The_Dramatisation_of_Madness_in_Renaissance_Tragedy-libre.pdf
-
Upload
jokkmokk999 -
Category
Documents
-
view
2 -
download
0
Transcript of The_Dramatisation_of_Madness_in_Renaissance_Tragedy-libre.pdf
Ophelia, John Everett Millais (1851)
The Dramatisation of Madness in
Renaissance Tragedy
ENGL3372: Dissertation
Student ID: 200620892
Supervisor: Professor Paul Hammond
Word Count: 10,414
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
2
Contents Introduction: Defining Renaissance Madness 3 Chapter 1. Innovative Madness Onstage: The Spanish Tragedy 6 Chapter 2. Shakespearean Madness: Titus Andronicus, Hamlet, King Lear 14 Conclusion 25
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
3
Introduction Defining Renaissance Madness
Mad call ) it, for to define true madness, what is╆t but to be nothing else but mad?
Polonius
Madness in Renaissance drama is, to some extent, a relatively conventional matter. It is
typically represented in humoral or ╅ecstatic╆ language, through melancholic or love-sick
characters, and visually in disintegrations of customary appearance used to exhibit its
metamorphosis. It takes place in a dramatic development which moves through the stages of
conflict, confusion and irrationality. In comedy, madness is resolved and the conflicts
straightened out; in tragedy, madness perpetuates the crisis of the self until death. Yet even in
its most conventional forms, madness has always a destructive vigour, of signalling the failures
of authority and reason to dictate the meaning of the Renaissance world.
Between 1576, the opening of the first public theatre in London, and 1632, the year that
Bethlehem (ospital╆s status as the administrative hub of the capital╆s madfolk was
consolidated, early moderns drew on the traditional humoral discourses of Galen to decode
and reconfigure madness. Although critics have postulated that the theories and practice of
madness were essentially unchanging until the end of the seventeenth century, the period is in
fact compellingly heterogeneous in its approach to madness, which is manifest in its varied
theatrical portrayal and development.1 Madfolk became a new focus of theorisation and
representation across a range of cultural discourses and practices, particularly stage
representations. The mad characters of the Renaissance stage were given new languages,
adapted from their historical roots. Conditions such as lovesickness and melancholy adopted
new gender associations. The practices of lunatic confinement and treatment were reinvented
in the theatre. The discourses of madness prospered because they helped to reconceptualise
the borders between natural and supernatural, body and mind, masculinity and femininity,
feigned and real madness.
In ごすさご, Robert Burton observed that ╅the tower of Babel never yeelded such confusion
of tongues, as this Chaos of melancholy doth variety of Symptomes╆.2 What he identifies here
1 In Mental Disorder in Earlier Britain, Basil Clarke claims that there was in the period ╉no integrated development, no boundary to the middle ages,╊ and no new conceptions of madness until after the scientific revolution of the latter half of the seventeenth century (207). Michael MacDonald, in Mystical Bedlam: Madness, Anxiety and Healing in Seventeenth-Century England, agrees that ╉the perception and management of mental disorders did not change fundamentally before ごすすこ╊ ゅざょ. 2 Robert Burton, The Anatomy of Melancholy, 3 vol., ed. Thomas C. Faulkner, Nicolas K. Kiessling and Rhonda L. Blair, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), vol. I, p. 395.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
4
is that the multiformity of what it means to be mad cannot be reduced to an essence. Yet for
all its variation, the history of language for madness can at least be described, and its dramatic
vocabulary identified from a conflagration of humoral terminology and language drawn from
the literature of Greco-Roman tragedy.
Humoral language located madness in the body, assigning its causes and effects to
corporeal states. The virtue of this theory for the diagnosis of illness was its easy application as
a combination of few related elements. Melancholy is theorized as rooted in the black bile,
one of the four humours that together constituted the body along with blood, choler (yellow
bile) and phlegm which, when in balance, produce health. According to the Hippocratic canon,
The human body contains blood, phlegm, yellow bile and black bile. These are the
things that make up its constitution and cause its pains and health. [...] Pain
occurs when one of the substances presents either a deficiency or an excess.3
Arabic translations of Hippocrates and Galen reached the medical schools of Italy, Spain and
France, where they were translated into Latin and widely disseminated. These works soon
became known across Europe, where they filtered down into English medical doctrine via the
writings of Ricardus Anglicus and Gilbertus Anglicus in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.4
The theory of the four humours then passed into the literature of the Middle Ages where it
was further codified in English medical texts. Later, this was developed by the work of Thomas
Linacre, the founder of the College of Physicians (c. 1460-1624), who undertook to translate
the works of Galen and subsequently consolidated humoral theory into the English medical
canon.
Throughout the sixteenth century, a number of texts reproduced the humoral theory
in shortened form with additional suggestions on appropriate treatments. The most well-
known of these texts was Timothy Bright╆s Treatise of Melancholie (1586), which linked
concepts of humoral imbalance to wider philosophical theories of nature. His text, it has been
suggested, may have contributed to Shakespeare╆s depiction of the melancholy Prince of
Denmark.5 In it, Bright strives to distinguish between natural melancholy and spiritual doubt
and advocates cures for each: ╅the phisicke cure╆ for ╅strange effects╆ of melancholy ╅in our
minds and bodies╆, and ╅spirituall consolation for such as haue thereto adioyned an afflicted
3 Hippocratic Writings, ed. G. E. R. Lloyd (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1983), p. 262. 4 Basil Clarke, Mental Disorder in Earlier Britain (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1975), pp. 87-92. 5 In the Introduction to his 1957 edition of Hamlet, John Dover Wilson asserts that ╅while its phraseology and ideas seem to have influenced Hamlet at several places, the melancholy of the Prince was clearly not wholly derived from it.╆ ゅxxivょ.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
5
conscience╆.6 But in Bright╆s struggle to separate a boundary between the soul and the
medicalised body, physical explanations outweigh theological ones, and the melancholy
temperament becomes almost universally applicable. Nevertheless, his treatise extends the
domain of melancholy beyond the corporeal, by implicitly beginning to refigure spiritual
transgression as a curable disease.
Whilst madness received humoral bodily explanations in the Hippocratic corpus, it
was represented differently by the Classical poets. The madness in Greek tragedy took the
form of ecstatic states described in such terms as ╅frenzy╆, ╅anger╆, ╅ecstasy╆ and ╅fantasy╆. This
was complemented by similar terms from Roman tragedy, in particular that of Seneca, whose
Tenne Tragedies was published in English between 1558 and 1581. Latin authors contributed
terms such as ╅fury╆, ╅rage╆, ╅fool╆ and ╅folly╆ to the language of madness, much of which filtered
into Middle English usage during the French Renaissance.7 So the humoral and ecstatic
vocabularies combined to form a diverse discourse from which literary and dramatic
representations of madness were constructed.
6 Timothy Bright, A Treatise of Melancholie (London: Thomas Vautrollier, 1586). 7 Duncan Salkeld, Madness and drama in the age of Shakespeare (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1993), p. 23.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
6
Chapter 1 Innovative Madness Onstage
(ieronymo╆s mad againe
T.S. Eliot, The Wasteland
The Spanish Tragedy (1592)8 initiated the hugely popular and influential genre of revenge
tragedy onto the Early Modern stage, translating and adapting Senecan tragedy for a
contemporary audience. The motif of (ieronimo╆s madness is central to characterisation, the
revenge plot, and to the play╆s staying power. So much so, that the subtitle of the frontispiece
to the ごすごじ quarto: ╅(ieronimo is mad againe╆ highlights the central role that madness
performs as a driving element of the protagonist╆s actions. Furthermore, the imitations and
parodies of Hieronimo that circulated as a result, contributed to the wider use of madness as a
recurring motif in Elizabethan tragedies.9
Carol Thomas Neely credits The Spanish Tragedy with introducing innovative
representations of madness onstage. )n this respect, Kyd╆s play takes further the exploration of
madness already present in the earlier Gammer Gurton’s Needle, first performed in Christ╆s
college, Cambridge in the 1550s.10 Whilst both plays turn madness into a central element in the
construction of characterisation and the revenge plot, the motif of ╅tragic madness╆ originated
with Hieronimo. Like many other editors of the play, Andrew Cairncross claims Kyd as ╅a
seminal force in Elizabethan drama╆ and ╅the father of the revenge play, if not of English
tragedy╆.11 The relationship between revenge tragedy and madness is symbiotic; a vengeful
purpose hones and focuses the passions, whilst madness allows its host to pursue revenge
unclouded by reason or moral judgment. In the first edition of The Spanish Tragedy (Q1, ca.
