Category Archives: Power struggles

Shades of Mephistopheles in Bosola

Posted on April 28, 2013 by Lyaman

During my reading of The Duchess of Malfi, the character of Bosola at times kept reminding me of Mephistopheles from Doctor Faustus. To me they seem to be an extension of the same archetype, not to say they are particularly similar but rather they seem to be part of the same string extending in different directions.

Mephistopheles is the fallen angel who makes the bargain with the Faustus to serve him for 24 years in return for Faustus’s soul. Throughout the play Mephistopheles keeps urging and helping Faustus to damn himself and waste his time, but at the same time he shows striking signs of trying to make Faustus believe in G-d and heaven, as well as showing signs of regret for his fall and banishment from heaven. Mephistopheles says, “I am a servant to great Lucifer/And may not follow thee without his leave. No more than he commands must we perform” (1.3.41-3) and then he follows it up with, “Why this is hell, nor am I am out of it. Think’st thou that I, who saw the face of God/ And tasted the eternal joys of heave, / Am not tormented with ten thousand hells/ In being deprived of the ever lasting bliss?”(1.3.78-82).  He  later repeats his knowledge of hell and thus heaven by saying, “For I am damned and am now in hell” (2.1.138). The quotes show that not only is Mephistopheles bound and subservient to Lucifer (and Faustus, but that’s besides the point) but he shows self-awareness of what he is and what he has lost.

We meet Mephistopheles already damned, and in the middle there are small instances of him trying to (futilely) dissuade Faustus from condemning his soul, thus doing a good deed. However, when that fails, Mephistopheles reverts to his prime directive as a servant of Lucifer, which is pushing Faustus into abandoning G-d and thus gaining Faustus’s soul.

It seems to somewhat mirror Bosola’s path. Just like Mephistopheles made a bad decision that damned him in following Lucifer to turn against G-d and heaven, so has Bosola made a bad decision in killing for the Cardinal (the first time).  We meet Bosola when he is already damned, having effectively sold his soul to the devil (the Cardinal), because as seen as the play unfolds, once fallen into the Cardinal’s clutches there is no escaping.  It is that first deed that leads Bosola to further irretrievably damn himself, as he falls into the life of spying on the Duchess. Bosola makes the comparison to Mephistopheles himself when he says to Ferdinand on his new job, “Why a very quaint invisible devil, in flesh:/An intelligencer” (1.1.261-2).  Just as Bosola is Ferdinand’s and Cardinal’s “creature” (1.1.289), so is Mephistopheles Lucifer’s creature. And as Bosola says, “Sometimes the devil doth preach” (1.1.293), both he and Mephistopheles preach a cautionary tale.

There are other similarities between the two characters like the disguises they take on, Bosola because he can’t bear to appear as himself to the Duchess and Mephistopheles because Faustus commands it and because he needs to disguise his true nature. As Mephistopheles plays a deceptive confidant to Faustus, so is Bosola to the Duchess.

The difference between the two characters emerges in in the closing of Doctor Faustus. Mephistopheles embraces his damned fate and his servitude to Lucifer. Bosola, on the other hand, repents his role in the death of the Duchess (as for the motives, there is a healthy mix of its wrongness and once again being cheated by the Duchess’s brothers).  The Duchess takes on the role of a deity to him. Bosola says, “am angry with myself, now that I wake” (4.2.326-8) and then, “What would I do, were this to do again? / I would not change my peace of conscience / For all the wealth of Europe.  …. Return, fair soul, from darkness, and lead mine/ out of this sensible hell! ” (4.2.340-50)

Like the theme in Doctor Faustus, penitence plays a large part in The Duchess of Malfi and in both cases all the characters fail to achieve it. When Bosola says, “I’ll be my own example” and “O, penitence let me truly taste thy cup that thrown men down only to raise them up” (5.2.366-67), it is his attempt to save himself, to make some sort of amends in saving Antonio. But much like Mephistopheles attempts to stop Faustus from making the bargain had the oppose reaction, so did Bosola’s actions – killing Antonio.  What Bosola says about himself, “That we cannot be suffered to do good when we have a mind to it” (4.2.364), relates to Mephistopheles too. Both these characters are damned because of their initial alliance.

The final difference between them is that Bosola is able to tear the string that ties him to his Lucifer figure , the Cardinal, when he kills him. And though that act is not enough to salvage him, it does at least just make him a damned soul, rather than one of the devils.

