The significance of Edward II is not only in the fact that Marlowe's concern turns, as it did in Dr. Faustus, to human sufferings, but in that the hero here is drawn, if imperfectly, as a character with a fatal trait with the result that Marlowe had created the tragedy of character before Shakespeare did. The present essay aims at substantiating the last point after making a brief survey of his other plays concerning the first two points. On the treatment of sufferings. In Dido the heroine's sufferings were hardly dwelt upon unless the plot requires; Marlowe's aim was to narrate an ill-fated love in the dramatic form. In the rest of his plays, the hero is a superman with power and undaunted will and none but Dr. Faustus undergoes sufferings. Tamhurlaine is a "hymn of human will" in the purest form. Death-theme is introduced in Part II, but it is used only to emphasize the greatness of the spirit which is indomitable in the face of death. Barabas in the Jew of Malta encounters difficulties, but with few groans he rises up against them. The Massacre at Paris, except the monologue where Guise declares his arrogant will, simply follows the thread of the plot. On creation of character. As above mentioned, Dido is, after all, a narrative of love affair. Tamburlaine is not so much a human being as "Voice" of the authour's longing for infinite self-realization. As he is always a victor, there is no chance of testing his character. Barabas may be said to have an individuality at first. His sole passion is to conquer the world by wealth and to love his daughter, and this character is revealed through his struggle against the antagonistic powers. But his figure changes suddenly in Act II, and thenceforward he becomes a vehicle to show "machiavellism" and to satirize lust for wealth. Dr. Faustus is, indeed, a man who plunges into Hell, of his own accord, and invites the tragic fall on his head purely on his own responsibility. Marlowe, however, adopted "Morality" form to depict him. There is no human interplay; no man who suffers for his will, nor one who gives him sufferings. What is shown, is purely Faustus' state of mind torn between longing of intellect for infinite knowledge and powers, and salvation of soul. Though Marlowe splendidly humanizes this allegory and heightens "everyman" in "Morality" to an "individual," it is impossible to characterize him in this simple form. In Edward II the cause of his sufferings, for the first time, is sought in a trait of his nature. He is not a tyrant, but an epicurean, a man of culture, unbecoming of the bloody medieval world, so he cannot control the powerful peers. But weak as he is, he has an intense self-consciousness as a king. His love of Gaveston is, so to speak, the utmost he could do to resist the interference of the peers about all things. Unfortunately, he cannot objectively measure his own strength or the real state of things, and insists on his will blindly. This is the trait that drives him to the tragic end. Indeed, Marlowe cannot yet depict him consistently; Edward II changes suddenly into a strong king in the midst, and regains the former status as soon. But the essential process of his fall never fails, so that his death leaves strong impression on our mind.
抄録全体を表示