1592), this madness is only briefly represented in a couple of scenes, which combines classical
motifs with the early modern vocabulary of distraction. The fourth edition (Q4, 1602) develops
the protagonist╆s madness further in five ╅Additions╆; significant textual revisions that, by
giving greater depth to (ieronimo╆s madness, create a new play. The writer of these Additions
recognised the importance of madness as a dramatic device, and the need to develop its
representation as a means of translating Senecan tragedy for an English audience. Therefore I
8 All quotations are taken from Thomas Kyd, The Spanish Tragedy, ed. Clara Calvo and Jesus Tronch (London: Bloomsbury, 2013). 9 Calvo and Tronch, p. 14. 10 Carol Thomas Neely, Distracted Subjects: Madness and Gender in Shakespeare and Early Modern Culture (New York: Cornell University Press, 2004), p. 27. 11 Andrew S. Cairncross, ed. The First Part of Hieronimo and The Spanish Tragedy, by Thomas Kyd (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1967), p. xii.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
7
propose to treat the play as two separate but mutually inclusive texts, in an attempt to
demonstrate how the Additions build upon what Hallett and Hallett quite reductively term as
the play╆s ╅purer form╆.12
Calvo and Tronch, the play╆s most recent editors, suggest that the play does not closely
follow any specific Senecan tragedies as a model. Whilst there are explicit references to
multiple tragedies of the poet╆s authorship, it will become apparent that Kyd╆s )nduction, and
(ieronimo╆s penchant for rhetorical soliloquy and stichomythia, transforms Seneca╆s Thyestes
in specifiable and deeply motivated ways.13 Hill summarizes the poet╆s legacy as having ╅no
peer among classical poets in conveying the texture of evil in a hopelessly corrupt polity╆. (is
tragedies ╅enact the bursting forth of malign forces from the underworld which [...] infest and
destroy a royal house╆.14
The ascent of the ghost of Andrea accompanied by a personification allegory in the
form of Revenge represents a schema derived from the Senecan prologue; in a typical tragedy
like the Thyestes, the ghost of Tantalus is driven by a Fury to return to Earth and provoke his
descendents to mad and murderous actions. This movement upward incites a movement
downwards as the underworld ascends to destroy the present. The ghosts that return to watch
the earthly action, the corpses that litter the stage, silently demanding vengeance are all
devices of Senecan horror. We observe with repulsion an elevated figure foundering in
corruption and misdeeds, as the interior monologue of the madman battles with the reasoned
duty of the obedient courtier. So Atreus of the Thyestes is coaxed into unimaginable acts of
slaughter in the pursuit of vengeance, just as Hieronimo rationalises the destruction of others
as a means of satiating his desire for justice.
Hieronimo then becomes prey to – or a representative of – Senecan horror, as The
Spanish Tragedy provides rare insight into the nature of classical tragedy, by enacting the
eruption of infernal passions into the world of men. The Thyestes repeatedly breaks this
boundary between the two worlds, giving passion and unreason a passport into the seemingly
predictable courtly world. (ill reads a political incentive here, as ╅the nightmarish inferno╆ of
Senecan tragedy reflects the ╅doomed Neronic tyranny in which the playwright lived╆.15 By
identifying this nightmarish realm of political tragedy with contemporary Spain, Kyd has
made the energies and wider implications of Senecan tragedy accessible to an English popular
12 Charles A. Hallett and Elaine S. Hallett, The Revenger’s Madness: A Study of Revenge Tragedy Motifs (London: University of Nebraska Press, 1980), p. 310. 13 Calvo & Tronch, p. 25. 14 Eugene D. (ill, ╅Senecan and Vergilian Perspectives in: ╉The Spanish Tragedy╊╆, English Literary Renaissance, 15:2 (1985), 143-165, p. 146. 15 Hill, p. 159.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
8
audience. The Spanish Tragedy is a deeply self-conscious work, one of whose major concerns is
with the problematic passage from Senecan to Renaissance tragedy. Whilst Kyd╆s )nduction
introduces the Senecan emblem of passion on its obstructed path to vengeance, it also
attempts to develop the revenge genre by giving us a more compellingly political and complex
psychological play, and it is this psychological realism that is integral to constructing
(ieronimo╆s madness.
At the end of the opening scene, Revenge initiates the play╆s metatheatricality with the
couplet ╅(ere sit we down to see the mystery, | And serve for chorus in this tragedy╆ ゅ).i.ぜこ-1).
Revenge invites the ghost of Andrea to be an onlooker in the classical convention of a chorus.
But unlike the traditional chorus, which adopts a passive, descriptive attitude, the two have as
Tydeman recognises, ╅a vested interest in the outcome╆.16 The fact that Revenge provides a
predetermination of the play by invoking the term ╅tragedy╆ also reinforces the classical notion
of infernal powers influencing characters╆ futures, as the two preside over the play with a pre-
ordained but problematic form of justice. This world is one in which men display an
increasing reluctance to wait for divine justice to work, taking it upon themselves to enact it.
(ieronimo╆s passion for revenge is in a very real sense a passion for justice over his son╆s
murderers, and what drives him mad is his growing awareness that the world of the court is
essentially unjust.
In Quarto ), (ieronimo╆s distraction as Neely puts it is ╅present but rudimentary╆.17 It is
referred to by others, and displayed through strange behaviours often signalled by stage
directions, and confined to act III, scenes xi, xii, and xiii. He is first diagnosed by the second
Portuguese as ╅passing lunatic, | Or imperfection of his age doth make him dote╆ ゅ))).ii.ざさ-33).
In the following scene, Lorenzo deliberately suggests he is ╅Distract, and in a manner lunatic╆
(III.xii.89) to deflect his accusations against him in the presence of the King, whose milder
diagnosis of ╅outrage╆, ╅fury╆ and ╅melancholy╆ justifies his firing Hieronimo as Knight Marshal
(III.xii.79, 80, 99).
Each of (ieronimo╆s increasingly odd behaviours imagines his entering into the
classical underworld in the model of Seneca, which is dramatised in the frame narrative of
Andrea and Revenge. In act III, scene xi, with the identity of his son╆s murderers having been
revealed his own personal weakness is confirmed, for as Knight Marshal it is his duty to
prevent such injustices. He responds to Portuguese who come looking for Lorenzo by acting
out this inability to find the murderer: he ╅goeth in at one door and comes out at another’ (SD.
16 Two Tudor Tragedies, ed. William Tydeman (London: Harmondsworth, 1992), p. 298. 17 Neely, p. 34.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
9
following III.xi.8). In an increasing proclivity for associating his actions with hell, he then
provides ╅directions╆ to the underworld where he imagines Lorenzo suffering punishment:
There, in a brazen cauldron fixed by Jove
In his fell wrath upon a sulphur flame,
Yourselves shall find Lorenzo bathing him
In boiling lead and blood of innocents.
