Inscribing the Time

8/21/2019 Inscribing the Time

1/213

Preferred Citation: Mallin, Eric S. Inscribing the Time: Shakespeare and the End of Elizabethan England. Berkeley:

University of California Press, c1995 1995. http:ark.cdli!.or"ark:1#$#$ft#n#9n%&'

Inscribing the Time

Shakespeare and the End of Elizabethan England

Eric S. Mallin

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS

Berkeley · Los Angeles · Oxford

!""# The Regents $% the Uni&ersit' $% Cali%$rnia

(or 'y 'other,and the 'e'ory

of her 'other

Preferred Citation: Mallin, Eric S. Inscribing the Time: Shakespeare and the End of Elizabethan England. Berkeley: University of California Press, c1995 1995. http:ark.cdli!.or"ark:1#$#$ft#n#9n%&'

(or 'y 'other,

and the 'e'oryof her 'other

) *i )

Ac(n$)le*gments+ a' deli"hted to acknoled"e those ho have helped, directly or indirectly, ith this !ook.

-hanks "o to the University of California Press for per'ission to reprint chapter 1, hich appeared in a

sli"htly shorter for' in Representations vol. /9, inter 199$0. + old also like to acknoled"e theEn"lish 2epart'ent of the University of -e*as at 3stin for "ivin" 'e to i'portant thin"s: a'ple

ti'e to rite and a fine place to ork.

4eah S. Marcs and (rank hi"ha' have !een "idin" li"hts in 'y ti'e at -e*as, and their "enerosity


2/213

has !een sstainin". 2olora o6ciehoski read 'ch of the 'anscript and 'ade several !rilliant

s""estions, so'eti'es casin" 'e to ish that she had ritten it. 7ohn P. 8'rich orked thro"h the

!ook heroically, stayin" enthsiastic a!ot it even hen + cold not. + thank the' all for their

re'arka!le colle"iality. + old also like to e*press deep appreciation to Bill Stherland, 7osephrppa, and ayne 4esser for findin" ays to 'ake 'y life easier thro"hot the ardos process of

co'pletin" the 'anscript.

2oris retsch'er of the University of California Press has !een e*tre'ely helpfl and attentive,shepherdin" this ork in a ti'ely 'anner despite 'y delays0 thro"h varios sta"es of prodction.-he Presss three anony'os revieers offered e*cellent s""estions on 'atters !oth essential and

orna'ental. 3t a critical sta"e in the preparation of the !ook, Melissa ;il!ert cheerflly provided

sper! research assistance.

) *ii )

Inscribing the Time had its ori"ins as a Stanford University dissertation ritten nder the aspices of

2avid 8i""s, 7ohn Bender, and 8onald 8e!hol&. -hey helped 'e, as so'eone once said, to ac


3/213

acco''odations at the end of the Eli&a!ethan era. -hro"hot + shall clai' that history!y hich +

narroly 'ean the specific past of 8enaissance sociopolitical and literary conditionsproves in

Shakespeares theater to !e a constant force ith varia!le coefficients. So'eti'es history is the direct

referent of the dra'atic !siness= 'ore often it is the deferred, s!'er"ed conspirator in the plot= atstill other ti'es it proves to !e an alienated, hostile presence dislod"in" the ork fro' secre 'oorin"s

or 'eanin"s.

Shakespeares -roy, 2en'ark, and +llyria are not repetitions of En"land= they are, as the epi"raph fro'7. E. Aeale is 'eant to s""est, analo"ies./D 3s analo"ies of history the plays constantly appro*i'ateand appropriate for's of the real"overn'ental or"ani&ations, physiolo"i?

) / )

cal processes, spirital str""lesin their fictions. My ar"'ents depart fro' so'e ne?historicalstdies !y takin" the te*ts topicalities not only as referent !t as literary structure = the conte'porary

history 'aterially shapes and 'isshapes the dra'a. + e*a'ine in the first chapter the ay divisive

Eli&a!ethan cort politics and self?delsional ideolo"ies are 'apped into the chiastic relationships ofviolence in Troilus and Cressida . +n chapter / + consider another cltral fact ith strctral

i'plications for the plays: epide'ic disease. +n Hamlet as to a lesser e*tent in Troilus and Cressida 0,

the idea of conta"ion afflicts the root relations of lan"a"e, 'ind, and rle, and these relations have

clear historical correlatesnot necessarily deter'inants !t, a"ain, definite analo"ies.

-he stdy of pla"e in Hamlet contines fi"rally in the third chapter ith a readin" of selected

conta'inatin" histories in 7a'ess royal sccession. By a conta'inatin" history + 'ean an episode or

'e'ory that pro!le'ati&es the tidy order and 'eanin" of the ne rei"nspecifically, a set of events

that interacts ith and nder'ines Shakespearean theatrical architectre. +n Hamlet , conta"ion andsccession are co'ple'entary topical an*ieties, !t to co'e to ter's ith these e 'st confront an

even 'ore sharply focsed isse of locality: the stats of the te*t itself. +n chapters / and #, + e*a'ine

the second or "ood


4/213

sense of its on endin"= the close of the period as self?consciosly likened to the end of -roy, a "reat

civili&ation in its death throes. 3t the sa'e ti'e, the hope of a ne kin" co'pensated for the de!ility,

as 'any 'ale cortiers sa it, of an a"ed


5/213

controls.

Shakespearean conte*ts alays recreate this !order indeter'inacy: the plays e*tend fro' the

for'ations that are their s!te*tal s!6ect. (ar fro' !ein" the preserve of disinterested cltral

infor'ation, this theater is alays a version of hat it contains, i'plicated in the orld it descri!es. 3s(redric 7a'eson has said:

-he literary or aesthetic act . . . alays entertains so'e active relationship ith the 8eal=

yet in order to do so, it cannot si'ply allo reality to persevere inertly in its on !ein",

otside the te*t and at a distance. +t 'st rather dra the 8eal into its on te*tre. . . . -hesy'!olic act therefore !e"ins !y "eneratin" and prodcin" its on conte*t in the sa'e

'o'ent of e'er"ence in hich it steps !ack fro' it, takin" its 'easre ith a vie toard

its on pro6ects of transfor'ation.5D

3 fle*i!le cate"ory in and of itself, conte*t varies dra'atically as ell a'on" recent 8enaissanceliterary theorists. (or so'e ne historicists, a relevant fra'e for interpretation 'ay !e far displaced

fro' the te*ts te'poral or spatial vicinity. -he 'ar"ins of conte*t can stretch ot over oceans, years,

and artistic for's. (or e*a'ple, to Stephen ;reen!latt, an 3l!recht 2Hrer print shos so'ethin"

critical a!ot the representa?

) 5 )

tional stats of re!ellion hich is reconfi"red in Shakespeares / Henr# $I = a story a!ot (rench

her'aphroditis' frnishes a ay of nderstandin" se*al ho'olo"ies and erotic e*chan"es in Telfth !ight .FD alter Cohen calls this interpretive techni


6/213

e'ployed as a 'ain interpretive te'plate, allos the critic to read the literary te*t thro"h its most

probable stresses and histories and to deli'it the profsion of

) F )

narratives that case !oth ar!itrary and likely inflences to !lend. 4ocal readin" can narro the

!eilderin" se'antic ran"e of the plays !y pinnin" the' to a near!y conte*t= it can also, hoever,enlar"e a dra'as si"nifyin" potential shold the te*t like Hamlet , for instance0 fail to specify

li'itations to conte*tal 'eanin"s. Becase conte*ts, like historical 'o'ents, are theoreticallyinfinite, constrin" the' alays involves an act of contain'ent, a resistance to the allrin" fact or

alternative story.

>ere, then, are so'e of 'y self?i'posed interpretive "idelines in this !ook. 3ltho"h it is difficlt to

'ark the ter'ini of historical 'o'ents, + have "enerally confined 'y analyses to the period defined inthe !ooks s!title, oras in the case of Scottish sccession history and the early Pritan 'ove'ent,

discssed in chapters # and G respectivelyto those histories hich have clear and on"oin"

i'plications for this period and these te*ts. 4ikeise, + have atte'pted to li'it conte*t spatially. -his !ook ass'es that these are En"lish histories that Shakespeare is on the ver"e of ritin"= their forei"n

settin"s distantiate reference only to secre, not frstrate, local interest. ;iven the fact that fashion,

reli"ion, and even "enre circlate a'on" nations, it 'ay see' nnecessary to restrict topicality to

En"lish concerns, hich cold neveras so'e of the !reathless reports of forei"n a'!assadors attest re'ain strictly En"lish. Bt in this particlar historical niche, Shakespeares plays concern

the'selves ith the cltral peril of specifically En"lish politics and ideolo"y. -hese dra'as are hardly

co"ent vehicles for 6in"oistic senti'ent= !t their central concerns are local, hoever !roadlyrepresentative i.e., niversal0 that locality 'ana"es to !e. (inally, + proceed on the ass'ption that

historical conte*ts 'st de'onstra!ly pla# into plot, the'e, "enre, i'a"e, or sta"in"= the dra'as

central literary featres 'st !e apposite to or co"nate ith so'e si"nificant cltral fact or presenceand so create a representational resonance ith history. Selective narroin" of conte*ts offers the !est

chance to recover the intercorse !eteen te*t and ti'e. + have tried, then, to slo don the fra'es of

historical reference that !lr past in Shakespeares plays= or to pt it another ay, + have placed the 6arof the te*t ithin and a!ot its knon historical conditions.

-he trick ord in that last sentence is knon. -his !ook atte'pts to deploy !t also to e*tend and

reconfi"re the historically knon. Ao s'all pres'ption for a non?historian, this effort can

nonetheless !e 6stified !y the natre of historical knoled"e, hich + take to !e lar"ely doc'entary that is, te*tal, and ths alays le"iti'ately s!6ect to

) I )

rereadin". 3n interpretive insta!ility 'st !e acknoled"ed at once: the past that + read thro"h

Shakespeares te*ts has already !een read !y those te*ts and finessed, over ti'e, !y "enerations ofhistorians and critics= and the idea of the theater that + atte'pt to norish thro"h cooked i.e., selectedand processed0 data cannot provide any certain access to the lived past of the plays. -his dile''a of

'ediated histories can !e eased if e see the te*t itself as an historical repository, ith a direct,

participatory relation to its ti'e. +n this re"ard, e 'ay follo (ocalts early ork in atte'ptin" toesta!lish archaeolo"ies of knoled"e resident in cltral prodctions.

Perhaps an analo"y in 'ore traditional archaeolo"ical ter's is in order. @ne interestin" for'ation

co''on in the Middle East is the tell, a hill?shaped site on hich several "enerations or even


7/213

civili&ations have sccessively !ilt. 3n artificial constrctthe acc'lated re'ains of one or 'ore

ancient settle'ents9D the tell stands to a 'odern a"e as co'prehensions ro"h draft, a version of

historical fact anticipatin" the refine'ents of ta*ono'ists, crators, and theoreticians. Co'pressin" the

past, the site presents a convenient if defor'ed epito'e of cltral activity. Becase the tell displaysithot 'akin" definitive disclosres, it is, !efittin" its ho'ony', a kind of narrative. 4ike any story,

the tell is an occasion for analysis, the "rondork for topical nderstandin".

