What do you think?
Rate this book
The Duchess of Malfi [Annotated]
More widely studied and more frequently performed than ever before, John Webster's The Duchess of Malfi is here presented in an accessible and thoroughly up-to-date edition.
Based on the Revels Plays text, the notes have been augmented to cast further light both on Webster's amazing dialogue and on the stage action. An entirely new introduction sets the tragedy in the context of pre-Civil War England and gives a revealing view of its imagery and dramatic action.
From its well-documented early performances to the two productions seen in the West End of London in the 1995-96 season, a stage history gives an account of the play in performance. Students, actors, directors and theatre-goers will all find here a reappraisal of Webster's artistry in the greatest age of English theatre, which highlights why it has lived on stage with renewed force in the last decades of the twentieth century.
Based on the Revels Plays text, the notes have been augmented to cast further light both on Webster's amazing dialogue and on the stage action. An entirely new introduction sets the tragedy in the context of pre-Civil War England and gives a revealing view of its imagery and dramatic action.
From its well-documented early performances to the two productions seen in the West End of London in the 1995-96 season, a stage history gives an account of the play in performance. Students, actors, directors and theatre-goers will all find here a reappraisal of Webster's artistry in the greatest age of English theatre, which highlights why it has lived on stage with renewed force in the last decades of the twentieth century.
Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1614
278 people are currently reading
7,173 people want to read
About the author
John Webster
122books99followersJohn Webster (c.1580 � c.1634) was an English Jacobean dramatist best known for his tragedies The White Devil (1612) and The Duchess of Malfi (1613), which are often regarded as masterpieces of the early 17th-century English stage. He was a contemporary of William Shakespeare.
Librarian’s note: There is more than one author in the ŷ database with this name.
Librarian’s note: There is more than one author in the ŷ database with this name.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 706 reviews
December 8, 2019
This play, the finest Jacobean drama outside the Shakespeare canon, is not only a gem of poetry and wit, but also a meditation on the vanity of public life and the inevitability of death. The satiric prose is filled with such poetic imagery and the subtle verse is so sharp in its commentary that each individual use of language complements all the others.
The reader is surprised to find in such a merciless play so much goodness and such tender love scenes. Perhaps that is part of the reason why, in spite of the absurdities of the plot and the decadent horror of many of its incidents, this play leaves the reader--as I believe Hamlet does too--with a sweet feeling of sadness and an increased reverence for struggling humanity.
October 10, 2020
The Tragedy of the Dutchesse of Malfy, John Webster
The Duchess of Malfi is a Jacobean revenge tragedy written by British dramatist John Webster in 1612�1613.
The play begins as a love story, when the Duchess marries beneath her class, and ends as a nightmarish tragedy as her two brothers undertake their revenge, destroying themselves in the process. Jacobean drama continued the trend of stage violence and horror set by Elizabethan tragedy, under the influence of Seneca.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز بیست و یکم ماه جولای سال 2015میلادی
عنوان: دوشس ملفی؛ نوینسده: جان وبستر؛ مترجم: ناهید قادری؛ تهران، نشر نی، 1393، در 200ص؛ شابک 9789641853855؛ موضوع نمایشنامه های کلاسیک از نویسندگان بریتانیایی - سده 17میلادی
دوشس ملفی (که در اصل با عنوان «سوگنمایش دوشس ملفی» چاپ شد)، سوگنمایشی هولناک است، که به قلم «جان وبستر»، نمایشنامه نویس بریتانیایی، در سالهای 1612میلادی تا سال 1613میلادی، بنوشته و در همان سالها، در «لندن» به نمایش درآمده است؛ نمایشنامه، در سال 1623میلادی برای نخستین بار چاپ شد، داستان بر پایه ی رخدادهای زندگی «جووانا د آرگونا»، «دوشس آمالفی (سال درگذشت سال 1511میلادی)» است؛ نمایشنامه به شکل یک داستان عاشقانه، آغاز می‌شود� که در طی آن «دوشس»، با مباشر خویش «آنتونیو»، بی خبر از برادرهایش، ازدواج می‌کند� ازدواجی که بعدها، هنگامی که برادرها از آن خبر می‌یابند� برای او به قیمت جانش تمام می‌شود�
نمایشنامه از سوگنمایش‌ها� «سنکا» وام گرفته� شده است، و یک تراژدی انتقام است؛ پیچیدگی‌ها� برخی از شخصیت‌ها� از جمله «بوزولا»، و «دوشس»، با زبان شاعرانه ی «وبستر»، موجب شده� است تا نمایشنامه، به یکی از بهترین نمونه� های «درام رنسانس» ادبیات «بریتانیا»، بدل شود؛ «دوشس ملفی»، یک داستان واقعی است، که از کتاب «قصر عیش»، نوشته «ویلیام پینتر»، گرفته شده� است؛ این کتاب مجموعه داستان‌های� است از مردان قدرتمند، که نه بر اساس خرد، بلکه بر پایه ی اغراضشان، تصمیم میگرفتند، و پیآمدهای ناگواری بر جای میگذاشتند؛ «پینتر» نیز، کتاب خودش را از روی اثری با عنوان «تراژدی‌ها� تاریخی»، نوشته ی «بله فورست»، برگردان، و اقتباس کرده بودند، و مآخذ «بله فورست» نیز، رمان کوتاهی بود، به قلم یکی از دوستان «آنتونیو» مباشر «دوشس»، که حدود یکسال پس از رخداد واقعه، نگارش یافته بود؛ «جووانا دِ آرگونا» دوشس تاریخی «مالفی»، در سالها� 1478میلادی تا سال 1511میلادی، می‌زیست� است؛ او با همسر نخستش که یک دوک و مباشرش بود، در سن دوازده سالگی ازدواج می‌کند� و تا پیش از بیست سالگی، در حالیکه باردار بوده، بیوه می‌شود� در سال 1510میلادی، خبر ازدواج پنهانی او با «آنتونیو دا بولونا»، در کل «ایتالیا»، بحث و جنجال بزرگی به راه می‌اندازد� دوشس تلاش می‌کند� به «لورتو» بگریزد، اما دستگیر و زندانی می‌شود� و از آن پس هیچ‌ک� خبری از او دریافت نمی‌کن�
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 18/06/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
The Duchess of Malfi is a Jacobean revenge tragedy written by British dramatist John Webster in 1612�1613.
