A Chaste Maid in Cheapside

by Thomas Middleton, Alan Brissenden

Written for the adult players at the open-air Swan theatre in 1613,this master-piece of Jacobean city comedy signals its ironic natureeven in the title: chaste maids, like most other goods and people in London's busiest commercial area, are likely to be fake. Money is moreimportant than either happiness or honour; and the most coveted commodities to be bought with it are sex and social prestige. Middleton interweaves the fortunes of four families, who either seek to marry their children off as profitably as possible, to stop having any more for fear of poverty, or to acquire some in order to keep their property in the family. Most prosperous is the husband who pimps his wife to a rich knight and lets him support the household with his alimony. Like many early modern critics of London's enormous growth, this play warned: the city is a monster that lives off the money the country produces.

Genres: Plays, Classics, Drama, Theatre, Fiction, Renaissance, 17th Century

144 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1613

About the author

Thomas Middleton (1580 – 1627) was an English Jacobean playwright and poet. Middleton stands with John Fletcher and Ben Jonson as among the most successful and prolific of playwrights who wrote their best plays during the Jacobean period. He was one of the few Renaissance dramatists to achieve equal success in comedy and tragedy. Also a prolific writer of masques and pageants, he remains one of the most noteworthy and distinctive of Jacobean dramatists.

Reviews

[Frank Stein · Rating 5 out of 5]

First, let me save you some time from reading the footnotes. Every single word in this play is a double entendre for 1. a penis 2. a vagina or 3. a prostitute. For instance a "bow" is also a vagina, a "goose" is a whore, and a "wit" is a penis (which adds a whole new level of course to "rapier wit"). That's about on one page.

Still, the play's remarkably funny, from the willfully cuckolded husband who refuses to besmirch his wife's name by claiming to sleep with her, to the religious Lenten enforcers who get tricked into accepting a baby instead of meat to steal. The satire is sometimes so biting as to be almost depressing, but Middleton apparently kept a good humor throughout.

It's a great read. Almost as good as any Shakespeare comedy.

[Robert Stewart · Rating 5 out of 5]

Of all the 17th century comedies I've read—every one of them thoroughly cynical—this one stands alone. Most city comedies (and restoration plays) depict the world as ruled almost solely by lust and greed. With the Chaste Maid, Middleton cuts it very close indeed. To give you an idea, the maid's parents skip her funeral so they can focus on getting their son an advantageous match.

[Francisca · Rating 3 out of 5]

It seems to be inevitable that Renaissance comedies where a simply sexist and misogynist genre. By principle, I should not like this play and, up to a point, I did not. That being said, when the inevitable comparison arises between this comedy and Volpone by Ben Jonson, this play was an improvement from the past experience. Why I cannot really put it into words.

Although it was still offensive towards women, it was less downright violent and agressive. I know it basically it feels a bit like picking up straws just to ge something nice to say about it, but bear with me. I cannot just admit this genre is lost to me and I must, at a level, like something about it because even though, I cannot say it rationally, I feel it.

It felt like a different reading experience and I cannot really say how. I hope that once we discuss it further during class, I can wrap my head more properly about it.

[[ J o ] · Rating 1 out of 5]

[Short and quick review from memory before I re-read and re-review at a later date:

I am very disappointed with the one-star... I thought this would be right up my alley, though I assume the fact that They Made Me read it...]

[Yorgos · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the first Elizabethan play not by Shakespeare that made me feel like I was reading a great play. Reminded me a lot of Measure for Measure in lots of ways--in particular in that the more you look at it the darker it gets--and I love Measure for Measure. So fun: really distinctive characters, four engaging plots expertly interwoven without the play feeling slow or heavy, and a TON of bawdy. Honestly I had so much fun with this I don't even want to analyze it deeply, though I've read some interesting analyses. Loughrey & Taylor offer a pithy and incisive commentary as always; Linda Woodbridge offers a lucid and Marxism-tinged take in the complete works. My edition was scribbled all over by the previous owner of this book but even that couldn't make me put the thing down.

I loved this. Fun fun fun fun fun. Can't wait to re-read it.

[Florence Ridley · Rating 5 out of 5]

A triumphantly bawdy city comedy. It has people sleeping with everyone other than their own spouses, places of commerce standing in for exchange of women (through marriage and otherwise), a ridiculous number of dick jokes and a delectable anti-Romeo-and-Juliet plot with lovers springing out of coffins all over the place. It's like if Much Ado About Nothing was very, very London, and ten times hornier. I would jump at the chance to see this acted faster than you can say "that potion of fertility is just almond milk and only works because he's shagging your wife when you aren't looking". Actually, quite a lot faster than you could say that.

[M.L. Rio · Rating 3 out of 5]

This play is so entirely ridiculous it's almost like reading a Monty Python sketch. Would dearly love to see this staged in door-slamming farcical style. What a riot.