-o read literatre !y ay of the past, one 'ay seflly re"ard the te*t as a tell?like strctre: arepository of tiered and clled histories co'pressed into shapes that forern 'eanin". -hearchaeolo"ical site rese'!les the literary artifact in that !oth co'prise sperposed layers of

si"nificance.1$D -he 'ore deeply s!'er"ed the level, the 'ore difficlt it is to retrieve and

reconstrct ithot alterin" it!t the !etter preserved that level 'ay !e !ecase of its chthonice'!eddedness. +n te*ts as in tells, crcial referentiality tends not to !e disposed too close to the srface.

-he archaeolo"ical 'odel offers the hope that so'e trace essence of the real can !e reclai'ed

certainly not ithot losin" so'e data, !t perhaps ithot scatterin" entirely the for's of the distant past. -he literary artifact differs in i'portant ays, of corse, fro' the tell, particlarly in its

constittive 'aterials: the ver!al ork asse'!les s!li'inal, co"nitive, and tonal ele'ents fro' its

cltre, the prior historical or ideolo"ical subte"t , in 7a'esons ords, of the society %olitical

&nconscious , %10. Bt the analo"y of te*t to tell can ill'inate the theoretical pitfalls of interpretivee*cavations. +n hopin" to find the thin" in itself, the past?as?it?as, archaeolo"ical ork 'ay

accidentally erase periodic or epochal divisions= later historical intrsion often distr!s the

) % )

stratifications that can, in the !est case, act as a diachronic key to the locale0. hat is 'ore, !ecase of

its spatial li'its, the tell, like the te*t, is !ond to ske the sa'ple of cltral activity= it cannot !e

flly representative. (inally, the strctre can silently, nintelli"i!ly a!sor! enconters ith othercivili&ations !y hich the cltre nder stdy has !eco'e enriched or infected. -he ncertainties of

readin" sch a di" s""est so'e of the ha&ards of historical in


8/213

and yet other points here they conspire to create a'!i"os i'pressions. -he theater rites and

records diffuse cltral intentions, transcendin" any sin"le historical s!6ects or athors !siness or

desire. Bt this characteri&ation of the sta"e shold not o!literate the notion of the athor, the inscri!er.

-re to 'y on poststrctral acade'ic conte*ts, + nderstand the te*t as 'ltiple: the intersection of aran"e of discorses. -hs the

) 9 )

early 'odern cltre as a hole can !e said to have helped rite Shakespeares plays, even as late?tentieth?centry 3'erican cltre helps rite the ay + interpret the'. +f the dra'atist cannot avoid

inscri!in" the ti'e into his te*tshether or not he intends the ra'ifications of the inscriptions11D

he also has the a!ility to reconstitte, thro"h the fierce endeavor of hisD art, specific histories in particlar ays.

@ne locs for theaters inscriptive intertinin" of cltral and athorial intention, and one that !ears

heavily on 'y readin"s of each of these plays, is the repeatedly sta"ed historical fi"re of Leen

Eli&a!eth. -here as little do!t that playri"hts and poets placed her in their ork in varios "ises.She spoke of her on position as theatrical e princes, + tell yo, are set on sta"es, in the si"ht and

vie of all the orld dly o!served, she is fa'osly spposed to have said0,1/D and the theater

!orroed a royal presti"e !y openly and s!tly perfor'in" her. hat e'er"es fro' the practice is the

'ltiplicity of her perceived selves, an i'pression of poly'orphis' partly created and partly perceivedthat did not alays acco'plish its stated "oal of honorin" her. +n the ell?knon letter of 15%9

anne*ed to the first edition of The 'aerie (ueene , Spenser rote to alter 8ale"h of his alle"orical

'ethod in the poe', a representational strate"y of the sort that + have tried to retrieve and analy&e inthis !ook:

+n that (aery Leene + 'eane "lory in 'y "enerall intention, !t in 'y particlar +

conceie the 'ost e*cellent and "lorios person of or soeraine the Leene, and her

kin"do'e in (aery land. 3nd yet in so'e places els, + doe otherise shado her. (or

considerin" she !eareth to persons, the one of a 'ost royall Leene or E'presse, theother of a 'ost vertos and !eatifll 4ady, this latter part in so'e places + doe e*presse

in Belphoe!e, fashionin" her na'e accordin" to yor one e*cellent conceipt of Cynthia,Phoe!e and Cynthia !ein" !oth na'es of 2iana.01#D

-his so'ehat coy description of the poe' s'ooths over the political dissonance inherent in these

alle"orical divisions, separations, and 'ltiple na'in"s. By confessin" that in so'e places els, + doe

otherise shado her, Spenser is ed"in" toard a state'ent a!ot the darker, 'ore shadoyrepresentations of Eli&a!ethan policy and character in the poe', 'ade 6stifia!le !y the human

i'perfections in the 'ost vertos and !eatifll 4ady. -his letter of the athors e*pondin" his

hole intention in the corse of this ork cannot possi!ly live p to its !illin", !ecase the athorsnderstandin" of his on intention is at once veiled and e*traordinarily conflicted. -here are desi"ned

and accidental leaka"es of 'eanin" in the alle"orical techni


9/213

co'pletely ansera!le to intentionality. 3ny te*t that atte'pts to collate 'ltiple historical realities

ill find itself, or those realities, fra"'ented, like a c!ist ork that tries to represent three di'ensions

on a sin"le srface. -hs the 'eanin"s of history sffer, in literary inscriptions, e'er"encies of

dis6nction, contradiction, and discord. -hese crises 'ay have !een part of an ori"inal perception a!otthe particlar s!6ect, !t they 'ay also arise as a reslt of that s!6ects incarnation in representational

flesh of 'any fi"res. Sch an aesthetic procedre opens the te*t to oppositional, nflatterin", or

ncontrolled lineations.e can stay ith the e*a'ple of the


10/213

those na'es 'ake !t one celestiall !ody, as all those loves 'eete to create !t one sole.

Prolo"e, 1F015D

3ll these na'es, hoever, have their on 'ytholo"ies, hich can collide to for' i'pacted ideolo"icalcontradictions that nderct the spposed o!eisant intent. @ne onders, for instance, ho the tro!lin"

se*al i'a"e of Pandora and the i'plications of the nsta!le Cynthia still inconstant, yet never

averin", as 4yly a'!ivalently calls her #.G.//#D0 rhy'e ith the 6ridical seriosness of the 3straeana'e. riters nder the


11/213

natre of topical reference in the theater deprives s of one !enefit that ne criticis' !estoed: the

l*ry of neat, reada!le patterns. +t is often difficlt a"ain, as the chapters on Hamlet testify0 to resolve

analyses of conflictin" and so'eti'es nintelli"i!le data, no 'atter ho narroly the historical

conte*ts are constred.

+ do not 'ean to clai' that these Shakespeare plays are entirely nhin"ed fro' pattern or especially0

fro' one another. +ndeed, even ith their different "enres, their diver"ent tonalities and referential

strctres, these three plays have so'e strikin" si'ilarities. +n fact, a pro'inent trope of si'ilarityoccpies each ork: e'lation in Troilus and Cressida , conta"ion in Hamlet , and echo in Telfth !ight . -hese featres are not prely rhetorical tropes sch as Lintilian or Scali"er descri!ed. +nstead,

each of these fi"res has a strctral or the'atic i'plication. E*perienced readers of Shakespeare ill

already !e fa'iliar ith the sy'!olic e*tensions of these tropes: they inclde the plays co''ono!sessions ith tinnin", srro"acy, i'itation, e*chan"e, dis"ise, inflence, and repetition. Each of

the tropes fnctions in the plots of the plays as a decenterin" device, splittin" off privile"e, identity, or

force fro' its sanctioned possessor and redistri!tin" it a'on" other clai'ants for poer or sy'pathy.Echo, hich + read as pertinent to Telfth !ight s s!te*t, is perhaps the 'ost co''on and !eni"n of

these fi"res. 3s a trope ith its on 'ytho"raphy, it carries a history of passivity, even potentially a

kind of "enerosity= echo sei&es !t retrns, in the act of sei&re, the voice of the other. By contrast,

e'lation Troilus and Cressida 0 and conta"ion Hamlet 0 are 'ore e*plicitly violent, appropriativefor's of si'ilitde, !efittin" their plays the'atic and "eneric indications. -hese three rhetorical

strctres or"ani&e plot and the li'its of dra'atic s!6ectivity= they also s""est i'portant aspects of

the theaters inscriptive procedres. + take these fi"res the'selves


12/213

shold not srprise s that these orks i'perfectly replicate the folds, horls, and dyna'is's of the

lar"er srrond.

-he appeal and of corse, the pro!le'0 of chaos theory is its accessi!ility to so 'any intitions= 'any

'etaphoric connections to the chaos paradi"' can !e 'ade ithot strain. @ne sch connection,central to this !ooks concerns ith conta"ion as a cltral ha!it, is thro"h the idea of the virs, the

npredicta!ly replicatin" 'echanis's of hich are only no co'in" to !e nderstood. ithot

ori"inal 2A3 of its on, a virs is involved in the hostile prodction of a self?si'ilarity derived fro' ahost or"anis'. -e*ts are, of corse, 'ore and other than chaotic propa"ations of history, 'ore thanviral reprodctions of an nresistin" cell of the real. -he disease 'etaphor, hoever, conveys the

parasitic inti'acy of te*ts and conte*ts, as ell as the dan"ers of dissolvin" the !ondaries !eteen

the'. Ssan Sonta" has 'entioned that i''nolo"ists class the !odys cancer cells as non?self, asdistin"ished fro' the self of ori"inal !iolo"ical 'aterial./$D Bt that nonself is eerily prodced !y

so'e co'!ination of environ'ental factors, syste'ic de!ility, and "enetic s!stance, a set of cases

hich pro!le'ati&es the virss destrction, linked as the "er' is to the self that hoses it. Condi?

) 15 )

tions that tri""er the "roth of a virs, the ot!reak of a ar,/1D or the creation of a Shakespeare play

are deeply npredicta!le: the avatars of coincidence, of cases 'ysterios or alays insfficiently

e*planatory. 3s an accont of cltral or artistic for'ation, a chaos or conta"ion 'odel 'akes 'oresense than deter'inistic theories !ecase the inn'era!le inflences of cltre are, at their core,

rando' events ith only satellite predicta!ilities. -he 'athe'atician Benoit Mandel!rot, ritin" a!ot

the calclations needed to "enerate a statistical 'odel of a coastline, cold ell !e discorsin" a!otart and its relation to history hen he notes that a deter'inistic approach old !e . . . doo'ed to

failre !ecase each coastline is 'olded thro"h the a"es !y 'ltiple inflences that are not recorded

and cannot !e reconstitted in any detail. -he "oal of achievin" a fll description is hopeless, andshold not even !e entertained ayles, Chaos ound , 1FI0. -his state'ent, ideolo"ically

deficient if applied to cltral for'ations, nonetheless carries a sefl re'inder for historicists: the

te*ts conditions of prodction si'ply cannot !e specified in fll. Effects in the orld are notnecessarily linear or proportionate to their cases= an effect sch as a te*t is especially, thankflly

npredicta!le, and alays at so'e distance fro' its case.

