Marlowe and the Popular Tradition: Innovation in the English Drama Before 1595 (review)

212 Reviews Parergon 21.2 (2004) the important questions being investigated in each chapter to be adequately fleshed out. This means that an overall argument is not always clear. This is particularly true of the first half of the book (chapters 1-4). Too often we are provided with minute detail on a particular point that is repeated for each convent chronicle, which could have been made more succinctly. For example the detailed physical descriptions provided of the manuscripts themselves in chapter 1 could have been much more succinct and the mass of detail could have either been placed in the notes or an appendix. Part of the problem is that Lowe’s methodological focus on comparison leads to much repetition and over-justification of why one chronicler compared to another did or did not do or say a particular thing. The issue of why a comparison on a particular point is significant is not addressed. It is also particularly frustrating that some chapters either begin with an introduction that is merely descriptive (chapter 3) or as is the case with chapter 4 have none at all and merely begin with a discussion of the title(s) given to the members of the different convent communities, with the rest of chapter containing a number of distinct subsections but lacking an overall contextual framework or specific argument. There is much of value that we can learn from this book about the lived experience of nuns in Italy between 1400 and 1600, but the lack of an overall argument sustained throughout the text, sadly, diminishes its usefulness. Natalie Tomas School of Historical Studies Monash University Lunney, Ruth, Marlowe and the Popular Tradition: Innovation in the English Drama Before 1595 (The Revels Plays Companion Library), Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2002; hardback; pp. x, 246; RRP US$138; ISBN 0719061180. Thisisanexceptionallygoodandimportantbook.Itissound,learned,uncommonly penetrating, and in a quiet, persuasive way little short of revolutionary. It should enduringly alter our perception of plays both before 1595 (with which Lunney is primarily concerned) and after. I choose a telling example from Chapter 6, ‘Looking at the Angels’. At the risk of simplification, I would say that Lunney successfully demonstrates that the really novel quality of Faustus as a character resides not primarily in his inherent attributes as a seeming person, but in how, technically, he is presented. In general, Reviews 213 Parergon 21.2 (2004) her book is concerned with ‘dramatic rhetoric’ (p. 5), which includes all those strategic devices of stagecraft, as found in the playtext and performance, which influence an audience. Thus what matters to her and should matter to all of us is not primarily the ‘content’ of a dramatic character, but the way we are led to view it. Indeed, the former is dependent on the latter. Without awareness of what the dramatist allows us to see, speculations of what the character is made of are beside the point. Thus, on p. 139, she directs us to Faustus’s reaction to the two Angels: Good Angel. Sweet Faustus, think of heaven and heavenly things. Evil Angel. No, Faustus, think of honour and wealth. Exeunt [ANGELS] Faustus. Of wealth? Why, the seigniory of Emden shall be mine. (A-text, 2.1.20-3) We have long considered it as somehow a black mark against Faustus that his reaction to the two speeches by the Angels is one-sided and materialistic, but, not paying attention to Marlowe’s technique, we have not previously realised how revolutionary that is.As Lunney explains, the tradition of psychomachia would not sanction the surprising fact that it is, for whatever psychological reason, only the statement by the Evil Angel to which Faustus pays attention. Thus the dynamics of Marlowe’s construction must be seen as, for the first time in English drama, forcing us to consider just what goes on in the character’s mind, because there is a disjunction (as in previous plays there had not been) between what Faustus so to speak opts for, or appears to perceive, and what to us is the total effect of the Angels’ words (where, if anything, we are more inclined to value those...