John Heywood (1)

Heywood was a survivor, a practising catholic who managed to retain the patronage of Both Henry VIII and Edward VI, coming into his own when catholic Queen Mary enjoyed her brief and bloody reign. He fled to the continent when Elizabeth I came to the throne. He was employed by Henry VIII as a court musician, first as a boy singer and later as a virginal player, composer and director of plays and revels. His wit and ability to be curry favour saw him just about keep his head on his shoulders. He was arrested for treason and spent some time in prison on charges of treason. He was also one of the talented band of early Tudor playwrights although his surviving works tend to be dialogues rather than drama. His major claim to fame was as a writer of epigrams, some of which are still recognisable today today:

• What you have, hold.
• Haste maketh waste. (1546)
• Out of sight out of mind. (1542)
• When the sun shineth, make hay. (1546)
• Look ere ye leap. (1546)
• Two heads are better than one. (1546)
• Love me, love my dog. (1546)
• Beggars should be no choosers. (1546)
• All is well that ends well. (1546)
• The fat is in the fire. (1546)
• I know on which side my bread is buttered. (1546)
• One good turn asketh another. (1546)
• A penny for your thought. (1546)
• Rome was not built in one day. (1546)
• Better late than never. (1546)
• An ill wind that bloweth no man to good. (1546)
• The more the merrier. (1546)
• You cannot see the wood for the trees. (1546)
• This hitteth the nail on the head. (1546)

I was therefore interested to read his magnum opus The Spider and the Fly: published in 1556 and now relatively obscure. There are reasons enough for some works to remain in obscurity and this case it is because this 400 page poem will test even the most interested reader. I gave up at page 300.

The idea is interesting enough; A reader sitting by the window notices a fly falling into a web and becoming trapped, the spider advances and the reader imagines a conversation between the two. The initial pleas from the fly for mercy are followed by pleas as in a court of law for justice. The spider gets caught up in the arguments which after an awful amount of tautology lead nowhere. Arbitrators are called in an ant represents the spider and a crude speaking butterfly the fly. The ant is captured by a fly army and threatened with hanging, an all out war follows between an enormous fly army and a smaller group of spiders. There are casualties on both sides and the leaders sue for peace. The original argument between the spider and the fly takes centre stage, which the fly looses and prepares himself for death. At the last moment a maid comes into the room and sweeps the cobweb away.

There is no doubt that this is an allegorical poem and it is thought that it refers to the war between the protestants and catholics. More pointedly the spider is supposed to be the Protestant Archbishop Cranmer and the maid Queen Mary. The poem was published in the last year of Queen Mary’s reign.

The poem with its lack of forward movement, it repetition, and its arcane legal arguments is difficult to read even with modern spelling. The allegory does not really pinpoint its target, with the battle at the centre of the poem relating to just about any war or conflict. The language only briefly flickers into life. It was not a success at the time and deserves its obscurity. The best thing about the poem is the full page etchings of some of the action. An early example of an author overreaching and so two stars from me.… (mais)

John Heywood (1497-1580) was an English Tudor courtier and made his name as a musician and composer. None of his music survives but there are plays, proverbs and poems and it is his plays or interludes that are of most interest today. Heywood was a devout Catholic and very well connected; his Uncle-in-law was Sir Thomas More, but Heywood managed to prosper under four Tudor Kings and Queens (Henry VIII, Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth), although he had to flee the court of Elizabeth when the Act of Uniformity became law in 1564.

Having read his plays and interludes earlier this year I discovered his epigrams and proverbs free on line and for completest sakes read these as well. Heywood lived and some would say survived by his wit. As a catholic in the court of Henry VIII he was in danger of meeting a traitors death especially when the Boleyn family held sway. His intelligence, command of repartee and his writing kept him in favour with most people that mattered. This book contains three hundred epigrams, three hundred proverbs, a dialogue concerning marriages, a few ballads and a couple of panegyrics.