+f the ork of art ere 'erely a recrsion of chaotic historical patterns, or a tell hose layers

co'prise cross?sections of its on fondin" cltre, it old then see' to lack all atono'y. @nce e posit that cltral inflences prodce, hoever npredicta!ly, te*tal effects, the idea of the te*ts tter

contin"ency is inevita!le. +nscription initially offers hope here, insofar as it si"nifies artistic control and

a"ency: if the cltre can !e inscri!ed in the te*t, then the latter ato'atically contains, netrali&es, or

otherise 'ana"es the for'er. Bt this accont of the process is inco'plete. -he act of inscri!in"history in te*ts 'ay begin athorially as an atte'pt to contain or reify chaotic 'eanin"s hich is ho

'y readin"s of literary historio"raphy !e"an0. Bt it 'ore often !eco'es, in spite of itself, the practiceof protracting and replicatin" a chaos of histories thro"h the artistic 'edi'. +n the case of the three plays stdied here, their the'atic tropes of si'ilarity evoke principles of apparent internal and

referential orderonly, as + have said, to !reak don for'al cate"ories and perspectives. 7st as the

rese'!lances of >ector and 3chilles, >a'let and Cladis, or Oiola and Se!astian are the occasion forlar"e?scale confsions, so the te*ts self?si'ilarity to the environin" histories of hich they are part

dissolves the ontolo"ical !ondaries !eteen the theater and its inflences, analo"es, and inter?


13/213

) 1F )

te*ts. >istory, latent in the plots of the dra'as, dissolves the selfnonself or e*ternalinternal dialectic

that feeds the for'alist hn"er. Shakespeares plays, hich have ntil fairly recently !een re"arded as

antiseptically literary, are in fact thoro"hly toched the 8enaissance ter' for conta'inated as ellas 'addened0 !y the ele'ents of the ti'e. @ne ass'ption nderritin" this !ook is that te*tal

a'!i"ity or aporia co'ple*ly e'!odies historical ndecida!ility. More than an ad6vant factor in

te*tal parado*es and cr*es, history is a casal one. +n this respect inscription is both an intentionaland an inevita!le act: the reslt of athorial choice and cltral co'plsion. Even in cases ofShakespeares deli!erate deploy'ent of referentiality, ne*pected co'plications inherent in the facts

!reak forth, rattlin" the athors "rasp of the operations. +nscription?as?control can !e alar'ed !y

inscription?as?infiltration. -he cltre inscri!es, lod"es itself in te*ts= the te*ts, in trn, ith and ithot athorial sanction, rite ot the 'eanin"s of this occpancy.

II

@ne o"ht to resist the te'ptation, even in introdctions, to 'ake a*io's ot of ncertainties. Still,sch for'las are sefl as positional 'arkers. So + shall clai', first, that the si"nificance of an

historical 'o'ent is alays nknoa!le at that 'o'ent, 6st as the originar# relation of te*ts to theirconte*ts is indeter'inate. So'e historical episodes, hich fro' or crrent vanta"e point appear tohave only a sin"le 'eanin", do!tless had, at the ti'e, n'eros se'antic re"isters. +n the second


14/213

3s an e*a'ple of the ays in hich orks of art prodce relativity a!ot the history they inscri!e, +

old like to consider !riefly another pla"e of crrent vinta"e and its inscription in a ork of poplar

cltre. -he seflness of this e*a'ple ill !e in its re'inder that the thick physiolo"ical o!sessions of

tra"edy are certainly not pecliar to the 8enaissance and that these o!sessions are alays factored !yhistorical forces./#D -o anticipate so'e of 'y readin"s of Shakespearean interactions ith history,

then, and to !rin" so'e diffse interpretive isses in this !ook into focs, + offer a !rief topical readin"

of a recent ork of 3'erican cine'a.+n 2avid Cronen!er"s re'ake of The 'l# -entieth?Centry (o*, 19%F0, the tra"ic hero, !rilliantscientist Seth Brndle, sffers fro' 'otion sickness. Becase he cannot "et oever, there are so'e "litches in the process: at the !e"innin" of the 'ovie, Brndle can teleport

only inani'ate o!6ects, !ecase, as he e*plains it, there is so'ethin" a!ot flesh that the central process?

) 1% )

in" nit of the co'pter does not nderstand. -he hero e*plains the pro!le' to Oeronica, a 6ornalist

ho has !een doc'entin" the e*peri'ent and has also recently !eco'e his seetheart. 3fter theirlove'akin", Brndle has the insi"ht hich ena!les his tri'ph and disaster: co'pters are stpid, he

says, and kno only hat yo tell the'= + 'st not kno eno"h a!ot the flesh 'yself= +' "oin" to

have to learn. >e ac


15/213

Seth Brndles dile''a diver"es palpa!ly fro' that of the typical

) 19 )

3'erican 3+2S victi', the >+O?positive ho'ose*al 'ale. Still, certain points of contact are fi"red

and deflected. Brndles transfor'ation is 'arked !y hei"htened se*al desire and pro'iscity,

characteristics freis nfaithfl deed a !etrayal of the o'an ho is, he thinks, !etrayin" hi'0 is a private

en"a"e'ent of the naked flesh. +t is also an act that has !een infiltrated !y a sort of virs. +f Brndle

co'es to rese'!le in so'e 'easre a victi' of disease, the fly is the patho"en, a natral, rando',invasive ele'entan nnoticea!le detail of daily life that can !eco'e deadly. 7st as the flea as for

so 'any centries virtally nthinka!le as the clprit in !!onic pla"e ot!reaks, so the 'ovie insectreaks havoc ot of all predicta!le proportion to its apparent poer. Bt the fly 'ay !e an appropriatesy'!olic vessel for fears a!ot 3+2S in ays the 'ovie never flly intends or nderstands. 3nd in this

unconscious co''nication ith its conte*t, the fil' can !e interpreted as an inscriptive doc'ent,

read in ays si'ilar to the readin"s of Shakespeare in this !ook. -he insects 'ore nsavorycharacteristics and appetites appeal, in a ay, to e*pectations and pre6dices that lie deep !eneath the

fil's nervosness a!ot ho'o0eroticis'. Pro'iscos !reeder, revoltin" "or'anda point e are

not cine'atically sparedand diseased co?propha"e a featre e never have to confront0, the flys!li'inally focses the deepest antiho'oerotic i'plses of heterose*al cltre. +t is associated not

only ith sickness in "eneral !t 'ore specifically ith a conflation of food, se*, and e*cre'ent. -he

'ost to*ically antiho'ose*al persons in or society fi*ated early in the 3+2S crisis on these

associations and char"ed "ay 'en ith se*al ha!its indistin"isha!le fro' the natral !ehavior of theinsect. +n 19%#, 2r. Pal Ca'eron of Ae!raska referred to the 'ale ho'ose*al co''nity as a

livin", !reathin" cesspool of patho"ens. . . . >ere is a s!class of people ho, as a fnction of their

se*ality, are cons'in" prodi"ios a'onts . . . of fecal 'aterial./FD

) /$ )

-he Cronen!er" fly not only prodces a sy'!olic virs in the 'ain character. +t also indces nreali&ed

associations ith a pro"ressive and fatal ail'ent that plays pon a particlar late?tentieth?centry fear

the fear that knoled"e of the flesh can lead to disease and death. -o interpret the fil' and its pivotalcreatre in an historical conte*t, the vieer 'st nderstand the flys dal fnction as origin of sickness

i.e., as 'etaphoric virs0 and as victi' of the sickness, a conver"ence the plot 'akes plain: after hisinternali&ation of the insects "enetic code and his transfor'ation, the scientist !eco'es, as he calls

hi'self, Brndlefly. (i"rin" at once the ndetecta!le "er', the carrier and victi' of illness, and,'ore o!li+O?infected 'ale, the insect and the scientist a!sor! and

disperse historical indicators in a nonlo"ical ay. Ket the fly, like the 'ovie itself, filters, contains,

!t does not e*actly hi"hli"ht its cltral referent. -he 'ovies 'ost !itter and pointed allsion to the3+2S crisis is


16/213

passin", + see' to !e stricken !y a disease ith a prpose, oldnt yo sayJ @ther than this

co''ent, hoever, the heros de'ise has little or nothin" to do e*plicitly ith 3+2S, and

ho'ose*ality does not have a voice in the story.

Brndles !rief rese'!lance in The 'l# to an 3+2S patient did not 'ark a atershed 'o'ent for>ollyoods treat'ent of the disease, nor did it chan"e the ays in hich it as possi!le to think a!ot

sickness= indeed, the presence of 3+2S or ne?disease discorse in the 'ovie has "one lar"ely

nnoticed./ID So hy is the trncated, slanted reference there at allJ Even tho"h the 'ovie cannot !esaid to !e a!ot the ail'ent in any e*tensive ay, Brndles lesions are si"ns, 'odern versions of the pla"y death tokens hich cried Ao recovery Troilus and Cressida , /.#.1I90 a!ot victi's of

pestilence. >istory insinates itself in The 'l# like a disease. Aeither a perfect nor perfectly conscios

'etaphor for the heros sfferin", 3+2S still fnctions s!li'inally to arn s of the despair and theterror of !odily deterioration hich aait 'any a victi' of the illness= this is the precise fate aaitin"

Seth Brndle. -he analo"y !eteen Brndle and that of an 3+2S patient tellsin the archaeolo"ical

sensethe encroachin" tra"edy of the hero: this tterly n!elieva!le fiction alldes askance to a'or!idly prevalent, too?co''on horror story in or 'idst. Brndles idiosyncratic fate, his co'plete

sin"larity, old see' to


17/213

+ndeed, even 'y personal an*ieties

) // )

hich do!tless helped 'e select the histories + interpret as ndenia!le te*tal presencescontrol

these readin"s hapha&ardly, not deter'inistically.

>istorical referentiality in Shakespeares ork 'st alays evoke dire do!t. -he proportions and

arran"e'ent of this !ook derive fro' this do!t, fro' 'y advancin" conviction a!ot the si'ltaneos

vitality and elsiveness of topical 'eanin"s in Shakespeares theater. +ndeed, even as these readin"s

'ake stron" clai's for Shakespearean inscriptions of his ti'e, they 'ove steadily aay fro' theass'ption of the plays direct topical correspondences ith their cltre. -he ay + have arran"ed

the' here, the three dra'as de'onstrate an increasin" resistance to history, descri!in" an arc fro' a

fairly neat if pro!le'atic deploy'ent of historical character and event Troilus and Cressida 0 thro"han e*tre'ely 'rky conta"ion of referentiality Hamlet 0 to the virtal a!sence of si"nificant local

reference Telfth !ight 0. Hamlet , Shakespeares 'ost episte'olo"ically nsta!le play and the 'ost

nsta!le te*t in its relation to histories, "ets the !lk of 'y critical attention here= it is fra'ed !y one?chapter stdies of the topically co"ent historical satire and the allsively dis6nctive co'edy. -he to

!racketin" te*ts occpy less space in 'y readin" of Shakespeares conte*tality !ecase they are in

so'e sense less !othered a!ot the presence of history ithin their !orders.