The play begins as a love story, when the Duchess marries beneath her class, and ends as a nightmarish tragedy as her two brothers undertake their revenge, destroying themselves in the process. Jacobean drama continued the trend of stage violence and horror set by Elizabethan tragedy, under the influence of Seneca.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز بیست و یکم ماه جولای سال 2015میلادی
عنوان: دوشس ملفی؛ نوینسده: جان وبستر؛ مترجم: ناهید قادری؛ تهران، نشر نی، 1393، در 200ص؛ شابک 9789641853855؛ موضوع نمایشنامه های کلاسیک از نویسندگان بریتانیایی - سده 17میلادی
دوشس ملفی (که در اصل با عنوان «سوگنمایش دوشس ملفی» چاپ شد)، سوگنمایشی هولناک است، که به قلم «جان وبستر»، نمایشنامه نویس بریتانیایی، در سالهای 1612میلادی تا سال 1613میلادی، بنوشته و در همان سالها، در «لندن» به نمایش درآمده است؛ نمایشنامه، در سال 1623میلادی برای نخستین بار چاپ شد، داستان بر پایه ی رخدادهای زندگی «جووانا د آرگونا»، «دوشس آمالفی (سال درگذشت سال 1511میلادی)» است؛ نمایشنامه به شکل یک داستان عاشقانه، آغاز می‌شود� که در طی آن «دوشس»، با مباشر خویش «آنتونیو»، بی خبر از برادرهایش، ازدواج می‌کند� ازدواجی که بعدها، هنگامی که برادرها از آن خبر می‌یابند� برای او به قیمت جانش تمام می‌شود�
نمایشنامه از سوگنمایش‌ها� «سنکا» وام گرفته� شده است، و یک تراژدی انتقام است؛ پیچیدگی‌ها� برخی از شخصیت‌ها� از جمله «بوزولا»، و «دوشس»، با زبان شاعرانه ی «وبستر»، موجب شده� است تا نمایشنامه، به یکی از بهترین نمونه� های «درام رنسانس» ادبیات «بریتانیا»، بدل شود؛ «دوشس ملفی»، یک داستان واقعی است، که از کتاب «قصر عیش»، نوشته «ویلیام پینتر»، گرفته شده� است؛ این کتاب مجموعه داستان‌های� است از مردان قدرتمند، که نه بر اساس خرد، بلکه بر پایه ی اغراضشان، تصمیم میگرفتند، و پیآمدهای ناگواری بر جای میگذاشتند؛ «پینتر» نیز، کتاب خودش را از روی اثری با عنوان «تراژدی‌ها� تاریخی»، نوشته ی «بله فورست»، برگردان، و اقتباس کرده بودند، و مآخذ «بله فورست» نیز، رمان کوتاهی بود، به قلم یکی از دوستان «آنتونیو» مباشر «دوشس»، که حدود یکسال پس از رخداد واقعه، نگارش یافته بود؛ «جووانا دِ آرگونا» دوشس تاریخی «مالفی»، در سالها� 1478میلادی تا سال 1511میلادی، می‌زیست� است؛ او با همسر نخستش که یک دوک و مباشرش بود، در سن دوازده سالگی ازدواج می‌کند� و تا پیش از بیست سالگی، در حالیکه باردار بوده، بیوه می‌شود� در سال 1510میلادی، خبر ازدواج پنهانی او با «آنتونیو دا بولونا»، در کل «ایتالیا»، بحث و جنجال بزرگی به راه می‌اندازد� دوشس تلاش می‌کند� به «لورتو» بگریزد، اما دستگیر و زندانی می‌شود� و از آن پس هیچ‌ک� خبری از او دریافت نمی‌کن�
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 18/06/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
April 9, 2025
The language is striking, and there’s plenty of sex, drugs, and rock’n’roll (or was that sex, poison, and murder?), but I didn’t love The Duchess of Malfi. I thought the play compared rather unfavorably to Beaumont and Fletcher’s The Maid’s Tragedy, which I read last week. The men and women in The Maid’s Tragedy—as ridiculous as their circumstances were—felt like real people trapped in a terrible nightmare. The Duchess of Malfi is certainly a nightmare, and its characters don’t feel unreal, necessarily—but I had trouble tracking their motivations until the last two acts, and all but the assassin were basically one-note (though I’m sure good actors could bring them to life). The political stakes were hard to follow, but there was no real sense of intimacy, either—so it didn’t really work as a drama about Dukes and Duchesses, or about brothers and sisters.
Like Ben Jonson’s comedies, this is a play about nasty people being nasty and good people being good, but mostly nasty people being nasty. It’s easy to see how the horror in the play might be effective on stage, but on the page, the play mostly lacks the sheer delight Jonson takes in his nasties, Marlowe in his murders, or Shakespeare in every word and thing.
[Edit: this play may have caught me on a bad week for Elizabethan theater. I had other things on my mind and I drew out reading it in a way that doesn’t generally help these plays, which tend to fare better if you play them out in your mind over a few hours of complete focus (perhaps with an intermission or two as necessary), as if you were indeed at the theater. Perhaps I would have seen and comprehended more, and gotten more out of it, if I’d read it last week or next, or all in one go...]
Like Ben Jonson’s comedies, this is a play about nasty people being nasty and good people being good, but mostly nasty people being nasty. It’s easy to see how the horror in the play might be effective on stage, but on the page, the play mostly lacks the sheer delight Jonson takes in his nasties, Marlowe in his murders, or Shakespeare in every word and thing.
[Edit: this play may have caught me on a bad week for Elizabethan theater. I had other things on my mind and I drew out reading it in a way that doesn’t generally help these plays, which tend to fare better if you play them out in your mind over a few hours of complete focus (perhaps with an intermission or two as necessary), as if you were indeed at the theater. Perhaps I would have seen and comprehended more, and gotten more out of it, if I’d read it last week or next, or all in one go...]
September 23, 2022
I was talking about the detective FD James "Close Her Face", the name of which was a phrase from the tragedy of the Elizabethan playwright John Webster, not having in mind to ever get acquainted with the play - where are we, where are the gloomy Elizabethans? But books have this ability to talk to each other through us, the readers.
I was invited to A Midsummer Night's Dream by Shakespeare's Globe Theater, and I took it as a return courtesy.tickets for another Globus performance of the HD Theater, it turned out to be The Duchess of Malfi. "Wait, wait," I said to myself, "Isn't this the drama from which the Duchess of the English detective took the title for her debut?" It turned out to be the one. Less than a month has passed, I'm already writing about her.
A beautiful rich, titled and childless young widow does not intend to bury herself after her husband's death. Nothing definite is said about the first marriage, but by some signs it can be guessed that it was concluded by calculation and the husband was much older than his wife. Now the duchess's brothers, the Calabrian Duke Ferdinand and the Cardinal (for whom the playwright did not bother with a name, confining himself to a rank, as for the main character with a title and surname) want to sell their treasure again as dearly as possible, for which purpose they forbid their sister to lead a secular life, Sit and wait with a gray mouse, and we will find a suitable husband for you.
But here, you see. what a deal, it's one thing to be the mistress of your life. to your body and your money, another thing is to voluntarily transfer the rights to all this to some guy. That is, it is clear that the next candidate selected by the brothers will again turn out to be a rich old man who will not last long, having increased the already considerable wealth of the Malfi family with his fortune. How does it feel to feel like a live bait, on which they catch another big fish? However, the Cardinal there is the main one for greed, the lustful Ferdinand directly lusts after his sister, which she can not like in any way.
And next to him all the time is Secretary Antonio Bologna. He lived in France for a long time, is not well-born and is not rich. but he has excellent manners, is good-looking, young, smart, in love. Now tell me. does a woman need something else? The Duchess falls in love with the secretary, they are secretly married and live in love and harmony for a while. But the jealous Ferdinand has assigned a spy to his sister, the equerry Bossola suspects that the burden of widowhood is not so heavy for the duchess. as it should be, and even treats her, suffering from toxicosis, apricots, which the woman eats with pleasure, further strengthening the fiscal in conviction. that the matter is unclean.
Now watch your hands. In the immediate vicinity of Bossola, a lady gives birth to a son, the child grows up in the castle for about three years, she has already managed to give birth to twins to her beloved husband, and the spy still does not inform the employer. The brothers who have already suspected something, who have just found a new brother-in-law, order their sister to go down the aisle, she already sends her beloved with their firstborn and a fair amount of money to another city in order to join them with the babies after. Publicly, the Duchess expels the secretary, accusing him of embezzlement.
Кровавая елизаветинская драма
- Сядь и прочитай
Трагедию какую-нибудь мне.
- Боюсь, тоску я вашу увеличу.
- Ты ошибаешься. Когда мы слышим,
Что есть страдания сильнее наших,
От этого нам делается легче.
Я рассказывала о детективе ФД Джеймс "Лицо ее закройте" названием которого стала фраза из трагедии драматурга елизаветинской эпохи Джона Уэбстера, в мыслях не имея свести когда-нибудь знакомство с пьесой - где мы, где мрачные елизаветинцы? Но у книг есть это умение разговаривать друг с другом посредством нас, читателей.
Меня пригласили на "Сон в летнюю ночь" от шекспировского театра "Глобус", в качестве ответной любезности я взяла.билеты на другой глобусовский спектакль "Театра HD", им оказалась "Герцогиня Мальфи". "Постой-постой, - сказала я себе, - А не та ли это драма, из которой герцогиня английского детектива взяла название для своего дебюта?" Оказалось, та самая. Не прошло и месяца, уж я пишу о ней.
