It is ironic that while William Shakespeare is universally lauded as the greatest dramatist of his time, scholars and historians usually point out that Ben Jonson was somehow more popular and much of his life was well-documented as well---perhaps because he himself chose to publish his own works or maybe (arguably) he was seen as a better playwright in his time. What he achieves in his most popular comedy Volpone is a feat of tightly interwoven plot and subplot structure which is often thought to be also one of the strengths of Shakespearean plays. Unlike Shakespearean comedies which often ends with happy endings like marriages, Volpone ends in a more somber tone as poetic justice is achieved when the deceivers are justly punished. Ben Jonson, in a very self-conscious way, dictates to the viewers of the play in his dedication and prologue that his play is a morality play and that the viewers will laugh so hard at the silliness of the story. He achieves this through many of the scenes, but what could confuse the audience is the end where after the poetic justice is portrayed, he invites the audience to applaud his play if they enjoyed watching. To my knowledge, while Shakespeare wrote introduction/prologue to his plays, he never inserted in the ending of his plays a direct request for applause. Perhaps this is why Ben Jonson is not as celebrated as much as Shakespeare today as even though his construction of the play is perfect and complex, he does not employ an aura of sprezzatura as the Bard did in his masterpieces.The main plot of Volpone revolves around the trickery of the titular heirless character Volpone against the three men who wish to be his heir as Volpone tricks them into believing that he is dying. He uses his ‘parasite’ Mosca in his scheme of accepting these get-well gifts but little does he know that Mosca has his own motivations as well. The comedy that we see in the first act easily foreshadows the lesson of the morality play that Volpone sets out to be: while it criticizes the greed of mankind, it utilizes gullibility as the main flaw which allow greed to reign and deceive other people. This deceiving nature of greed is not just apparent in the character of Volpone, but even the three heir-wannabes, Voltore, Corbaccio and Corvino, are all aware that they think they are deceiving Volpone as well with their offerings. This might be the reason why Volpone can be seen as a morality play that extends the idea how greed (and even materialism) drive(s) people to take advantage of each other’s faith and trust.The subplot, while it is woven perfectly with the scheme of the five men, treats the minor characters with, initially, misfortune, but then at the end of the play, with more patronage. Celia, who becomes objectified as an addition to Volpone’s ill-amassed possessions, initially, seems to be so unfortunate for having a husband who see her as nothing more than means to the realization of Corvino’s deception of becoming the heir of Volpone. Similarly, we see the victim of Corbaccio’s deception, his disowned son, Bonario become an unlucky person who would suffer because of his father’s greed. Jonson’s clever subplot of making both Celia and Bonario defend each other seems to show Jonson’s sense of justice and consideration for the people maligned by tricksters. Even the minor details of Voltore’s fooling of the court of justice with his manipulation of the real events in the story reverse its effect when the consequence of Mosca’s treachery against Volpone backfires as Volpone reveals the truth in an attempt to get back at Mosca. The complex lacing of these events really just goes to show the masterful ability of Jonson in weaving a comic story that not only successfully entertain and make the audience laugh out loud but also will be able to preach a moral lesson to the audience as well.And this ‘achievement‘ of Jonson, being able to entertain and preach, is probably why we, the modern audience, might not feel as impressed with Jonson as we are with Shakespeare’s plays. While Shakespeare in his comedies also make the audience laugh out loud with the trickeries and deceptions of false identities and love misadventures, the audience is not smacked with an in-your-face lesson and a plea for applause. Maybe that’s the irony of Jonson’s popularity: with the Elizabethans and the Jacobeans, they feel the need to be spoonfed with spectacles and laughter and a lesson in their plays, while the audience yearn more for pure entertainment and maybe scholastic discussion that need not come from direct cues from the playwright.
The review of Ben Jonson’s Volpone, or the Fox, is the review of death. I’ve started it three times and deleted it three times and, frankly, I just want to get it over with. The result: super short incoherent review. Here goes:Funny scenes. Manipulation of minor characters by title character and his servant Mosca featured in the first act were hilarious. Dramatic irony throughout. Deception and manipulation played both humorous and thematic roles. Characters were entertaining, yet seemed a little flat. Use of stock characters, such as the sly servant, which didn’t bother me much, but seemed to contrast with Shakespeare, who I believed in such characters as Twelfth Night’s Feste redefined and developed stock characters rather than simply using already established forms. I haven’t decided if I liked the ending. It followed from the plot, yet I think it would have been more entertaining if there was a sort of “winner,” which Jonson’s end didn’t seem to allow for. I’d nominate Mosca, as Jonson was playing with for a while. But I guess in the Renaissance, the slave or servant couldn’t really win. Woulda been hilarious though. As with most of the plays I’ve read, I acknowledge that this would be much better performed than read in dim lighting late at night after doing an eight page paper. Either because of the conditions I read it or because of its nature (or both), Volpone, or the Fox was as difficult to read as it was to review, but I’m glad that I read it if not just to have read the works of a Renaissance playwright who’s not Shakespeare.