The epigrams take up the majority of the book and consist of pithy verse like structures that follow in the footsteps of Erasmus. Difficult to describe them and so here are a few examples that probably had Henry VIII and his court rolling in the aisles (or not)

Of Dogs and Thieves
To keep thieves by night out of my house
I keep dogs to aid me in my yard
Whose barking at the stirring of every mouse
By lack of sleep killed me in regard
Thieves or dogs then, which may both be spared
Thieves can do no more and dogs no less.

Of Blowing
What wind can there blow that doth not some men please
A fart in the blowing doth the blower ease

Of Waiting
I would see a man wait to his master's mind
As the weathercock waiteth on the wind
Blow it here or there, blow it low or high
The weathercock's beak is still in the winds eye

A Fools Tongue
Upon a fools provocation
A wise man will not talk
But every light instigation
May make a fool's tongue walk

Of a Dyer
"Is thy husband a dyer woman?", "Alack"
"Had he no colour to dye thee on but black"
"Dyeth he oft". "Yea too often when customers call
But I would have him one day die once for all
Were he gone, dyer would I never mo' wed
Dyers be ever dyeing, but never dead"

The three hundred proverbs consist of popular sayings of the time (many of which we would recognise today as proverbs) to which Heywood adds a line or two of witty comments.

The dialogue on marriage concerns a dilemma for a young man at court. Should he marry a flowering young maid who has many friends but no money or should he marry a rich widow with few friends who is old and white haired. Heywood spins a couple of amusing yarns based on examples of such marriage with the advise that the young man should not rush into anything. One of the panegyrics "A description of a Most Notable Lady" was written about and for princess Mary who would later become Queen Mary.

All in all a mixed bag of writing from the Tudor court, some of which is amusing, but many of the puns and in-jokes will be lost on todays readers. The book is edited by John S Farmer and was probably published in 1906 and has modern spelling. There is an extensive notebook and word list, but this is one for the enthusiasts I think and I rate as 3 stars.… (mais)

Is this my attempt to post a review of one of the most obscure books read in club read this year? No of course not; I could never compete with stevenTX. It is my on going project of reading early 16th century literature and Heywood serves as a link between medieval morality plays and the Elizabethan drama tradition of Shakespeare, Marlowe and others.

John Heywood (1497-1580) was an English Tudor courtier and made his name as a musician and composer. None of his music survives but there are plays, proverbs and poems and it is his plays or interludes that are of most interest today. Heywood was a devout Catholic and very well connected; his Uncle-in-law was Sir Thomas More, but Heywood managed to prosper under four Tudor Kings and Queens (Henry VIII, Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth), although he had to flee the court of Elizabeth when the Act of Uniformity became law in 1564.

His plays vary somewhat in content and quality and were written to be performed at court or in private houses, there were no permanent theatres at that time, although there were professional players and the plays were written to be performed by a minimal number of actors. There is very little actual drama and they would have been performed as interludes between or among other courtly activities. The plays are:

The Pardoner and the Friar Printed 1533. Most of the interlude is a dialogue between the Friar and the Pardoner, in which they both state their case as to what they have to offer to people who wish for salvation. It is not long before they start trading insults and there is an amusing passage where each of the actors are given alternate lines, where it would have called for some skill to bring this off. The players also have a chance to directly address the audience and the Pardoner gets the best lines here when he says to the women in the audience that if they have cuckolded their husbands they will receive no benefits from his relics, so they had better come forward. A Parson then enters and it becomes obvious it is his church and he berates both the friar and the Pardoner for the fraudsters that they are and he demands that they leave. They stand their ground and the Parson asks Neighbour Prat to help him clear the church. A fight develops and surprisingly it is the Pardoner and the Friar that come off best saying they will leave now, but will come back any time they like.