Красивая богатая, титулованная и бездетная молодая вдова не намерена хоронить себя после смерти мужа. О первом браке не говорится ничего определенного, но по некоторым признакам можно угадать, что он заключался по расчету и муж был значительно старше жены. Теперь братья герцогини, калабрийский герцог Фердинанд и Кардинал (именем для которого драматург не озаботился, ограничившись саном, как для главной героини титулом и фамилией) желают снова продать свое сокровище как можно дороже, с каковой целью запрещают сестре вести светскую жизнь Сиди и жди серой мышкой, а уж мы тебе приищем подходящего мужа.
Но тут, понимаете. какой расклад, одно дело быть хозяйкой своей жизни. своему телу и своим деньгам, другое - добровольно передать права на все это какому-то мужику. То есть, понятно, что следующий кандидат, подобранный братьями, снова окажется богатым стариком, который долго не протянет, увеличив своим состоянием без того немалые богатства семьи Мальфи. Каково это, чувствовать себя живцом, на которого ловят очередную крупную рыбину? Впрочем, главный по алчности там Кардинал, похотливый Фердинанд прямо вожделеет сестру, что никак не может ей нравится.
А рядом все время секретарь Антонио Болонья. Он долго жил во Франции, не родовит и не богат. но обладает прекрасными манерами, хорош собой, молод, умен, влюблен. А теперь скажите. нужно ли женщине что-то еще? Герцогиня влюбляется в секретаря, они тайно венчаются и некоторое время живут в любви и согласии. Но ревнивый Фердинанд приставил к сестре шпиона, конюший Боссола подозревает, что бремя вдовства не так тяжело герцогине. как должно бы и даже угощает ее, мающуюся токсикозом, абрикосами, которые женщина с удовольствием съедает, еще больше укрепив фискала в убеждении. что дело нечисто.
А теперь следите за руками. В непосредственной близости от Боссолы дама рожает сына, ребенок растет в замке лет этак до трех, уже она успела и близнецов родить любимому мужу, а шпион все не доносит работодателю. Уже заподозрившие что-то братья, которые как раз подыскали нового шурина, приказывают сестре идти под венец, уже она отправляет любимого с их первенцем и изрядной суммой денег в другой город с тем, чтобы после присоединиться к ним с малютками. Прилюдно герцогиня изгоняет секретаря, обвинив в хищениях.
И все бы ничего. но хитрый Боссола, единственный из ее придворных, не говорит об Антонио гадостей, даже и напротив, так, в стиле: ""Я старый солдат" упрекает хозяйку. что она выгнала единственного честного и преданного человека в своем окружении. Растрогавшись, Мальфи открывает ему правду и свой план бежать вслед за мужем, тот советует ей сделать это под видом паломничества к святым местам. Тут-то ее и хватают. обвинив кроме распутства еще и в богохульничестве.
Герцогиня томится в замке, ставшем темницей, в то время, как один ее брат откровенно распутничает, а другой потихоньку сходит с ума, не в силах противостоять влечению к собственной сестре. Желая сделать ее муки невыносимыми, он приказывает изготовить восковые фигуры мужа и сына, показывает ей, бедняжка страдает, после чего, рассудку вопреки (но елизаветинская драма считала повествовательную логику излишеством), братья приказывают Боссоле удавить герцогиню вместе с малютками и преданной служанкой Кориолой.
После чего Фердинанд окончательно съезжает кукушечкой, на палача Боссолу снисходит раскаяние и решимость исправить добрыми делами причиненное зло (будто такое возможно). Но плохим лучше не пытаться быть хорошими, он по ошибке смертельно ранит Антонио, который приходит к жестокосердным родственникам жены искать примирения, а потом все всех убивают, включая любовницу Кардинала Джулию. Такое - в общем все умерли
Чушь несусветная, но каким-то парадоксальным образом в постановке Доминика Дромгула и исполнении актеров Глобуса таковой не выглядит. В актерах видишь не марионеток, а живых людей. Джемма Артертон и Сара МакРэй в ролях герцогини и Кориолы прекрасны, андрогинная красота Дэвида Доусона (Фердинанд) являет невероятную смесь порока и обаяния. А как они зажигают свечи! А как хорош финальный танец после воскрешения для поклона.
Вирджинии Вулф говорила, что в елизаветинской драме нет характеров, есть орудия мести, одетые в мужское и женское платье.Однако в силе воздействия и чувстве юмора, хотя бы и сплошь на темы телесного низа, ей отказать нельзя. Пусть дюжина трупов в финале пьесы не трогает нас, но посреди какой-нибудь особенно невероятной и занудной пьесы вдруг поразит проникновенная деталь, тронет душу безыскусный и тонкий мотив.
Что ж , "Герцогиня Мальфи" такова.
I was invited to A Midsummer Night's Dream by Shakespeare's Globe Theater, and I took it as a return courtesy.tickets for another Globus performance of the HD Theater, it turned out to be The Duchess of Malfi. "Wait, wait," I said to myself, "Isn't this the drama from which the Duchess of the English detective took the title for her debut?" It turned out to be the one. Less than a month has passed, I'm already writing about her.
A beautiful rich, titled and childless young widow does not intend to bury herself after her husband's death. Nothing definite is said about the first marriage, but by some signs it can be guessed that it was concluded by calculation and the husband was much older than his wife. Now the duchess's brothers, the Calabrian Duke Ferdinand and the Cardinal (for whom the playwright did not bother with a name, confining himself to a rank, as for the main character with a title and surname) want to sell their treasure again as dearly as possible, for which purpose they forbid their sister to lead a secular life, Sit and wait with a gray mouse, and we will find a suitable husband for you.
But here, you see. what a deal, it's one thing to be the mistress of your life. to your body and your money, another thing is to voluntarily transfer the rights to all this to some guy. That is, it is clear that the next candidate selected by the brothers will again turn out to be a rich old man who will not last long, having increased the already considerable wealth of the Malfi family with his fortune. How does it feel to feel like a live bait, on which they catch another big fish? However, the Cardinal there is the main one for greed, the lustful Ferdinand directly lusts after his sister, which she can not like in any way.
And next to him all the time is Secretary Antonio Bologna. He lived in France for a long time, is not well-born and is not rich. but he has excellent manners, is good-looking, young, smart, in love. Now tell me. does a woman need something else? The Duchess falls in love with the secretary, they are secretly married and live in love and harmony for a while. But the jealous Ferdinand has assigned a spy to his sister, the equerry Bossola suspects that the burden of widowhood is not so heavy for the duchess. as it should be, and even treats her, suffering from toxicosis, apricots, which the woman eats with pleasure, further strengthening the fiscal in conviction. that the matter is unclean.
Now watch your hands. In the immediate vicinity of Bossola, a lady gives birth to a son, the child grows up in the castle for about three years, she has already managed to give birth to twins to her beloved husband, and the spy still does not inform the employer. The brothers who have already suspected something, who have just found a new brother-in-law, order their sister to go down the aisle, she already sends her beloved with their firstborn and a fair amount of money to another city in order to join them with the babies after. Publicly, the Duchess expels the secretary, accusing him of embezzlement.
Кровавая елизаветинская драма
- Сядь и прочитай
Трагедию какую-нибудь мне.
- Боюсь, тоску я вашу увеличу.
- Ты ошибаешься. Когда мы слышим,
Что есть страдания сильнее наших,
От этого нам делается легче.
Я рассказывала о детективе ФД Джеймс "Лицо ее закройте" названием которого стала фраза из трагедии драматурга елизаветинской эпохи Джона Уэбстера, в мыслях не имея свести когда-нибудь знакомство с пьесой - где мы, где мрачные елизаветинцы? Но у книг есть это умение разговаривать друг с другом посредством нас, читателей.