-o 'ove fro' -roy to +llyria, ith 2en'ark !eteen, is to travel fro' 'i*ed "enre to fi*ed "enre. Myartificial sche'e tentatively s""ests that hen Shakespeares 'iddle plays stray fro' "eneric

re"larity, they cleave to referentiality, as if historys anchor actally freed for' fro' convention. -he

"ender coordinates of the te*ts also shift as this stdy 'oves fro' -roys co'pro'ised tra"ic orld to

+llyrias 'elancholy co'ic one. Specifically, in this arran"e'ent, the potential for an ndi'inishedfe'ale poer "radally increases, and 'iso"yny decreases accordin"ly. Perhaps this, too, is the pshot

of "enre4inda Ba'!ers Comic 3omen, Tragic )en paradi"' co'es to 'ind/9D !t hereas in

other co'edies a latent 'iso"yny can !e sensed !eneath fe'ale trials and tri'phs, in Telfth !ight

o'en are, for once in Shakespeare, portrayed not as trivial, enervated, or e'asclatin" fi"res !t as pleasra!ly forcefl practitioners of their co'plicated ills. + hope that the 'ove'ent to +llyria in this

!ook orks as so'ethin" of a corrective to the 'ch decried and denied ne?historicist tendency tondervale fe'inist theory and consciosness. Perhaps the 'ar"inali&ation of the topic to the

penlti'ate para"raph of this introdction see's

) /# )

only to confir' the tendency. Bt the transfor'ations of "ender hierarchies and erotic potencies inthese plays are central concerns of this !ook. -hese transfor'ations inscri!e history= they fi"re the

social strctres and possi!ilities of fe'ale poer in the 8enaissance. Sch isses, it shold !e noted,

are so often s!ordinated to 'asclinist concerns in the plays the'selves Telfth !ight e*cepted that it is so'eti'es difficlt to restore referentiality to the fe'inist pro6ect. -his difficlty, hoever,shold itself !eco'e the s!6ect of historicist readin"s.

Michel de Certea re'inds s that the pro6ect of historio"raphy is the inverse of the poetic one:

>istorio"raphyD consists of frnishin" discorse ith referentiality, to 'ake it fnction as

e*pressive, to le"iti'i&e it !y 'eans of the real, in short, to initiate discorse as thathich is spposed to have knoled"e. -he la of historio"raphy fnctions to o!scre

nothin"ness, to sppress the void, to fill the "ap. -he discorse 'st not appear separate


18/213

fro' its referents. -he a!sence or loss at the ori"in of its constrct 'st not !e

nveiled. . . . 4iterary historys fnction is to tirelessly restore referentiality= it prodces

sch referentiality and forces its reco"nition fro' the te*t. 4iterary history ths . . .

transfor's the te*t into an instittion, if e define the instittion as the instr'ent hichrenders credi!le the ade


19/213

3s lon" as the contry like its er parado*ical description of defenseshe ill lie pon her !ack to

defend her !elly, pon 'y secrecy, to defend 'ine honesty= 'y 'ask, to defend 'y !eaty 1././G% G90can also !e taken as a pecliarly Eli&a!ethan 'ode of !ehavior. -he


20/213

as is "enerally reco"ni&ed, the proliferation of e'lation and factions as a crcial characteristic of

Eli&a!eths 'ethod of rle. (ro' the !e"innin" of her rei"n the


21/213

the cort to the -oer to the pro*y "overn'ent in +reland, hostility prevailed as internal policy "re

precarios and p!lic. Cort !attles at the end of the rei"n had their stor'y center in the Esse* and

Cecil conflict, yet they

) /9 )

srpassed policy or even personality and entered a different cate"ory, that of inescapa!le "overn'entalrift. Proliferatin" factions see'ed to 'anifest a patholo"ical disnity of political strctre and spirit, a

conta"ios e'lation of disorder. -he 'ost pro'inent featre of the rei"n in its last years as thisspreadin" a"on inside it= internal strife prolon"ed e*ternal pro!le's and diseased the real'.

+n Troilus and Cressida , Shakespeare transfor's a de facto Eli&a!ethan policy and its nforeseen

conseo'eric ter's as an offended heros protest a"ainst

rapacios athority, Shakespeare fra'es the crisis as a pla"e of personal interest "rops. Oe*in"

factionalis' nderlies the failre of the ;reek ar'y and co'pels Ulysses to e*pond on the loss of

de"ree. >e attri!tes the prolon"ation of the -ro6an ar to ad'inistrative ne"lect and a conse


22/213

divisiveness. 3ccordin" to Ulysses, the ;recian pro!le' is nearly featreless, e'ptied ot, nreada!le

hollo factions in hollo tents pon a plainyet there is one clear si"nifier: -he "reat 3chilles,

ho' opinion crons -he sine and the forehand of or host 1.#.1G/G#0, distr!s the order of

thin"s.

3chilles derives his 'sclar soverei"nty fro' opinion, an essential featre of any cort dyna'ic.

>e !eco'es the only consenss a"ent of force in the orld of -roy= the entire ar, it see's, is his

prero"ative. Poer is sitated, ne"otiated, !rleso'ere, the Earl of Esse*.1GD -his address enacts there


23/213

dis"race ith the Leen since retrnin" fro' his voya"e ##0.

Esse*s srly ithdraals ere ell knon to Chap'an= as a reslt, the 159% Iliads discloses

Chap'ans stdied, eccentric atte'pt to apolo"i&e for 3chilless isolation,1FD Chap'ans pro'otion

of the earl as 3chilles is a sstained 6stification of an individalist hose separation fro' society isintended to indict corrpt social practice. -he dedication to Esse* contines:

Most tre 3chilles ho' !y sacred prophecie >o'ere did !t prefi"re in his ad'ira!le

o!6ect and in hose n'atched vertes shyne the di"nities of

) #/ )

the sole and the hole e*cellence of royall h'anitie0, let not the Pessantco''on polities

of the orld . . . stirre yor divine te'per fro' perseverance in "odlike prste of Eternitie.

Chapman1s Homer , 5$G0

-he >o'eric 3chilles is the perfect fi"re for an Esse* apolo"ia !ecase, as Cedric hit'an has said,inte"rity in 3chilles achieves the for' and athority of i''anent divinity, ith its inviola!le, lonely

sin"leness, half repellent !ecase of its al'ost inh'an asterity, !t irresisti!le in its passion and

perfected selfhood.1ID 4ike his >o'eric archetype, Chap'ans 3chilles is a sensitive, ron"edarrior ho ri"hteosly ithdras fro' the !attle to confond 3"a'e'nons overeenin" athority.Bt any e*tensive prsit of the parallel prodces a 'ore co'plicated readin". Esse*s ithdraals,

ne ca'e to e'!ody the dark side of 'artial individalis'. 3fter the earls nsanctioned, rashretrn fro' the +rish ars and i''ediate confine'ent for diso!edience in 1599, Chap'ans ideal of a

nearly n!le'ished herois' no lon"er see'ed plasi!le. +nterestin"ly, it as an ideal in hich

Shakespeare had participated, tho"h ith characteristic cation. -he folloin" passa"e fro' Henr#$ , hile re6oicin" in Esse*s anticipated tri'ph, see's aare of hi' as a rival force and nervosly

s!ordinates praise for the "eneral to pladits for the 'onarch. 3fter i'a"inin" >enry !ein" sept into

4ondon like so'e con


24/213

>o 'any old the peacefl city e is plled !ack to the !attle, even as 2evere* as

ine*ora!ly dran to cort and is dran !y the play orld: a s!6ect pressred !y representational

politics in hich he participates flly and in hich character and selfhood are alays !ein" read andritten./1D +n his period of dis"race Esse* co'plained that they print 'e and 'ake 'e speak to the

orld, and shortly they ill play 'e pon the sta"e.//D >e as correct. -he revisionist portrait of

f"itive poer in Troilus and Cressida evokes an historical 'o'ent in hich Pessant?co''on polities and their representation are not only navoida!le, !t conta"ios.

-hs does the rhetoric of conta"ion, essentially a lan"a"e of conte"t , clin" s""estively to 3chilles in

the play. Ulysses descri!es hi' as sfferin" fro' a ter'inal disease: >e is so pla"y prod that the

deathtokens of it Cry Ao recovery /.#.1I%I90. Bt pla"es spread. 3chilles is the pre'ier victi'and carrier of epide'ics, for hile his arro"ance


25/213

of his for'er "reatness. >e says even the "ods sffer fro' 6ealosy of the hero: 3chilles "lorios

deeds !t in these fields of late Made e'los 'issions 'on"st the "ods the'selves,3nd drave "reat

Mars to faction #.#.1%%9$0. E'lation and its prodct, factionalis', alays florish to"ether

thro"h the collapsin" of difference, even pres'a!ly the ontolo"ical difference !eteen 'en and"ods. Becase cort factionalis' as an e


26/213

o!literation of the ideolo"ies that no lon"er validate that tale. -his dra'a is an enterprise sick ith its

on knoled"e of conte'porary dra'atic, political, and erotic practice. -he Shakespearean e'lation

of the -roy story is a profondly defor'in" pro6ect of literatre readin" history.

II

2a'e, fait il, 6ai !ien oR parler

de vostre pris, 'ais che nest ore 'ie=et de -roie rai 6o oR conter

kele f 6a de 'ot "rant sei"norie=

or ni pet on fors les plaches trover . . .

4ady, says he, + have indeed heard talk of yor "reatness, !t there is nothin" left of it.

+ have also heard talk of -roy,

ho it as once a "reat poer=

noadays they can 6st !arely find the site. Conon de BNthne#$D

-he -ro6an ar is a !attle !eteen to sets of cortiers for possession of a oever, this

canted parallel, far fro' si"nifyin" the te*ts distance fro' its historical 'o'ent, actally reprodces

the 'a6or topical pro!le'. Cortier control over the factions in ;reece confi"res an i'potence inroyal or 'onarchical athority ith respect to sch strctres. 3"a'e'nons estran"e'ent fro' his

on athority and fro' his fello kin"s ena!les factios ins!ordination. 4ikeise, the presentation of

factional rivalry as first a pla"e and then an e* post facto policy-heir fraction is 'ore or ishthan their faction /.#.1$10, Aestor says of a potential 3chilles?36a* alliancenderscores a crrent

"overn'ental failre. Eli&a!eths re"latory 'echanis' takes dra'atic for' as a hierarchical and

or"ani&ational ne'esis. 2issi'ilar arran"e'ents in the play and cltre hi"hli"ht analo"icalsi'ilarities: they are differences encoded to sho sa'eness and lti'ately to insinate deficiencies of

conte'porary rle. Bt so'e dis6nctions are less easily decoded than others.


