#there's also a christopher marlowe quotation

[the-paintrist]

Henry Wallis - The death of Chatterton - 1856

oil on canvas, Height: 622 mm (24.48 in); Width: 933 mm (36.73 in)

Tate Britain, London, UK

The Death of Chatterton is an oil painting on canvas, by the English Pre-Raphaelite painter Henry Wallis, now in Tate Britain, London. Two smaller versions, sketches or replicas, are held by the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery and the Yale Center for British Art. The Tate painting measures 62.2 centimetres (24.5 in) by 93.3 centimetres (36.7 in), and was completed in 1856.

The subject of the painting was the 17-year-old English early Romantic poet Thomas Chatterton, shown dead after he poisoned himself with arsenic in 1770. Chatterton was considered a Romantic hero for many young and struggling artists in Wallis's day.

Wallis's method and style in Chatterton reveal the importance of his connection to the Pre-Raphaelite movement, seen in the vibrant colours and careful build-up of symbolic detail. He used a bold colour scheme with a contrasting palette and he exploited the fall of the natural light through the window of the garret to implement his much loved style at the time, chiaroscuro. Wallis painted the work in a friend's chamber in Gray's Inn, with St Paul's Cathedral on the skyline visible through the window. It was probably a coincidence that this location was close to the garret in Brooke Street where Chatterton died 86 years before. The model used for the painting was the young George Meredith, a Victorian era English novelist and poet.

The painting was Wallis's first exhibited work. It was shown at the Royal Academy summer exhibition in 1856, with a quotation from the Tragedy of Doctor Faustus by Christopher Marlowe inscribed on the frame: "Cut is the branch that might have grown full straight, And burned is Apollo's laurel bough". It was an immediate success, with John Ruskin describing it as "faultless and wonderful". It drew large crowds at the Art Treasures Exhibition in Manchester in 1857, was also exhibited in Dublin in 1859, and was one of the most popular Victorian paintings in reproductive print form.

Wallis sold the painting to Augustus Egg in 1856, and Egg sold the right to make engraved reproductions. The painting became the subject of a court case after Dublin photographer James Robinson was inspired to recreate the painting as a tableau vivant so he could sell photographs of the scene. The painting was left to the Tate Gallery by Charles Gent Clement in 1899.

There are two smaller versions of the same subject by Wallis, one either a study or a replica in the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery, which measures 17.3 centimetres (6.8 in) by 25.25 centimetres (9.94 in) and, somewhat unusually for the period, a small oil-on-panel replica at the Yale Center for British Art, which measures 22.7 centimetres (8.9 in) by 30.2 centimetres (11.9 in). The Birmingham work was sold at Christie's in 1875 to Baron Albert Grant and then in 1877 to William Kendrick, who donated it to the gallery in 1918.

Thomas Chatterton (20 November 1752 – 24 August 1770) was an English poet whose precocious talents ended in suicide at age 17. He was an influence on Romantic artists of the period such as Shelley, Keats, Wordsworth and Coleridge.

Although fatherless and raised in poverty, Chatterton was an exceptionally studious child, publishing mature work by the age of 11. He was able to pass off his work as that of an imaginary 15th-century poet called Thomas Rowley, chiefly because few people at the time were familiar with medieval poetry, though he was denounced by Horace Walpole.

At 17, he sought outlets for his political writings in London, having impressed the Lord Mayor, William Beckford, and the radical leader John Wilkes, but his earnings were not enough to keep him, and he poisoned himself in despair. His unusual life and death attracted much interest among the romantic poets, and Alfred de Vigny wrote a play about him that is still performed today. The oil painting The Death of Chatterton by Pre-Raphaelite artist Henry Wallis has enjoyed lasting fame.

Henry Wallis RWS (21 February 1830 – 20 December 1916) was a British Pre-Raphaelite painter, writer and collector.

[noshitshakespeare]

I love your blog. I'm a student studying Hamlet and Faustus and I was wondering what you thought about Christopher Marlowe and his influences on Shakespeare.

Thank you very much! I’m glad you like the blog; much obliged.

Marlowe’s influence on Shakespeare is a pretty broad question, so I don’t have any particular thought on the subject as a whole. I mean, it’s clear that Shakespeare was influenced by Marlowe, especially given that he quotes him at times. The two most often noted are Evans’ song in Act 3, scene 1 of The Merry Wives of Windsor, which is a quotation of Marlowe’s The Passionate Shepherd to His Love, and Phoebe’s ‘Dead shepherd, now I find thy saw of might: / Who ever loved, that loved not at first sight?’ (3.5.82-83) in As You Like It is an acknowledged quotation from Hero and Leander (‘dead shepherd’ referring, of course, to Marlowe). I also think that Richard II’s ‘Is this the face which faced so many follies / That was at last outfaced by Bolingbroke?’ (4.1.285-86; the 4th Quarto has ‘Was’ instead of ‘Is’) might be a reference to Marlowe’s ‘Was this the face that launch’d a thousand ships, / And burnt the topless towers of Illium?’ (Dr Faustus, B-text, 5.1.93-94).

