Difference between Jacobean Drama and Elizabethan Drama

Difference between Jacobean Drama and Elizabethan Drama

Elizabethan era refers to the era of Queen Elizabeth which was from 1562-1642. The dramas and the dramatic works that were created and performed during this era are known as Elizabethan drama. The Elizabethan era compares several renowned and well known dramatic works by renowned dramatists. The major and significant playwrights of the period were Christopher Marlow (1564-1593), Shakespeare (1564-1616), Peele (1558-1597), Lyly (1554-1606) and Greene (1560-1592). It is entirely unquestionable issue to regard Shakespeare as the greatest dramatist of not just the Elizabethan era but of all the times throughout. But before going to Shakespeare several others features and aspects of the age are to be taken into consideration along with many other significant and contemporary playwrights of the period.

Beginning and the features: In the beginning of the Elizabeth age the drama was in struggling into its maturity unlike the early period in which the drama was scholarly and aristocratic in authority. The dramas of the Elizabethan era were largely dependent upon the remarkable imagination of the dramatists and their great skill of great writing. Thus the dramas of the Elizabethan era had emphasis entirely not just upon the dramas that were appreciated by the public but also were socially acceptable through their language and content. As such the language of the dramatists was very refined and standard backed up by sensation.

        Dramatic Progress:  With the shift of drama from religious to a secular function in society playwrights and poets were among the leading artists of the age. Towards the end of the seventeenth century the popularity and progress of drama kept on increasing throughout the time. Thus the dramatic works of various renowned playwrights viz. William Shakespeare, Christopher Marlow, Robert Greene, John Lyly and Thomas Lodge etc gained very profound fame.

        Comedy of Manner: One of the prominent features of the Elizabeth feature of the Elizabethan drama was ‘Comedy of Manner’. In this the social manners of the contemporary society were highlighted by the playwrights. The characters of the dramas were portrayed as the true representatives of the entire age. The playwrights in this age were concerned with highlighting the follies and vices of the sophisticated society in a very amusing manner; although their description acquired a bit of exaggeration but yet they were successful in conveying their idea thus attracting huge number of crowd audience to the theatre. Ex William Shakespeare’s ‘As You Like It, Merchant of Venice etc.

        Dramatic Works: Amongst the renowned dramatic works was Christopher Marlow’s ‘Turbulaine the Great’ (1857), Jew of Malta (1589), and Dr Fantus, Thomas Keate’s ‘The Spanish Tragedy, proving a roaring success became ‘exemplar of the Elizabethan Revenge’ tradition. The incomparable works of Shakespeare including Hamlet, Macbeth, Othello etc, along with George Peele’s ‘The Chronicles of Edward I (1590), Marlow’s ‘Edward II’, ‘The Massacre of Paris’ etc.

     JACOBEAN ERA had its beginning marked by the Elizabethan dramas falling into neglect in around 16^th century. The famous dramatists of the Elizabethan era were taken over by that of Jacobean era. The famous and renowned dramatists of the era were Ben Johnson, John Marsh (1575-1634), Thomas Middleton (1570-162- ), George Champman (1539-1634), Francis Beaumont (1584-1616) and John Fletcher (1579-1625).

        Features: The Jacobean dramatists undertook to more realistic way of writing. They enormously enhanced the sensational level of writing within their dramatic work. Consequently the dramatic works of the Jacobean age gained the description and sequences of murder, blood, loot and many such criminal sequences became a casual part of the Jacobean dramatic writings. The Shakespeare contemporaries like Beaumont and Fletcher were amongst the prominent ones to do this in their plays. The standard and the classicism of dramas established in the Elizabethan era started getting a downfall as the primary focus of the dramatists shifted towards producing evil and licentious scheme for their own sake making the character and situation immortal to the extent that the stage became frivolous, bad and improper representation of the dramatic actions, thus making drama of cheap nature and quality.

        Divisions: Unlike the Elizabethan age, the Jacobean era had dramas divided into two classes; one were those dramatists who were of the Elizabethan era and the others were the dramatists of the Jacobean era. They were divided as:

1.    The dramatists of the Old School, comprising of Decker Heywood, Webster, Fletcher, Beaumont, Fletcher.

2.   The Satiric group consisting of Chapman, Johnson, Marston, Middleton and Tourneur.

These groups of satiric play especially Ben Johnson were fond of mocking the old school dramatists. He had lack of sympathy in portrayal of both life and character.

        Comedy of Humor: Unlike the Elizabethan age the Jacobean age having an entirely identical satirical group had also the comedy of humour. The comedy of humour mainly deals with the oddities of the characters i.e. the odd features and characteristics of the character. It represented and threw a whimsical and shadow over the life of the character. Also the aim of the playwrights is to have in the character, a dominance of humor in their personality. Some prominent examples of Comedy of Humor are Ben Johnson’s ‘Every Man In His Humor’ (1598), ‘The Alchemist’, ‘Every Man Out of His Humor’ (1599).