27/213

+n associatin" the ;recian ca'p ith Eli&a!eths cort, the play deflects the sin"le e"pected

correspondence !eteen te*t and orld. (or ;eoffrey of Mon'oths 'ytho"raphic accont of

Britains ori"ins had lon" since esta!lished an identity !eteen En"land and -roy. 3eneass "reat

"randson Brte or Brts as said to have fonded Britain after the fall of the ancient city. +n Spensersfor'lation, no!le Britons spron" fro' -ro6ans !old, 3nd -roynovant as !ilt of old -roys ashes

cold 'aerie (ueene , #.9.#%0. +f 4ondon -roynovant0 is re"arded as a phoeni* sprn" fro' the ashes

of a "reat civili&ation, then the reco"ni&a!le En"lish pro!le' of factionalis' in Troilus and Cressida sy'!olically afflicts the ron" side.

hat can e 'ake of this alterationJ +t see's at first to confte the cherished -dor 'yth of -ro6an

ori"ins, a 'yth that as !eco'in" increasin"ly nconvincin" toard the end of the


28/213

cynicis' of their political 'anevers. -he -ro6an 'en, !y contrast, e'er"e thro"h attitde and

lan"a"e as va"ely anti


29/213

aristocratic ho'a"e as ell as the !oilin" rivalries of the 'ost a'!itios no!les. +t provided a sta"e

pon hich factionalis' as perfor'ed. -he


30/213

don, Esse* laid his hand on his sord hilt. -he death knell of chivalry sonded !y this episode

rever!erates ntil the end of the rei"n. Esse* repeated his diso!edience on a lar"er scale in +reland and

yet a"ain in his re!ellion. Eli&a!eths inevita!le physical deterioration as not 6st the s!6ect !t the

ena!lin" fact of Esse*s effrontery= her physical vlnera!ility li!erated trans"ressive i'plses andre'oved a flcr' on hich the no!ility once safely !alanced its poers and desires. (or all the

stren"th of Eli&a?

) G/ )

!ethan chivalry, it ran a "reat risk in locatin" ideolo"y in the


31/213

-he pro!le' ith 'aintainin" the chivalric ideal as ths not solely in pholdin" the fiction of

Eli&a!eths infinite desira!ility !t 'ore "enerally in s!li'atin" the 'ltiple, intensely strenos

conditions of that desira!ility. -he cort as dissilient, "enerationally fractred, 'anned as it ere0 !y

an increasin"ly i'patient and ac


32/213

3EAE3S : (air leave and lar"e secrity. >o 'ay3 stran"er to those 'ost i'perial looks

no the' fro' eyes of other 'ortalsJ

3;3MEMA@A

:

>oJ

3EAE3S : 3y.

+ ask, that + 'ay aken reverence,3nd !id the cheek !e ready ith a !lsh

Modest as 'ornin" hen she coldly eyes

-he yothfl Phoe!s.

hich is that "od in office "idin" 'enJhich is the hi"h and 'i"hty 3"a'e'nonJ

1.#.///#10

) G5 )

3n actor 'i"ht deliver 3eneass speech ith either foppish sincerity or snooty conte'pt. +t contains

!oth these ele'ents as ell as a see'in"ly "ratitos ho'oerotic overtone of a !lshin" !ride in an

a!ade. 3"a'e'non responds to the speech ith a 'arvelos aporia: -his -ro6an scorns s, or the

'en of -roy 3re cere'onios cortiers. >e knos that either he is !ein" inslted or that the pecliar-ro6ans alays speak this ay. 3"a'e'nons perple*ed "loss e*poses the to poles of Eli&a!ethan

chivalric 'eanin": cere'ony as cortesy, cere'ony as s!version. @nce 3eneas delivers >ectorschallen"e, the sincerity of the cortly 'ode !eco'es no less sspect.

-he challen"e itself is a protest a"ainst prevailin" conditions. 3ltho"h it is peaceti'e in -roy a trceis on0, >ector is resty "ron 1.#./F/0 and seeks disrption. @t of the !oredo' and an*iety that

settle on soldiers prevented fro' creatin" their perfor'ative fa'e, the "reatest -ro6an tries, thro"h

3eneas, to pick a chivalric fi"ht ith the ;reeks. >e does so in ter's of a defense of his ladyse*cellence and honor:

+f there !e one a'on" the fairst of ;reece

-hat holds his honor hi"her than his ease,

-hat feeds his praise 'ore than he fears his peril,

-hat knos his valor and knos not his fear,-hat loves his 'istress 'ore than in confession

ith trant vos to her on lips he loves,3nd dare avo her !eaty and her orth

+n other ar's than hersto hi' this challen"e:

>ector, in vie of -ro6ans and of ;reeks,Shall 'ake it "ood, or do his !est to do it,

>e hath a lady iser, fairer, trer,

-han ever ;reek did cople in his ar's=


33/213

3nd ill to'orro ith his tr'pet call

Miday !eteen yor tents and alls of -roy

-o rose a ;recian that is tre in love.

+f any co'e, >ector shall honor hi':+f none, hell say in -roy, hen he retires,

-he ;recian da'es are sn!rnt and not orth

-he splinter of a lance. Even so 'ch. 1.#./FG%/0

>ectors invitation to the sportfl co'!at is not 'otivated !y either a need or desire to defend his

ife, 3ndro'ache, ho re'ains nna'ed in the speech. +ndeed, the o'an in the challen"e fnctions

as a deeply a'!ivalent rhetorical constrct. -his panderin", 'ediated invitation

) GF )

reads Eli&a!ethan cortly !ehavior and dras its s!stance fro' the font of conte'porary cltral

practice.5#D >ectors challen"e e'ploys a lan"a"e of cortly love as a prete*t for 'ilitary activity, !t the pri'ary i'plses of the speech are antife'inist and, correlatively, ho'oerotic.

-he -ro6an challen"e is a callin"?otthe colloector ill call to rose a ;recian that is

tre in love. +f any shold co'e after >ector aroses hi', the -ro6an ill do hi' honor.5FD Ao

erotic !ondin" !eteen arriors is co''on eno"h in literatre, altho"h it is "enerally directedtoard a !eloved co'panion, not an ene'y.5ID hat

) GI )

'akes this speech particlarly interestin" is that it does not posit an ene'y. +nstead, the lan"a"e


34/213

deflects the e*pected hostility fro' the chivalric rival to the traditional ptative chivalric love o!6ects.

-he speech deni"rates o'en in the "ise of their defense= it e*clpates the 'en fro' and i'plicates

the o'en in any ne"ative otco'e of the del.5%D Shold the ;reek arriors fail to 'eet >ector, he

ill not !la'e the'= rather, hell slander the ;recian da'es, ho, he ill say, are sn!rnt and notorth -he splinter of a lance. Sn!rnt connotes infected ith venereal disease= the splintered

lance s""ests an i'paired penis: the ;recian da'es, >ector ill say, are not orth the risk of syphilis.

59D Chivalric style cloaks the 'ost ncortly, hostile senti'ents in "lea'in" ar'or. 3t the sa'e ti'e,sch 'eanin"s are pro!a!ly not in the ran"e of >ectors intentions. -he fissres in the -ro6an

'on'ent to chivalry are plastered over !y ha!it of force.

>ectors challen"e pricks dra'atic tension !ecase the ;reeks conspicosly lack any o'en in their

ca'p at this point. hat they do have, hoever, is the only openly condcted ho'ose*al relationshipin the Shakespearean canon. 3chilles and Patrocls are lovers, and their private !ond is s!stantial: it is

the only loyalty that 'ana"es to srvive the depredations of the ar.F$D ;ranted, their relationship is

seen as an nholy alliance !y the ;reek concil, !t not for se*al reasons= the politicos are an"ry onlythat 3chilles, and ith hi' Patrocls Upon a la&y !ed the livelon" dayBreaks scrril 6ests

1.#.1GFG%0, 'ockin" hat is left of ;recian athority. -hersites vies the lovers as preposteros,

!t he is scarcely a tochstone for accepta!le social activity.0 -he 'ale?enfolded desire of the ;reeks is

especially co'pellin" conte*tally !ecase, as Ulysses notes, >ectors love call does have an intendedo!6ect: -his challen"e that the "allant >ector sends . . . 8elates in prpose only to 3chilles

1.#.#/1/#0. -he ar's that >ector finally ses to rose 3chilles fro' his drosy tent are !attle ar's

that destroy Patrocls, his o!stacle for 3chilles attentions. 3chilles seeks horri!le "ratification for theloss, catchin" >ector nar'd: this is the 'an + seek 5.%.1$0.

;iven the noncortly, 'ascline?oriented, dis"rntled ;recian soldiers, it is odd ho ectors challen"e. -heidio' of kni"htly sincerity is nearly o!solescent slan" to the ;reeks, !ecase only their older

"eneration can apprehend hat has clearly !eco'e nintelli"i!le to the rest of the': the concept of

defendin" a o'ans honor.

-he repressive 'iso"yny in the ranks 'ay !e ascri!ed in part to fears of inade


35/213

!t like Eli&a!eth0 the font of do!t and paranoia. 3fter the o'ans inevita!le re6ection of 'ost of

those desires, she is transfor'ed !y the re6ected sitors into so'ethin" hatefl, hile the 'en are

stran"ely e*onerated for any hint of 'iscondct in the cortship "a'e. 2io'edes ill'inates this

process in the 'ost violent ver!al attack on a o'an in the dra'a. +n an intervie ith Paris G.1.F9 I50, he ai's sch vitriol at >elen (or every false drop in her !ady veins 3 ;recians life hath

snk0 that an adience 'ay !riefly for"et that the ar is a prodct of Pariss, not >elens lsts= and,

'ore tellin"ly, that 2io'edes had earlier e*pressed his consensal desire for the ;recian ad + so "ood occasion to lie lon"3s yo, Prince Paris, nothin" !t heavenly !siness

Shold ro! 'y !ed?'ate of 'y co'pany.

2+@ME2ES

:

-hats 'y 'ind, too.

G.1.G I0

) G9 )

Bt Paris re'e'!ers the e*chan"e and ironically ndercts 2io'edes vitperation ith his on !rand

of 'iso"yny: (air 2io'ed, yo do as chap'en do, 2ispraise the thin" that they desire to !yG.1.IFII0. 2eni"ration of the fe'ale erotic o!6ect spreads thro"h the ar'iesa s!te*tal tin of

e'los factionalis'. (olloin" the transfer of Cressida to the ;reeks, Ulysses proposes the "eneral

kissin" reception cere'ony, a 'ock?chivalric rital stron"ly evocative of a "rop rape. hen it isUlysses trn to clai' a kiss, Cressida cleverly denies hi'. >e then sava"ely denonces her as one of

the slttish spoils of opportnity 3nd da"hters of the "a'e G.5.F/F#0. -his ot!rst is patently

retri!tive for her neat h'iliation of hi' !efore his fellos= !t >ectors sennet sonds i''ediately

after Ulysses an"ry speech, and the entire ;reek presence on sta"e cries: -he -ro6ans tr'pet. Sodespite evidence to the contrary, Cressidas antonness is 'ade to see' conta"iosly irrefta!le

thro"h nani'os aral conta'ination-he -ro6an s0tr'pet.F/D Cressidas tr'peted

transfor'ation !y "rop accord reveals the ar'ies conspiracy to honor their on nlovely psychicarran"e'ents.