(III.xi.26-29)
By scene xii, he enters ╅with a poniard in one hand, and a rope in the other’ and considers using
the weapons that killed his son to embark on his own journey to hell, where he hopes to find a
different kind of justice. But again he is lost: ╅Turn down this path, thou shalt be with him
straight; | Or this [...] This way or that way?╆ ゅ))).xii.せ-16). When further attempts to gain the
King╆s justice are rejected at court, he entirely disregards protocol as ╅He diggeth with his
dagger,╆ seeking to ╅rip the bowels of the earth╆ ゅ))).xii.70) to find his son. His obsession with
invoking infernal powers uncontrollably spills over into the King╆s presence with ╅)╆ll go
marshal up the fiends in hell | To be avenged on you all for this╆ (III.xii.76-7). The final
outburst in Q1 occurs in act III scene xiii and evolves out of his desire to provide justice to his
double Bazulto. When he realises he cannot, he frantically acts out revenge by ╅shivering the
limbs╆ of the petitions with his teeth as he would ╅rent and tear╆ the murderers ゅ))).xii.ご22-3).
After this, the distracted behaviours cease, but isolated as they are, they lay the foundation for
representing tragic madness onstage. They are diagnosed by witnesses in the language of
classical and humoral discourse; they enhance the theatrical power of (ieronimo╆s emotions
and to a large extent elicit audience sympathy.
It is in the revised text of Q4 however that the psychological development of
Hieronimo is given most depth. Whereas in quarto I, his condition is defined by others, and
termed ╅mad╆ only on one occasion when he mimics Lorenzo with ╅╆God amend that mad
(ieronimo╆╆ ゅ)V.iv.ごさこょ; in the ごすこし text he repeatedly names his own condition with the terms
╅mad╆ or ╅madness╆, which occur ten times, making the state central.18 With his condition
named and self-acknowledged, these extended scenes of madness provide as Neely puts it ╅the
glue that transforms isolated behavioural episodes into psychologically coherent character
development╆.19 The Additions achieve this by documenting (ieronimo╆s demurral between
uncompromising denial and acceptance of (oratio╆s death and his painful adjustment from
paralysing disbelief to more expressive grieving, and hence, to planning revenge.
18 Charles Crawford, A Concordance to the Works of Thomas Kyd, In Series, Materials for the Study of Old English Drama, Vol. 15 (Louvain: A. Uystpruyst, 1906-1910), p. 247. 19 Neely, p. 36.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
10
The first Addition extends the scene of discovering (oratio╆s body in act II, scene v,
and depicts (ieronimo╆s retreat from his initial longing for revenge, into delusional denial of
the murder. (is jaunty assertion that (oratio is ╅so generally beloved╆ seems to assure him
that ╅he cannot be short-lived╆ ゅごst Add. 10-13), instead he attributes his apparent murder to
╅strange dreams╆, ╅great persuasions╆ and the fact that the corpse╆s ╅garments are so like╆ his
son╆s ゅ1st Add. 19, 31, 30). When his wife Isabella refutes these conjectures, Hieronimo lapses
into the reality of his loss in the Addition╆s stark monosyllabic last line ╅(ow strangely had )
lost my way to grief╆ ゅじしょ. Continuing the development of madness initiated in the first
Addition, the eleven-line fragment which replaces a two-line speech in act III, scene ii
develops his earlier denial into ╅an aggressively sardonic repudiation of Lorenzo╆ 20 by
trivializing the death as ╅a toy╆, ╅an idle thing╆ ゅさnd Add. 3, 5).
)n the third Addition, which follows the first line of act ))), scene xi, (ieronimo╆s ironic
bitterness earlier in the act develops into cynicism and a more desperate repudiation of loss.
The first half of the long monologue argues that there is nothing in a son ╅To make a father
dote, rave or run mad╆ as they are ╅A thing begot | Within a pair of minutes╆ ゅざrd Add. 10, 4-5).
Sons pout, cry, and ╅must be fed, | Be taught to go, and speak╆ and end up ╅unsquared,
unbevelled╆ ゅざrd Add. 12-13, 22). But in the second half of the speech, he reforms his own
satirical cynicism by identifying with (oratio╆s personal attributes. He was loving and
honourable: ╅my comfort and his mother╆s joy╆ ゅざこょ; ╅his great mind, | Too full of honour╆ ゅざす-7).
This acknowledged loss breeds fantasies of revenge as the now familiar reference to ╅Nemesis
and Furies╆ who ╅sometimes do meet with murderers╆ (40-42) at the end of the Addition
remembers (ieronimo╆s earlier invocations of the underworld that conclude the original scene.
The longest and most central Addition to the construction of madness is the fourth,
inserted between III.xii and III.xiii (often identified as III.xiiA), which ╅exacerbates the father╆s
conflict between fantastic denial and acceptance and dramatizes how grief and madness are
purged through identification and self-representation╆.21 The scene opens with Pedro and
Jaques having been summoned by Hieronimo to attend his fruitless search for Horatio in the
garden. Denying having ever asked them to help him, (ieronimo╆s anger and confusion is
projected onto ╅pale-faced (ecate╆, whose moonlight gives ╅consent to that is done in darkness╆
(III.xiiA.33-ざしょ. When )sabella refers directly to the garden as the place where (oratio╆s
murder occurred, (ieronimo╆s irrational scapegoating extends onto the tree that ╅grew a
gallows, and did bear our son. | It bore thy fruit and mine. O wicked, wicked plant!╆ ゅ))).xiiA.
70-71). Then Bazardo the painter enters, who replaces Bazulto (the old man who has also lost a
20 Neely, p, 37. 21 Neely, p. 37.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
11
son) from the first quarto. He too seeks justice for the death of a son, to which Hieronimo
suggests he seeks ╅that | That lives not in this world╆ because ╅God hath engrossed all justice in
his hands╆ ゅ))).xiiA. 82-せざ, せすょ. As (allett and (allett recognise, the play ╅never doubts the
existence of a divine order╆, rather it depicts a society in which men display ╅an increasing
reluctance to wait for divine justice to work╆.22 (ieronimo╆s advice is indicative of this: he
recognises the ultimate claim to justice that the Christian setting of the court projects, yet the
author╆s choice of the verb ╅engrossed╆ implies that he must enact an alternative form of
recompense.
First he acknowledges the painter╆s shared grief and madness with ╅(ow dost take it?
