Crack Me This Nut: Difference between revisions
| Line 189: | Line 189: | ||
==Critical Commentary== | ==Critical Commentary== | ||
Hazlitt suggests without evidence that "It is probably identical with the " Play of the Nut," mentioned by Henslowe under December, 1601" (p. 53). | [[WorksCited|Hazlitt]] suggests without evidence that "It is probably identical with the " Play of the Nut," mentioned by Henslowe under December, 1601" (p. 53). | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
In ''The Shakespeare Company'' Gurr notes only 14 performances of this play, not the 16 listed [[#Historical Records|above]] in the extracts from Henslowe's ''Diary'': "New plays ''Chinon'', ''Longshanks'', and ''Crack Me This Nut'', all had 14 stagings" (p. 99). In ''Shakespeare's Opposites'' (217-18, 262 n124) Gurr adjusts this total upwards to the correct 16, and incorporates the sale of the book of "the nvtte" in 1602 into the historical records of ''Crack Me This Nut'' without any acknowledgement that they may be discrete titles. | In ''The Shakespeare Company'' '''Gurr''' notes only 14 performances of this play, not the 16 listed [[#Historical Records|above]] in the extracts from Henslowe's ''Diary'': "New plays ''Chinon'', ''Longshanks'', and ''Crack Me This Nut'', all had 14 stagings" (p. 99). In ''Shakespeare's Opposites'' (pp. 217-18, p. 262 n124) Gurr adjusts this total upwards to the correct 16, and incorporates the sale of the book of "the nvtte" in 1602 into the historical records of ''Crack Me This Nut'' without any acknowledgement that they may be discrete titles. | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Revision as of 11:56, 4 February 2022
Historical Records
Performance Records
Playlists in Philip Henslowe's diary
- Fol. 12v (Greg 1.24)
ye 5 of septmbʒ 1595 . . . . . ne . . . Rd at cracke me this nvtte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iijll js ye 12 of septmbʒ 1595 Rd at cracke me this nutte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iijll
- Fol. 13 (Greg 1.25)
ye 24 of septmbʒ 1595 Rd at crack me this nvtte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iijll js ye 2[7]8 of septmbʒ 1595 . . . . . . . . . Rd at crack me this nvtte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iijllvjs ye 8 of octobʒ 1595 Rd at cracke me this nvtt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxvjs ye 20 of octobʒ 1595 Rd at crack me this nvtte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xxjs ye 24 of octobʒ 1595 Rd at crack me this nvtte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xxiijs ye 5 of novmbʒ 1595 Rd at cracke me this nvtt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxiiijs
- Fol. 14 (Greg 1.27)
ye 18 of novmbʒ 1595 . . . . . . . . . . . . Rd at crack me this nvtte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxiiijs ye 6 of desembʒ 1595 Rd at Crack me this nvtt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvs ye 2 of Jenewary 1595 Rd at cracke me this nvtt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ixs ye 14 of Jenewary 1595 Rd at crack me this nvtte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxiijs
- Fol. 14v (Greg 1.28)
ye 7 of febreary 1595 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rd at crack me this nvtt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xixs
- Fol. 15v (Greg 1.30)
ye 7 of maye 1596 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rd at crack me this nvtte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xviijs
- Fol. 21v (Greg 1.42)
ye 7 of June 1596 . . . . mr pd . . . . . Rd at crack me this nvtte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxviijs ye 23 of June 1596 Rd at cracke me this nvtt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xijs
Payments
For apparel in Philip Henslowe's diary
NB. the following references to "the playe of the nvtte" and the book of "the nvtte" are provided here because of the apparent connection to the title of Crack Me This Nut, but it should be noted that the identification is not absolutely certain.
Fol. 95 (Greg 1.151):
Lay owt for the company to bye buckerom } for a sewt for the playe of the nvtte to the } vs littell tayller the 4 of desemb[er] 1601 the some of }
Purchase of the play from Edward Alleyn in Philip Henslowe's diary:
Fol. 96 (Greg 1.153):
pd at the apoyntment of the companye the } 18 of Janewary 1601 vnto E Alleyn for iij boockes } wch were played called the french docter the } vjli massaker of france & the nvtte the some of }
Theatrical Provenance
First recorded performance by the Admiral's men 5 September 1595, and thereafter for a total of 16 performances. It was marked as "ne" in a period when the Admiral's "began to introduce new plays very quickly: 'Longshanks' on August 29, 'Crack Me This Nut' a week later, and "The New World's Tragedy" two weeks after that" (Knutson, p. 122). At some stage, Edward Alleyn seems to have acquired the book of "the nvtte" (presumably "Crack Me This Nut"). He sold it to the Admiral's men along with "The French Doctor" and The Massacre at Paris in 1601/2. The play was apparently already in revival at the Fortune if the purchase of the suit of buckram is any indication.
Probable Genre(s)
Comedy (?) (Harbage); tragedy? (see For What It's Worth below)
Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues
It is frustrating that virtually nothing can be ascertained with any certainty about the subject of this considerably successful play. For a new speculation on subject matter, see For What It's Worth below.
References to the Play
As Greg observes, "[t]he phrase was proverbial" (2.176). It was the subtitle of an anti-Martinist tract (Pap with a Hatchet, alias A Fig for my Godson, or Crack Me This Nut, 1589), and Greg suggests that "[i]t is no doubt the tract and not the play that is alluded to in Old Fortunatus" (2.176). Greg may well be correct that Dekker was referring to the tract rather than the lost play, but it is not possible to establish this conclusively.
Critical Commentary
Hazlitt suggests without evidence that "It is probably identical with the " Play of the Nut," mentioned by Henslowe under December, 1601" (p. 53).
In The Shakespeare Company Gurr notes only 14 performances of this play, not the 16 listed above in the extracts from Henslowe's Diary: "New plays Chinon, Longshanks, and Crack Me This Nut, all had 14 stagings" (p. 99). In Shakespeare's Opposites (pp. 217-18, p. 262 n124) Gurr adjusts this total upwards to the correct 16, and incorporates the sale of the book of "the nvtte" in 1602 into the historical records of Crack Me This Nut without any acknowledgement that they may be discrete titles.
W. J. Lawrence's 1935 book, Those Nut-Cracking Elizabethans, takes its title not from the lost play, but from "the custom of hawking apples, pears and nuts in the house while the audience was slowly assembling" and the playgoers' "habit of persistent nut-cracking which proved a nuisance" (p. 1). He marshals evidence from plays to show that "nut-crackers" were typically lower class playgoers more interested in spectacle than dialogue.
Wiggins, Catalogue #1008 calls attention to the proverbial nature of the play-title.
For What It's Worth
A hitherto unconsidered possibility is that Crack Me This Nut may not have been a comedy at all. An entry in the Stationers' Register for 20 January 1595/96 reads:
Master Ponsonby. Entred for his copie vnder the hands of the Wardens A booke
Intitled The Paragon of pleasaunt histories . . . vjd
Or this Nutt was neuer Cracked Contayninge a Discourse of a
nobl[e] kinge and his Three sonnes /
(S.R.1, 3.57 / Fol. 7)
The subtitle's reference to a noble king and his three sons may even suggest a King Lear-style tragedy, though the "pleasant" part of "pleasaunt histories" tends to curtail this possibility. Unfortunately, as with the play, this text appears to be lost.
Works Cited
Site created and maintained by David McInnis, University of Melbourne; updated 12 March 2011.