+f the cortiers 'iso"yny arises fro' re6ected or frstrated heterose*al desire, as it see's to do in the

case of 2io'edes and Ulysses, that desire is nonetheless ala#s ratified in the co'pany of 'en. -he

"eneral kissin" scene has a poerflly ho'oerotic, locker?roo' ed"e= Cressida !eco'es a 'eans !yhich the 'en 'easre their 'asclinity a"ainst one another. orth notin" is that !oth 3chilles and

Patrocls participate in the kissin" of Cressida= it is not so 'ch that the lines of ho'oand hetero?

eroticis' !lr in -roy as that one se*al for' is the fra'e or container for the other. 7st as >ectors 6anty "enital challen"e eli'inates o'en as serios contenders for 'ale attention, the kissin" of

Cressida replays on a s'all scale the lar"er occasion of the ar: the se of a o'an as prete*t and

pretense for the enthsiastic display of 'ale desires to and !efore other 'en: >ector, in vie of-ro6ans and of ;reeks, Shall 'ake it "ood, or do his !est to do it. >elen is not the "oal of the ar:

she is its local e*cse. o'en !rin" ar'ies of 'en to"ether. 3nd like the ad6ective chialrous itself,

arfare definitively e*cldes o'en.

Even -roilss one?shot affair ith Cressida is a plot device to perpetate and intensify the 'asclineen"a"e'ent. -roils raises no o!6ection to her e*chan"e for 3ntenor !ecase he is conditioned to think


36/213

of the trade of a o'an for a 'an as a "ood sap. Certainly, the transaction ener"i&es !oth sides. 3t

the 'o'ent of her e*chan"e, -roils and

) 5$ )

2io'edes indl"e in a 'tally arosin" display of chivalric chest th'ps and antichivalric tants, all

the hile i"norin" the silenced o'an. -he arriors no have an e*cse to e*cite one another asCressida vanishes a"ainst the !ackdrop of their reflective interests. -he 'echanis' of the cortiers

conflict 'ay see' to !e, as 8enN ;irard old have it, 'i'etic desire, !oth 'en havin" !een inspired !y the others interest in the o'an= !t that trian"lation distorts the obious vector of desire in this

scene.F#D Everythin" here, and in the play as a hole, 'oves alon" the patent or s!'er"ed a*is of

ho'oeroticis', the dedication to 'ale intercorse. -he i'a"inative disappearance of o'en is anecessary conseectoresector than Poly*ena #.#./$FI0. Ulysses

ho'oerotic "oad to 'anly action, a replay of >ectors to the ;reeks, is


37/213

+s not 'ore loathd than an effe'inate 'an

+n ti'e of action. . . .

Seet, rose yorself.

#.#./1F/10

Sed"icks point a!ot a 'ale heterose*ality that eclipses o'en is especially relevant to 3chilles,

ho condcts a secret affair ith Pria's invisi!le da"hter Poly*ena !t a fairly p!lic dalliance ith

Patrocls pon a la&y !ed the livelon" day 1.#.1GI0. 3chilles a'!ivalent se*ality addressed iththe reectors chivalric evacation ofheterose*ality in the love challen"e. hat is defined as effe'inate here is passivity, !t that is the

very thin" that 'arks 3chilles heterose*ality: for his fe'ale !eloved, Poly*ena, has 'ade hi' pled"e

his ithdraal fro' the ars. 4ove for o'en prevents fi"htin"= love for 'en de'ands it, as Patroclshere and later, !y his death0 calls 3chilles !ack to the !attle. hereas !oth >ectors and 3chilles

heterose*al relationships end in separation, the to "reatest arriors end ith one another, in a kind

of ho'osocial cons''ation.

-he desire for co''nion ith 'en in a 'ilitary or se*al conte*t 'ay have an inard?trnin", self?directed valence to it. 3s a reslt of his collea"es entreaties, 3chilles e*presses a physical need to see

his conterplayer, !t the ter's of his desire s""est so'ethin" distr!in" a!ot its natre and perhaps

its historical for'ation:

) 5/ )

+ have a o'ans lon"in",

3n appetite that + a' sick ithal,

-o see "reat >ector in his eeds of peace,-o talk ith hi', and to !ehold his visa"e,

Even to 'y fll of vie.

#.#./#FG$0

3chilles conceives of his desire as fe'inine and ths, of corse, de!ilitatin"0 !t descri!es its""estively in narcissistic ter's. >e hn"ers to see >ector in his on condition, nar'ed, entented= it

is an essentialist and e'los desire, !ent to fit a narcissistic fra'e. E'lation, that conflictal loss of

difference, is itself narcissistica social 'odel of relations that trns otard only to feed inard, aself?o!sessin", self?pro'otin", and self?destroyin" infinite re"ression or 'otivational loop. -he

e'los desire is for the self to rese'!le another hich it already rese'!les !y virte of the very

desire. 3nd hile !oth ter's, e'lation and narcissis', si"nify a destrctive i'itation, they also alldeto a pro!le'atic strctre of love. +f there is a psycholo"ical point in this play on the contin'

!eteen ho'osocial and heterose*al desire, an interstice here 3chilles resides, it is the vorte* of

e'los narcissis', in hich the 'ale can conceive of hi'self as fe'ale via the 'ale other0 in orderto respond co'pletely to a self?directed need. Male narcissis' in the te*t is a co"nate of ho'ophilia

that parodically depends on a heterose*al vie of relations.FFD

-he e*i"encies of i'itative narcissis' also descri!e the chivalric pro6ect, hich provides 'ale

participants ith the kind of reflective self?"ratification that fe'ales, !y definition, cannot spply.hen >ector and 36a* finally 'eet for their kni"htly del, 3eneas e*plains to 3chilles that -his 36a*

is half 'ade of >ectors !lood= +n love hereof, half >ector stays at ho'e G.5.%#%G0. 3chilles

instantly nderstands the fi"ht in erotic ter's: 3 'aiden !attle, thenJ @, + perceive yo G.5.%I0.

-hese arriors ill dra no !lood fro' one another, and so ill re'ain npenetrated, 'aidenly. Aarcissis' too is 'aidenly, foreclosin" cons''ation. >ectors relctance to fi"ht 36a* / l1outrance


38/213

s""ests not an incest ta!oo so 'ch as a ay of preservin" and enclosin" the i'a"e of the self in the

ene'y:

4et 'e e'!race thee, 36a*.

By hi' that thnders, tho hast lsty ar's=>ector old have the' fall pon hi' ths.

G.5.1#G#F0

) 5# )

>ectors chivalric acts are flly e'los and ho'ophilic= his 'eetin"s ith 3chilles, then, have thesy'!olic density of self?enconter a!ot the'. +n Troilus and Cressida , the chivalric and the

narcissistic 'er"e hen the ar'ies co'e passionately to"ether, pitched in their e*tre'ity toard a

'tally "lorifyin" violence. -he arriors are 'irror lovers in ar'srivals in love.

IV

-o hat e*tent do these conflictin" se*al re"isters reprodce an Eli&a!ethan cort co'ple*J +n hat

ays can e recover the historical reality of sch potentially ndifferentiated ter's as narcissis' andho'osocial !ondin" for a readin" of Troilus and Cressida J Certainly, the social fact of these cate"ories

is e*ceedin"ly hard to specify. Aarcissis' is a h"ely inclsive, inchoate desi"nation= 'ale !onds have

!een ever present in patriarchal social and literary te*ts since at least0 the Iliad . -o apply narcissis'as a periodi&in" concept, + appeal only to the nonclinical0 notion of an lti'ately self?destrctive self?

interest= for ho'osocial !onds, those relations !eteen 'en that e*clde, de"rade, or i'a"inatively

o!literate o'en. -hat the con6nction of these ter's can si"nify in any deli'ited, historical fashion isa hope + pin on the earl of Esse*, the a*ial fi"re in Troilus and Cressida s cltral referentiality. Esse*

a"ain evokes relevant coordinatesin his navailin" o!session ith his on i'a"e and inflence and

in his 'asclinist strate"ies for circ'ventin" and s!din" the


39/213

ith Eli&a!eth a!ot financin" and strate"y arose. -he +rish ca'pai"n as a fiasco of diso!edient self?

deter'ination and 'onarchical disapproval.F%D Esse* ent so far as to for"e a sy'!olic alliance ith

'en of ar a"ainst the er fry see's as !ond to the isse of se*ality ashierarchy: no 'an as a!ove her, nor old ever !e.

+t as not only in international ar "a'es that Esse* for'ed alliances ith 'en as antidotes for

servitde to a o'an. >e responded to the stor'y faction fi"hts of the late 159$s !y repeatedly

retreatin" to his !ed at ho'e, acco'panied !y his !and of disaffected arriors and soldiers de

Maisse, 7ournal , G90. -hs, 2evere* e*tended a ho'osocial sphere of 'ale rle fro' the p!lic andactive to the private, passive life. Bt even hen he see'ed to !e servin" his 'onarch, Esse* 'ana"ed

>ectors chivalric trick of ndercttin" and defyin" hat he alle"edly defended. ;estres of apparent

ho'a"e to Eli&a!eth ere in fact often trans"ressions a"ainst her co''and'ents.I1D +n 15%9, Esse*ndertook a voya"e ith Sir (rancis 2rake to Port"al to escape perceived restraints at cort. 4etters

he left !ehind infriated the


40/213

hich 'ay persade yo to self?love.IGD -he perfor'ance is so thoro"hly narcissistic, so

a""ressively self?"lorifyin" that Eli&a!eth felt no co'plsion to sffer all of it: -he Leen said, that if

she had tho"ht there had !ene so 'och said of her, she old not have !ene there that ni"ht= and soe

ent to !ed.I5D @n this evidence !oth 8oy Stron" and 8ichard McCoy sppose that the tilt failedspectaclarly, !t that notion ass'es the ector !ears a fa'e for "entleness and cortly condct that alldes to the renoned kni"htly side of2evere*.IID +t is >ector ho has, in -roilss ords, a vice of 'ercy, and >ector to ho' 3eneas

refers hen he annonces that the "lory of or -roy doth this day lie @n his fair orth and sin"le

chivalry G.G.1G5GF0. 3nd it is >ector, not 3chilles, ho sffers Esse*s fate: death at the hands of arival "rop. -he Cecil contin"ent had lon" a'plified thro"h innendo Esse*s a'!itions and desire for

self?rle.I%D 3pprised in +reland of the Cecil factions !ar!ed insinations, the earl felt like a 'an

e*posed to a 'ortal assalt:

+ a' ar'ed on the !reast, !t not on the !ack. . . . + a' onded in the !ack, not sli"htly,

!t to the heart. . . . + lay open to the 'alice and the practice of 'ine ene'ies in En"land,ho first procred a clod of dis"race to overshado 'e, and no in the dark "ive 'e

ond pon ond.I9D

>is prophetic ords fantastically shado >ectors nar'ed de'ise at the Myr'idons hands in Troilusand Cressida : Esse* and the -ro6an !oth 'eet their ends as failed heroes a"ainst strate"ic conspiracy,

the victi's of a "an" killin". 3ltho"h Sava"e nderesti'ates >ectors capacity for antiherois', as

does >ector hi'self, s!stantial parallels do reco''end an Esse* inscription in >ector.

e cannot easily prchase this identification ithot e*chan"in" ;eor"e Chap'ans for it= !t indisavoin" the 3chillean, faction?leadin" Esse* to o!tain the -ro6an, chivalric version, the reader

'erely sacrifices one prescriptive referentiality for another. 8o!ert 2evere*s contradictory responses

to his on heroic statre discora"e a readin" that no'inates a sin"le candidate as his theatricalrepresentative. >e personifies 7ean >oards apt co''ent a!ot history: not o!6ective, transparent,

nified, or easily knoa!le and conse


41/213

!e recovered. -o e*cavate the co'ple* nity of the Esse* inscription, let s look at the crisis point of

>ectors cortly characterhis heartless sla"hter of the speechless ;reek soldier.