[Esdaile · Rating 4 out of 5]

In my first review I said that I would have to read the play again and I have, so now follows a second review and my original review at the end. I have increased my rating from three to four stars on the second reading!

Elizabethan and Jacobean writers are well known for enjoying innuendos and punning, especially punning of a sexual nature, Shakespeare not excluded, but Thomas Middleton's A Chaste Maid in Cheapside would win first prize if their were a "nudge nudge wink wink" competition among the playwrights of the time. A Chaste Maid in Cheapside does not let up from first ("Have you played over all your old lessons o'the virginals?"to near last "I'll pick out my runts there: and for my mountains, I'll mount upon-" line. Middleton's London society is one governed by cupidity and greed. The play is a slapdash story of cuckolding, pimping, whoring, bastardising, eloping, scheming, prostituting and brothel keeping. Even by today's standards some of the innuendos are raw. Several times I read a line and asked myself "oh no, surely he can't mean that?". My edition is the The New Mermaids edition edited by Alan Brissenden, who seems to be offended if not shocked by the liberties which Middleton takes and occasionally is too innocent or too prudish to draw the extreme but obvious interpretation. For example, when Yellowhammer's daughter, intended for Sir Walter Whorehound (sic.) elopes with Touchwood, Yellowhammer marvels that she has managed to escape to her lover:

Yellowhammer: There was a little hole looked into the gutter/But who would have dreamt of that?
Sir Walter: A wiser man would.
Tim: He says true, father, a wise man for love will seek every hole: my tutor knows it."

All the editor can find to say in the footnotes here is "Ironic, as the tutor has probably cuckolded Yellowhammer."
Many readers would think of a more "hard core" interpretation of that exchange.
Thomas Middleton's theatre is apparently a scourge of vice. Why apparently? After all, vice is appropriately condemned in asides and warnings and language. True, yet there is no suggestion in this play that crime or vice does not pay. (It is vice which preoccupies Middleton here, not crime, itself slightly suggestive, since a condemnation of vice is usually undertaken by linking vice with crime) None of the characters is punished for vice, unless it be Sir Walter Whorehound, and his fate is instructive. He is the only character to repent of his immoral behaviour. He is a bachelor who regularly enjoys the favours and hospitality of Mrs. Allwit, whereby he pays for the upkeep of the Allwit family in return for open house (as Middleton himself might have termed it) at the Allwits and farming out for being permitted to leave his seven bastards with the Allwit family. Allwit is a contended cuckold, being kept in wine and comfort by Sir Walter in return for pimping his wife to Sir Walter on a permanent basis. Sir Walter's repentance occurs alongside his downfall. Is Middelton condemning vice or laughing at those who condemn it? I find it hard to answer this question. The Changeling, his best known and probably most accomplished play, clearly portrays vice in a very dark way indeed and links it to crime. Such is the traditional religious Christian perspective, but always with Middleton the reader will be, I think, tempted to say the writer is very indulgent in the depiction of what is supposed to be condemned, suspiciously indulgent. The entire Middleton corpus so far as I know it, is very tabloid, by which I mean it condemns vice but spends an inordinate amount of energy and talent in depicting what it condemns. Vice is entertainment and a source of income, not onyl to the characters in the story, but to the story teller. If we reduce the impact of vice in the plays there is nothing left. Vice is not the vehicle of a dramatic intention, as in Shakespeare, it is the drama. Middleton's plays are the very stuff of vice. The obsession and the puns may be venereous for some people, and if so, are they intentionally so? That is for the reader to judge. A Chaste Maid in Cheapside is hugely entertaining and I suspect hugely cynical. Uxor non est meretrix. The play ends with a double wedding feast. Whether the chaste couples (ahem) live happily ever after, is for us to decide.

That was my second review which I wrote having forgotten that I had reviewed the play already.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

This was my first review



This is a very energetic no holes barred (to use the kind of double entendre which the writer is so keen on) scurrilous romp. It most probably works much more effectively on the stage than read, like all good comedies. I have the New Mermaids Edition edited by Alan Brissenden and the annotation is totally inadequate for a modern readership. Some of the words and jokes are explained but not nearly enough. Middleton's play abounds in local references archaic words and probably insider jokes and did not understand a good deal of it. The plot seemed to me to be pretty muddled too; I shall have to read it a second time to get everyone sorted out. There is little psychological realism, the drama is close to morality play (the best example of which is "The Revenger's Tragedy", attributed to Cyril Toruneur, about whom almost nothing is known but in whose play Middleton may well have had a hand in), much more so than Shakespeare's plays in fact. Although puritans are made fun of in the play, the moral thrust of the play (there I go again) is a puritanical denunciation of the greed and cupidity of the world. There does seem to me to be a paradox or contradiction, between Middleton's denunciation of vice and his obvious enjoyment revealing and portraying it -shades of the English gutter press here. I can imagine Thomas Middleton working as a journalist for "The Sun", perhaps providing copy for headlines:

HOUNDED OUT
Whorehound gets his come-uppance

TERRIFIC
Taffy Tania ties the knot with Tiny Tim

That sort of thing

[Anna-Marie · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not terrible, wasn’t great either

[joudix · Rating 2 out of 5]

the second star is ONLY for the plot-twist in the end.
smart but full of sex jokes what the heck ?? Middleton if you have money and sex issues just say it

[Léa Skov]

Lidt forvirrende, mange karakterer men fløj igennem

[Grace · Rating 3 out of 5]

It’s just okay, the beginning and part of the middle were funny but the ending lost me and could have been stronger.