Меня пригласили на "Сон в летнюю ночь" от шекспировского театра "Глобус", в качестве ответной любезности я взяла.билеты на другой глобусовский спектакль "Театра HD", им оказалась "Герцогиня Мальфи". "Постой-постой, - сказала я себе, - А не та ли это драма, из которой герцогиня английского детектива взяла название для своего дебюта?" Оказалось, та самая. Не прошло и месяца, уж я пишу о ней.
Красивая богатая, титулованная и бездетная молодая вдова не намерена хоронить себя после смерти мужа. О первом браке не говорится ничего определенного, но по некоторым признакам можно угадать, что он заключался по расчету и муж был значительно старше жены. Теперь братья герцогини, калабрийский герцог Фердинанд и Кардинал (именем для которого драматург не озаботился, ограничившись саном, как для главной героини титулом и фамилией) желают снова продать свое сокровище как можно дороже, с каковой целью запрещают сестре вести светскую жизнь Сиди и жди серой мышкой, а уж мы тебе приищем подходящего мужа.
Но тут, понимаете. какой расклад, одно дело быть хозяйкой своей жизни. своему телу и своим деньгам, другое - добровольно передать права на все это какому-то мужику. То есть, понятно, что следующий кандидат, подобранный братьями, снова окажется богатым стариком, который долго не протянет, увеличив своим состоянием без того немалые богатства семьи Мальфи. Каково это, чувствовать себя живцом, на которого ловят очередную крупную рыбину? Впрочем, главный по алчности там Кардинал, похотливый Фердинанд прямо вожделеет сестру, что никак не может ей нравится.
А рядом все время секретарь Антонио Болонья. Он долго жил во Франции, не родовит и не богат. но обладает прекрасными манерами, хорош собой, молод, умен, влюблен. А теперь скажите. нужно ли женщине что-то еще? Герцогиня влюбляется в секретаря, они тайно венчаются и некоторое время живут в любви и согласии. Но ревнивый Фердинанд приставил к сестре шпиона, конюший Боссола подозревает, что бремя вдовства не так тяжело герцогине. как должно бы и даже угощает ее, мающуюся токсикозом, абрикосами, которые женщина с удовольствием съедает, еще больше укрепив фискала в убеждении. что дело нечисто.
А теперь следите за руками. В непосредственной близости от Боссолы дама рожает сына, ребенок растет в замке лет этак до трех, уже она успела и близнецов родить любимому мужу, а шпион все не доносит работодателю. Уже заподозрившие что-то братья, которые как раз подыскали нового шурина, приказывают сестре идти под венец, уже она отправляет любимого с их первенцем и изрядной суммой денег в другой город с тем, чтобы после присоединиться к ним с малютками. Прилюдно герцогиня изгоняет секретаря, обвинив в хищениях.
И все бы ничего. но хитрый Боссола, единственный из ее придворных, не говорит об Антонио гадостей, даже и напротив, так, в стиле: ""Я старый солдат" упрекает хозяйку. что она выгнала единственного честного и преданного человека в своем окружении. Растрогавшись, Мальфи открывает ему правду и свой план бежать вслед за мужем, тот советует ей сделать это под видом паломничества к святым местам. Тут-то ее и хватают. обвинив кроме распутства еще и в богохульничестве.
Герцогиня томится в замке, ставшем темницей, в то время, как один ее брат откровенно распутничает, а другой потихоньку сходит с ума, не в силах противостоять влечению к собственной сестре. Желая сделать ее муки невыносимыми, он приказывает изготовить восковые фигуры мужа и сына, показывает ей, бедняжка страдает, после чего, рассудку вопреки (но елизаветинская драма считала повествовательную логику излишеством), братья приказывают Боссоле удавить герцогиню вместе с малютками и преданной служанкой Кориолой.
После чего Фердинанд окончательно съезжает кукушечкой, на палача Боссолу снисходит раскаяние и решимость исправить добрыми делами причиненное зло (будто такое возможно). Но плохим лучше не пытаться быть хорошими, он по ошибке смертельно ранит Антонио, который приходит к жестокосердным родственникам жены искать примирения, а потом все всех убивают, включая любовницу Кардинала Джулию. Такое - в общем все умерли
Чушь несусветная, но каким-то парадоксальным образом в постановке Доминика Дромгула и исполнении актеров Глобуса таковой не выглядит. В актерах видишь не марионеток, а живых людей. Джемма Артертон и Сара МакРэй в ролях герцогини и Кориолы прекрасны, андрогинная красота Дэвида Доусона (Фердинанд) являет невероятную смесь порока и обаяния. А как они зажигают свечи! А как хорош финальный танец после воскрешения для поклона.
Вирджинии Вулф говорила, что в елизаветинской драме нет характеров, есть орудия мести, одетые в мужское и женское платье.Однако в силе воздействия и чувстве юмора, хотя бы и сплошь на темы телесного низа, ей отказать нельзя. Пусть дюжина трупов в финале пьесы не трогает нас, но посреди какой-нибудь особенно невероятной и занудной пьесы вдруг поразит проникновенная деталь, тронет душу безыскусный и тонкий мотив.
Что ж , "Герцогиня Мальфи" такова.
November 15, 2008
Life is a desperate business carried on by demented apes and ending in a welter of blood and shit. Everybody knows this, more or less, but it doesn't hurt to be reminded now and then. That, as I take it, is one of the modest functions of literature, reassuring us that we're all down here in the hole together, manning the pumps. Then again, I'm just a guy with a laptop and a Starbucks card, so what do I know?
So here's another thing I learned from Webster: I happened to read The Duchess of Malfi in one of those high-minded scholarly editions with lots of variant readings and a running critical gloss, and it made me realize to what an extent books, even great and original books like this one, are made up of other books. On practically every page, I'd be struck by some neato sententia and glance down at the notes to find it had been lifted almost verbatim from Sydney or Donne or Florio. Into The Duchess of Malfi Webster apparently poured, not only his own poetic talent, but the accumulated treasures of his commonplace book, too.
God, what a geeky thing for me to have taken away from a tragedy that features incest, severed body parts and mass murder (to say nothing of the lycanthropy business, already gleefully noted by a couple of other reviewers.) So, yeah, if that turns your crank, there's the usual Jacobean ultraviolence and a fair bit of sexual hysteria thrown in (male hysteria, for a change - the women in the play seem to have a much healthier attitude towards sex: they want it and don't mind asking for it.)
A bloody and beautiful piece of work.
So here's another thing I learned from Webster: I happened to read The Duchess of Malfi in one of those high-minded scholarly editions with lots of variant readings and a running critical gloss, and it made me realize to what an extent books, even great and original books like this one, are made up of other books. On practically every page, I'd be struck by some neato sententia and glance down at the notes to find it had been lifted almost verbatim from Sydney or Donne or Florio. Into The Duchess of Malfi Webster apparently poured, not only his own poetic talent, but the accumulated treasures of his commonplace book, too.
God, what a geeky thing for me to have taken away from a tragedy that features incest, severed body parts and mass murder (to say nothing of the lycanthropy business, already gleefully noted by a couple of other reviewers.) So, yeah, if that turns your crank, there's the usual Jacobean ultraviolence and a fair bit of sexual hysteria thrown in (male hysteria, for a change - the women in the play seem to have a much healthier attitude towards sex: they want it and don't mind asking for it.)
A bloody and beautiful piece of work.
June 12, 2016
First thoughts: THANK GOD THIS IS OVER WITH! AUGH.
My God. My brain hurts.
MY ANGER HURTS.
**Also just a forerunner: Everything after this will be going full tilt into spoilers. So if you don't want to see them, skip ahead to where the bold asterisks mark the continuation spot please!**
I read this play and I sit there and I'm like:
NOTHING IS HAPPY. NOTHING. ALL OF IT IS BULL.