This is a lively entertainment that ends in a brawl which would have amused the audience. The Pardoner and the Friar both come across as whipping boys of the catholic church in the best traditions of Chaucer. However the Pardoner perhaps the biggest rogue reminds the audience of the power of the catholic church when he becomes angry at the Friar and the parson for interrupting him:

And all such that make interruption
The Pope sends them excommunication
And eke if you disturb me anything
Thou art also a traitor to the king

The above example demonstrates the rhyming couplets that are a feature of most of the lines.

The play called the Four PP's printed in 1543. The dialogue here again involves four players: A Pardoner, a Palmer, A 'Pothecary and a Pedlar. The argument is again over who is best qualified to lead the people to God. They decide that if they band together then they will be invincible, but they must choose a leader. They agree on a contest and the one who can tell the tallest tale or who is the biggest liar will win. The Pothecary's story is gross and obscene, the Pardoner gets the best story which involves a trip to Purgatory and then to Hell in search of a female neighbour of his who he has promised to save. However the contest is cut short when in response to the Pardoner saying that the devil is only too pleased to release the troublesome woman because of her evil tongue, the Palmer declares that he has never met a woman that would loose patience with him and let loose her tongue. The pedlar immediately declares the Palmer the winner for telling a lie that cannot be beat. An amusing interlude that has some good lines but there is no drama and the sudden ending before each participant gets to tell his tale, while witty smacks of Heywood afraid of boring his audience.

A Merry Play Three players in this comedy: John John, Tyb his wife and the priest Sir John. A relatively short and funny interlude that moves the furthest distance away from the morality plays of the middle ages. This is a domestic drama featuring real people who are named. There are changes of scene, asides to the audience and even a scene within a scene that could be acted out in the playing area. It is genuinely funny with the cuckolded husband coming off worst. The play opens with a long soliloquy from John John who is waiting for his wife to come home, he says how he suspects her of running around and he says how much he will beat her when she returns. He goes into great detail of what he will do to her and of what he has done in the past. As soon as Tyb enters, one word from her and John John is put in his place and the only thing he beats is his fish for supper. Tyb has been making a pie with her gossip (friend) and the ingredients have been provided by Sir John the priest. She orders husband John John to go round to the priests house and invite him to supper. John John swallows his pride and goes. He returns with the priest and Tyb tells him to go and fetch a pail of water. The pail badly leaks and John John has to fix it before he can return, meanwhile Tyb and the priest eat all the pie and have a merry time together. They go off leaving John John on his own.

This makes for an amusing and fun interlude with changing dynamics between the players, that points the way towards Elizabethan drama.

The Play of the Weather printed 1533. With the number of players this could be seen as Heywood's most ambitious play, but it is more attune to the morality play format than A Merry Tale above. The God Jupiter controls the weather but he is fed up with the carping from the humans about the weather he provides and so he asks Merry Report - a Vice to find out from the people what they want. A number of representatives from the people all want different things. The water miller wants rain, the wind miller wants wind, the Gentleman wants good weather for hunting, and the Gentlewoman wants no sunshine to spoil her complexion. The play is organised as a series of dialogues with no more than three or four actors on stage at any one time, which would allow players to take on a number of roles. The dialogue is enlivened by Merry Report who chides, goads and laughs at the various representatives.

The Play of Love Features more disputation rather than drama. The lover loved, The lover not loved, The woman beloved but not loving and Neither Loved nor Loving dispute over who suffers most pain and who is the happiest. The theme is courtly love dating from the middle ages and while it might have appealed to Tudor Courtiers, much of the "witty" dialogue reads a little tedious today.

A Dialogue Concerning Witty and Witless This was never printed in Heywood's lifetime and one can understand why. A dialogue that seems to go nowhere, suffering from repetition and confusion.

These plays or interludes are of interest to readers who want to delve into early modern drama, they are amusing at times and of course give a real feel for the times in which they were written. One can see the early stirrings of recognisable drama in a couple of them, but they are only for the enthusiast I suppose, and so I would rate them at 3 stars.… (mais)