+n five lines near the end of the play, the entire chivalric pre'ise ith hich >ector has !een identified

collapses:

Enter one in 8sumptuous9 armor .

>EC-@8 : Stand, stand, tho ;reek= tho art a "oodly 'ark.

AoJ ilt tho notJ + like thy ar'or ell:

+ll frsh it and nlock the rivets all

Bt +ll !e 'aster of it. ilt tho not, !east, a!ideJ

E"it +reek .

hy then, fly on= +ll hnt thee for thy hide.

5.F./I

#10

-he 8enaissance adience 'st have had a eird, hallcinatory sense of dN6T v at this 'o'ent. 3

!eatiflly attired anony'os kni"ht enters the field of !attle= 'te, he enconters a chivalricopponent. -his scene ncannily rese'!les one particlar torna'ent and 3ccession 2ay conceit. -he

fi"re of the Unknon ni"ht, ho entered the lists anony'osly, as an inte"ral part of the tilts fro'

'edieval ti'es.%1D +n Eli&a!eths torna'ents, Esse* hi'self likely appeared dis"ised as the

'elancholy Unknon in 1F$$, hich 'i"ht have represented a last?ditch effort to retrn to royal favor.%/D 3ppearance in the lists as an Unknon ni"ht, speechless and "or"eosly clad, !etokened a

special stats. Aot 6st anyone cold !e the Unknon. -he role si"nified a cortiers distinctive

position at a "iven tilt: he old enter in e*ector his life as ell. (or he disar's, satisfied ith the kill, and"ives 3chilles an opportnity to 'rder hi' 'ost nchivalrosly. >ectors appeal to fair play + a'

nar'd: fore"o this vanta"e, ;reek0 resonds holloly, for in viciosly seekin" and o!tainin" the

'erely e*ternal, he sicidally destroyed the i'a"e of hat he asan i'a"e that served, hoeverdeceptively, to protect hi'. 3chilles is effective and !rtal force in rhy'in" co'ple'ent to >ectors

on, a!sent the ideolo"ical trappin"s. >is Myr'idons, speechless nchivalric Unknons all, e*act the

necessary death of the rival, ad6nct self.


42/213

3 ell?doc'ented theatrical csto' e*tends the interpretive !orders of this scene. +n a conte'porary

prodction of Troilus and Cressida the actor playin" the Unknon ni"ht 'i"ht have orn ar'or that

once !elon"ed to a 'e'!er of the no!ility. Eli&a!ethan actin" co'panies csto'arily prchased entire

ardro!es fro' the estates of no!le'en ho ore sch finery on for'al occasionssch as the3ccession 2ay tilts.%#D +f >ector did 'rder an Unknon clad in a


43/213

-he overco'in" of fe'inine presence, ill, and inflence is a

) F$ )

pro'inent 'ove'ent of the last act of Troilus and Cressida , and it is played on !oth sides. Cressida is

a!andoned !y -roils, ho never once voices a desire to re"ain her= instead, he ants 2io'edes to

pay the life tho ost 'e for 'y horse 5.F.I0.%ID >er strate"y of delayed "ratification fails'isera!ly ith !rtish 2io'edes, the ne antichivalric cortier.%%D Poly*ena, the a!sent fe'inine

principle the o'an as cipher0, cannot !lock 3chilles fro' !attle once Patrocls dies. -he ;reek hero pln"es !ack into the fray and cancels the last vesti"e of fe'ale inflence in -roy, ths articlatin"

Esse*s deepest desires in the +rish ca'pai"n: to !e en"a"ed in arfare ithot !ein" s!6ect to the

do'inion of a o'an. +nstead, every o'an in the play is herself s!6ectedto the hi's, lsts,ne"li"ence, or fry of cortiers. -he retrieval of Menelass ector, shes a deadly the'e G.5.1%$0.

-he play re"isters the a!sence of fe'ale poer, 'ediatin" !eteen the fact and the fantasy of a

profond, on"oin" di'intion of Eli&a!eths potency= !t Troilus and Cressida alays !la'es the 'ale

aristocracy for the orlds disasters. Cortiers narcissis' !eco'es endless, shared self?i''olation:Ao space of earth shall snder or to hates, -roils spits 5.1$./I0. -he factionali&ed ;reeks encode

a criti


44/213

fro' the -ro6an ar, !t it as also rapidly de'ateriali&in" in the last years of Leen Eli&a!eths rei"n.

-he fall of +lion and the scatterin" of the ;recian lords occr so'eti'e !eyond Pandarss infectios

epilo"e= those events are not far off, !t neither are they sta"ed. Troilus and Cressida holds the

conclsion of this tale in a!eyance !ecase a s!stitte version of athoritythe only hope a"ainst theepide'ic of disinte"rationas yet to arrive. hen it did, in 1F$#, the orst ot!reak of the !!onic

pla"e in forty years ca'e ith it.

) F/ )

T)$,

$r* an* Plag+e in the Sec$n* /+art$ Halet

@n the day of 7a'es Starts nhrried descent fro' Scotland to clai' his kin"ship3pril 5, 1F$#

4ondons Cort of 3lder'en as !sy. -he 'a"istrates ordered poor relief, 'ore atches, and a

va"a!ond rond?p for St. ;eor"es Parish, an i'poverished, nlcky nei"h!orhood in Sothark.1D

-hese orders had little to do ith 7a'ess i''inent arrival. -hey ere instead the first official responseto nes of the !!onic pla"e, hich as reported in the s!r!s on March #. -he ail'ent tri""ered

the clicks and hirs of civic rle and the intrsive vi"ilance that si"nals "overn'ental an*iety. Btthere as "ood reason for the nervosness: the 'ost recent 'a6or ot!reak, in 159#, had killed a!ot

1# percent of the citys inha!itants./D

arnin" si"ns of the disease coincided ro"hly ith r'ors and 'achinations of the Scottish

sccession. Pla"e as spied in the ell?traveled corridors of co''erce, ar, and diplo'acy: 1599 inPort"al, 1F$1 in Spain, 1F$/ in the 4o Contries. +n the s''er of 1F$/, the Privy Concil

prohi!ited !oth i'ports and i''i"ration fro' 3'sterda', here the epide'ic as in fll, afl

!loo'. Septe'!er of that year sa the port of Kar'oth sffer ei"hty pla"e deaths in one eek, after

hich do'estic trade ith the ton as sspended for over a 'onth. 3nd sloly, drin" the inter

tha, sickness !e"an to take hold in the poor pockets and ed"es of 4ondon. +t e'er"ed in criosconte'poraneity ith the chan"e of rlers.

-he ne kin" ths 'et a for'ida!le o!stacle to his kin"ship. 2rin"

) F# )

the eek of May 5, 1F$#, pla"e killed eleven in 4ondon and the otlyin" ards. 3pprised of thedan"er, 7a'es skirted the city, takin" a royal !ar"e nder 4ondon Brid"e to visit the -oer on May 11=

he then pro'ptly departed for ;reenich. By May /F, the eekly pla"e total had reached thirty?to.

3fter the !ills of 'ortality ere reported, 7a'es ordered everyone ho as not already at cort to

leave 4ondon !efore the end of the ter' 7ne F0 and not to retrn ntil the coronation. 3s late as 7ne/%, hen the force of the ot!reak as indispta!le, 2dley Carleton rote that altho"h the Sickness

doth spread very 'ch, and it is feared it ill prove a "reat pla"e . . . the Coronation holds at theappointed ti'e, hich shall !e perfor'ed ith 'ch sole'nity and all the old cere'onies

o!served.#D 7a'es dearly anted the cere'onial acknoled"'ent of his stats, !t he as ca"ht

!eteen the need for p!lic le"iti'ation and self?preservation. @n 7ly F the coronation asrelctantly postponed, oin" to the "roth of Pla"e and the fear that those co'in" to see or

Coronation 'ay spread it in the contry, and ths the kin" deferred all state and po'p accsto'ed !y

or pro"enitors . . . andD or sole'n entry and passa"e thro"h or City of 4ondon for this ti'e


45/213

Aichols, %rogresses , 1:19%990. Monarchical pro"ress and cere'ony ere literally !otched, disrpted

!y those prplish, sollen nodes and lesions called pla"e !otches, hich 'arked the disease and its

victi's. -hro"hot the s''er of 1F$#, the eekly 'ortality cont increased "eo'etricallyfro'

'ore than #$ on 7ne / to /F# on 7ly I= and then, shockin"ly, to 1,#9F !y 7ly /%. Before the sicknessran its corse, there died in 4ondon #%,/GG= of hich n'!er there ere #$,5I% of the Pla"e.GD

-he epide'ic of 1F$#hich kept theaters closed for the !etter part of a year, prevented royal

residence in 4ondon, and, stran"ely, !ro"ht Shakespeares actin" co'pany nder the kin"s protection did not of itself si"nify an ni'a"ina!le alteration.5D 3s -ho'as 2ekkers pa'phlet The 3onderfull eare 1F$# de'onstrates, it as the concatenation of Eli&a!eths death, 7a'ess see'in"ly rede'ptive

accession, and the nsally !ad ot!reak that had sch a devastatin" i'pact on En"land that year. +n

this chapter and the ne*t, + shall consider so'e of the literary i'plications of this historical se


46/213

-his chapter is a!ot the sy'!olic and strctral operation of pla"e in the second eart.1GD Bradell provides an especially interestin" ta*ono'y of the poison resident in pestilence:

-his Ptrid Pla"e, is . . . vene'os, hich is "ranted of all !oth Physitians and

Philosophers. Ao !y $enom or %o#son , e co''only nderstand so'e thin" that has init so'e dan"eros s!tle is s!tle entrance, his slye creltie, his

sift destroyin"= the nfaithflnesse of his Crisis , and the other %rognostick Signes = and


47/213

the vehe'encie, "rievosnesse and ill !ehavior of his S#mptomes , all !ein" 'anifest

proofes of his enemous ;ualit# . Bradell, %h#sick , F= italics in ori"inal0

e shold spend a 'o'ent ith this description, for its clai's and contradictions epito'i&e the

cltral discorse a!ot the pla"e. -o Bradell, this disease is not 'erely fatal, !t i''oral: itcondcts srreptitios assalts on the holeso'e or innocent !ody, e'ployin" poison as its a"ent. -he

riters tendency to alle"ori&e the physical da'a"e done !y pla"e arises fro' a her'enetic i'plse

as 'ch as a 'edical one. 2iscssin" the veno' or poison inherent in the disease offers athoritativedia"nostic sta!ility!oth physicians and philosophers a"ree on the ta*ono'yand the everydayreader can also co''only nderstand it. Bt for all his confidence in havin" associated pla"e ith

the s!stance, Bradell cannot provide a respecta!ly precise technical definition of veno': he

descri!es it, rather li'ply, as so'e thin" that has in it so'e dan"eros, s!tle a'let that thy Oncle

stole ith iyce of crsed >e!ona in a viall, 3nd in the porches of 'y eares did pore-he leaprosdistil'ent 2#0, it pretends to solve a cri'e the sorces, 'otives, and ra'ifications of hich have not

!e"n to !e rooted ot. (atal, ndetecta!le, finally ncontrolla!le, to*in in the play fnctions as it did

in pla"e tracts: an all?enco'passin" e*planation that cannot accont for 'ch. Even tho"h the ;host

depicts in" >a'lets de'ise in alle"orical ter's as the si'ple pshot of poisonos Evils infectios,treacheros invasion and destrction of ;ood, this e*planation like Bradells0 leaves copios "aps.

Cladiss poison 'ay !e the ori"inal vial of disorder, the revealed, ph#sical case of in" >a'lets

death= !t hat 'atters in the play, hat ani'ates and infects it, is poisons psychic reside: that hichis !orne fro' the ;host to yon" >a'let. -he historical transfor'ation of the kin" into the ;host

prodces a crcial chan"e in the idea of poison: to*in alters fro' a physical to a co"nitive fact, a

chan"e that is 'arked !y the ;hosts astondin" transfor'ation fro' victi' to trans'itter of

destrction. 3nd so the specter 'ateriali&es as the dra'as pri'e fi"rative poisoneran a"ent provocater ho, as several critics have noted, pors another veno', the virlent narrative of his death,

into >a'lets ears.15D -his narrative enveno'in" proliferates and proves conta"ios. (or once havin"

a!sor!ed this rhetorical to*in, the son disse'inates it in varios for's thro"hot the 2anish cort,here it enters all ears. -his pla"e constittes >a'lets characteristic !siness at Elsinore, his normal

'ode of relationship.1FD

-he veno' >a'let in"ests, the i'a"inative poison, has a ti'e?release a'let speaks to the is on pla"y speech


48/213

!eco'es the dra'as plot pistonnot 'erely a l!ricant !t the vital 'ovin" part, ani'atin" the

desltory sea'letspeaks ith veno', ith !itter?

) F% )

ness and an"er, is doo'ed to die. -he catalo"e is strikin": Polonis, @phelia, 4aertes, Cladis,;ertrde, 8osencrant& and ;ildensternall feel the stin" of the central carriers ver!al !ar!s. e

cannot e*clde >a'let hi'self fro' this list, as his self?laceratin" lan"a"e incites the dan"er that

cons'es hi'= he is atoinfected at the last. Perhaps 'ost re'arka!le, the onl# characters ho die inthe play are the ones >a'let has ver!ally assalted. +n his essay @f the Poer of the +'a"ination,

Michel de Montai"ne prepares the theatrical scene played ot in 2en'ark:

Bt all this 'ay !e attri!ted to the narro sea' !eteen the sol and !ody, thro"h hich

the e*perience of the one is co''nicated to the other. So'eti'es, hoever, onesi'a"ination acts not only a"ainst ones on !ody, !t a"ainst so'eone elses. 3nd 6st as a

!ody passes on its sickness to its nei"h!or, as is seen in the pla"e, . . . likeise the

i'a"ination, hen vehe'ently stirred, lanches darts that can in6re an e*ternal o!6ect.1ID

3s ith the pla"e, clear casal evidence is elsive, !t considera!le circ'stantial cles point to thefatal virlence of >a'lets i'a"ination as reified in his lan"a"e= his ords endan"er the !ody as 'ch

as they i'peril the 'ind. >is discorse, and the knoled"e that fires it, have an uncann# poer to

deran"e and destroy.

+n his 'a"nificent ork on the natre of conta"ion 15GF0, ;irola'o (racastoro (racastor0 takes careto distin"ish the poisonos fro' the conta"ios.1%D >e !ases his conta"ion theory on si'ilitde, the

idea that the infection is precisely si'ilar in !oth the carrier and the receiver of conta"ion= e say that

conta"ion has occrred hen a certain si'ilar taint has affected the' !oth (racastor, Contagion , #0.

Bt he flatly denies that poisons can prodce likeness: poisons cannot, strictly speakin", case ptrefaction or en"ender in a second individal a principle and "er' of e*actly the sa'e sort as as in

the ori"inal individal. -he proof of this is that persons ho have !een poisoned are not conta"ios to

others G90= ths, hen persons die of drinkin" poison, e say perhaps that they ere infected, !tnot that they sffered conta"ion #0. (racastor cate"ori&es poisons as pri'arily 'aterial or spirital,

dependin" on hich parts of the person they afflict, and his description of the spirital type har'oni&es

ith the openin" crises of Hamlet : -hose poisonsD that operate !y spirital i'a"es can destroy !y . . . prodcin" an intolera!le sadness. Bt they can "enerate nothin" si'ilar to the'selves G90.

Becase (racastors theory pivots on the idea of si'ilitde, it lends

) F9 )

itself to a rhetorical and psycholo"ical as ell as a prely 'edical readin" of conta"ion. >is discssion

ri"s a sefl theoretical fra'eork for the application of conta"ion theory to Hamlet . -he play doesnot, of corse, ha''er ot a strctre !ilt solely fro' the treatises ter's and propositions= !t it does

en"a"e the essential 'etaphor of (racastors ork. (or in Hamlet , si'ilitde is the fertile, poisonos

"rond of plot and character= the i'plse for likeness en"enders ra'pant si'ilarity, parallelis',repetition, and do!lin". Shakespeare e'ploys the (racastorian idea 'ainly !y distri!tin" the physical

fact of infectios likeness to the 'oral, affective, and i'a"inative spheres. -he sy'!olic ra'ifications


49/213

of !iolo"ical conta"ion theory receive a co'pellin" "loss fro' 8enN ;irard, ho enlar"es ith

anthropolo"ical intent0 the 'icroscopic featres of (racastors ori"inal o!servations= here is ;irards

characteristic state'ent on the literary fnction of pla"e i'a"ery and the'e: -he pla"e is

niversally presented as a process of ndifferentiation, a destrction of specificities.19D -his readin"of the disease can !e 'apped !ack into (racastors nderstandin" that conta"ion prodces deadly

likeness. -he destrctive si'ilarity that !efalls !odies in epide'ics afflicts 'inds and 'otives in

2en'ark.Cladis o!tained his !rothers place, ife, and privile"e thro"h e'los fratricide, and so !e"an thecycle of i'itation and the prodction of likenessread conta"ionthat ensnares his nephe. -he

;host in trn i'itates Cladis !y tryin" to en"ineer a 'rder= he calls for filial loyalty, an enforced

si'ilarity that ill prodce a like?'inded reven"er and replicate re"icide./$D >a'let !eco'es, inseveral ays, a si'ilitde of !oth fathers. -he rhetorical strate"y e'ployed yet disavoed in the

reven"e overtre to >a'let also has (racastorian overtones: the spirit prodces s#mpath# 3las poore

;host 2/D0. 3ltho"h the ;host e*pressly denies this as its "oal Pitty 'e not, !t lend thy serioshearin" -o hat + shall vnfold 2/vD0, its tale cannot !t !e a pathos 'achine, concoctin" and

refinin" the 'yth of the fathers victi'a"e. Sy'pathy, the e'otional correlative to conta"ion,

'aniplates identification on !ehalf of a sfferer to reprodce and propa"ateperhaps alleviate

sfferin". (racastors "reat treatise 2e Contagione !e"ins ith a lon" e*crss called 2e S#mpathia , inhich he otlines the sy'pathy or natral attraction necessary to prodce an effective conta"ion

!eteen o!6ects in the orld. >e asserts thro"hot that !!onic pla"e is a vast patholo"y of

sy'pathy, a hei"htened relationship !eteen disparate, conver"in" entitiesidentity rn ild(racastor, ***iv0. Hamlet portrays a poison that, pace (racastor, does

) I$ )

indeed en"ender conta"ions of si'ilarity, in 'aterial and 'etaphoric ays. -his veno' has 'ercrial,varia!le for' and fnction. +t is an elsive, nsta!le s!stance, ith one e*clsive channel of entry,

one avene of force: the ear. -he plays to*in is lan"a"e.

-he historical force of pla"e, so 'etaphorically s""estive, can !eco'e translated into te*tal or

dra'atic strctre. So'e evocative differences in the


50/213

3nd for prpose, +le annoynt 'y sord.

+ !o"ht an vnction of a Monti!anck

So 'ortall, that !t dippe a knife in it,

here it draes !lood, no Cataplas'e so rare . . .

. . . can sae the thin" fro' death

-hat is !t scratcht ithall.

M10

hat 'akes this addition to the plan so interestin" is that Cladis did not think of it first. 4aertesdevises the poisoned sord trick, hich

) I1 )

depends on the notion of an n!ated point !t is 'ore clever= hen the kin" then proposes the

ha'fisted e*pedient of the poisoned chalice as a fail?safe 'anever, e can see that so'ethin" has"one ary ith the notion of character. -o !rin" 4aertes to this pass, Cladis has had to poison hi'

sloly a"ainst >a'let, sin" crafty insinations that epito'i&e the plays 'ove'ent of ver!al

corrption. Ao 'ental "iant, 4aertes has descended into the Chary!dis of a sperior intelli"ence= !t hehas e'er"ed ith so'ethin" of that intelli"ence. >e see's to have ca"ht the very idea of poison fro'

the pri'al poisoner, the kin". +n the first #>#v0. Bt in the second a'lets innocence. -his threat is confi"red se*ally


51/213

and psychically, for the seed of the ;hosts tale i'pre"nates the sons i'a"ination. hen the ;host

earlier appeared to >oratio, it occpied a te'poral space analo"os to a !arren se*al onein the

dead ast and 'iddle of the ni"ht C/0and it as 'te. Bt the aral assalt on the prince helps the

spirit achieve co'pensatory potency and recover a 'easre of poer lost in the cckolded kin"s slack,nconfessed de'ise./FD (i"ratively i'potent ntil it speaks, in" >a'lets i'a"e e'!odies the

'ltivalent force of the ord spirita vital poer, a 'ysterios transcendent !reath, an a!scondin"

de'on, a se'inal s!stance. -he father revivifies hi'self !y poisonin" the heir. -he ;hosts narrativerese'!les a perverse incarnation= it is a rape so a' + !ond to hear, >a'let says0 or sei&re of !ody

and 'ind that also recollects the 3nnnciation, insofar as Marys fertili&ation ith Christ as in so'e

early patristic traditions acco'plished arally./ID 3nd to set the ti'e ri"ht, to redee' it hen 'enleast think he ill, >a'let, like Mary an nsspectin" receptacle, 'st carry the fathers desire to ter'

even if he feels vnpre"nant of 'y case (Gv0. hether confi"red as disease, rape, or so'ethin"

'ore spirital, spectral lan"a"e has a physical i'pact on hi'= pre'atrely !rdened, profondly a"ed !y the dreadfl ords, >a'lets !ody inherits the ;hosts psycholo"ical tor'ent: o fie, hold, hold 'y

hart, 3nd yo 'y sinnoes, "roe not instant old, Bt !eare 'e siftly vp 2#v0. -his 'ost

r'inative of dra'as repeatedly devolves into focs on physicalitythe !odys pri'acy over politics

or ideolo"y= its 'a"netic resonances ith other !odies= its spre'e contors of need./%D

-he ;hosts narrative provides "risly clinical details of in" >a'lets 'rder and descri!es not 'erelya death !t a patholo"y. -he spir

Inscribing the Time

Documents

Transcript of Inscribing the Time