Posted in Doctor Faustus, Power struggles, The Duchess of Malfi, Tragedy | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

The Hypocrisy and the Selfishness of the Brothers

Posted on April 24, 2013 by dc135125

The brothers of the Duchess were nothing but hypocrites. They forbid their sister to marry, but they were also not married at all. Normally one would secure their legacy by marrying and having children.  However that will not happen for the two males of the royal family. They, unlike their sister, only cared for themselves, and that would prove their downfall in the end. Selfish people would get their judgment in due time, but the good would need to suffer first.

In the case of Ferdinland, why does he hate his sister so much, especially if they were twins? He was a terrible and wicked brother who seemed to be too obsessed with his sister and wants her for herself. When the Duchess lives, Ferdinand wants her to be single so he could inherit all of her money. However, he got his wish, but his sanity was gone, and his other half (the Duchess) was torn away from him. He became a like a werewolf and died a horrible death. A hypocrite to the end, his fate was well deserved, since he caused Bosola to murder his sister, her children, the maid Cariola, and others.

However, the Cardinal is even worse. He values reputation, but his sister has the reputation he needed. There was no love, mercy, or any type of selfless aspect from the Cardinal. He only cares for himself and would abandon his own brother, the one who plotted with him in the end. However, the Cardinal deserved a far worse death than the attack from Bosola because of his wicked plans, wicked deeds, and a stable mind. He was the real mastermind and deserved to be tortured like his sister before he dies. However, that was not to happen, and in the end, all the reputation the Cardinal wanted was gone and he wished himself to be forgotten, since his family name became tarnished.

Posted in Power struggles, The Duchess of Malfi | 2 Comments

Bosola: Good or Evil?

Posted on April 24, 2013 by thomash

The Duchess of Malfi by John Webster is an unpredictable tragedy that holds some very pure characters as well as some very wretched characters. Antonio is characterized as a loyal and loving husband who cares deeply for his wife, the Duchess, and their children. The Duchess, who is the heroine of the play, is of equally good character. She defies the wills of her brothers, Ferdinand and the Cardinal, to marry Antonio and attempt to live happily with her husband and children in secrecy.  She loves Antonio dearly, as we can see in act 3.2 when they playfully tease one another, and lives for her family as she begs to be killed when she believes that they have also been killed in act 4.1. However, the purity of these two characters is met with the rotten souls of Ferdinand and the Cardinal. Throughout the play these two men are guilty of conniving against others, holding their sister prisoner, and committing murder. There is one character that is initially perceived as a rotten character but may in fact have a soul in search of redemption. Bosola represents the struggle of good and evil in this play, and even though he commits vile acts, he shows flashes of repentance and regret for the deeds that he has committed, much like Dr. Faustus of The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus.

 This play opens with a conversation between the Cardinal and Bosola in which Bosola reveals that he has served a prison sentence in the galleys for a murder that he committed at the demand of the Cardinal. This initial meeting of Bosola gives the audience a mindset that labels Bosola as an immoral character. This immoral image is added to when Bosola assists in the strangling of the Duchess at the command of Ferdinand. Bosola also kills Antonio, but this was due to pure mistake and cannot be blamed on his will. Whenever anyone is rampantly murdering people, it is difficult to say that they may not necessarily be a completely rotten individual, but in this case it can be justified that Bosola may have a heart after all.

After strangling the Duchess and her children, Bosola speaks with Ferdinand about his payment. During this conversation Bosola questions why Ferdinand does not have pity for the children and criticizes the brother for having empty hearts, ending the statement with, “I am angry with myself, now that I wake” (4.2.328). It can be argued that Bosola only criticizes Ferdinand and the Cardinal because he never received his payment, but it seems that Bosola truly regrets what he has done and is determined to redeem himself. After the Cardinal tells Bosola to also kill Anotnio in order to gain his reward, Bosola agrees but after leaving reveals his true plans to protect Anotnio and help him avenge the death of the Duchess. Bosola eventually kills both Ferdinand and the Cardinal to attempt to right his wrongs, but also dies as well after Ferdinand stabs him.