And no, seriously. It's all bull. The entire story is about a woman who has been recently widowed and her two high ranking brothers. One is a prince, the other a cardinal. So they're both pretty high up there in terms of social status. But they're both corrupt as the devil. And the one brother, Ferdinand, is hell-bent on never letting his sister remarry. Why?
I WISH I KNEW!!!! D8<<<
They spew some crap about reputation in there and not soiling your social status, but the Duchess (our main character) doesn't listen to them. She's fallen in love with a man, and so she marries him posthaste and in secret, soon having three children by him. Unfortunately the brothers find out and the one goes batshit crazy and tries to kill her, her kids, her husband, exiles her from the country, takes all her fortune--AND SUCCEEDS.
NO. No he's NOT. THEN, he conveniently goes insane... INSANE?! And he pretends to be a werewolf saying that they just don't know that he is because his fur is on the INSIDE of his skin and they can take their swords and cut him up and they'll see it then!
...........
...wait what?
To top it off, in the meanwhile his brother is going murder-happy too! And in the end just about everyone.... DIES. )8< So I'm sitting here, left thinking, "...so you did this all... for... reputation... Even though your sister MARRIED, THEN had kids, and was living a private, happy life, with NO infidelity or outrageous lewd and crazy schemes! But no. Apparently marrying--someone who the entire country totally loved and supported by the way--was BAAAAD for her. And because she tries to hide this secret husband's identity they were like, LE GASP. U NO TELL US WHO DA DADDY IS, DEN WE TEENK U A WHORE!" -_- ...my good God in Heaven, spare me.
**Spoilers end here.**
I cannot believe that I just toiled through a play, which, for the first half was dull to begin with, where nothing at all of import happened besides-- "You can't get married!" "I already am married!" "I won't stand for it!" "Well it's already happened so what are you going to do? I even have three children!" "Tell me who the father is!" "No!" --that. After that, all the vicious, unsupported, cruel, monstrous actions that the characters commit don't elicit a feeling of sorrow or despair like a tragedy is supposed to. This "tragic" play only made me angry. Watching the injustice of completely innocent characters being slowly and crudely destroyed is a pastime I can't stomach! I didn't even CARE for the characters that much! They were there for me, yeah, but they weren't even people I would consider dwelling on. Nothing interested me about them! They didn't catch my attention or my mind. But seeing even people who I don't care about being dragged down into the dirt and violently torn apart bit by bloody, vile, bit is too much for me! I'm not the type of person to just sit there and read about these poor people suffering, suffering things worse than death! And all for what? FOR WHAT? Because some GUY didn't LIKE it? THAT'S IT? That's it?!
You can be the most heartless bastard, and still go stark-raving mad watching the absolute shit that these brothers did to their sister! Their SISTER. It's not like she was even a wife or some woman in the court--their SISTER! And they did such things to her!!
What kind of BROTHERS are you?!
I have no brothers, but I was raised close to my father, and I'm the firstborn. When you're put into the man's shoes in the house, and you have younger sisters to take care of, you would do anything to protect them, to make sure they're safe, to assuage all their fears and to see them truly, truly happy. These men, the Cardinal and Ferdinand, are monsters.
My God. Just reading this play made me feel dirty, made me sick and disgusted. I feel like I've been covered in grime and slimy filth. UGH. I feel like I need to take a shower.
The storyline aside, I've got more problems with this, and I'm only going to mention them in brief. One, the writing was tedious. Nothing happens, so you're dragging your feet through the play. Two, it was hard to pick up on meanings and what was going on sometimes. Being written in a more distant time period is no excuse. You can still write and make it so that people can follow along. But maybe in part because it was uninteresting, following along was made that much harder. Three, on the subject of time periods, dude. You're writing about a time period a century before your own. Thanks to footnotes, I get to hear about ALL the oblique references you've made throughout your play to your own time period. ...dude. That's not even worth considering for value. If you're writing about a certain time period, write accurately for that time period. Duh? Geez, give it to the guy to prove he's a bad writer in all aspects, why don'tcha.
Mind you, that last comment comes off as a little blunt. He has his skillful moments, and there are some parts where I happily take a quote and say, "This. This is worthwhile. This is good." But the moments are too sparse for a story so bland. If it wasn't for the fact that I was getting increasingly pissed off as the tale continued, I probably would have been bored out of my wits come the end of the play.
All in all, I didn't like it, though that should be pretty obvious. Was it atrocious and downright incomprehensible or indigestible? No. You can get through it. It's under a hundred pages in most versions, so it's not monstrous long. But I almost feel like just ushering you away from this play altogether. Maybe if you like this sort of thing, or you're a tragedy or play buff, you might see some worth in it. But for those who want to spare it a cursory glance? Let me save you the time. Just drop it. Move on. Don't buy it--save your money. You can probably Google it online if you tried and it'll be up there somewhere. But really? Don't waste your time on it. There are far better things for you to read out there. This? This was just absolutely pointless. You don't wanna go here.
And yes, that's my final answer. Done!
My God. My brain hurts.
MY ANGER HURTS.
**Also just a forerunner: Everything after this will be going full tilt into spoilers. So if you don't want to see them, skip ahead to where the bold asterisks mark the continuation spot please!**
I read this play and I sit there and I'm like:
NOTHING IS HAPPY. NOTHING. ALL OF IT IS BULL.
And no, seriously. It's all bull. The entire story is about a woman who has been recently widowed and her two high ranking brothers. One is a prince, the other a cardinal. So they're both pretty high up there in terms of social status. But they're both corrupt as the devil. And the one brother, Ferdinand, is hell-bent on never letting his sister remarry. Why?
I WISH I KNEW!!!! D8<<<
They spew some crap about reputation in there and not soiling your social status, but the Duchess (our main character) doesn't listen to them. She's fallen in love with a man, and so she marries him posthaste and in secret, soon having three children by him. Unfortunately the brothers find out and the one goes batshit crazy and tries to kill her, her kids, her husband, exiles her from the country, takes all her fortune--AND SUCCEEDS.
NO. No he's NOT. THEN, he conveniently goes insane... INSANE?! And he pretends to be a werewolf saying that they just don't know that he is because his fur is on the INSIDE of his skin and they can take their swords and cut him up and they'll see it then!
...........
...wait what?To top it off, in the meanwhile his brother is going murder-happy too! And in the end just about everyone.... DIES. )8< So I'm sitting here, left thinking, "...so you did this all... for... reputation... Even though your sister MARRIED, THEN had kids, and was living a private, happy life, with NO infidelity or outrageous lewd and crazy schemes! But no. Apparently marrying--someone who the entire country totally loved and supported by the way--was BAAAAD for her. And because she tries to hide this secret husband's identity they were like, LE GASP. U NO TELL US WHO DA DADDY IS, DEN WE TEENK U A WHORE!" -_- ...my good God in Heaven, spare me.
**Spoilers end here.**
I cannot believe that I just toiled through a play, which, for the first half was dull to begin with, where nothing at all of import happened besides-- "You can't get married!" "I already am married!" "I won't stand for it!" "Well it's already happened so what are you going to do? I even have three children!" "Tell me who the father is!" "No!" --that. After that, all the vicious, unsupported, cruel, monstrous actions that the characters commit don't elicit a feeling of sorrow or despair like a tragedy is supposed to. This "tragic" play only made me angry. Watching the injustice of completely innocent characters being slowly and crudely destroyed is a pastime I can't stomach! I didn't even CARE for the characters that much! They were there for me, yeah, but they weren't even people I would consider dwelling on. Nothing interested me about them! They didn't catch my attention or my mind. But seeing even people who I don't care about being dragged down into the dirt and violently torn apart bit by bloody, vile, bit is too much for me! I'm not the type of person to just sit there and read about these poor people suffering, suffering things worse than death! And all for what? FOR WHAT? Because some GUY didn't LIKE it? THAT'S IT? That's it?!
You can be the most heartless bastard, and still go stark-raving mad watching the absolute shit that these brothers did to their sister! Their SISTER. It's not like she was even a wife or some woman in the court--their SISTER! And they did such things to her!!