But even though we know that Marlowe must have influenced Shakespeare, the extent of this influence is extremely difficult to determine. No doubt Shakespeare borrowed or was inspired by his contemporary playwrights’ poetic elements, storytelling methods, characterisation and so on, but how does one judge? And is Marlowe’s influence limited to the time they were both actively writing for the London stages, or does it continue after he dies? In the case of this latter question, it seems to me (judging by themes and quotations) that Marlowe’s influence is stronger on Shakespeare’s earlier plays, but do continue in some ways to his later plays.

But I suppose that you’re more particularly interested in the connection between Dr Faustus and Hamlet. Well, if you look at the two plays in isolation, there are a lot of elements that chime with one another: there’s the intelligent protagonist that feels trapped in his world, there are the religious themes of the Reformation and the afterlife, the idea of sexual attraction and making a change in the world and so on. But when you look at all of these themes with a wider view of early modern culture you get the sense that Hamlet isn’t so much a direct response to Dr Faustus as that the two plays are both responding to similar issues and belong to a similar tradition, even though both plays happen to be particularly outstanding in the way they use and transform these elements. And while it’s possible to surmise that Shakespeare may have been partly inspired to write this kind of play based on his experience of Marlowe’s box office hit, there are many more plays in the revenge tragedy genre before and after Marlowe’s play that deal with similar questions, so it’s impossible to attribute it to Marlowe alone. Take for instance the figure of the disenchanted intellectual – the character was so common in early modern writing that it even has a name, the malcontent.

What’s most important, I think, is that Marlowe and Shakespeare were living, experiencing, and responding to the time in which they lived in similar ways, both thematically and poetically. They’re both interested in questions of politics and authority, in cruelty and bloodshed, and in questions of faith, human freedom and individuality (among other issues), and both of them deal with these questions similarly at times, distinctly at others. Sometimes they diverge. For instance, Shakespeare is more interested in capitalism than Marlowe, and Marlowe is more interested in atheism than Shakespeare. They’re also writing in the golden age of British playwriting, and are, along with several others, creating and transforming the very field of dramatic writing as they write. So they’re not only influencing one another but working at the same time on similar materials for similar audiences, creating the very categories by which they would come to be judged in the future.

[claudiaryc]

Saying it With Roses - The Significance of Color

In European lifestyle, there is no plant more rich in romantic endeavors than the increased. There are 1000 loving quotations associated with this plant. Captain christopher Marlowe, Bill Shakespeare, Gertrude Stein-all were transferred to put mankind's connection with the increased into words. I believe the best is David Boyle O'Reilly's "The red increased whispers of passion/And the white-colored increased inhales of love; O, the red increased is a falcon, And the white-colored increased is a dove."

Because of its loving organizations, the increased is the go-to plant for marriages, especially since the increased comes in an endless range of colors and colors. However, the http://www.flowersdelivereduk.org.uk various colors of roses have become associated with particular definitions over time. This means that while a new bride may want to pick a shade plan based completely on her individual flavor, she might also want to consider what she is "saying" with her flowers.

Red roses, of course, are the perfect example of enthusiastic real really like. As David Burns up said "Oh, my luve's [sic] like a red, red increased." Nor amazingly, this hue continues to be absolutely well-liked by fans and at marriages. It also never hurts that red roses are stunningly wonderful and don't require a lot of additional decoration, if any.

The white-colored increased, much like the white-colored dress of the new bride, is a indication of cleanliness and purity. In days gone by, it was essential that a new bride be genuine, or "untouched." Today, although many people take a more easygoing view on this subject, the white-colored increased can still signify the cleanliness of really like and the beauty of new origins.

Pink roses can signify a variety of ideas, probably due to the range of colors available. Strong light red, for example, often symbolizes admiration, while light light red symbolizes sweet flavor and joy. Reefs, which is carefully related to light red, signifies desire and enjoyment, and apple, another close comparative, symbolizes concern and modesty. Clearly, when it comes to roses, the colors of light red carry the most different organizations. However, none of them would be considered unsuitable for a wedding, and light red roses of any and all colors are highly sought after for wedding festivities.

Yellow roses are a indication of connection, pleasure and comfort. As a result, they can often be the plant of choice for teenage boys to give to younger ladies during the teenager years; yellow-colored roses can be used to indication a loving interest without the psychological hazards of the enthusiastic red increased. Although some wedding brides may not want to use yellow-colored roses at wedding ceremonies for this reason, others identify that connection is an important part of any wedding. Additionally, yellow-colored roses make a nice-looking addition to most other colors.