Bosola was a conflicted character. He was influenced by others to carry out heinous deeds with promises of payment as motivation, but he shows that he does in fact feel sorrow for the things that he has done. This is why he felt that he had to protect Antonio and avenge the Duchess’ death. He also gave Antonio and the Duchess’ oldest son a life free of living in fear of his uncles.

Posted in Power struggles, Psychological detail, The Duchess of Malfi, Tragedy | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Death and Its Release

Posted on April 22, 2013 by pw134848

Given the setting of the drama and the attitudes during the time it wouldn’t be a stretch to say that death was a release for the Duchess and the ones truly close to her. Instead of being bound by the rules and laws that are present she is able to escape all that. Death does not represent to her an end but rather a beginning. For in the next world she would be able to live freely and as she wishes (granted this would mean that there is a life after death but…this is not the time to argue on that matter). Granted at the time she thought that Antonio and her children were dead, so this furthered her belief that death would enable her to reunite with them. While we as the audience know that this is not the case at the moment, it allows her to face her impending execution with courage  and defiance.

Frankly I’m glad that the Duchess was killed. Had she remained alive it would’ve been for no other reason then for Ferdinand to gloat over the so-called power he has over her. With her execution Ferdinand kinda lost what he was trying so hard to keep in the first place. I could imagine the Duchess smiling down from whatever astral plane she is on and remarking on how she won in the end. True her death could have been avoided and maybe something could have happened that might have resulted in a happier ending, but given the circumstances it played out quite well.

 

 

 

Posted in Life vs. Death, Love relationships, Power struggles, The Duchess of Malfi, Tragedy | 3 Comments

A Strong Female Force

Posted on April 22, 2013 by bk145564

The Duchess of Malfi is a tragedy  that clearly depicts female social issues. Since this play illustrates the Duchess going against the male figures in her life, it is ironic to realize females were still not allowed to act on stage. When the Duchess chose to marry Antonio, she put her desire before what her brothers wanted. This showed her using power to make her own decisions.

Both Ferdinand and the Cardinal tried to control the Duchess. They prove to have no boundaries and even go to the extent of murdering at an attempt to regain their power. The brothers keep Bosola under their control until he realizes once again payment isn’t guaranteed. At the end, the character they used to destroy others (Bosola) ends up destroying them. Furthermore, the more they tried to control the Duchess the more everything spun out of control.

Even though it may seem the play ended on a bitter note for the Duchess and female empowerment, there was still hope. The eldest son of Antonio and the Duchess shows their actions were not all in vein. The Duchess still maintained control of her estate by having it left to her child from the husband she chose. This play depicts women to have a great deal of power by showing the danger of trying to trap in a strong, independent, female character.

Posted in Power struggles, Psychological detail, The Duchess of Malfi, Tragedy | 1 Comment

Fed Fortune

Posted on April 17, 2013 by Melissa Salamat

As I was reading through Volpone and witnessing Mosca’s intelligence and position, I wondered why wasn’t Mosca’s already rich himself? From the start of the play I could tell Mosca held the reins of the whole scheme; all Volpone had to do was think of a plot and lie in bed. Mosca had to be the one on his feet, thinking of minute details in a short amount of time while Volpone acted like a blubbering mess. So why was Mosca still under Volpone’s roof or control for so long if it is clear Mosca’s aware of how a con-artist works? Sure, it could have been because Volpone already had an insurance of wealth that he could live well on for the rest of his life, but if he was so driven to act out Volpone’s antics, it could not have been all too difficult to start his own act? Well then, maybe it was loyalty? However, as the play progressed I could tell Mosca did not want to be under Volpone’s wing forever.

I feel Mosca would never have turned on Volpone if the course of events did not happen in this play. It is partly Volpone’s fault for giving Mosca the opportunity to turn against him, providing Mosca with such a large foothold on his treasures with the will. I believe as Volpone’s tricks started to lose their traction,  Mosca started thinking of a way out. The way Jonson planned out the timeline of Volpone, it all worked out perfectly where the bad guys get their punishment and the good remain free. With such a clean ending, I wonder what would have transpired if Mosca could have gotten away with Volpone’s riches and how far the immoral could succeed.

Posted in Power struggles, Revenge, Volpone | 1 Comment

Almost perfect criminals

Posted on April 16, 2013 by zr126166

There is no such thing as perfect crime because no one is perfect. Volpone and Mosca are the ultimate con artists.  When they work together they can pull off any trick and can deceive anyone, anytime. But both men have their faults and this is what causes their fall. Neither of them recognizes that they achieved everything together and can continue only if they are co-operating. Volpone doesn’t appreciate Mosca and Mosca thinks that he can go on alone without Volpone.

