Attitudes Towards Plays and Players

Amanda Cloud 2009

During the Renaissance period theatre went through many changes as lots of new influences and powers came into focus. This time in history was a time of change in every aspect of life. The role of theatre in this time period changed drastically. Before the renaissance, theatre was mostly dominated by the church. With all the changes being made during the renaissance, theatre became a more public controlled form of performance art. People saw it as public amusement. (Fletcher-Bellinger)

“The theater as a public amusement was an innovation in the social life of the Elizabethans, and it immediately took the general fancy. Like that of Greece or Spain, it developed with amazing rapidity.” (Fletcher-Bellinger)

Plays became very popular and playhouses started being built, both public and private playhouses existed in this time. During this time acting troupes and theatre companies were created. The emphasis was on the performers. Troupes or companies of actors worked on a repertory of plays they would perform. These companies were organized like an acting guild. In the troupe or company there would be a group of owner-actors, journeymen and hirelings. (Renaissance)

Although many people enjoyed the theatre, allowing it to grow rapidly, there were still negative thoughts about the theatre. This was a period when the influence of the Church was against the theater; and this time its efforts towards the repression of theatre were considerably successful. For a good portion of the sixteenth century there was resentment towards plays and players of the time. There were many different reasons why people resented the theatre. A main focus of it was because of the playhouses themselves. They were said to cause a lot of traffic congestion. The playhouses also put people in danger because there was a lack of civil order at times allowing for violence to be more easily accessible. The playhouses also, indirectly, encouraged people to visit the less than reputable taverns. (Fletcher-Bellinger)

The church was a huge concern for plays and players of the Elizabethan era of the Renaissance. People involved with the church thought that the theatre was causing the plague to spread. They believed that the plague was a consequence of theatre growing so rapidly. They believed that the stage was the reason for the plague visiting them and the playhouses are the reason that the plague spread so rapidly. It was an ungodly act to participate with plays and players. (Fletcher-Bellinger)

After a while the negativity towards the theatre took a less valid approach. People started going against the theatre because of men dressing as women. They thought it was blasphemy for men to wear woman’s clothing and be portrayed as women on stage. Since women were not yet on the stage, men and boys took the roles of women in the plays so they had to wear dresses like the women of their time wore. The church and other people who resented the theatre thought this was completely unacceptable. (Gewertz)(Fletcher-Bellinger)

Having such an overflow of negativity towards plays, players and playhouses, theatre was regarded as being less than moral. A lot of people had problems with the theatre because it allowed for issues that could not be spoken about in everyday life to be brought up and discussed or performed on stage, causing drama to be a very controversial topic of this time. Plays and playhouses were said to be uncontainable and uncontrollable causing situations of uncertainty throughout. (Mullaney)

In the Renaissance time period, plays and playhouses were blamed for many things going wrong. One of the major problems was the plague mentioned previously. When William Shakespeare started being recognized it was a particular violent time for theatre. Although there was an excess of negativity surrounding the theatre, there was a great contribution of literature coming from plays and players. (Fletcher-Bellinger)

“An earthquake had occurred in 1580, and in the following year there was a recurrence of the plague. At a bear-baiting show, given on a Sunday, a wooden scaffolding had given way, killing several people and injuring others. A few years later, a brawl outside the theater caused serious disturbance. To many of the good people of London, all these things were signs of the wrath of heaven against the play-acting profession, and arguments for its extermination. When it was recognized that play-acting, not long before, had been utilized as a means of teaching the lessons of the Church, the argument against it was that it was popish. At the very time when England was making the greatest single contribution that any modern nation has ever made to the literature of the stage, preachers both Puritan and Anglican, pamphleteers, and politicians were loud in their denunciations.” (Fletcher-Bellinger)

Another topic that people thought was connected with theatre was the sexual incontinence that took place during this time period. People who frequented the playhouses were thought to be stepping outside of societal norms in many aspects of their lives, including their sexual lives. Before the rise of the plague and the rise of drama, leprosy was a major issue. The disease was extremely disfiguring and scary for most people. After the outbreak of leprosy was under control, people say the rise of theatre was the next big issue to dominate the margins of the city, but in a way that could resemble the army taking over the city. (Mullaney)

Although so many people had very negative feelings towards plays, players and playhouses during the Elizabeth era of the Renaissance, so many good things came out of it. Some of the greatest literature of the Renaissance was conceived through the playhouses. Through all the cynical times of the Renaissance, theatre was able to stay alive and even prosper at a rapid rate. Theatre has stood the test of time and strength after going through such harsh times and negative connotation. Many people despised the theatre and many people, including the queen, frequented the theatre.

Having a very influential friend in the queen was a considerable help with plays and players of this time. Many different practices were put into place to keep plays a float but it was ultimately Elizabeth who kept theatre alive.

“Since companies of actors "belonged" to the queen and were under the protection of the highest nobles of the land, the fight over the theaters resolved itself mainly into a struggle on the part of the queen's agents, or counsel, to outwit the decrees of the city Corporation. One method was to regard the giving of a play as a "rehearsal" for a royal production. Of course these "rehearsals" could be as numerous as the manager wished; and the public could be, and was, admitted. This practice brought on a bitter quarrel in which professors of Oxford and Cambridge were involved. One wise man at Oxford condemned the public plays, but defended those of the universities. "As an occasional recreation for learned gentlemen, acting received its highest praise; as a regular means of livelihood, it was regarded with scorn." In all this contention, however, the astute Elizabeth managed to have her own way. The stage and its players were kept alive.” (Fletcher-Bellinger)

After the death of Elizabeth the conditions which under troupes and companies worked were changed. Instead of being in control of nobility the king was the sole authority. Having the king in charge helped for some of the playhouses to become stronger. With the strength of the theatre at this time, players were less likely to censure their performances. This began a time when politics were brought onto the stage. This caused not only the church to feel negatively towards the theatre but it added politicians into the resentment of theatre. (Fletcher-Bellinger)

Plays, players and playhouses had extremely bad luck from 1630 until 1660. There were annual attacks of the plague that became increasingly more violent with each attack. There were Pamphleteers that attacked the playhouses and players for their immorality and their neglect for censorship. The old reasons of why the playhouses were bad started re-circulating among plays, players and playhouses. With this increasing rise of negativity surrounding the theatre, the parliament began to crackdown on playhouses. This suppression eventually led to the playhouses in London to be shut down for five years. (Fletcher-Bellinger)

 

WORKS CONSULTED

Fletcher-Bellinger, Martha (1927). A Short History of the Drama. Henry Holt.

Gewertz, Ken. "When Men Were Men (and Women, too)." Harvard Gazzette 17 July 2003:

Howard, Jean E. The Stage and Social Struggle in Early Modern England. New York: Routledge, 1994.

Mullaney, Steven. The Place of the Stage. Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1998.

Ormsby, Robert. "Coriolanus, Antitheatricalism, and Audience Response." Shakespeare Bulletin 43-62.

“Renaissance and Roformation.” Integrated Performing Arts Guild. October 28, 2008. <http://www.msuiit.edu.ph/ipag/studies/drama/topics/renaissance.html>