What kind of BROTHERS are you?!
I have no brothers, but I was raised close to my father, and I'm the firstborn. When you're put into the man's shoes in the house, and you have younger sisters to take care of, you would do anything to protect them, to make sure they're safe, to assuage all their fears and to see them truly, truly happy. These men, the Cardinal and Ferdinand, are monsters.
My God. Just reading this play made me feel dirty, made me sick and disgusted. I feel like I've been covered in grime and slimy filth. UGH. I feel like I need to take a shower.
The storyline aside, I've got more problems with this, and I'm only going to mention them in brief. One, the writing was tedious. Nothing happens, so you're dragging your feet through the play. Two, it was hard to pick up on meanings and what was going on sometimes. Being written in a more distant time period is no excuse. You can still write and make it so that people can follow along. But maybe in part because it was uninteresting, following along was made that much harder. Three, on the subject of time periods, dude. You're writing about a time period a century before your own. Thanks to footnotes, I get to hear about ALL the oblique references you've made throughout your play to your own time period. ...dude. That's not even worth considering for value. If you're writing about a certain time period, write accurately for that time period. Duh? Geez, give it to the guy to prove he's a bad writer in all aspects, why don'tcha.
Mind you, that last comment comes off as a little blunt. He has his skillful moments, and there are some parts where I happily take a quote and say, "This. This is worthwhile. This is good." But the moments are too sparse for a story so bland. If it wasn't for the fact that I was getting increasingly pissed off as the tale continued, I probably would have been bored out of my wits come the end of the play.
All in all, I didn't like it, though that should be pretty obvious. Was it atrocious and downright incomprehensible or indigestible? No. You can get through it. It's under a hundred pages in most versions, so it's not monstrous long. But I almost feel like just ushering you away from this play altogether. Maybe if you like this sort of thing, or you're a tragedy or play buff, you might see some worth in it. But for those who want to spare it a cursory glance? Let me save you the time. Just drop it. Move on. Don't buy it--save your money. You can probably Google it online if you tried and it'll be up there somewhere. But really? Don't waste your time on it. There are far better things for you to read out there. This? This was just absolutely pointless. You don't wanna go here.
And yes, that's my final answer. Done!
November 29, 2015
Other sins only speak, murder shreiks out:
The element of water moistens the earth,
But blood flies upwards and bedews the heavens.
Oh mercy, revenge upon the cursed Vengeful in five sumptuous acts of poetry, racy bits and bloodshed. The initial revengers are a creepy pair of powerful brothers miffed that their sis has moved on from bereavement and is now happily shacking up. They enlist the world's most literate assassin for the wet work. I began this a month ago and made it half way. I started over and completed the piece this evening. Touch your caps to the lyrical wizardry of John Webster. Extra points should be awarded for use of a poisoned book.
The element of water moistens the earth,
But blood flies upwards and bedews the heavens.
Oh mercy, revenge upon the cursed Vengeful in five sumptuous acts of poetry, racy bits and bloodshed. The initial revengers are a creepy pair of powerful brothers miffed that their sis has moved on from bereavement and is now happily shacking up. They enlist the world's most literate assassin for the wet work. I began this a month ago and made it half way. I started over and completed the piece this evening. Touch your caps to the lyrical wizardry of John Webster. Extra points should be awarded for use of a poisoned book.
October 11, 2021
Year of New Authors
The widowed Duchess of Malfi has decided to marry again, but must do so in secret due to the disapproval of her brothers. Chaos ensues.
This is a book that's wandered on and off my 'to read' list for an age, and now I've read it: What the hell was that?!
This is the weirdest melodrama I've encountered since I tripped over of Gandersheim's hilarious madness. We have corrupt officials, pointless tortures, people falling in love at the drop of a hat and people paralysed with guilt over gruesome acts they performed perfectly willingly two seconds before. Everyone and everything is ridiculous, such as this exchange (paraphrased to prevent spoilers):
Or this actual quote of literary brilliance, that isn't at all trying to rip off an infamous line from and doesn't, in anyway, fail spectacularly:
The widowed Duchess of Malfi has decided to marry again, but must do so in secret due to the disapproval of her brothers. Chaos ensues.
This is a book that's wandered on and off my 'to read' list for an age, and now I've read it: What the hell was that?!
This is the weirdest melodrama I've encountered since I tripped over of Gandersheim's hilarious madness. We have corrupt officials, pointless tortures, people falling in love at the drop of a hat and people paralysed with guilt over gruesome acts they performed perfectly willingly two seconds before. Everyone and everything is ridiculous, such as this exchange (paraphrased to prevent spoilers):
Dying man: I fafe, I fade!
Bloke who accidentally stabbed him: Oh, sir, I must tell you of your loved ones.
Dying man: Ah, just to hear of my darlings stirs life back into me!
Bloke: They're all dead.
Dying man: Oh fuckest me! *Dies*
Or this actual quote of literary brilliance, that isn't at all trying to rip off an infamous line from and doesn't, in anyway, fail spectacularly:
'We are merely the star's tennis balls, struck and bandied which way please them'Sadly, the play never goes quite weird enough to be full comedy, the writing simply bad rather than circling round to a guilty pleasure. Preposterous, ludicrous and just down right silly, I reccomend this to no one and suggest you stick to Shakespeare, Marlowe, or Hrotsvitha if you can spell her.
July 22, 2015
A great play, I have been lucky enough to see it performed twice. The most recent was with the wonderful Gemma Artherton playing the lead role at the Wannamaker theatre.
October 27, 2023
Powerful, dark, violent and sad. Read for Open Uni studies and I have just purchased a ticket to go see it in London next year at the Globe.
Read
September 1, 2022As intense and intriguing as his better known contemporary, William Shakespeare
July 1, 2017
"Black-birds fatten best in hard weather"
It’s a still-performed play in our days. Though its best place for representation had been, for long, the Blacks Friars Theater. According to scholar James Shapiro, it’s a “story of intrigue and murder”…”a bloody dark work”of 1623.
Webster surely based his story on a real one: the real Giovanna D’Aragona, who in 1493 married the regent, soon to die. She had two brothers.
Yet Giovanna had a secret marriage and two children concealed. By 1510 she was quite talked about in Europe. She managed to escape, but was captured in 1511, sent to prison…and thereafter “never to be seen again�.
"-how do you like the French court?
Antonio:... admire it...
...the cardinal and brother are like fruit that grows crooked on plum trees....but only crows feed on them" (adapted)
The play is about this intrigue involving the twin brother of the duchess, Ferdinand, who doesn't want her to marry again; he is “incestuously infatuated with his sister�; he's "obsessed about the purity of blood".
The Duchess gets tormented by the brothers� one a cardinal. Ferdinand kills her. All major characters die in the end. The dark moments on the stage involve the exhibiting of “waxed cadavers� …and “a severed hand�.
It seems that, on a biographical short note, Webster himself was born near a slaughterhouse, in 1580, in the 22nd year of the Elizabethan reign; a time when criminals were executed and dismembered. His vocabulary is yet very different from Shakespeare and Marlowe.
November 15, 2017
Catching up with the classics #31
Really almost a 2? I’m not really sure how I feel about this play? It just seemed like pointless violence and hatred.
Really almost a 2? I’m not really sure how I feel about this play? It just seemed like pointless violence and hatred.
January 13, 2020
BOSOLA. Break, heart!
Which pretty much sums up my reaction to this play. That and the recurring question of “Why have I not read or seen this before now?�.
As much as I am sure that I will never truly love Jacobean revenge tragedies, and as much as I am sure that I will always be grossed out by Titus Andronicus, I loved The Duchess of Malfi. It may have helped that unlike Titus A., The Duchess has a clear message…but also, there was “method to the madness� (which Will S. may not have mastered yet when he wrote Titus. He did master it later on, of course. ).