     Dramatic Works: The great dramatic works of the Jacobean era were Thomas Dekker’s ‘The Shoemaker’s Holiday, Thomas Heywood’s ‘A Woman Killed with Kindness’, John Webster is famous for his two renowned plays ‘The White Devil’ and ‘The Duchess of the Malfi’. Among the other plays the Philaster and the ‘Maid’s Tragedy’ were amongst the prominent ones.

Thus it can be fairly concluded that the Elizabethan and Jacobean dramas hold a considerate differences and distinctions amongst themselves.

ARISTOTLE’S CONCEPT OF COMPLEX PLOT

Aristotle’s concept of plot is entirely based and dependent upon his concept of tragedy. The reason being, his concept of plot is a constituent of his concept over tragedy of which Plot is also one of the five constituent. Thus according to Aristotle tragedy means “Imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude, in a language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the separate kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action not of narrative; through pity and fear affecting the proper catharsis of these emotions.” This concept of tragedy states its six constituents viz. plot, character, thought, diction, melody and spectacle.

        So the term plot, as a constituent of the tragedy refers to a component that determines the meaning of the play. According to Aristotle plot means “the arrangements of the incidents.” i.e. the ways and sequences are presented in the story. Aristotle divided the plots into two categories viz. ‘Simple Plot’ and ‘Complex Plot’. Of this, the simple plot he stated as an action which is continuous and one, is called Simple Plot. Complex Plot on the other hand was given quiet special treatment by Aristotle. According to him the complex plot consists of either ‘Peripeteia’ or ‘the reversal of intention’ and ‘Anagnorisis’ or ‘recognition’ connected with ‘catastrophe’. In order to properly understand complex plot, both of these constituents are to be given due consideration.

        Peripeteia: According to Aristotle, Peripeteia occurs when a character performs an action and this becomes the cause of giving rise to an effect which is contrary of that effect which he intends to produce. In other words, it is the sudden reversal or inversion of desired effect which were supposed and expected to occur. The English form of Peripeteia is Peripety. Aristotle defines Peripeteia as “A change by which actions veers round in its opposite subject always to our rules of probability or necessity.” Example, In Hamlet it occurs when Hamlet draws the sword out of avenge from Claudius against his father’s murder but hesitates seeing him praying and believing that he would go to heaven if he’s killed now.

        The reversal of the situation or the change of fortune form the hero should occur in the manner which is contrary of what has been expected by the audience which is equally surprising but is still a justifiable consequence or the effect of the preceding cause, responsible for undergoing such effect. According to Aristotle Peripeteia along with discovery is more effective when the reversal that occurs in drama is negative. Yet Peripeteia is not confined to only form of being negative. It can be equally positive as negative or vice-versa. Peripeteia consequently leads to anagnorisis or the discovery of the true facts. Soon after Peripeteia a new discovery or revelation (termed as anagnorisis) takes place.

The termed being a Greek one, in its Greek sense also means recognition, not only of a person but also of what that person represented. For instance if the protagonist who faces the situation of Peripeteia is further, revealed of the anagnorisis or the ultimate truth after the truth that he knew turns out to be contrary. Finally it is a perception that results in an insight with the hero, often revealing his relation with the antagonistic character within Aristotelian tragedy. (In Aristotelian tragedy it was the discovery of one’s own identity or true character of someone else’s identity or true nature by tragic hero). Thus Anagnorisis in Aristotle’s words can be concluded as a change from ignorance to knowledge producing love or hate between the persons destined by the poor or proper fortune. Ex. Oedipus, despite his attempt of changing his fate of killing his father and marrying his mother, does the same in ignorance and later on the truth is revealed to him, which turns out to be entirely unexpected. Thus anagnorisis is caused as a result of Peripeteia.

Conclusively, both these factors or concepts of peripety and anagnorisis being the major components of a complex plot hence declaring it a complex situation which progresses in a very complicated manner and further turns out to be contrary and inverse of as it should have been in actual as of peripeteia. Thus consequently the anagnorisis occurs which reveals the true fact (after the inversion of the situation) which was unknown and in  its stead something else was known; now after the other thing has turned out wrong the actual truth is revealed or disclosed later and thus forming or making the plot very complex. Now at last after the actual situation turns out to be contrary or distinct of previous situation truth has also to be revealed which is done through anagnorisis. Thus consequently making the plot complicated and complex. Thus, this is the concept of the complex plot in respect of Aristotle’s concept of the complex plot.