What do You think about Volpone (1994)?
The thing about early modern satire is that it really isn't very subtle. Ben Jonson's characters are all personifications of follies and vices, so they lack depth. Then again, they were never meant to be complex, they just serve to make a point. Volpone can be laugh-out-loud funny at times, but it's just not my cup of tea. It's too mean-spirited, there's no emotion, no subtlety, and the levity with which the near rape of Celia is discussed made me very uncomfortable.The play makes sense in its historical and cultural context, but it's not for me.
—Yara
VOLPONE, or, The Fox. (1605). Ben Jonson. ****.tBen Jonson (1573-1637) was one of the primary playwrights of the Jacobean period in England, and this play is probably his most famous. It’s about time that I finally got around to reading it, although it was certainly covered years ago in a variety of courses covering the literature of that time. The play is, ultimately, one about greed and dishonesty, but told in fable form. The play was mostly written in verse and featured a cast of characters named after a variety of animals who embodied their traits. The main character, Volpone, means “fox” in Italian. Other players are also given Italian names: Mosca, Volpone’s servant, means “the fly,” or “the parasite;” Voltore, a lawyer, means “the Vulture,” Corbaccio, an old miser, means, “the Raven;” Corvino, a merchant whose wife is desired by Volpone, means “the Carrion Crow.” One of the themes, then, is that we are presented by people acting like animals, who are acting like people. The plot is simple. Volpone is a gentleman from Venice who is acting as if he were close to death in order to fool his attorney. While playing his role as terminally ill, he manages to fool many of his associates into believing that they will be named as his sole heirs if they treat him well while he is still alive. Many of them provide him with costly gifts and favors to be eligible, while Volpone secretly – with the knowledge of Mosca – revels in his increasing wealth. When he has had enough of lying in bed, he disguises himself and goes walking about town, playing the role of a mountebank. Suddenly he sees a beautiful woman looking out of her balcony window and falls in love (or lust) with her. Turns out she is Corvino’s wife. Volpone makes a deal with Corvino, using his servants as go-betweens, that possessing his wife would put him on top of the heir list. Corvino finally orders his wife to go to Volpone and comply with his wishes and confusion reigns. This is a broad comedy with many subtle and sly sub-plots that reduces the actions of men to those of their animal namesakes, and shows the all-powerful role of wealth on the actions of ordinary people. It takes a little getting used to the writing, but once mastered becomes relatively easy. Recommended.
—Tony
Jonson was perhaps the first (since Shakespeare was somehow not in touch enough) representative of what we generally understand to be that thing we call "English humor"; the quintessence of which may be found in miniature here (from whence it takes off tremendously after Smollett and Fielding a little later translated it into the much more appropriate form and setting of the novel). In Volpone, specifically, we have an example of that really awful guy (since the symbol is a fox, I really couldn't help imagining Volpone as Rupert Murdoch) who we can't tell whether or not he's really awful because of his being surrounded by hypocrites who collectively seem to justify his evil (like in Don Giovanni almost, just without that amazing score). His dependent, Mosca, demonstrates to the full the instability inherent in the master/slave relationship, and hence its lack of reality; but every type of person, from the doctor to the lawyer, to the politician and the charlatan, reveal the same characteristics as Mosca, and so, like in the satire of the Pickwick Papers, we are confronted with a venomous mist of fakers and egotists; but the saving grace is that English spriteliness which became immortal with Dickens and which makes everything seem OK and even, despite wading in blood and deception, cheerful. Is this how the English "kept calm and carried on" with their bad consciences and imperial murder for 400 years (they only just gave back Hong Kong!)? In any event, it makes for a pleasant romp. This is Jonson's first masterpiece, and is every bit as delightful, if not, I dare say, more delightful, than a Shakespearean comedy on account of that special Aristophonic English thing goin' on which you should all know and love.
—Jesse
