Mack, The: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
(30 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|company=Admiral's | |company=Admiral's | ||
|themes=Henslowe's records | |themes=Henslowe's records | ||
|probableGenres=Comedy | |probableGenres=Comedy | ||
|documentarySources=Performance Records (Henslowe's Diary) | |documentarySources=Performance Records (Henslowe's Diary) | ||
|wigginsNo=#990 | |wigginsNo=#990 | ||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
| y<sup>e</sup> 21 of febreary 1594 | | y<sup>e</sup> 21 of febreary 1594 | ||
| . . . . ne . . . . | | . . . . ne . . . . | ||
| R'' | | R''es'' at the macke | ||
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iij<sup>ll</sup> | | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iij<sup>ll</sup> | ||
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} | ||
<br> | |||
== Theatrical Provenance == | == Theatrical Provenance == | ||
"The Mack" enjoyed a single performance by the Admiral's men at the Rose (its debut, according to Henslowe's "ne"); it appears in no other extant theater records. | "The Mack" enjoyed a single performance by the Admiral's men at the Rose (its debut, according to Henslowe's "ne"); it appears in no other extant theater records. | ||
<br><br> | <br><br> | ||
Line 38: | Line 36: | ||
<!-- This template outputs the probable genres entered in the data section above. You can replace this comment and the line below if you'd like to write about the probable genres in more detail --> | <!-- This template outputs the probable genres entered in the data section above. You can replace this comment and the line below if you'd like to write about the probable genres in more detail --> | ||
{{Play/Probable Genres}}[[WorksCited|Harbage]] | {{Play/Probable Genres}}[[WorksCited|Harbage]] | ||
<br><br> | |||
== Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues == | == Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues == | ||
Information welcome. | |||
<br><br> | |||
== References to the Play == | == References to the Play == | ||
None known. | |||
<br><br> | |||
== Critical Commentary == | == Critical Commentary == | ||
[[WorksCited|Malone]] observes that "The Mack," like [[Set at Maw, The|"The Set at Maw"]], names a card game (p. 296, n.5). [[WorksCited|Collier]] repeats Malone's observation, then adds his own guess that it "was perhaps written in consequence of the success of the Maw, already many times represented" (p. 49). | |||
[[WorksCited|Fleay, ''BCED'' (1.136)]], as he had for [[Set at Maw, The|"The Set at Maw"]], identifies "The Mack" with a much later play: ''Come see a Wonder,'' 1623, by John Day. He believes that Day's play was the second generation of Thomas Dekker's ''The Wonder of a Kingdom'' (1623), and that at some deeper level it was the lost "Mack": "The original Dekker play was a "Card play" (see the last nine lines), probably ''The Mack'', an Admiral's play of 1595." Fleay further surmised a revival "at the Bull," by which he apparently meant not "The Mack" but the Dekker play, with bits of "The Mack" incorporated. | |||
[[WorksCited|Greg II]] dutifully considers Fleay's lumping of "The Mack" with John Day's ''Come See a Wonder,'' which was published under authorship of Thomas Dekker and the title of ''The Wonder of a Kingdom''. Although he thinks the case "better" than Fleay's for linking [[Set at Maw, The|"The Set at Maw"]] with ''Match Me in London,'' he believes that ''The Wonder of a Kingdom'' was only "possibly" the Admiral's play called "The Mack." | |||
'''Gurr''' has nothing to say about "The Mack" beyond its having received one performance marked "ne" in Henslowe's records (p. 94). | |||
[[WorksCited|Wiggins, ''Catalogue'' (#990)]] resurrects the suggestion of [[WorksCited|Collier]] that "The Mack" was "probably a follow-up to the previous year's ''Set at Maw''. Addressing the possible story of the play, he suggests that the script might have "followed the structure and process of the game; but in this case the rules are unknown" (#990). He is therefore thinking of a card game other than "Maw," the rules of which ''are'' known (see [[#For What It's Worth|For What It's Worth]], in the entry for [[Set at Maw, The|"The Set at Maw"]]). | |||
