I gotta get this train back on the tracks. Let’s see. I’ll write this bit about The Spanish Tragedy, then something about the Henry V and Henry VI plays I’ve been reading, then get to Christopher Marlowe’s hilarious farce The Jew of Malta. Somewhere I will fit in something about Stephen Greenblatt’s new biography of Marlowe which, happily, is excellent.
The crazy revenge scheme of The Spanish Tragedy is
famously a play-within-a-play in which three people die of stabbing (Stab
him… Stab him… Stab herself) while the idiot nobility in the
audience nod along, thinking it is acting.
HIERONIMO Haply you think, but bootless are your thoughts,
That this is fabulously counterfeit,
And that we do as all tragedians do (IV.iv, 117)
Before the scene ends, two more people are stabbed (plus
there is the business with the tongue).
It is like a combination of Hamlet’s last scene and its own play-within-a-play.
Which may be what it is, if Thomas Kyd wrote the legendary
lost Ur-Hamlet, and if Ur-Hamlet precedes The Spanish Tragedy,
in which case Ur-Hamlet invented the revenge tragedy and The Spanish
Tragedy is its generic sequel.
Fredson Bowers, writing in Elizabethan Revenge Tragedy:
1587-1642 (1940) is sure both of those things are true. He for some reason really wants Ur-Hamlet
to come first, so it does. In Chapter
III, “The Spanish Tragedy and the Ur-Hamlet,” Bowers provides a detailed,
scene-by-scene synopsis of Ur-Hamlet, showing how it led to The
Spanish Tragedy and eventually Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
It is a fascinating chapter, mostly because Ur-Hamlet
does not exist, in any form. Two words
have survived (“Hamlet, revenge!”, spoken by the ghost). Bowers just makes the whole thing up. He takes Shakespeare’s Hamlet and the French
novella that is Kyd’s source (probably) and kind of plots a midpoint.
The Spanish Tragedy has no known source, which
bothers Bowers. It would be a rarity for
the period if the story during this plundering period were original. But I am okay with the idea; also the idea
that Kyd did not write Ur-Hamlet and that it was written after The
Spanish Tragedy. Brian Vickers has
recently led an effort to massively expand the attributions to Kyd – see The
Collected Works of Thomas Kyd and the biography Thomas Kyd: A Dramatist
Restored, but boy does the evidence look thin to me, very close to nothing
in most cases. The attribution of Ur-Hamlet
to Kyd is based on interpreting a pun-filled line by Thomas Nashe.
The literary history of this period is of the highest
interest. Much of the interest is
figuring out how we know things.
I’ll give poor, dim, Balthazar the last word.
BALTHAZAR Hieronimo, methinks a comedy were better.
HIERONONIMO A comedy?
Fie, comedies are fit for common wits (IV.i, 109)
But revenge is too much fun.

Stephen Greenblatt’s new biography of Marlowe which, happily, is excellent
ReplyDeleteI'm glad to hear it; from some reviews I'd gotten the impression that he is too credulous of the many rumors about Marlowe's colorful life when he should have stuck to the known facts.
I have not gotten to Marlowe's murder yet. Still plenty of time for Greenblatt to be credulous, but so far he is not, really not at all. He knows the avavilable evidence as well as anyone.
ReplyDeleteThere are places where he has to make his choice about what the evidence means; he has been working on Marlowe for more than forty years, so those choices are in a sense his insights. There has also been one place where he resorts to fiction, clearly frustrated by the lack of evidence not about Marlowe but about Shakespeare.
I will write about the subtle way Greenblatt uses evidence. I will likely write about nothing but his use of evidence.
I guess "credulous" was the wrong word: I didn't mean that he believed them but rather that he couldn't resist passing them along because they were so much more lively than the bare facts. At any rate, I look forward to your further discussion!
ReplyDeleteI wonder what the specific complaints are. I can imagine readers frustrated by his constant refusal to go beyond the bare facts, by which I mean various texts. A literary scholar, he is always interpreting texts. The usual conclusion about this episode or that is some version of "but we don't realy know."
ReplyDeleteI hope to write about the book soon and give some examples. Soon soon soon.