It has been a tough and interesting semester around the Bloffice. Like most of you, I'd never engaged with Old English poetry before enrolling in this course, and probably never will again (just kidding! Some of this stuff was very inspiring, the Shakesperean sonnets in particular). But, with this wonderful play by Ben Johnson, we nudge ever closer to the "modern" sensibilities that I am far better accustomed to. I have never read Shakespeare's plays (needless to say, I was not what you'd call a "good" student in high school), so Johnson's Volpone is my first introduction to this sort of thing.
The classical referents that have defined the work we've gone over this semester thus far are still most certainly here: in the first few pages alone, the always erudite Norton footnotes point out references to the Latin playwright Plautus, the poet Horace, the Illiad, the Greek philosopher Hermotimus, and so on. The play has one foot in the world we've grown so used to over the last few months, and yet its other foot is firmly lodged in something completely different. Most noticeably, this is a seemingly almost godless world, with sexual inhibitions at an all-time low (need I bring up Volpone's attempted rape? Or the constantly alluded to sexual suggestiveness of Lady Would-Be Politic, who at one point actually says "This band shows not my neck enough" like an old English sorority girl?).
And then there are the characters, who are far from the paragons of moral and civic virtue that we learned quite a bit about in More's Utopia. Everyone's a con man, it would seem (or, put more eloquently by Mosca: "All the wise world is little else in nature/ But parasites or subparasites" (p. 1371). It's hard to empathize with the people being conned when the people being conned are seemingly MORE reprehensible than the con-men themselves. (Take, for example, the scene where Mosca goes through an entire list of terminal (and, of course, made up) illnesses that are plaguing the ailing Volpone. He's saying this Corbaccio, who responds to each new illness saying: "Good," "'Tis good," and, eventually, "Excellent, excellent. Sure I shall outlast him!") It brings to mind, of all things, a TV show like Seinfeld or It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia--horrible people doing horrible things to other horrible people, with the creator depicting all of the proceedings with a light comic touch (and, it would seem, with a serious undertone of fear and contempt re: what the Norton Anthology terms the "proto-capitalistic" society of early 17th century Europe).
It's a sensibility that would be honed, refined, and vulgarized (because, really, some of the soliloquies here--particularly those by the hyper-eloquent Mosca, are beautiful in and of themselves) over the next few centuries; luckily, we will always be able to return to this, one of the original sources.
Great post! I thoroughly appreciated your causal connections of this play to more modern trends and plot lines we are familiar with today. Beyond the content of your analysis, which served to explain your point impeccably, I found the style and delivery of your thoughts to be highly effective in capturing and maintaining my genuine intrigue and interest. My experience with writing these ruminations has been a significant learning experience in and of itself. I find myself developing and explaining my point of view in such a formal, stringently articulated, manner that, often times, I lost the relatablity factor that garners more well-received success. God.. even that last line may be too contrived-sounding to articulate what I'm saying.
ReplyDeleteANYWAY- I don't mean to ramble about my perceived shortcomings with writing ruminations...My intention is to commend you on being able to relay a solid reaction/connection to this play with a casually seamless charm. More specifically, the final example you offer, linking the cast of characters to that of Seinfeld or Always Sunny, was a consummate parallel to Jonson's play, and a perfectly fitting closing reference to how this work nudges ever closer to more "modern" sensibilities.
If I didn't blow your head up enough already, great success! haha
I wrote a wild card based off of my reaction to this rumination and I thought it would be appropriate for me to link it here for you, and anyone else who may be interested after reading your post.
ReplyDeletehttp://a-glimpse-of-internal-perspective.blogspot.com/2011/05/wild-card-thinking-beyond-office.html
Volpone reminded me of some old folktale I read about a fox that essentially conned and lied to every animal in the forest in order to kill and eat them. The only difference here is that the fox in the folktale got away with it all and at the end brought a bunch of conned, dead bears back to feed it's pups. Volpone didn't make out so well.
ReplyDeleteI can definitely see the differences in moral beliefs between the older folktale that condoned deceit for the sake of survival and Volpone which condemned the use of deceit in a civilized society where survival was more assured. Interestingly enough, London did end up becoming somewhat of a center of crime and deprivation just Jonson had apparently predicted (according to Norton).