<br><br> | |||
== For What It's Worth == | == For What It's Worth == | ||
As [[WorksCited|Wiggins]] observes (''Catalogue'' #990), the rules of the game of Mack are unknown. For the rules of the game of Maw, see the entry for "The Set at Maw" in this database. | |||
'''Sharpe''' reads the solo performance of "The Mack" as a possible signal that it "gave offense and was suppressed" (p. 54). | |||
<br><br> | |||
== Works Cited == | == Works Cited == | ||
<div style="padding-left: 2em; text-indent: -2em;">Gurr, Andrew. ''Shakespeare's Opposites: The Admiral's Company 1594-1625''. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.</div> | |||
<div style="padding-left: 2em; text-indent: -2em;">Sharpe, Robert Boies. ''The Real War of the Theatres.'' Boston: D. C. Heath & Company, 1935.</div> | |||
<br><br> | |||
Site created and maintained by [[Roslyn L. Knutson]], Professor Emerita, University of Arkansas at Little Rock; updated 8 January 2021. | |||
[[category:Solo performance]][[category:Admiral's]][[category:Rose]][[category:Roslyn L. Knutson]][[category:Card games]] | [[category:Solo performance]][[category:Admiral's]][[category:Rose]][[category:Roslyn L. Knutson]][[category:Card games]] | ||
[[category:Duplicate plays]][[category:Serial/Sequel plays]] |
Latest revision as of 12:10, 22 September 2022
Historical Records
Performance Records
Playlists in Philip Henslowe's diary
- Fol. 11v (Greg I.22)
ye 21 of febreary 1594 . . . . ne . . . . Res at the macke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iijll
Theatrical Provenance
"The Mack" enjoyed a single performance by the Admiral's men at the Rose (its debut, according to Henslowe's "ne"); it appears in no other extant theater records.
Probable Genre(s)
Comedy Harbage
Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues
Information welcome.
References to the Play
None known.
Critical Commentary
Malone observes that "The Mack," like "The Set at Maw", names a card game (p. 296, n.5). Collier repeats Malone's observation, then adds his own guess that it "was perhaps written in consequence of the success of the Maw, already many times represented" (p. 49).
Fleay, BCED (1.136), as he had for "The Set at Maw", identifies "The Mack" with a much later play: Come see a Wonder, 1623, by John Day. He believes that Day's play was the second generation of Thomas Dekker's The Wonder of a Kingdom (1623), and that at some deeper level it was the lost "Mack": "The original Dekker play was a "Card play" (see the last nine lines), probably The Mack, an Admiral's play of 1595." Fleay further surmised a revival "at the Bull," by which he apparently meant not "The Mack" but the Dekker play, with bits of "The Mack" incorporated.
Greg II dutifully considers Fleay's lumping of "The Mack" with John Day's Come See a Wonder, which was published under authorship of Thomas Dekker and the title of The Wonder of a Kingdom. Although he thinks the case "better" than Fleay's for linking "The Set at Maw" with Match Me in London, he believes that The Wonder of a Kingdom was only "possibly" the Admiral's play called "The Mack."
Gurr has nothing to say about "The Mack" beyond its having received one performance marked "ne" in Henslowe's records (p. 94).
Wiggins, Catalogue (#990) resurrects the suggestion of Collier that "The Mack" was "probably a follow-up to the previous year's Set at Maw. Addressing the possible story of the play, he suggests that the script might have "followed the structure and process of the game; but in this case the rules are unknown" (#990). He is therefore thinking of a card game other than "Maw," the rules of which are known (see For What It's Worth, in the entry for "The Set at Maw").
For What It's Worth
As Wiggins observes (Catalogue #990), the rules of the game of Mack are unknown. For the rules of the game of Maw, see the entry for "The Set at Maw" in this database.
Sharpe reads the solo performance of "The Mack" as a possible signal that it "gave offense and was suppressed" (p. 54).
Works Cited
Site created and maintained by Roslyn L. Knutson, Professor Emerita, University of Arkansas at Little Rock; updated 8 January 2021.