Art thou not sometimes mad? | )s there no tricks that come before thine eyes?╆ ゅ))).xiiA. 104-
105). He then reconnects with the memory of his son by lovingly describing the portrait he
wants painted of his family: )sabella standing beside him with a ╅speaking look╆ towards
(oratio; he with a ╅hand leaning upon his head╆ ゅごごず-120). Having imagined this reunification,
he can now mourn, and does so by reliving the murder via his description of its painting:
╅behold a man hanging [...] And looking upon him by the advantage of my torch, find it to be
my son (oratio╆ ゅごしず-151). This done, he can fully embrace the passionate anger he felt: ╅Make
me curse, make me rave, make me cry, make me mad╆ ゅごじし-156). These consecutive self-
portraits illustrate his movement from love to loss to mourning and passionate raving - a
catharsis which leads Hieronimo to act upon his rage by beating Bazardo, then to his decision
to take revenge which begins the ╅Vindicta mihi!’ soliloquy in act III, scene xiii. Making
Hieronimo quote from Seneca in this speech allows Kyd to refashion meaning to suit the
protagonist╆s vengeful needs. Calvo and Tronch gloss the line ╅Per scelus semper tutum est
sceleribus iter’ (III.xii.6), derived from Seneca╆s Agamemnon as ╅Crimes always find a safe way
through crimes╆.23 In the original, this sententia is spoken by Agamemnon╆s wife Clytemnestra,
as she prepares for her husband╆s murder. )t serves as a kind of prompt to action, as he calls
upon the ╅notorious Senecan code of Elizabethan stage revengers╆.24 )f Ratliff╆s interpretation is
assumed that the murderers of his son are ╅all too likely to go further and attack him just as
Clytemnestra attacked Agamemnon╆, then (ieronimo╆s revenge is given greater depth as a
matter of self-preservation.25 This is also an example of how his developing madness hones
and sharpens revenge: his obsession with justice persists to the extent that more reasonable
methods are eradicated. He acts on this new found determination immediately, by forging a
22 Hallett and Hallett, p. 132. 23 Calvo and Tronch, p. 256. 24 William Shakespeare, King Richard III, ed. James R. Siemon (London: Bloomsbury, 2009), p. 322. 25 John D. Ratliff, ╅(ieronimo explains himself╆, SP, 54 (1957), 112-118, p. 117.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
12
reconciliation with the murderers in III.xiv, then by organizing the climactic play within the
play in the opening scene of the final act. Thus the fourth Addition establishes the efficacy of
expressive self-representation as a means of acting out subversive ends; a facet of mad raving
that will lead to successive interpretations of madness, most importantly Shakespeare╆s
Hamlet. The final Addition extends the penultimate scene by 49 lines, and whilst it does not
clearly present Hieronimo as mad, it does give new vigour to the biting off of his tongue. He
continues in the vein of self-conscious self-representation with ╅Now to express the rupture of
my part, | First take my tongue, and afterwards my heart╆ ゅじth Add. 48-9). In his dying lines
Hieronimo poignantly summarises the ╅rupture╆ of his parts: father, husband, Knight Marshal;
as well as the rupturing of the self that madness has conceived.
Whilst traditional ideas of madness persist in The Spanish Tragedy, many facets of
future representations of madness are inaugurated, particularly in the 1602 edition. Madness is
expressed through comparisons with and invocations of the classical underworld, whilst being
portrayed as interior and self-conceived. (ieronimo╆s powerfully articulated grief and his use
of metatheatrical means to elicit justice links him with the intensity of the Senecan revenger,
but also draws on the kinds of melancholic symptoms set out by Bright╆s treatise and later
Burton╆s Anatomy. The sympathy his portrayal evokes from both character and audience,
makes ╅palatable, even desirable, his resistance to authority and his brutal revenge╆. 26
Stylistically, (ieronimo╆s distracted exchange with the painter in the fourth Addition is in
prose, which becomes the standard form for the madman╆s voice. That said, the language of
his madness has few distinctive semantic markers vis-à-vis the complexities of (amlet╆s or
Edgar╆s Poor Tom. And while he seeks divine justice and infernal vengeance, he is not
explicitly consumed by the supernatural, cursed or possessed. Equally there is no overt
reference in the original text to the feigned madness that later plays adopt.27 In this initiating
play of early modern tragedy, which revives motifs from Latin drama, we see new
representations of an heroic madness that is secular, consumes body and mind, but opens up
self-representation whilst challenging the established social order.
And so we move on to Shakespeare, by way of looking back upon the authorship of the
Additions and encompassing new critical exploration. Brian Vickers╆ research into the
language of these developmental scenes has found that they contain no traces of Jonson╆s
dramaturgy or style, which is evidenced through a comparison of concordances in the
26 Neely, p. 39. 27 Critics who claim otherwise offer no evidence for (ieronimo╆s feigning. See Bevington, who asserts that (ieronimo ╉assumes a guise of madness to throw off his enemies╊ ゅごごょ; whilst (allett and Hallett deny feigned madness (148-149).
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
13
Additions with Jonson╆s complete dramatic works. The development of new computational
linguistics techniques has enabled researchers to conduct a similar analysis of Shakespeare╆s
language, concentrating on collections of words and phrases that reoccur across the canon.
The following example, taken from (ieronimo╆s speech in which he describes fruitlessly
searching for his dead son, closely matches the words of Aaron the Moor, recalling how he
spied on the misfortunes of Titus Andronicus:
I pry through every crevice of each wall (Add. III.xiiA.17)
I pried me through the crevice of a wall (Tit. V.i.114)
This is one example of a large number of idiosyncratic collocations that points undeniably to
Shakespeare╆s authorship.28 In reading the analyses of Shakespeare╆s plays that follow, it is
worth bearing in mind in light of Vickers╆ new evidence that not only did Shakespeare initiate
madness as a theatrical motif, he remained throughout the period its most important and
skilled developer.
28 Brian Vickers, ╉Identifying Shakespeare's Additions to The Spanish Tragedy (1602): A New(er) Approach╊, in Shakespeare, 8:1 (2012), 13-43, p. 19.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
14
Chapter 2 Shakespearean Madness
Madness in great ones must not unwatch╆d go. Claudius
Madness in Shakespeare╆s tragedies is depicted not as a retreat into the lunatic interior of its
characters, but ╅as a means of personal and political survival╆.29 The mortality of the physical
body which upholds the madman and sustains his suffering, ensures that the madness of
tragedy is perceptible, and therefore threatening. This form of madness has yet to be relocated
from the body and the fluctuation of its humours into more refined medical terms of the
╅vapours╆ and later psychiatric categorisation. As Salkeld puts it, ╅it has still to be cleaned up,
sanitised, and so forms part of the bloody mess Renaissance tragedies hurl themselves into╆.30
Titus Andronicus (1594)31 dramatises issues of the human and political body, alongside
power, gender and violence in a Senecan representation of man╆s cruellest capabilities. From
the start, we are introduced to a gendered discourse of honour and duty, with claims both to
power and women. Assumptions of nobility, honour and primogeniture around which the
Roman state is unified are made fluid and arbitrary by conflicting claims to power. The result
is a gradually dissolving political body into which Titus is immediately thrust, then forced to
find his place within on the basis of his own decisions. For a man who defines himself by an
unwavering code of loyalty, honour, and duty to one clear authority, such disruptions to his
innate sense of being, together with the sustained violence and cruelty projected onto his
family, create the kind of psychological displacement we see portrayed in Hieronimo, Hamlet,
and Lear. Just as the body of the state is fragmented and divided, so too are the bodies of
individuals, who absorb the violence forced upon them and those they love to such an extent
that revenge becomes the driving action of the play, and madness its enabler.
When Titus Andronicus first enters with his victory procession, the darkness below the
stage figured by the Elizabethan structure of a three-tiered theatre comes into play. The
underworld is invoked in the vein of classical tragedy with ╅They open the tomb’ (SD. following
I.i.92), his first task is to give proper burial to his sons who have died for the Roman cause. As
a city Rome prided itself on a civilized social ethos, and the religious rituals at the centre of
29 Duncan Salkeld, Madness and Drama in the Age of Shakespeare (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1994), p. 86. 30 Salkeld, p. 86. 31 All quotations are taken from William Shakespeare, Titus Andronicus, ed. Jonathan Bate (London: Methuen, 1995).
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
15
the civilized city involved animal rather than human sacrifice.32 So when Lucius demands that
the ╅proudest prisoner of the Goths╆ be sacrificed to appease the ╅shadows╆ ゅ).i.ぜぜ-104)
barbarism has entered the city, and the values that delineate Roman civilization begin to
disintegrate. Titus ignores the pleas of Tamora with ╅your son is marked, and die he must╆
(I.i.128-9) and so he condemns himself by condoning, in the words of Tamora╆s oxymoron, a
╅cruel, irreligious piety╆ ゅI.i.133). His first mistake serves as the catalyst for what is to come,
which Demetrius here names a ╅sharp revenge╆ ゅI.i.140), paving the way for the violent action
and reaction structure of the play.