In The Duchess of Malfi we have complexity and human frailty and grand character scenes and greed and treachery and mischief and repentance.
Oh, and as an added bonus, I found a radio production of the play starring Roger Allam as Bosola and Fiona Shaw as the Duchess. (I may have actually squeed when I found this.)
Yup, it’s gory and horrible � and absolutely brilliant.
Which pretty much sums up my reaction to this play. That and the recurring question of “Why have I not read or seen this before now?�.
As much as I am sure that I will never truly love Jacobean revenge tragedies, and as much as I am sure that I will always be grossed out by Titus Andronicus, I loved The Duchess of Malfi. It may have helped that unlike Titus A., The Duchess has a clear message…but also, there was “method to the madness� (which Will S. may not have mastered yet when he wrote Titus. He did master it later on, of course. ).
In The Duchess of Malfi we have complexity and human frailty and grand character scenes and greed and treachery and mischief and repentance.
Oh, and as an added bonus, I found a radio production of the play starring Roger Allam as Bosola and Fiona Shaw as the Duchess. (I may have actually squeed when I found this.)
Yup, it’s gory and horrible � and absolutely brilliant.
July 12, 2010
I always remember being one of the few people dying of laughter during the film Shakespeare in Love when the little street urchin reveals his name is John Webster. Of course he also declared that his favorite part in the play was when when the lady stabbed herself.
I really don't know why I loved this play so much since it was so dark and morbid and filled with murder. But it was also pretty funny. I couldn't help but love every word.
I really don't know why I loved this play so much since it was so dark and morbid and filled with murder. But it was also pretty funny. I couldn't help but love every word.
January 17, 2021
Oh boy, this play isn't just a tragedy but an absolute blood bath. Did anyone even stay alive? I almost feel bad that I enjoyed it!
It is definitely a great play from that time. A young Duches is widowed, her brothers want to make sure she doesn't marry anyone beneath her. She does in secret, has kids with him but when brothers find it out all the horror begins. Well this is pretty much the summary. It is pretty short and pretty captivating. I liked the characters Webster created. Bosola is the most intriguing one with the role that he has in this play.
Was also fun to look at it as a social critique of that time. There is obviously a lot about class, we have a woman refuse to obey her brothers. There is also some politics which I admit I didn't completely comprehend because I am no expert on the detailed history of those times.
Writing is something I as always struggled with and had to look up some things. Yet I could see the beautiful language and wit in it. The plot develops so well and I really liked the scenes with Duchess and Antonio and great portrayal of their love.
After finishing I knew I need to watch the play. Plays were written to be watched. I know it will help me to understand it even better and considering how much I liked it now I am sure that watching it will increase my opinion. So now I found the play on Youtube and will be watching it tomorrow.
It is definitely a great play from that time. A young Duches is widowed, her brothers want to make sure she doesn't marry anyone beneath her. She does in secret, has kids with him but when brothers find it out all the horror begins. Well this is pretty much the summary. It is pretty short and pretty captivating. I liked the characters Webster created. Bosola is the most intriguing one with the role that he has in this play.
Was also fun to look at it as a social critique of that time. There is obviously a lot about class, we have a woman refuse to obey her brothers. There is also some politics which I admit I didn't completely comprehend because I am no expert on the detailed history of those times.
Writing is something I as always struggled with and had to look up some things. Yet I could see the beautiful language and wit in it. The plot develops so well and I really liked the scenes with Duchess and Antonio and great portrayal of their love.
After finishing I knew I need to watch the play. Plays were written to be watched. I know it will help me to understand it even better and considering how much I liked it now I am sure that watching it will increase my opinion. So now I found the play on Youtube and will be watching it tomorrow.
April 2, 2020
Spoiler alert: this is a tragedy.
*dies*
More seriously, despite this play sitting on my to-read shelf for years and years, I didn't know this was a Jacobean drama written in the early 1600s until I started reading. And then I couldn't put it down. It was super absorbing and I even got a little choked up just reading it. That doesn't often happen with plays. Usually you have to see it to feel it.
I don't want to make this an actual spoiler so I'll keep it vague but the character of Bosola in particular impressed me. He's villainous from page one and yet not wholly evil. A tinge of remorse runs through him and it keeps you half-hating, half-hoping for him the entire time. It is just a level of nuance I wasn't expecting.
But otherwise, if you want villainous villains, noble heroes, and a bit of a tear-jerker ending, this is the one for you.
*dies*
More seriously, despite this play sitting on my to-read shelf for years and years, I didn't know this was a Jacobean drama written in the early 1600s until I started reading. And then I couldn't put it down. It was super absorbing and I even got a little choked up just reading it. That doesn't often happen with plays. Usually you have to see it to feel it.
I don't want to make this an actual spoiler so I'll keep it vague but the character of Bosola in particular impressed me. He's villainous from page one and yet not wholly evil. A tinge of remorse runs through him and it keeps you half-hating, half-hoping for him the entire time. It is just a level of nuance I wasn't expecting.
But otherwise, if you want villainous villains, noble heroes, and a bit of a tear-jerker ending, this is the one for you.
December 19, 2015
This was heartbreaking.
July 19, 2010
Everybody’s favourite Jacobean tragedy (other than those by Shakespeare), really the only one that is played today with any regularity, The Duchess of Malfi has it all: a good story, great writing, enough comedy to keep it entertaining, complex characters, quotable lines and superb stagecraft. There is even horror, but not the gratuitous bloodiness of earlier plays. That severed hand with the ring is unbeatable.
There is some problem with our not having a clean copy of the play. Even John Webster complained of other writers inserting their own text. That might explain at least some plot inconsistencies. Was Duke Ferdinand the older brother of the duchess, or her younger twin? Does it matter? It might, if it affects why Ferdinand tried to prevent his widowed sister from remarrying. He could not have been behaving like an older brother if he was her twin. Nor could he have felt they had some kind of mystical blood connection as twins if he was the first-born.
Initially, Ferdinand refuses to explain his reason to trying to keep the duchess celibate, but later says it was to control her wealth. However, by the time he says this, we know that her first husband’s estate went to their son, leaving the duchess only her dower and making nonsense of the idea that she was immensely rich.
Was Ferdinand the puppet of their older brother, the cardinal? Then what was his reason for secretly attempting to control her? If the duchess only owned her dower, she was not likely to be able to marry into the kind of powerful family that the cardinal implies is all he will accept. Some people have suggested an incestuous relationship between the duchess and at least one of her brothers, but my innocent mind can find no justification for that. Perhaps the audience of the day could fill in the gaps from their knowledge of the actual events on which this play was based.
What I find intriguing is the way Webster can switch points of view like few other playwrights. When we see the duchess informing her choice of partner that she intends to marry him, we see a strong person; a prince assuming control of the situation, and treated by all those around her as such. She finds her brothers� patronizing attitude amusing. When the brothers learn of her marriage, they see only a stereotypically weak woman.
There is some problem with our not having a clean copy of the play. Even John Webster complained of other writers inserting their own text. That might explain at least some plot inconsistencies. Was Duke Ferdinand the older brother of the duchess, or her younger twin? Does it matter? It might, if it affects why Ferdinand tried to prevent his widowed sister from remarrying. He could not have been behaving like an older brother if he was her twin. Nor could he have felt they had some kind of mystical blood connection as twins if he was the first-born.
Initially, Ferdinand refuses to explain his reason to trying to keep the duchess celibate, but later says it was to control her wealth. However, by the time he says this, we know that her first husband’s estate went to their son, leaving the duchess only her dower and making nonsense of the idea that she was immensely rich.
Was Ferdinand the puppet of their older brother, the cardinal? Then what was his reason for secretly attempting to control her? If the duchess only owned her dower, she was not likely to be able to marry into the kind of powerful family that the cardinal implies is all he will accept. Some people have suggested an incestuous relationship between the duchess and at least one of her brothers, but my innocent mind can find no justification for that. Perhaps the audience of the day could fill in the gaps from their knowledge of the actual events on which this play was based.
