A New Way to Pay Old Debts
Endymion
Historical Background Links
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- PBerggren on Comparison of Prodigal Sons
- PBerggren on A Very Modern Character
- PBerggren on Madness – the sign of villainy without the cover of rationality/humanity
- PBerggren on Judgement of Females in Literature
- peter d'antonio on Madness – the sign of villainy without the cover of rationality/humanity
Archives
Categories
Meta
Tags
- betrayal
- bosola
- Coercion
- conflicted
- cynthia
- damned but with a bit of saving grace
- dedication
- De Flores
- desire
- Doctor Faustus
- Dr faustas
- endymion
- eumenides
- Evil
- female characters
- gender differences
- good and evil
- Greed
- Helen
- human condition
- humanity
- judgement
- lawyers
- Lorenzo
- loyalty
- madness
- Madoff
- master/servant
- mephistopheles
- mirror characters
- Mosca
- Pedringano
- Power and Fear
- pragmatism
- queen elizabeth
- satire
- scene study
- survival
- symbolism
- the lesser bad
- The Spanish Tragedy
- too late for salvation
- video
- villains
- Volpone
Tag Archives: the shoemaker’s holiday
Social Status in The Shoemaker’s Holiday
The Shoemaker’s Holiday, written by Thomas Dekker, is one of the first plays we have read in class that closely examines social status. I say closely because I think the other plays we have read thus far do incorporate social status as a plot device in one way or another, but none do so as thoroughly as The Shoemaker’s Holiday. The plot’s main character is the boisterous yet charming Simon Eyre, a shoemaker dedicated to his craft and to those who work with him. Eyre’s trademark phrase is “Prince am I none, yet am I princely born”. He says this over and over again, and it might provide an explanation as to how and why Eyre is able to ascend the social ladder as a shoe maker to a Lord Sheriff, to finally a Lord Mayor. The fact that Eyre has the opportunity to climb the social ladder is intriguing, and offers and interesting parallel to the side plot of Lacy and Rose, whose guardians are opposed to their marriage due to differences in social status.
While Lacy’s Uncle is opposed to his marriage to Rose because she is middle class (albeit her father is what one might recognize as New Money). On the other hand, Rose’s father opposes the marriage due to Lacy’s previous lifestyle as a reckless spender, and in turn a threat to Roses’s assets if they do get married. However, Lacy finds his way around this roadblock to his happiness with Rose, and chooses to disguise himself as a shoemaker, thus entwining his plot with that of Simon Eyre. Things aren’t completely settled between the already married Lacy and Rose, as their guardians still oppose the union. Leave it to the King to make an appearance in the last scene, and set everything right. He talks in length about how the problem of social status shouldn’t be an obstruction to the couple’s happiness, as Rose is ” worthy bride for any gentleman” (21.109) and Lacy “To gain her love became a shoemaker” (21.113). This part of the King’s speech is moving as he stands up for the couple’s love for each other coming before social status. However, he promptly appoints Lacy a higher status as a Knight, much to the delight of Oately and Lincoln. In conclusion, I don’t think that this play is campaigning that social status doesn’t really matter; instead it provides a well thought out portrayal of matters of the working class in a manner that showcases the cunning and vivacity of these particular characters.
Posted in Love relationships, The Shoemaker's Holiday
Tagged social status, the shoemaker's holiday
2 Comments