1721


 * 1721 in the Theater and England **

By 1721 England had experienced several upheavals from the restoration of Charles II and the monarchy. A war of succession involving Spain had been fought in Europe from 1701-1714 and the British government was deeply in debt without a plan to resolve the issue. The South Sea Company was started and granted a monopoly in order to assist the government with recovering from the debt. By January of 1721 it had just failed in spectacular fashion and cast doubt the British government as the value of the entire economy fell and many government officials lost considerable portions of their fortune.

In the papers, //The London Journal// published a series of letters called Cato’s letters and was considered a pioneer in printing political essays. As stated by Martin Conboy in //Journalism: A Political History//, this was in response to Horace Walpole’s influence on the publishing industries. He put a number of controls on the press that resulted in journalism becoming a profession as opposed to the voice of the people. //The London Journal’s// vocal questioning of the incidents surrounding the South Sea Bubble resulted in a large rise in readership and Walpole’s solution which was to buy the paper in 1722 and end its rhetoric against the government by installing pro-government editors.

In print, //The London Journal// did devote a considerable amount of its print space to these letters, signed by Cato and others. Cato’s spent quite a bit of time comparing current British policy to that of Rome, particularly to Julius Caesar and Cicero. Responses to Cato’s letters as well as numerous other writers often couched criticism in references to then-current political figures and policies.

Some of the primary concerns of these letters were the rights and responsibilities of men towards each other and towards government. They were also frequently nostalgic yearnings towards a time when “men’s morals were not corrupted with riches and luxury” and that “great men, who, to gratify their private passion, often bring public ruin”. The focus on the separation between private and public life are often compared to each other as well as the manner of common men to men of a royal nature. The paper often laments criminality as something that the common man has been exposed to by royalty and there were attacks against the Church policies of power and wealth, attacks against Charles II’s handling of the nation, and that royalty does not alter the content of a crime.

Much of this criticism was likely tied to the situation on the throne, George I was the first Hanoverian King and came to court speaking very little English. He was deeply enmeshed in the South Sea Company prior to its defeat and did not rule in cooperation with his Parliament. As he became increasingly disaffected he allowed Robert Walpole to become more and more powerful and run the country. Walpole’s rise in power led to his assumption of the same authority as the Prime Minister which he is generally considered to be.

Although this political commentary was the primary focus, //The London Journal// did also provide news of both local and foreign affairs. Locally this included matters of estate, the instances of highwaymen and violent crime, marriages, births and deaths. Also only exceptional events were recorded for the common person; a woman who gave birth to living triplets was commented on as well as the sex of the babies, 2 boys and 1 girl; births of royalty, even cousins to the crown were recorded in detail as were other issues of health and sickness. In foreign affairs, war threatened and broke out between the Swedes and the Muscovites and several times when peace seemed likely, negotiations ultimately broke down. The Poles and the Turks remained in a constant state of tension while the paper did rejoice that peace between France and S pain endured with the possibility of a long term alliance between the two countries and England. Also important were the reports of plague from France, and while the seriousness of the outbreak was not well understood, the violence within the country while trying to keep quarantine lines showed the difficulty of managing disease as well as the flow of information. A smaller outbreak of smallpox in England received much less print space.

The paper spent a considerable space discussing the ships and commerce of England. A fitting discussion since more than one letter admitted the arrival of the merchant class as a significant impact on the economy of England. In this vein, the actions of smugglers, pirates and highwaymen were of great import to the economy of England, including those supported by the government against other countries. Several times loads of goods were listed as recently liberated by an English ship and brought to market in a celebratory manner. As the country was still reeling from the effects of the South Sea Bubble, the actions of the South Sea Company continued to be of import, including the findings of a general inquiry, how to redeem stocks from the company, and the dissolution of the owners’ estates all were detailed in several pages.

And as a public service, there were always advertisements for the cure of venereal diseases such as the clap, the pox, and gonorrhea, deworming treatments that were touted by the length of worm produced after ingestion of the medication, and various lyquors, hair dying agents, and other medicinal and beautification products.

During all of this the London theater scene was still dominated by the two powerhouses of Drury Lane and the King’s Theatre. Drury Lane was noted for having a summer season when most playhouses were closed, and the King’s Theatre for showcasing opera. For the most part plays began at 6 o’clock and t heir prices were not advertised unless the cost of admission had risen. For postings and other news, the //Daily Courant// and //Daily Post// were the best source of information, however //The London Journal// did post a notice in its May 6, 1721 edition that included a notice for “The Revenge; A Tragedy” by Edward Young with the Latin below ‘//manet alta mente repostum’// which is attributed to a quote from Virgil that means ‘it is stored deep in the mind’. //The London Stage// indicates that Othello, from which The Revenge is based on, played throughout the year that The Revenge debuted.