Purple roses have gained popularity in the past couple of decades. They are still a relatively unusual and therefore unique option. This shade conveys the feeling of really like at first vision, one of the most typically loving ideas these days. This shade can be used to express the charm the couple seems with each other.

[shakespiracymystery-blog]

The authorship question

The Shakespearean plays, poems and other works are nowadays an important part of our culture and still touch many people. But one question, the reason of many debates for over 150 years, remains: was William Shakespeare, son of a glove-maker, the real author?

This question first occurred in the middle of the 19th century when people began to worship Shakespeare as the greatest writer of all times and also developed an interest in his biography. However, they then noticed some aspects which did not always fit the author they had in mind. Because of that, some started to assume that he was not the one who really had written all the works but rather some of the aristocrats of Shakespeare’s time such as Edward de Vere, Christopher Marlowe, William Stanley and Sir Francis Bacon.

The aspects Shakespeare’s biography contains and make people doubt his authorship are the following: To begin with, he was son of a glove maker whose ancestors and descendants were illiterate and who only received an elementary school education. In addition to that, there is not a single letter found written by him or anything else. The things he left behind at his death in 1616 did not contain any books or other written material and there was not a single manuscript found written by his own hand. 

The most popular alternative Shakespeare authorship theory is called the “Oxfordian theory”. It presents Edward de Vere,17th earl of Oxford, as the true author. This theory relies heavily on the biography of both men for many aspects of Edward de Vere’s biography seem to be more coherent with the events in Shakespeare’s works. The places Shakespeare’s plays are located fit his travels. Many of them are located in Italy and Edward de Vere is proven to have lived in Venice and to have traveled Italy for one year. Moreover, in de Vere’s bible several passages and words had been marked by him. These can often be found in the shakespearean works as either a theme, allusion or quotation. Still, there are some arguments against this theory such as his date of death. De Vere died in 1604 and after that date, the publications have not stopped. 

Argumentations for William Shakespeare as the real author rely mostly on history. The shakespearean plays were performed by William Shakespeare himself together with his acting group and only by them. Moreover, the most evident of all arguments is of course the signature below all of his works which states William Shakespeare as the true author. The people supporting this belief call themselves “Stratfordians”.

Sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespeare_authorship_question

https://heyprof.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/oxfordian-theory-of-shakespeare-authorship.pdf

Pathway advanced

http://mymodernmet.com/was-shakespeare-a-fraud/

[fionamccall]

Blasphemous braggadocio

A report in the Guardian a few days ago announced the British Library’s release of the so-called Baines note listing a series of blasphemous statements notoriously made by Christopher Marlowe in 1593, shortly before his murder in a Deptford tavern:

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2017/mar/31/christopher-marlowe-spy-baines-note-gay-christ-british-library-online

In the first quotation, referring to John the Evangelist being ‘bedfellow’ to Christ, the word ‘Christ’ has been obliterated.  I’ve seen similar censorship at work in church court records where swear words are reported, suggesting some sensitivity over the power of bad language or thoughts, even in quotation.

Marlowe’s views reminded me of some equally shocking statements reported to Wiltshire Quarter sessions in 1656, taking place in a similar social setting, and with a comparable level of braggadocio.  No doubt the authorities were on the lookout for ranter activity, following that reportedly involving Thomas Webb at nearby Langley Burrell in 1652.

Truly atheistical beliefs like these are uncommonly expressed in the early modern period  and  people are often tarred as atheists on account of their general behaviour rather than their doctrinal position.  If both Marlowe, Jones and Hibbord were setting out to shock, they succeeded.

Complaint of Thomas Jones against William Bond and Thomas Hibbord of Lacock, Wiltshire Quarter Sessions, 3 April 1656

William Bond publicly professed and affirmed that … there was no God or power ruling above the planets, no Christ …that the twelve patriarchs were twelve houses, that if the Scripture were a making againe then Tom Lampire of Melksham would make as good Scriptures as the Bible, there was neither heaven nor hell except in a man’s own conscience, for if he had a good fortune and did live well, that was heaven, and if he lived poor and miserable, that was hell, for then he would die like a cow or horse … Hibbord stated that God was in all things, and that whatever sins he did commit, God was author of them all and acted them in him.  He would sell all religions for a jug of beer.

Further witnesses elaborated further on Bond’s homespun religious philosophy, reporting that Bond had stated that,

When he dies, ‘whoe knows whether the breath of a beast goes upwards or downewards’.

‘Lily would make as good a book as the bible’ [presumably William Lilly the astrologer].

‘God was everywere.  God was in the flaggon and in the jugg and everywhere’.

‘God repented he made man’.

‘God would save every man’.

Bond was also heard to say ‘he would fart as good a Christ’, or in another witness’s version, ‘‘shit as good as Christ out of his Arse’, to ‘much laughter’.

Source: Wiltshire Record Office A1/110 Quarter Sessions Great Rolls, 1656 E/193