Skip to main content
  • 8 Accesses

Abstract

Jonson gives us what is the entirely orthodox neo-classical theory deriving from Aristotle when he tells us in the Prologue to Every Man in his Humour that it is the function of comedy ‘to sport with human follies not with crimes’. It is a definition which still influences the general idea of comedy, which, most people would feel, should be limited in the seriousness of its concerns, unless it is self-consciously ‘black comedy’. What then ofjonson’s own play Volpone: fraud, perjury, prostitution, conspiracy to murder, attempted rape — are these merely follies? Volpone has made many of Jonson’s critics uneasy and uncertain of its classification. E. B. Partridge’s comments are representative:

Comic masks are not entirely appropriate for a play which creates such a profound sense of evil that the tone seems closer to tragedy than comedy … Is it satire, burlesque, farce, comedy of humour, melodrama? … all of these critical terms have some validity, but none is wholly justifiable.1

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Ferdinand Brunetière, Les Epoques du Théâtre Français (1636–1850) (Paris 1901 – 5e édit.), p. 147.

    Google Scholar 

  2. H. Levin ‘Jonson’s Metempsychosis’, Philological Quarterly 22 (1943), 231 – 9.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jonas A. Barish, ‘The Double Plot in Volpone’, Modern Philology 51 (1953), 83 – 92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. See Alvin Kernan (ed.) Volpone (New Haven and London 1962), p. 214.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Richard Perkinson ‘Volpone and the reputation of Venetian justice’, Modern Language Review 35 (1940), 11 –18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ian Donaldson ‘Volpone: Quick and Dead’, Essays in Criticism 21 (1971), 121 – 34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. John Creaser makes much of this point in his article ‘Volpone’s Mortification’ Essays in Criticism 25 (1975), 329–56, and there is further discussion of this article in ‘The Critical Forum’, Essays in Criticism 26 (1976), 274–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Emanuel S. Chill, ‘Tartuffe, Religion, and Courtly Culture’, French Historical Studies 3 (1963), 176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jacques Schérer, Structures de Tartuffe (Paris 1966), p. 186.

    Google Scholar 

  10. John Cairncross, New Light on Molière (Geneva and Paris 1956) and also Molière Bourgeois et Libertin.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Georges Pholien, ‘Une défense de Tartuffe’, Marche Romane 17 (1967), 183.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lionel Gossman, ‘Molière and Tartuffe: Law and Order in the Seventeenth Century’, French Review 43 (1970), 910.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Raymond Picard, ‘ Tartuffe “Production impie”?’ in Mélanges d’histoire littéraire offerts à Raymond Lebèque (Paris 1969), pp. 227–39.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 1980 Nicholas Grene

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Grene, N. (1980). Follies and Crimes. In: Shakespeare, Jonson, Molière. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-03603-5_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics