanced during the Renaissance and Enlightenment;however, the assumed dichotomy between Sidney's work and the expectations regarding literature of the time is perhaps even more ergonomic when contrasting the extreme idealism of Arcadia in relation to the reality of Renaissance culture. The comparison begets a unique perspective into the Renaissance and the multiplicity of interactions and expectations associated with the time.Worden


From a political perspective, the numerous documents reccounting Sir Philip Sydney's participation within the Elizabethan court allow for easier access and understandings of the political motifs reciprocated in the plot of Arcadia. Edwin Greenlaw was perhaps the first to address the political implications of Arcadia in 1913 when he published his article "Sidney's Arcadia as an Example of Elizabethan Allegory." The article, albeit rather one dimensional in its scope and explanation, parallels the stagnate rule of Arcadia's king to the period of inactivity of Queen Elizabeth c. 1580. Sidney's close proximity and interactions within the Elizabethan court suggest that he acknowledged Elizabeth as the rightful queen, and documented letters and other missives indicate a close relationship in which the queen greatly valued Sidney as a political adviser. One letter in particular, sent from Sidney to Elizabeth in 1579, constitutes a warning against Elizabeth's proposed marriage to Anjou. Sidney warned that such a union would fundamentally destabilize Elizabeth's political and religious autonomy. Contrary to the guise of pleasantry Sidney adopted in his letter, tensions formed between the Queen and himself. Consequently, this tension and subsequent dormancy of Elizabeth's reign, provided the inspiration behind the political motifs of Arcadia.Worden

When considering publication practices and lack of copy right laws in the Renaissance, Arcadia  was essentially liberated from the threat of revisions and the changes that often occurred throughout the publication process. In accordance to the customary practices concerning novels, Arcadia was published in three separate volumes which naturally increased its susceptibility to publication errors and revisions. Several early revisions depict a narrative that noticeably differs from Sidney's original text; but, as a result of Sidney's dedication of Arcadia to his younger sister, many of the revisions were published through the familial aristocracy to which Sidney and Mary belonged. In 1593, Mary published her own revision of Arcadia which collaborated the three separate "books" into a cohesive whole. Although Sidney's original text did not entirely escape the dangers of the publication process, the revisions associated with Sidney and his immediate family can be construed as being a more valid reflection of the original work especially, when one considers the scholarly debates concerning the authenticity of other prominent authors and any subsequent revisions published.

London's Changing Market c.1500-1700

            The capacity and influence of London’s markets in the early sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was primarily dictated by the irrefutable advantages of establishing a flourishing system of commerce that exploited England’s burgeoning status as a profiteer in international trade. Substituting the traditional, yet archaic guild system, the advent of trade companies and modernized monetary practices, prompted the large scale economic growth that would eventually fulfill England’s ambition to ascertain a worldwide empire.

            The decline of the guild system is primarily attributed to the widening divisions between entrepreneurs and skilled artisans and the commercial and industrial capitalists. As England’s investments in international trade improved, the jurisdictions of the various guilds became compromised by the reallocation of monetary and municipal boundaries that had previously been  irresolute.<Fisher> As the marketplace shifted to accommodate the growing demands for worldwide commercial trade, expansive conglomerates referred to as trade companies, became the primary executors of London’s economic dealings around the world. England’s initial forays into international trade have been recorded as a trial and error process in which the outcome was often times negative. London’s rural producers were skeptical of corporations and their definite influence over England’s emergent economy. In order to appease corporate investors and localized traders a compromise was formatted to effectively identify two fundamental principles that satisfied all competing economic interests: monopolies and chartered companies. <Fisher>

            Whereas monopolies effectively granted exclusive trading rights on certain exported goods and materials, chartered companies were the primary institution responsible for expanding London’s economic boundaries. Chartered companies represented the interests of not only merchants, but also the wealthy investors who funded expeditions with eventual aspirations of exploiting new sources of raw materials and potential trading partners. The Folger online exhibition asserts that “Incorporations bestowed a charter and a legal personality. Cities and craft and trade companies were alike corporate bodies with legal standing- and all depended on the royal prerogative.” <Folger> In accordance to England’s ventures in international trade, a few prominent companies were rewarded royal charters and were financed directly by the king or queen. King James and King Charles are notable for liberally extending royal support to various trading companies looking to market their goods outside of London’s immediate boarders.

     Once England had successfully established itself as a competitor in international commerce the question then became how to effectively market the exotic goods that were being acquired as a result of monopolies and chartered companies. In 1569 Sir Thomas Gresham convinced the city to purchase land and personally funded the construction of the Royal Exchange.  Designed to accommodate both the private and public economic interests of the city, the Royal Exchange constituted a commercial hub in which London consumers invested in domestic and foreign merchandise. By collaborating with the Dutch, England’s chief trading partner, the Royal Exchange was perhaps most successful in alleviating the trepidations that existed between traditional economic practices and England’s advancement in international trade. <Folger>