Volpone is brilliant in deceiving people, and also, he is enjoying every moment of his tricks. But like a gambler (that he is) doesn’t know where to stop. He is doing his cons for the act itself, not because of greed. He does love his treasure very much; in a blasphemous way he even replaces God with it at the beginning of the play. But what he really likes is to deceive people, to play with them, to control them and then take away whatever valuable they have. This is above all the treasures that he already has. In fact he is giving away everything to Mosca in his will just to pull his new prank on the greedy “carrion birds” and the “she-wolf.” He has his ultimate trust in Mosca and he would never expect Mosca (or furthermore, anyone) to deceive him. He admires his servant’s brilliance in pulling tricks but he fails to recognize his ambition to be more than his sidekick. Mosca for him is just a device (just like his disguise costumes) that helps him to perfectly pull his tricks.

On the other hand Mosca wants to be recognized as (at least) equal to Volpone. He wants to be a true partner in their business venture of crimes. He is not as obsessed by the act itself as Volpone is. He knows that he is good as a con artist and values himself even above of his master. We can see that he is a real pro when he is covering up after Volpone’s failure with Celia, but his true brilliance comes when he is finally in charge. While he is making the inventory of all the valuables he shows who the real boss is now. He kicks out all of those who thought that they have any chance to inherit anything. (Volpone enjoys the show so much and he fails to recognize what is really going on.) Mosca ultimately fails in the courtroom because of his over-confidence. He thinks that he is in total control now. He got what he wanted; he showed what he is capable of, and finally his master also recognizes that they are equal; he wants half of everything and Volpone willing to give it. Together they would get away this time too, but now Mosca is not cooperating and this leads to their ultimate fall.

Posted in Power struggles, Psychological detail, Revenge, Volpone | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Volpone vs. Mosca

Posted on April 16, 2013 by Lyaman

In class we discussed the differences between Volpone and Mosca, and Carol A. Carr’s article, “Volpone and Mosca: the two styles of roguery”  argues that although there are similarities between the two, Volpone is the more intriguing, charismatic and less typical rogue/ villain.

While that may be true, I still find myself preferring Mosca to Volpone. One of the reasons for that is for all their seemingly innate roguishness / villainny there is still one essential difference between them: Volpone is the ‘gentleman’ and Mosca is his servant, his ‘parasite.’  That means that Mosca is dependent on Volpone for his livelihood and for his very survival. However weird their relationship seems in the beginning of the play, however untypical for the usual master / servant relationships, at the end of the day they all, from the vultures: Castrone, Voltore, Carbaccio, to the rest of the world, including Volpone, still view Mosca as someone below them, there to do their bidding.  Despite the hints of admiration Volpone shows for Mosca’s ability to turn cons, there is still no admiration or respect for Mosca’s skill, as Volpone says in act 5.7.1-3, “Outstripped thus by a parasite? A slave/Would run on errands, and make legs for crumbs? …”  ( And even further proved by the severity of Mosca’s punishment compared to the Volpone’s sentence.)

The article talks about how both Volpone and Mosca are intelligent and creative in their cons, and how although they are both detached from the money, they are detatched for difference reasons.  But the issue with that is that while the cons are primarily entertainment (not profit) for Volpone, they are part of Mosca’s job and his way of life in order to survive.

Mosca is much more pragmatic and realistic because that is the reality of his station in life. The article mentions that while Volpone has static disguises he takes on,  Mosca’s disguise is constant but at the same time fluid, as he adapts his manner to the person with whom he is interacting.  But despite that fact, there is much less pretense to Mosca, no rose- colored cover or pretty words to present the type of person that he is or his motivation in a better light.

In class we also spoke about loyalty and how it seems that Mosca betrays Volpone. But Volpone’s loyalty is to the con, not to Mosca or his bastard children – so why did Mosca have to show him more loyalty than was shown to him?! Mosca says, “ I’ll bury him or gain by him. I am his heir / And so will keep me till he share at least” (5.5.13-15).  Mosca wants part of the profit; he wants financial security and independence, which can be understandable because Volpone has no care or caution about anyone beside himself.  In a play where every character (except two) is rotten to the core, at least Mosca doesn’t pretend to be better than he is, but the same cannot be said for the others.