What I find intriguing is the way Webster can switch points of view like few other playwrights. When we see the duchess informing her choice of partner that she intends to marry him, we see a strong person; a prince assuming control of the situation, and treated by all those around her as such. She finds her brothers� patronizing attitude amusing. When the brothers learn of her marriage, they see only a stereotypically weak woman.
CARDINAL. Curs’d creature!Then, of course, there is ±ٱ’s glorious English. No wonder that it is actor’s play.
Unequall nature, to place womens hearts
So farre upon the left-side!
FERDINAND. Foolish men,
That ere will trust their honour in a barke,
Made of so slight, weake bull-rush as is woman,
Apt every minnit to sinke it!
BOSCOLA. Doe you not weepe?
Other sinnes onely speake; murther shreikes out:
The element of water moistens the earth,
But blood flies upwards, and bedewes the heavens.
FERDINAND. Cover her face. Mine eyes dazell: she di’d yong.
--The Duchess of Malfi, John Webster (circa 1613)
November 2, 2019
Having just brushed up my Shakespeare I was more-than-usually susceptible to a mention in another book: Sleeping Murder. Since the original publication date is more than 400 years ago, it is quite easy to find a free copy. Total instant gratification!
***
The saucy Duchess just popped again, as an epigraph in Silent in the Sanctuary, a book with quite a bit of Shakespeare as well.
***
Curiosity is satisfied, but I did not love it.
***
After pondering some more: it's all very one dimensional. At the very beginning we are introduced to all the bad guys. We are told and shown that they are bad guys. Bad guys put out a hit on their sister, her second husband, and their four children. For the money. And then the hitman decides to go after the bad guys for revenge. Lots of murder, sure, but no jokes, no reversals, no mystery, only one character ever changes course and no very satisfying motivation is ever given. Without good special effects, which you don't get in a script, there isn't anything else of interest. You'd have to really love going to the theater, or be a superfan of some actor, to be anything more than horribly disappointed after sitting though it. All that murder and yet, boring. The only interesting thing here is that this script didn't disappear.
personal copy
***
The saucy Duchess just popped again, as an epigraph in Silent in the Sanctuary, a book with quite a bit of Shakespeare as well.
***
Curiosity is satisfied, but I did not love it.
***
After pondering some more: it's all very one dimensional. At the very beginning we are introduced to all the bad guys. We are told and shown that they are bad guys. Bad guys put out a hit on their sister, her second husband, and their four children. For the money. And then the hitman decides to go after the bad guys for revenge. Lots of murder, sure, but no jokes, no reversals, no mystery, only one character ever changes course and no very satisfying motivation is ever given. Without good special effects, which you don't get in a script, there isn't anything else of interest. You'd have to really love going to the theater, or be a superfan of some actor, to be anything more than horribly disappointed after sitting though it. All that murder and yet, boring. The only interesting thing here is that this script didn't disappear.
personal copy
February 28, 2017
I quite enjoyed The Duchess of Malfi, one of the best revenge tragedies. In many ways it reminds me of some of the best of contemporary political drama, with court intrigue, sex, religious corruption, a nihilistic wasteland that sometimes makes Shakespeare's darkest visions seem hopeful by comparison (yet Shakespeare's darkest visions are far more dark, in one level).
Hamlet's words - "'Tis an unweeded garden/That grows to seed. Things rank and gross in nature/Possess it merely" - are truly apt for this corrupt word. The Duchess and Antonio are united in holy marriage, yet they are engulfed in blood and fate. Bosola's a man sinning against his better nature, and is killed. Truly there's something sad for Bosola's kind.
Of course the villains are deliciously evil in a special kind of archetypical way. The cardinal and Ferdinand fulfill their roles as Jacobean villains. Yet I find myself compelled by Antonio and Bosola, and even the Duchess
Hamlet's words - "'Tis an unweeded garden/That grows to seed. Things rank and gross in nature/Possess it merely" - are truly apt for this corrupt word. The Duchess and Antonio are united in holy marriage, yet they are engulfed in blood and fate. Bosola's a man sinning against his better nature, and is killed. Truly there's something sad for Bosola's kind.
Of course the villains are deliciously evil in a special kind of archetypical way. The cardinal and Ferdinand fulfill their roles as Jacobean villains. Yet I find myself compelled by Antonio and Bosola, and even the Duchess
June 12, 2019
the character of the duchess is one of my favorite. she has a quite active role, from proposing to her beloved to planning their flee. she does what she thinks is best for her, regardless of her brothers' discontent.
the way all the characters attempt to intertwine their inner self to the outer world is very interesting.
all in all, an enjoyable read!
the way all the characters attempt to intertwine their inner self to the outer world is very interesting.
all in all, an enjoyable read!
April 5, 2017
I am Duchess of Malfi still.
Read
November 30, 2023can the early modernists leave twins alone? please? please ??
October 19, 2024
Duchess: Diamonds are of most value, They say, that have passed through most jewellers� hands.
Ferdinand: Whores by that rule are precious. (I, 2)
most vulturous eating of the apricocks (II, 2)
The lusty spring smells well; but drooping autumn tastes well (II, 2)
Happily with some strong-thighed bargeman (II, 5)
Methinks her fault and beauty, blended together, show like leprosy, the whiter, the fouler (III, 5)
What’s this flesh? a little crudded milk, fantastical puffpaste (IV, 1)
Ferdinand: Whores by that rule are precious. (I, 2)
most vulturous eating of the apricocks (II, 2)
The lusty spring smells well; but drooping autumn tastes well (II, 2)
Happily with some strong-thighed bargeman (II, 5)
Methinks her fault and beauty, blended together, show like leprosy, the whiter, the fouler (III, 5)
What’s this flesh? a little crudded milk, fantastical puffpaste (IV, 1)
February 13, 2021
Actually not bad
(Although the opening speech was quite irrelevant in the end)
(Although the opening speech was quite irrelevant in the end)
May 31, 2019
Fantastic play, I enjoyed it immensely and I cannot say that my time was worth it.
It was a play of madness, willpower and hypocrisy.
I always thought that I loved Shakespearean tragedies best, but now I can say I equally love this play. The kind of humor woven in this play was more obvious than the ones in Shakespeare which made it easier to understand and laugh with and the point that made me love this play maybe a tad bit more is the show of violence in it. In Shakespeare the violence is so theatrical that one can't take it plausible but in this one, violence is so raw and wild it chilled me to my bones. There's no sigh and statement of "I am dead" and the character falling dead, it's saying nonsense before you die and dying.
I would recommend it to everyone really.
It was a play of madness, willpower and hypocrisy.
I always thought that I loved Shakespearean tragedies best, but now I can say I equally love this play. The kind of humor woven in this play was more obvious than the ones in Shakespeare which made it easier to understand and laugh with and the point that made me love this play maybe a tad bit more is the show of violence in it. In Shakespeare the violence is so theatrical that one can't take it plausible but in this one, violence is so raw and wild it chilled me to my bones. There's no sigh and statement of "I am dead" and the character falling dead, it's saying nonsense before you die and dying.
I would recommend it to everyone really.
June 6, 2017
If Elizabethan Tragedy was marked by exhilaration ; Jacobean tragedy was marked by decadence. Just as the phenomenon of a crest in the sea is followed by that of a trough, so also Elizabethan Tragedy was followed by Jacobean tragedy, indicating a distinct falling off from the achieved standard of literary excellence. As a revenge tragedy, though less action oriented than The Spanish Tragedy, The Duchess of Malfi forms a class by itself. (full review will follow)..
March 29, 2015
Instead of reading this Masterpiece as a FALLEN TRAGEDY, approach it as a SUBLIMALLY HEIGHTENED MELODRAMA and see the wonders! The play will open itself to unimagined readings!!! Must try.
August 21, 2024
I had to read this for my British lit class. It was an interesting yet disturbing play.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 706 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.