For Titus, the upholding of honour is paramount and above all other values. Its
relevance to our consideration of his character is outlined by the OED: ╅a fine sense of and
strict allegiance to what is due or right╆.33 )f we consider the notion that ╅what is due or right╆ is
dictated by the hierarchical structure, Titus╆ internalised ╅honour╆, whilst it may seem morally
repugnant to the audience or reader is in fact within the boundaries of his moral code. But this
moral code is dependent on the position of the authoritative figure. Thus, the sudden change
in Saturninus╆ praise disarms Titus:
)╆ll trust by leisure him that mocks me once, Thee never, nor thy traitorous haughty sons,
Confederates all thus to dishonour me.
(I.i.306-8)
Titus╆ notion of honour is now deeply confused and as a result so too is his allegiance. )n quick
succession he has been stripped of the two most important elements of any soldier╆s psyche:
what constitutes honourable actions and in whose name are they undertaken. This is the
beginning of a downward spiral into madness that is paralleled in the opening of King Lear. In
both plays, the abrupt fragmentation of the state occurs in the opening scene, and as
governance becomes a more arbitrary notion, so too do those selves responsible for its
integrity. Lear and Titus begin as figures of power, but are gradually diminished by the arrival
of a new, hungrier order.
The second act of the play moves away from the court space, where actions and words
are limited by the need to maintain a degree of civility, into the dark and unregulated forest.
This second-act journey away from the city anticipates the wild pagan space of the heath in
King Lear. The focus then shifts from issues of the body politic associated with the power
32 Richard Marienstras, ╅The forest, hunting and sacrifice in Titus Andronicus’, in New Perspectives on the Shakespearean World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1985), 40-7, p. ? 33 OED, sense 2a.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
16
struggle at court, to the human body and its limits. Titus╆ initial reaction to the form of his
mutilated daughter of ╅Give me a sword, )╆ll chop off my hands too╆ ゅ))).i.ずざょ attempts to deal
with the matter in the self-sacrificial mode of the soldier. Unfortunately this dramatically
ironic line anticipates future events, similar to Lear╆s ╅Old fond eyes, | Beweep this cause again,
)╆ll pluck ye out╆ ゅKL I.iv.293-3). Further, his speeches in this scene incorporate an extended
metaphor of water as depicting overflowing passions. (is grief ╅like Nilus it disdaineth bounds╆
(III.i.72) takes the favourite Shakespearean image of the annually-flooded river Nile as its basis.
This is developed throughout the scene as madness drowns: Titus stands ╅as one upon a rock, |
Environed with a wilderness of sea,╆ ゅ))).i.ぜし-5) waiting to be swallowed by the water.
Harkening back to his isolation in the opening scene, here his mental separation is self-
induced as he imagines a lone figure surrounded by his own overflowing passions. There are
parallels here with (eironimo╆s rhetoric of passion in The Spanish Tragedy and the lines ╅My
woes [...] | Made mountains marsh with spring-tides of my tears╆ ゅST III.vii.2-9). But after Titus
cuts off his hand, there can be no rational restraint, and the metaphor extends through his
rhetoric:
When heaven doth weep, doth not the earth o╆erflow?
If the winds rage, doth not the sea wax mad,
Threatening the welkin with his big-swollen face?
And wilt thou have a reason for this coil?
I am the sea. Hark how her sighs doth blow.
She is the weeping welkin, I the earth.
Then must my sea be moved with her sighs,
Then must my earth with her continual tears
Become a deluge overflowed and drowned...
(III.i.222-30)
What is so compelling about these lines is the way in which, even when consumed by
overflowing emotion, reason keeps language in check through the controlled rhetoric, the
balance of the lines and formal repetitions. The grief is expressed, stretched over the scene
with the reoccurring image of water. As D.J. Palmer recognises, ╅here and throughout the play,
the response to the intolerable is ritualised, in language and action, because ritual is the
ultimate means by which man seeks to order and control his precarious and unstable world╆.34
This internal coherence or logic is a means of ordering Titus╆ world of suffering. But
Shakespeare complicates and develops the conventional Senecan hero in Titus as we will see.
34 D.J. Palmer, ╅The unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable: language and action in Titus Andronicus╆, in Critical Quarterly, 14 (1972), 320-39, p. 322.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
17
The moment his speech ends, a Messenger arrives with his severed hand and the heads
of the sons he thought he had saved. Marcus, ever the voice of reason, recognises that ╅Now is
a time to storm╆ ゅ))).i.さすしょ, but what does one do when twenty-one of your sons have been
killed in battle, you have killed the twenty-second under false pretence, your daughter has
been raped and mutilated, you have been told that your two remaining sons condemned to die
will be saved provided that you sever your hand as payment, only to have their heads sent
back to you? Dramatic decorum dictates that one should rage. But human nature does not
obey dramatic decorum, and what Titus says is in fact truer: ╅(a, ha, ha!╆ ゅ))).i.さすじょ. These
three short words provide us with an insight into the mind of a man whose internal logic has
been stripped of all order and reason. While the response seems a more humanistic
representation of passion than Titus╆ rhetoric, it is precisely because of this linguistic shift that
the words appear so alien, and lead us to diagnose his madness. They also signify a move
towards the register of the revenger; his next lines are focused in the pared-down style of
Hieronimo after the fourth Addition, when both madness and revenge reach a peak, with
╅which way shall ) find Revenge╆s cave?╆ ゅ)II.i.271), placing Titus in the dangerous position of
the unreasonable avenger.
The two figures together, Titus and Lavinia, display madness and physical devastation
alongside one another, absorbing the violence of forces above and beyond their control and
representing the body as the point at which all designs of revenge and destruction end.
Through the play madness is conventionally referred to as ╅fits╆, ╅frenzy╆, ╅ecstasy╆, ╅fury╆
ゅ)V.iv.ごさ, さご, さじょ, ╅lunacy╆ and ╅brainsick humours╆ ゅV.ii.ずこ-1). The language fits the classical
blueprint of Latin tragedy, yet the madness depicted is no less threatening. Lavinia chases
Lucius╆s boy in an attempt to reveal the identities of her torturers, but her actions are
interpreted as madness by those she loves. And arrows rain in Rome as Titus looses messages
to the heavens in an attempt to consolidate his grieving. Violence and writing are inextricably
linked in the play: Titus fires messages that could kill, whilst Lavinia bears the strokes of the
knife. )n these images, as Salkeld identifies, ╅we see products of a society wherein masculine
desire is in contradiction with codes of masculine virtue╆ and the ╅social opposition of these
forces tears apart both corporate and individual identities╆.35 Rome is ╅headless╆ ゅ).i.ごせすょ from
the outset; Lavinia is bereft of both hands and tongue; Titus cuts off his hand and beats the
╅hollow prison of my flesh╆ ゅ))).ii.ごこょ; and Tamora is made to eat her sons in the cannibalistic
mode of Seneca╆s Thyestes. The body either stands or lies as the object, not subject, towards
which the strategies of madness are directed, and into which the violence is absorbed.
35 Salkeld, p. 88.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
18
In Hamlet (1601),36 madness takes the shape of paranoia, shifting through the court of Elsinore
in the form of suspicion and secrets. Denmark is from the start in a state of nervous confusion
as (oratio identifies after having witnessed the Ghost: ╅This bodes some strange eruption to
our state╆ ゅ).i.ずさょ. To the melancholy (amlet, ╅Denmark╆s a prison╆ in which there are ╅many
confines, wards and dungeons╆ ゅ)).ii. さしざ, さしじ-6). Even Claudius observes the madness of the
place, whose subjects are ╅the distracted multitude, who like not in their judgment but in their
eyes╆ ゅ)V.iii.4-5). Whilst there are of course questions surrounding the truth of (amlet╆s
distraction, to which we will return, the issue of madness preoccupies the play as one of its
central themes. Even before he assumes his antic disposition, Hamlet is in the grip of an
unstable depression, and our first impression of the Prince is one of a troubled young man
unable to overcome the grief of his father╆s death. While Claudius and Polonius speculate
about the cause of (amlet╆s melancholy, Gertrude╆s diagnosis of ╅(is father╆s death, and our
o╆erhasty marriage╆ ゅ)).ii.じずょ goes straight to the point. Ophelia is presented as the most
affected, and her main concern is for him: ╅O, what a noble mind is here o╆erthrown!╆ ゅ))).i.ごじさょ.
