Renaissance Magic and the Return of the Golden Age: The Occult Tradition and Marlowe, Jonson, and Shakespeare by John S. Mebane (review)

Reviews379 followed" (p. 165). Bardolatry, Charney rightly notes, obscures "the relation of Shakespeare to his fellow dramatists" (p. 9), yet no essay in this book sets a play by Shakespeare alongside one by a major contemporary , and very few contributors—Hawkins most notably—link a play of Shakespeare's to anything but another of his plays. The tacit effect is to reinforce the impression, central to Bardolatry, that Shakespeare is sui generis. PHILIP C. MCGUIRE Michigan State University John S. Mebane. Renaissance Magic and the Return of the Golden Age: The Occult Tradition and Marlowe, Jonson, and Shakespeare. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1989. Pp. xviii + 308. $29.95. Why such interest in magic and the occult on the part of writers in the English Renaissance? John Mebane provides an answer as he carefully establishes the philosophical context for this Renaissance fascination. In the first half of the book, Mebane, examining the role of Neoplatonism and Hermetic/Cabalist magic in the period, focuses on two primary issues: "the recent debates concerning the relationship between the occult tradition and Renaissance humanism" and "the extent to which Renaissance magic may have contributed to the emergence of genuine science" (p. 3). His argument is that "philosophical occultism carried to its logical extreme the humanists' affirmation of the power of human beings to control both their own personalities and the world around them." That is, the preoccupation with magic and witchcraft lies at the center of understanding the plight of the individual, his powers and limitations. Mebane traces the roots of Renaissance occultism in Florentine Neoplatonism, especially as found in Ficino, who sees magic as the completion of the contemplative ascent and finds the soul's immortality to be "manifested in its creative power" (p. 27). Pico della Mirándola "transformed the entire basis of Renaissance occult philosophy through his addition of the Jewish Cabala to the sources of occult lore which Ficino had used" (p. 38). Cornelius Agrippa popularized Pico and Ficino through his own writings, which had a major impact on John Dee and Giordano Bruno. Witchcraft adds another threatening dimension by sharpening the conflict between experience and authority, underscoring the possibility of subversion that all expressions of magic and the occult carry. Small wonder that King James joined in the debate about witchcraft. As Mebane rightly observes, "Accusations of witchcraft were powerful political weapons" (p. 104). Francis Bacon, finally blunting the political issue through his emphasis on empirical science, argued that "innovation in natural philosophy need not undermine the traditional authorities" (p. 111). With this skillfully delineated background, Mebane turns to the dramatists. Doctor Fattstus focuses, Mebane suggests, "upon the central, underlying question of the limits of human nature, but its response to this question is equivocal" (p. 114). One of the central conflicts is whether magic is an illusion "or whether the illusion is traditional orthodoxy itself (p. 121). Thus the play, questioning the Christian concept 380Comparative Drama of reality, thereby explores the conflict between two irreconcilable systems of value. Mebane states his thesis: "Our appreciation of Dr. Faustus is enhanced if we regard the play's complexities as the product of consciously controlled artistry" (p. 116). But we need no magician's incantations to tell us that: this thesis seems applicable to almost any play. To demonstrate that Marlowe has control of his play certainly breaks no new critical ground. A curious disjunction results: the marvelous material about the occult only slightly informs this analysis of Doctor Faustus. Seemingly an "answer" to Marlowe's play, Jonson's The Alchemist explodes "the illusion that the individual can realize a godlike potential through a series of self-transformations" (p. 137). Jonson therefore "reacts against unquestioned faith in the individual and advocates restraint, discipline, and objectivity." On its face, this statement implies a moral stance for Jonson the man that we cannot know—a troubling problem throughout Mebane's discussion. Jonson tellingly links the magicians of the play to the Puritans as he reduces the occult tradition to ordinary fraud. Mebane rightly focuses much attention on Mammon whose exposure forms part of the attack upon the claims of occultists and whose personality manifests itself in several of the minor characters. This deflation...