Posted in Power struggles, Uncategorized, Volpone | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Loyalty like a Fly

Posted on April 15, 2013 by eg129177

From the beginning it is clear that Mosca’s relationship to Volpone is rooted in the delicate acts they construe.  They function as a finely tuned machine of trickery that operates seamlessly, even in the face of unforeseen obstacles. Throughout his servitude to Volpone, Mosca is undoubtedly loyal, and receives the greatest satisfaction at his successes in the name of their bizarre game. While Volpone seems to derive satisfaction from the sheer thrill, Mosca nourishes himself on the scraps of this profound enjoyment, much like a parasite would his host. He is an unswerving and irreplaceable aspect of Volpone’s grand ruse. Until he isn’t. Much like others in the play, he is forced to sacrifice his bizarre code of honor in the face of self-interest, which, oddly enough forces Volpone to do the same. Although portrayed rather abruptly, it would seem that this inevitable reversal is something Jonson is keenly fascinated with, an altogether unsurprising conclusion.

These shifts occur at key junctures. As soon as Volpone commits the fatal flaw of violating their relationship status, by elevating him beyond his well-accepted boundaries, he forces the break in Mosca’s otherwise solid code. In this darker take on the pitfalls of honor, the near inability of it to exist, one finds that the root of this falls to nature, and the movement of people. In such a city, marred as it is by strains of depravity, but also, resting on these shifting, oozing grounds as foundation. Mosca begins to realize that his affection for the con is growing beyond his bounds of loyalty.

Willing his estate to Mosca, forgetting his ultimate reliance on the cunning man, is symbolic for each misstep. And in committing this motion Volpone has allowed himself to fall victim to his own devices. The only way to right this imbalance is to essentially ‘reset’ by self-incrimination and acceptance of guilt. Thus they are all wrapped up in varying levels of greed and conditions for individual honor, and until the final unraveling, this suspends each character against the chaos of the cityscape of Venice.

Ultimately what does this mess present as a central theme? At the risk of oversimplification, some light cliche, and grandiose generalizations, the work as a whole takes a very hopeless turn for those mired in greed and depravity. It would seem that once tainted, various indiscretions are impossible to wash off.

Posted in Power struggles, Psychological detail, Satire, Uncategorized, Volpone | 1 Comment

Dangerous Desire

Posted on April 13, 2013 by thomash

Desire plays a major role in Volpone by Ben Jonson.  The most dominant theme in this play is by far greed, but desire and lust also play significant roles as well. Volpone and Mosca develop a scheme to manipulate Voltore, Corbaccio, and Corvino into giving Volpone gifts because of their desire to be named his heir, Volpone and Mosca desire not only to accumulate wealth from their scheme but also to outsmart everyone, and Volpone desires Celia despite her disgust towards him.

At the beginning of the play Volpone says to Mosca, “Yet I glory more in the cunning purchase of my wealth than in the glad possession, since I gain no common way.” (1.1 30-33). This statement shows that Volpone’s desire to be the best con artist outweighs the importance he places on the wealth that he accumulates. His desire to fool everyone is fueled by the desire to ascertain Volpone’s wealth of Voltore, Corbaccio, and Corvino. Once Volpone sees Celia, his desire quickly changes from gaining wealth through his scheme to claiming the love of Celia, although it seems that he has more lust for her than love and will do anything to have sex with her. Celia is one of the few symbols of good in this play and she is saved by Bonario when Volpone tries to rape her.

Desire can be strong motivation for the actions of individuals. In many cases, people desire to reach a goal that represents success to them. However, in Volpone, Ben Jonson manipulates human nature to twist his characters’ desires to yearn for unethical things, causing them to act in a grotesque manner at times. Corvino prostitutes his wife, Volpone attempts to commit rape and adultery, and Mosca manipulates Voltore into lying and nearly has two innocent individuals punished for crimes that they did not commit. Nearly every character in this play, with the exception of two, has a rotten core and some even acknowledge their wrongdoing and yet they still do not care. Desire is a powerful emotion and when the goal is bad, the means to reach that goal may be worse than the goal itself.

Posted in Power struggles, Psychological detail, Volpone | Tagged , | 1 Comment