Duchess of Malfi AO5 Flashcards
Lucy Webster’s views in relation to the Fuedal system and Bosola
asserts that Bosola’s character and development (his constant changing of role; his ‘service’ to Ferdinand; his rejection of cash payment; his desire for a position in court) reveal a CONTEXTUAL concern about the change from a feudal to a mercantile/cash economy. End of the Feudal system meant nobody knew their role/identity in society; a sense that cash cheapened human relations
what contextual example can be used to benefit Lucy Webster’s argument on the feudal system?
James’ selling of Knighthoods
Ian Jack views on Revenge tragedy and Webster’s morals in the DOM
Revenge Tragedy is a ‘pulp’ genre, intended to make the audience’s skin crawl and little else
the ‘moral’ message that Webster gives through the rhyming couplets, isn’t supported by the action of the play. That in fact, Webster only writes with passion when writing about evil, darkness, deceit and chaos. For Jack, this means that Webster’s view of the world is “too narrow” and that Duchess of Malfi is a play which is “fundamentally flawed” and that this flaw is a “moral flaw”. There is no sense, as there is in Measure for Measure that when the evil/ sin has been purged from Malfi the state will return to health as we believe Vienna will because there is no “Messianic Duke” to return and sort it all out
what critic can be used to argue against Jack?
Irving Ribner as he argues that there IS a strong moral vision in Duchess of Malfi. He suggests that the fact that Antonio, in Act 1 scene 1, is returning from France where the King has created a court and state full of order and justice, means that the audience has seen the “possibility of a moral order; and nothing in the play can convince it of its impossibility.
Ribner’s argument on the play’s function
suggests that the play’s function is to display “the human spirit’s triumph in spite of the body’s destruction”. He further argues that Bosola is crucial in illustrating this theme and that the different roles he plays allow the Duchess to “assert the dignity of human life and meet death with the readiness and courage that are her triumph”
Ribner’s argument on the Duchess’ impact on Bosola
suggests that “we may regard the play as the education of Bosola by the Duchess”
Ribner’s argues on the final message of the play and what the core characters (Duchess, Antonio, and the Brothers) stand for
He states that the Duchess and Antonio stand for life, love, continuity of life through children [and faith]. The Brothers, in contrast, stand for death, disease, corruption and decay. He believes that the ‘human spirit’ triumphs
Ultimately, Ribner argues, the final lesson (which both Antonio and Bosola have learned from the Duchess) is that the only thing that separates human beings from animals [animal imagery is always used for the brothers] is to be able to reject the things of this world “to accept the pain and frustration of life and to die with courage and dignity”
Fredson Bowers views on Duchess of Malfi in the context of its genre
Bowers looks at Duchess of Malfi as a revenge tragedy [AO3 point] and considers how Webster has developed the genre through this play. He points out that the play is unusual for a number of reasons
- the main protagonists (the Duchess) is also the victim of the villain’s revenge; then her death begins another revenge cycle against them
- the tool villain (Bosola) has a much more important role: given a much more developed character than a tool villain would normally have, he then undergoes a “psychological change in character” and becomes the revenger against his previous employers
- Webster has also humanised his villains, so that, rather than just being 2 dimensionally ‘evil’ caricatures, they are portrayed as real persons and the revenger himself is ‘grey’ (an in-between character with real human flaws) so that we end up with a much more realistic treatment of revenge story
J. W. Lever asserts that the play is a criticism of what?
JW lever suggests that the play is very specifically a criticism of James’s court and mentions how James sold honours promoted favourites like Robert Carr and controlled the lives like Arabella Stuart
What ideas does Lever argue against?
Argues against the “subconscious incest” reading for Ferdinand’s motivation that: in reading it has subconscious incest we are applying post-Freudian ideas to a c.17th century play if he’d wanted to suggest incest Webster could have made Ferdinand’s motivations much more explicit in reality is part of type of status hatred and desire not pollute the aristocratic bloodline which we can only understand if we think of Hitler’s idea about Jewish people or the views of modern race is about interracial marriage
break
time
what does Lever suggest the play is about
Lever suggests that the play is about “the effects of power upon the human heart and mind”. That “the corruption of power brings with it madness sterility and death” that ‘Ferdinand’s lycanthropia results from the murder of his humanity and reduces him to the level of a predatory beast’ while the Duchess an Antonio are “identified with reason, fertility and life”. The play ultimately reveals the choices we face in the ‘political world’
in relation to Renaissance Maxim, what does Lever argue that Webster is suggesting
He argues that the fact that the eldest son survives, despite his terrible horoscope, could be Webster suggesting that ultimately there is hope and the “belief in a better age”– particularly because Webster seems to have broken with the traditional dramatic convention (inherited by renaissance dramatist from the ancient Greeks) that a character can never escape their fate- Webster seems to be championing ‘the triumph of reason’ instead, via the favourite Renaissance Maxim ‘that reason, or the Wiseman, overcomes the stars’