Through all of this Shakespeare portrays the maddened Hamlet not as a distanced figure
whom other characters watch, as is the case for Hieronimo, but as someone close to them for
whom they feel constant worry.
In spite of such attempts on behalf of other characters to alleviate his pain, Hamlet╆s
madness, like any other in the drama of the period, resists categorisation.37 The play itself,
apart from the critics, breeds controversy over such questions of madness, yet they remain
unanswerable as Maynard Mack has concluded: ╅Even the madness itself is riddling: How
much is real? (ow much is feigned? What does it mean? Sane or mad, (amlet╆s mind plays
restlessly about his world, turning up one riddle upon another╆.38 Such riddles are part of the
complex game that Hamlet plays, he teases the other characters and by extension the
audience, about this very question. The famous announcement of his intention to affect
madness ╅) perchance hereafter shall think meet | To put an antic disposition on╆ ゅ).v.ごずぜ-80)
has a casualness that makes it difficult to spot his disposition when it appears; and ╅) am but
mad north-north-west╆ ゅ)).ii.ざずしょ whilst it may seem to signify location, is deliberately
36 All quotations are taken from William Shakespeare, Hamlet, ed. Harold Jenkins (London: Methuen, 1982). 37 To reduce the complex worlds of Renaissance madfolk into definable categories would of course be to miss the point entirely, but there is something to be said perhaps for the wider cultural understanding of madness as an indefinable, arbitrary state of being. 38 Maynard Mack, ╅The World of (amlet╆, in Shakespeare: Modern Essays in Criticism, ed. Leonard F. Dean (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967), 242-62, p. 245.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
19
unhelpful.39 Like his father, he appears ╅in questionable shape╆ ゅ).iv.しざょ, firstly as quite mad
with his ╅wild and whirling words╆ ゅ).v.ござぜょ and then quite sane, as in his initial meeting with
the Players at )).ii. Even Polonius is confused by his ╅pregnant╆ replies, yet he is the only
character to recognise that ╅Though this be madness, yet there is method in╆t╆ ゅ)).ii. 208, 205-6).
)n the confusion, as Salkeld notes, ╅even the tragic form of the play can be lost.╆40 Ophelia╆s
report of Hamlet╆s intrusion into her chambers illustrates how his rejection of society takes a
conventional form:
his doublet all unbrac╆d, No hat upon his head, his stockings foul╆d, Ungarter╆d and down-gyved to his ankle
(II.i.78-80)
But the description also remembers Malvolio╆s ╅midsummer madness╆, and serves to confirm
Polonius╆ suspicions that ╅This is the very ecstacy of love╆ ゅ)).i.102), a phrase synonymous with
madness, particularly in the classical tradition as Jenkins recognises.41 Yet for all its comedic
potential, the appearance has still a threatening aspect, which upsets the ╅affrighted╆ Ophelia
(II.i.75). He also takes a madman╆s licence to say politically hazardous things in court, noticing
╅how cheerfully my mother looks and my father died within╆s two hours╆ ゅ))).ii.ごさし-5), and
explaining to Claudius ╅how a king may go a progress through the guts of a beggar╆ ゅ)V.iii.ざこ-
31). He later insists on calling Claudius his mother (IV.iv.54-6), the implication of which is a
rude jest about the incestuous taboo surrounding the marriage, but by doing so he
demonstrates a widely accepted symptom of madness by demonstrating trouble in recognising
familiar faces.
The madness that Hamlet displays, or imitates, is not just conventionalised theatrical
madness but drawn from the characteristics that many Elizabethan families would have
experienced.42 He is divided, sometimes a performer, sometimes not; we may wonder if his
assumed role is an outlet for real insanity, as Leggatt suggests, a performance that ╅comes not
from without, but within╆.43 Such notions of interiority reflect the evasive nature of (amlet╆s
distraction, and later on in the second act after the inner play, Hamlet responds to the
capacity of the player to ╅force his soul╆, which leads him to interrogate his own contradiction
of seeming to be that which he is not:
39 Alexander Leggatt, ╅Madness in ╉(amlet╊, ╉King Lear╊, and Early Modern England╆, in Critical Essays on Shakespeare’s King Lear, ed. Jay L. Halio (New York: G. K. Hall & Co., 1996), 122-138, p. 130. 40 Salkeld, p. 92. 41 Jenkins, p. 235. 42 Leggatt, p. 130. 43 Leggatt, p. 130.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
20
O what a rogue and peasant slave am I!
Is it not monstrous that this player here,
But in a fiction, in a dream of passion,
Could force his soul so to his own conceit
(II.ii.544-551)
The player here is ╅seeming╆ to be and succeeding, while (amlet, with a real cause of grief,
believes he cannot achieve the same level of realism. In this soliloquy at the end of the second
act he is reproaching himself for his inaction, for his inability to convincingly perform
madness, yet paradoxically this speech is perhaps his most passionate, his most convincingly
human. The contradiction Hamlet sets up is that, whilst he professes his inability to ╅seem╆
mad, here convincing seeming is precisely what he is achieving. It is these contradictory forces
that produce the madness of the Prince. He struggles to resolve the interiorised dialectic
between belief and imagination, reality and performance, action and delay, and so is
entrapped in a space between contraries. )n this Foucauldian ╅space of indecision╆ that he
essentially embodies, he is ironically deprived of the power to act or decide.44
Ophelia╆s ╅dangerous conjectures╆ present a much more straightforward case, but
whilst (amlet╆s struggle between pretension and reality hinders his ultimate goal of revenge,
it is through madness that Ophelia shifts from obedient subject to a more assertive and
dangerous figure. Our impression of her is a young woman struggling within the limitations of
a non-reciprocal courtship, lectured by her brother and father about the inappropriateness of
her love and then later rejected outright by her lover. She maintains dignity even under the
strain of (amlet╆s repeated dismissals, but the final blow is bereavement at the hands of the
man she thought she loved, and she cracks. Whilst she is not as disturbingly remote as Hamlet,
her mad speech nevertheless causes political anxiety, for as Horatio cautions, ╅she may strew |
Dangerous conjectures in ill-breeding minds╆ ゅ)V.v.ご4-15). She finds herself torn between
conflicting loyalties and unable as she is to resolve this contradiction, madness ╅becomes her
asylum╆ from the reality of her situation.45 Her songs give evidence of this escapism and
provide a lyric quality to her sorrow; they are summed up by Laertes as ╅Thought and affliction,
passion, hell itself, | She turns to favour and to prettiness╆ ゅ)V.v.ごせぜ-190). Her death provides
an ironic approach to the conventional clothing code of madness, in that whilst most madmen
destroyed their clothes in the vein of Poor Tom, Ophelia╆s clothes destroy her. For a moment
they hold her up in the water, but then
44 Michel Foucault, Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason (New York: Random House, 1965), p. 287. 45 Salkeld, p. 94.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
21
her garments, heavy with their drink,
Pull╆d the poor wretch from her melodious lay
To muddy death.
