Category Archives: Generic types

The Shoemaker’s Holiday is a comedy filled with sexual humor but there are much deeper meanings behind the bawdy jokes. Dekker’s play is a citizen’s comedy and it clearly and explicitly represents the voice of the upward rising class of the craftsmen.

Simon Eyre and also Roger Oatley are successful working class men who, by acquiring positions in city government got additional respect and also political power above their financial strength. What they also represent is a strong criticism toward the aristocrats. They are conscious representatives of their own class who have disdain toward courtiers. In Scene 1 Oatley doesn’t want Lacy for his son in law. To have one’s daughter marry with an aristocrat should be desirable, but for him to have a husband for his daughter from his own class is much more important. Eyre further reinforces this opinion in his advice to Rose in Scene 11 about who should she marry to. His advice to the fellow craftsman’s daughter furthermore has a universal, ever valid connotation: don’t judge a person by his external appearance. People can be well dressed but have nothing in the inside.

Juxtaposing Lacy’s and Ralph’s situation in Scene 1 is also a great example for this aforementioned additional meaning behind the explicit sexual humor. Both young men have to go to the war in France. Lacy as a courtier appointed by the king to be the chief colonel of the London’s company sent to the war. Ralph as a shoemaker was drafted as a soldier. Lacy deserts the army because he is in love with Rose and doesn’t want to leave her. In a romantic play this would represent the greatness of love, that can go beyond any boundaries. But Dekker’s play is not like that. There is Ralph’s figure in the other corner. He is a young husband deeply in love with his wife and not just a guy who having a secret affair with someone. Eyre and his men are trying to persuade the captains (who are – so brilliantly written – Lacy and his cousin) not to take him to France, but poor Ralph never says a word. He arrived with gun and gunpowder, ready for the battle. Deserting the army was never in the mind of the young craftsman.

There is so much more in this sort scene. Yes, it is filled with bawdy jokes that are the trademarks of Firk’s character and are there to make the comedy more enjoyable (or more offensive for others). But among these it is showing how virtuous is the working class and how prone to vice are the aristocrats. There is the master who is willing to suffer financial loss just to save his worker, there is the young craftsman who is ready to go to war, and on the other side there is Lacy, the aristocrat showing his true character. I believe that Lacy had the power to discharge Ralph, yet he does nothing. Even if he really couldn’t do anything, he is a true hypocrite. A man presented to him in a really similar situation as himself; nevertheless he cares nothing about him. He is already made his decision to desert the army for her love but he is telling Jane that his husband must go because his country needs him.

Thomas Dekker’s The Shoemaker’s Holiday brings a change of pace to the usual blood, vengeance, and death I’ve grown accustomed to reading in the past few plays.  Dekker’s play, being a comedy, encompasses the up spirited topic of love.  Rightly so, this topic is usually what makes up most of our current day comedies.  Yet, at the same time, love makes up much more than a comedy altogether; it provides conflicting emotions and the intriguing chase for a lovers’ embrace.  Dekker elects Hammon to be Cupid’s target practice.

If Hammon were around today he would surly be the quirky main character of a romance/comedy who bides his time until the girl he loves finally notices his affection toward her. Given that we are studying English Renaissance Drama, the struggle for one girl’s affection is not enough.  Hammon claims love for both Rose and  Jane.  Love is always a dangerous thing because it tricks you.  Why does Hammon have this conflict between Rose and Jane?  He seems like a completely suitable man yet the love he claims to have for them goes unwanted and unnoticed.  Does he have this conflict because he doesn’t truly know what love is? Is he proclaiming love just for the slim chance that he might get noticed? I believe so.

Hammon’s going from one girl to the next announcing his love proves just how little he knows of it.  His conversation with Jane in scene 12 shows that maybe Hammon is throwing love around in hopes that he may enjoy the more physical nature of love. Hammon being ‘muffled’ at the start of the scene can also suggest that his true motives are concealed and that his urge for physical attention drives him to fall in love quickly.  There is something off with Hammon and I’m hoping that there is some perverse nature underlying his gentle, loving outward form in order to make things a bit more interesting.

Humor. It differs from person to person in their ability to perceive it or react to it. This is either due to culture, religion, or other factors. In The Shoemaker’s Holiday the humor is very geographically and culturally based. Which makes sense since it is an Elizabethan play. But because of the way the humor is presented, it often causes confusion and bewilderment from readers that don’t come from London. This was the case when I was reading it. Half the time I couldn’t understand what they (the actors) were saying and the other half was spent in re-re-reading what I had just read because I couldn’t believe what I had just read.

That being said the play itself, once you get over the odd humor, is quite sexual. At every turn there seems to be some sexual joke or hint that seemingly comes out of nowhere each and every time. At the end of each one you would probably scratch your head in confusion and need to refer to the footnotes and definitions just to understand what the actors mean.  Like in scene 7 where Firk, Hodge, and Eyre are mentioning the various ways they will “firk” or “take down” various women. Or how Firk mentions how he “For yerking and seaming let me alone, an I come to’t.” and that he will “deal with her.” At first glance their little conversation makes no sense but reading deeper into it you realize exactly what Firk wants to do with Sibyl.

The rest of the play goes along the same lines. There are references to sexual acts and actions that seem to mean one thing often turn into something more…carnal. The entire play seems to be one long sex comedy that’s been “hidden” by the citizen comedy it tries to portray itself as. Granted I’m not positive since the entire play still has me scratching my head!