English drama -- Early modern and Elizabethan, 1500-1600 -- History and criticism; English drama -- To 1500 -- History and criticism
These Seneca modified by the introduction of acts and
scenes, a subordination of the Chorus, and an exaggerated predilection
for long sententious speeches; he also added a new stage character known
as the Ghost. Seneca's elevation, to the dogmatic position of laws, of
the unities of Time, Place and Action, rules by no means invariable
among his older and greater masters, has been the subject of much
debate, but, on the whole, the verdict has been hostile. According to
these unities, the time represented in the play should not greatly
exceed the time occupied in acting it, the scene of the action should
not vary, and the plot should be concerned only with one event. This
last law was generally accepted, by Elizabethans, in Tragedy at least.
The other two, though much insisted on by English theorists, such as Sir
Philip Sidney, met with so much neglect in practice that we need devote
no space to the discussion of them.
Having thus hastily summarized the larger superficial characteristics of
classical drama, we may return to _Gorboduc_ and inquire which of these
were adopted in it and with what modifications. We find it divided into
five acts and nine scenes. A Chorus, though it takes no other part,
sings its moralizing lyrics at the end of each act except the last.
Speeches of inordinate length are made--three consecutive speeches in
Act I, Scene 2, occupy two hundred and sixty lines--the subject-matter
being commonly argumentative. Only through the reports of messengers and
eye-witnesses do we learn of the cold-blooded murder and many violent
deaths that take place. Everywhere hurried action and unreasoning
instinct give place to deliberation and debate. Between this play and
its predecessors no change can be more sweeping or more abrupt. In an
instant, as it were, we pass from the unpolished _Cambyses_, savage and
reeking with blood, to the equally violent events of _Gorboduc_, cold
beneath a formal restraint which, regulating their setting in the
general framework, robs them of more than half their force. Had this
severe discipline of the emotions been accepted as for ever binding upon
the tragic stage Elizabethan drama would have been forgotten. The truth
is that the germ of dissension was sown in _Gorboduc_ itself. Conscious
that the banishment of action from the stage, while natural enough in
Greece, must meet with an overwhelming resistance from the popular
custom in England, the authors, Thomas Sackville and Thomas Norton,
invented a compromise. Before each act they provided a symbolical Dumb
Show which, by its external position, infringed no classical law, yet
satisfied the demand of an English audience for real deeds and
melodramatic spectacles. It was an ingenious idea, the effect of which
was to keep intact the close link between stage and action until the
native genius should be strong enough to cast aside its swaddling
clothes and follow its own bent without hurt. As illustrating this
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account