(IV.vii.180-182)
Perhaps the mad instinct of divesting oneself of clothes is right, there are times when
nakedness is safer.46 But on reflection Ophelia╆s madness is more distanced, and theatrically
stylised than her unruly lover╆s, and Gertrude╆s narration of her death leaves us with a
question of legitimacy: who saw it and why did they do nothing to help? Leggatt goes as far as
to assert that it works only as an ╅artificial convention╆, but it is important to recognise that
female madness was relatively unexplored thus far in the drama of the period, and viewed as
symptomatically and characteristically separate to its masculine counterpart, setting limits on
its representation. Madness in Hamlet then, has begun to transcend the boundaries of its
classically-based understanding; it is given new depth and range both linguistically and in its
physical representation. Functioning less as the abstract, conventionalised motif that we see in
the two earlier plays, it is more aggressive, confrontational, and has a force of its own that
neither character nor audience can wholly understand.
The Bedlamite figure of Poor Tom in King Lear (1608 and 1623)47 is another example of a
performance of madness, one created by Edgar, yet in a sense one that closely resembles social
reality: a common belief held in the Renaissance mindset that Bedlam beggars were frauds
trying to evade social restrictions by feigning madness.48 But in practice there is less sense of
performance here than in (amlet╆s antic disposition. Whilst Edgar╆s asides constantly remind
us of the man behind the nakedness and the grime, Tom stands almost as a character in his
own right. As Leggatt notices, one reason behind this may be that we see very little of Edgar
before he affects his disguise, to the extent that Tom seems the primary character, and Edgar
emerges later.49 Perhaps a more plausible reason might be that the exuberance of Tom╆s
language and imagery exceeds Edgar╆s purposeful but reserved register, making the assumed
madman the more vivid character. The strength of this portrayal rests on Edgar╆s firm
commitment to the role. While (amlet╆s announcement to affect madness is in a passing
46 Leggatt, p. 131. 47 All quotations are taken from William Shakespeare, King Lear, ed. R. A. Foakes (London: Bloomsbury, 1997), which collates the 1608 Quarto and the 1623 first Folio. 48 See William Carroll, ╅╊The Base Shall Top Th╆Legitimate╊: The Bedlam Beggar and the Role of Edgar in ╉King Lear╊╆, Shakespeare Quarterly, 38 (1987), 426-441, pp. 431-2. 49 Leggatt, p, 132.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
22
subordinate clause, making his intentions arbitrary, Edgar makes a determined pledge that
carries with it tough physical demands:
My face )╆ll grime with filth, Blanket my loins, elf all my hairs in knots,
And with presented nakedness outface
The winds and persecutions of the sky.
(II.iii.180-183)
From this soliloquy, Tom is a more vivid character than Edgar has previously been. He
sacrifices himself to the nakedness and the brutality of the elements in an act that places him
as a true outsider, to the extent that even the chameleon Kent, as Edgar reports, ╅Shunn╆d my
abhorr╆d society╆ ゅV.iii.さこぜょ. )n this respect Poor Tom appears as the most realistic Bedlamite
in any of the chosen plays. His speech is frequently incoherent – ╅O do, de, do, de, do, de╆
(III.iv.57) – and his babbling of devils echoes (ieronimo╆s invocation of the underworld. But
like Hamlet, Edgar realises his role not by practicing conventional theatrical madness but by
imitating the real thing.
But the very real madness of Lear is no performance to put on and off at will. His is a
descent into an inner tempest which he actively fears; just as with Hieronimo we painfully
witness a man fighting to stave off madness only to be overpowered by its chaotic potential.
The first lines tell us that Lear╆s mind is beginning to fail with age, according to Kent, he had
perceived a difference in the value of Albany and Cornwall, but Gloucester╆s reply suggests he
has either lost this perception or is unwisely ignoring it.50 The rashness of his decision to
divide his kingdom also points to a decline in reasonable thought, and his choleric
temperament is demonstrated by his irritable responses to Cordelia╆s ╅Nothing╆ ゅ).i.せぜょ. When
her steadfast refusal to meet his demands of dotage maddens Lear, he casts her off in a harsh
dismissal of their filial bonds. (is remark, ╅) loved her most, and thought to set my rest | On
her kind nursery╆ ゅ).i.ごさざ-4) at first seems more shocking than his action, but it also goes some
way to explicating his extreme behaviour, to the extent that she was both an object of sexual
desire and a substitute mother.51 As Bradley observes, Lear never intended to visit each of his
daughters in turn, he meant only to live with Cordelia as he has already intimated. The idea of
alternative monthly stays with Goneril and Regan is forced upon him at the moment Cordelia
is undutiful.52 As we have seen, the loss of a family member, be it literal or symbolic, has
50 A.C. Bradley, Shakespearean Tragedy (London: Penguin, 1991), p. 259. 51 See Kahn, on Lear╆s ╅frustrated incestuous desire for his daughter╆ ゅざぜょ, who argues that his desire for Cordelia is deflected into a deeper need for her as ╅daughter-mother╆ ゅしこょ. 52 Bradley, p. 231.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
23
contributed in lesser or greater terms to the madness of each character studied thus far. Lear
is no exception, and it is the events of this opening scene that provide the opportunity for
Goneril and Regan to capitalise on Lear╆s growing infirmity.
Whilst there is some critical support for regarding him as suffering initially from ╅acute
hypochondrial melancholy developing into mania╆, the structure of the play brings Lear to his
first major climactic moment at the end of act II.53 As the two sisters join forces to whittle
away his train of knights, and by extension the symbol of power, authority and control, Lear
begins to recognise the truth of the Fool╆s warnings. (is outburst in the speech beginning ╅O,
reason not the need!╆ ゅ)).ii.しじざょ marks the beginning of a mental breakdown, and the language
reflects this by dissolving into incoherence:
I will have such revenges on you both
That all the world shall – I will do such things –
What they are yet I know not, but they shall be
The terrors of the earth!
(II.ii.468-71)
He senses he will go mad, but he appears relatively in control of his language until well into
the storm scenes. One aspect of Lear╆s interaction with the Fool is to confirm he remains in his
right mind; as long as he can participate in conversation with the Fool he believes in his own
sanity. At the end of the first act, the Fool╆s comment ╅Thou shouldst not have been old till
thou hadst been wise╆ ゅ).v.しご-さょ provokes his cry, ╅O let me not be mad, not mad, sweet
heaven!╆ ゅ).v.しざょ; at the end of act )), his perception of what lies ahead after his thoughts of
revenge on his daughters is again addressed to the Fool: ╅O fool, ) shall go mad╆ ゅ)).ii.しずじょ. )t is
as though the Fool acts as a measure of Lear╆s sanity, insofar as his signing off line ╅And )╆ll go
to bed at noon╆ ゅ))).vi.せさょ, found only in the Folio, neatly checks Lear╆s last mad utterance; as
the Fool exits, so too does Lear╆s mad language.
The most obvious symptom of Lear╆s madness is the recurring domination of a fixed
idea, and whatever is presented to him is seized on by this idea and forced to express it,54 for
example in those words which first show his mind has succumbed to insanity: ╅Didst thou give
all to thy two daughters? And art thou come to this?╆ ゅ))).iv.しせ-9). A naked beggar in the form
of Poor Tom appears, and Lear projects onto him this perpetuating idea; thus Poor Tom
essentially displaces the Fool, and becomes the centre of Lear╆s concern. Whilst Lear╆s insanity
has destroyed the coherence of his speech and narrowed his imagination, it does however
53 See Hoeniger, 330, who argues that Lear would have been seen in Renaissance ideology as afflicted almost from the beginning of the play. 54 Bradley, p. 265.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
24
stimulate the power of moral perception and wider reflection. In A Midsummer Night’s Dream,
Shakespeare noted the relationship between lunatic, lover and poet, and here he presents the
near-truth that madness and genius are allied. Lear╆s growing impression of Tom is of a man
who represents truth and reality: ╅)s man no more than this? Consider him well╆ ゅ))).iv.ごこごょ, in
contrast with the seeming flatteries and corruptions of the old world of monarchy that he no
longer lives by. He regards the beggar with a kind of reverence, a ╅philosopher╆ ゅ))).iv.ごじこょ who
understands the truth of things. Madness provides him with an insight into the world of the
common man which he would not otherwise have enjoyed. And it is in this strain of thought
which unites, in his recovery, with the powers of redemption and love, and produces his
ultimate renunciation of the hate that has for so long blinded him. It may well be that this
sacrifice for love would never have been offered were it not for the knowledge that came to
Lear in his madness.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
25
Conclusion
The motif of tragic madness initiated by Kyd in The Spanish Tragedy, expanded on by
Shakespeare in the Additions, and disseminated widely throughout early modern culture,
created a forceful, dynamic model that would be developed to complex and searching ends.