//The London Stage// lists the debut of The Revenge as 18 April 1721 at the Drury Lane theater with Mr. Booth playing Don Alonzo and Mr. Wilks playing Don Carlos. A special note indicated that the play was by Edward Young. “A new Tragedy. All the Persons being new drest.” The entries show that Drury Lane was redecorated between the seasons of 1721 and 1722 and June 1722 was the next time The Revenge was played followed by performances in December 1723 by request and again in January 1724.

Although The Revenge is based loosely on Othello, it has the simpler plot of the two plays. In it, Zanga, a Moorish slave has been in service to Don Alonzo due to his unjust punishment which Zanga does not feel deserved. As Alonzo has fallen in love with Leonora, he pits Alonzo against his friend Don Carlos for Leonora’s hand and affections. Once Alonza has won Leonora, Zanga and his mistress Isabella, plot to make Alonzo question whether Leonora has had a sexual relationship with Carlos prior to and during Alonzo’s suit. They plant evidence until Alonzo causes Carlos’s death. Leonora takes her own life and finally Zanga brags about his betrayal to Alonzo who kills himself as Leonora’s father arrests him for trial and execution. Both plays use the revenge of a slighted character, Iago in Othello, whose deeds result in the deaths of the love triangle that he caused through accusations of infidelity. One large difference between them is that Othello, who is wronged by Iago’s lies, is the Moor of the play and has married a Spanish Desdemona. This leads to the question of whether Iago’s actions were truly with cause or only as an act of racism against Othello’s marriage to a woman of a different skin color. In The Revenge, the instigator of the tragedy is the Moor with the three wronged individuals being Spanish, it certainly changes the perceived injustice as well as the tone of race within the plot.

One possibility for the change in tone might be the rise of the slave trade in England as seen through the trading companies. //The London Journal// makes several references to the three powerhouses of English fortune: the South Sea Company (South America), the East Indies Company (India), and the African Company (Africa) as well as the transport of slaves through these companies and through allied nations. The nation of England was becoming increasingly dependent on the use and labor of slave markets as well as the oppression of dark-skinned people in the colonies. Although the story of Othello predates these changes, it might have been seen as more appropriate for the time to have a cautionary tale about a group of people considered untrustworthy instead of retaining Iago, a ‘white man’, in the role of that betrayal. In “Kean, Byron, and Fantasies of Miscengenation” Edward Ziter discusses the portayal of both the characters of Othello and Zanga by the actor Edmund Kean in the late 1700s and 1800s. Othello was portrayed in ‘tawny’ face-paint because Kean’s biographer said that Kean felt that Othello being portrayed as Negro or black was unacceptable. However, Ziter says that in Romantic theater “one discerns the emergence of a distinctly modern, and ultimately oppressive, conception of race,” which he uses when he requotes a critic in praising Kean’s portrayal of Zanga, “He has all the wild impetuosity of barbarous revenge, the glowing energy of the untamed children of the sun whose blood drinks up the radiance of fierce skies.” Ziter says this is the “obsessive desire for revenge specific to the Moors of Northern Africa.” Without direct evidence from the playright, these intentions are speculation, however the rise of the slave trade seems to support the theory that England followed the trend in Europe and the Americans to see colored people as separate and distinct races than white-skinned people with negative attributes ascribed to them as well.

The Revenge is interesting because it shows that revising previous plays was still an accepted practice to fit current morals, so common that Othello itself was a play based off an earlier Italian story that was supposed to be based on a true story.


 * __ Works Cited __**

“The London stage, 1660-1800; a calendar of plays, entertainments & afterpieces, together with casts, box-receipts and contemporary comment.” Carbondale, Southern Illinois University Press, 1960-1968.

Edward Ziter. “Kean, Byron, and Fantasies of Miscegenation.” //Theatre Journal//, Vol. 54, No. 4, Re-Thinking the Real (Dec., 2002), pp. 607-626.

Eaves, T.C. Duncan. “ Joseph Highmore's Portrait of the Reverend Edward Young.” //Studies in Philology//, Vol. 43, No. 4 (Oct., 1946), pp. 668-674.

Cassini, Jacques, //Cartographer//. “New Map of the World.” Published 1721 by John Overton. University of Washington, University Libraries, Digital Collections, World and Regional Maps

Collections.

Young, Edward. “The Revenge.” Published 1721. Retrieved from The Gutenberg Project 6 July 2012.