Titus Andronicus then rekindles this development, by lighting the path from Classical to
Renaissance tragedy, and reforming and resituating the languages and symbols of madness for
a new stage audience. Hamlet was then one of Shakespeare╆s most popular plays, which is to a
large extent due to the fact that Hamlet╆s madness, often realistic in its representation, is both
an entertaining and searching performance. Unable to maintain the conflicting roles and
duties of son, revenger, and future king, Hamlet recognises his confusion by making madness,
and no longer Claudius, his enemy: ╅What I have done [...] | I here proclaim was madness╆
(V.ii.226-8). The question of individual responsibility is raised and dropped in the same
moment, and the culpability for Ophelia╆s death is moved onto the madness of political
upheaval and social disorder. Later, Lear╆s dreams of a quiet retirement, sketched out on the
map of his divided kingdom, are shattered by a kind of femininity represented through
Goneril and Regan, which has adopted the political strategy of absolute patriarchy for its own
subversive ends. Ophelia achieves a kind of feminine power too, her death lends a poignancy
to the tragic cause, but it is at the cost of her sanity and her life. King Lear appears not to have
enjoyed the same popularity as Hamlet, perhaps its portrayal of madness was too close to
reality, too desolate in its effect. Other plays cope with madness by stylising it and distancing
from it; Lear confronts it head on.
While these plays represent madness in order to heal or purge it, its destructive power
both in terms of corporate and individual bodies is retained. The cycle of madness from grief
to melancholy to fury and hysteria serves as a kind of political catharsis in these plays.
Through the dissolution of the established order, and via the downfall of its central figures,
madness is inherent in the reformation of these imagined worlds. Though the tragedies end,
they point however bleakly to a glimmering sense of hope, led by the next generation. As the
final lines in King Lear spoken by Edgar reiterate,
we that are young
Shall never see so much, nor live so long.
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
26
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Where multiple editions of the same work are listed, quotations are taken from the edition marked with an asterisk.
Bright, Timothy, A Treatise of Melancholie (London: Thomas Vautrollier, 1586)
Burton, Robert, The Anatomy of Melancholy, ed. Thomas C. Faulkner, Nicolas K. Kiessling and Rhonda L. Blair, 3 Vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989)
Hippocratic Writings, ed. G. E. R. Lloyd (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1983)
Kyd, Thomas, The First Part of Hieronimo and The Spanish Tragedy, ed. Andrew S. Cairncross (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1967)
— The Spanish Tragedy, ed. David Bevington (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1996)
— The Spanish Tragedy, ed. Clara Calvo and Jesus Tronch (London: Bloomsbury, 2013)*
Shakespeare, William, Hamlet, ed. John Dover Wilson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1957)
— Hamlet, ed. Harold Jenkins (London: Methuen, 1982)*
— Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, ed. Philip Edwards (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003)
— Hamlet, ed. Ann Thompson and Neil Taylor (London: Bloomsbury, 2006)
— King Lear, ed. R. A. Foakes (London: Methuen, 1997)*
— King Richard III, ed. James R. Siemon (London: Bloomsbury, 2009)
— The Tragedy of King Lear, ed. Jay L. Halio (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005)
— Titus Andronicus, ed. Jonathan Bate (London: Methuen, 1995)
Two Tudor Tragedies, ed. William Tydeman (London: Harmondsworth, 1992)
Seneca, Six Tragedies, ed. and trans. Emily Wilson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010)
Secondary Sources
Bruster, Douglas, ╅The Jailer╆s Daughter and the Politics of Madwomen╆s Language╆, Shakespeare Quarterly, 46 (1995), 277-300
Carroll, William, ╅╊The Base Shall Top Th╆Legitimate╊: The Bedlam Beggar and the Role of Edgar in King Lear╆, Shakespeare Quarterly, 38 (1987), 426-441
Clarke, Basil, Mental Disorder in Earlier Britain (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1975)
Crawford, Charles, A Concordance to the Works of Thomas Kyd, In Series, Materials for the Study of Old English Drama, Vol. 15 (Louvain: A. Uystpruyst, 1906-1910)
Foakes, R. A., Hamlet Versus Lear: Cultural Politics and Shakespeare's Art (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993)
The Dramatisation of Madness in Renaissance Tragedy
27
Foucault, Michel, Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason (New York: Random House, 1965)
Hallett, Charles A. and Elaine S. Hallett, The Revenger’s Madness: A Study of Revenge Tragedy Motifs (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1980)
Hoeniger, F.D., Medicine and Shakespeare in the English Renaissance (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1992)
Henley, Trish Thomas, 'Performing the Material Body: Enacting Passion, Madness, and Death on the Shakespearean Stage', Early Modern Cultural Studies, 7:1 (2007), 113-25
Hill, Eugene D., 'Senecan and Virgilian Perspectives in The Spanish Tragedy╆, English Literary Renaissance, 15 (1985), 143-165
Kahn, Coppelia, ╅The absent mother in King Lear╆, in Rewriting the Renaissance: The
Discourses of Sexual Difference in Early Modern Europe, ed. Margaret W. Ferguson, Maureen Quilligan and Nancy J. Vickers (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986), 33-49
Leggatt, Alexander, ╅Madness in Hamlet, King Lear, and Early Modern England╆, in Critical Essays on Shakespeare’s King Lear, ed. Jay L. Halio (New York: G. K. Hall & Co., 1996), 122-138
MacDonald, Michael, Mystical Bedlam: Madness, Anxiety, and Healing in Seventeenth-Century England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981)
Mack, Maynard, ╅The World of (amlet╆, in Shakespeare: Modern Essays in Criticism, ed. Leonard F. Dean (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967), 242-62
Marienstras, Richard, ╅The forest, hunting and sacrifice in Titus Andronicus╆, in New Perspectives on the Shakespearean World, ed. Richard Marienstras (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1985), 40-47
Neely, Carol Thomas, Distracted Subjects: Madness and Gender in Shakespeare and Early Modern Culture (New York: Cornell University Press, 2004)
— ╅╊Documents in Madness╊: Reading Madness and Gender in Shakespeare's Tragedies and Early Modern Culture╆, Shakespeare Quarterly, 42:3 (1991), 315-338
Palmer, D. J., ╅The unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable: language and action in Titus Andronicus╆, Critical Quarterly, 14:4 (1972), 320-339
Ratliff, John D., ╅(ieronimo explains himself╆, SP, 54 (1957) 112-118
Rossky, William, ╅)magination in the English Renaissance: Psychology and Poetic╆, Studies in the Renaissance, 5 (1958), 49-73
Salkeld, Duncan, Madness and Drama in the Age of Shakespeare (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1993)
Vickers, Brian, ╅Identifying Shakespeare's Additions to The Spanish Tragedy (1602): A New(er) Approach╆, Shakespeare, 8:1 (2012), 13-43