[Tom · Rating 4 out of 5]

As far as Early Modern dramas go, Thomas Middleton's A Chaste Maid in Cheapside is one of the funnier city comedies I have read, easily rivalling those of Thomas Dekker or Ben Jonson. It is set in London in the early 17th century and can largely be summarised as a Jacobean comedy that deals with (w)holesaling, bawdy houses and whores - to paraphrase the title of Jean Howard's third chapter in 'Theater of a City' (2009) - while also acknowledging different types of motherhood and parental love or lack thereof. Contrary to popular belief, this play uses brothels not as a place of women's social decline but, in fact, the attainment of financial security and freedom. Without going into any details, I would highly recommend this play to anyone looking for a comic refuge from everyday life.

[May · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a play that I had to read for my English literature course. I found it confusing; partly due to my struggles with the language of the time and also in part to the many different storylines and sub plots. There is a lot of characters all with very different agendas and it definitely took some time to understand what was happening. The themes were interesting and once I began to understand the language more I gained an application for the irony to them.

[jennifer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Moll is the maid, or pretty young daughter, of Yellowhammer, a goldsmith. She has two men vying for her hand. One is the wealthy Knight, Sir Walter Whorehound, who already has two mistresses, one of whom has several of his children. Yellowhammer favors Sir Walter for a son-in-law. The second suitor is Tuchwood Junior, whose older brother is a local conman. He is Moll's choice, which forces scheming.
A second plot line involves Tuchwood Senior's con of the wealthy Sir and Lady Kix, a couple who are at each others throats over their lack of children.

This play is a comedy that gets crude and raunchy and probably had its audiences choking with laughter. Puritan women get sloppy drunk, the aristocratic are impotent and obnoxious, the newly educated are pretentious fops and there are constant double entendres about sex. The play did well enough that it was still being published nearly two decades later, then seems to have disappeared from the stage completely until a revival in 1956.

Since this was most likely written around 1613 (it was first performed that year), getting the most out of it would take some doing. I mean that even if you're familiar with Shakespearean language, this is a little more challenging. I read from the Fountainwell Drama Texts, edited by Charles Barber, and it was a decent enough copy but I did feel there were some explanations missing.

[Stephen Kelly · Rating 2 out of 5]

This city comedy opens with a very promising scene of deception and cuckoldry but quickly sags into a conventional, predictable, and rhythm-less mess. By the time it begins to pick up speed, it's already over. Even the editorial introduction in the English Renaissance anthology I'm reading had very little of illumination or interest to say about this play other than a plot summary and a general kudos for its lighthearted depiction of contemporary social life. I'm not sure why they even included it.

[Mac · Rating 4 out of 5]

In following the curriculum of an online course about English theater beyond Shakespeare, I've now read several plays written or co-written by Thomas Middleton. It has become clear to me that he was a gifted comic playwright. "A Chaste Maid in Cheapside" sets up several situations that all come together at the end in a funny and delightful way. I was reminded of a perfect "Seinfeld" or "Curb Your Enthusiasm" episode where all the story threads combine for a hilarious and perfect conclusion. This requires skillful structural plotting, a rare skill that Thomas Middleton and Larry David share.

[Sam Wescott · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was both my first city comedy and my first experience with Middleton. I enjoyed his ribald humor and the way he pushed the sexual ideologies of the early modern period to their most absurd and contradictory levels. While some find the lack of iambic pentameter to be substandard, I found the common city voice to be refreshing and humorous. A wonderful piece of London color complete with archetypal characters and good, dirty humor. Highly recommend!

[Atikah Wahid · Rating 3 out of 5]

This play is pretty vulgar. I'm no prude but after the umpteenth innuendo and sexual imagery, you get tired of it. Just like every Renaissance play, it's pretty sexist as well. But it's quite interesting in the way the play sets off characters against each other. And the puns are very punny. The twist ending is also quite hilarious. I do enjoy the fact that there is no obvious "good guy". Would I read it again though? Probably not.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Incredibly bawdy, even for its time, but unlike in a play like Burning Pestle, the wordplay and sexual punnery here all coheres and builds towards rather than distracts from an interesting narrative thread. Another example of a couple that has to fake-die before they can be married. And also Puritans getting drunk and peeing on stuff.

[Mitchell · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was a difficult read. I know the comedies of Shakespeare very well and hoped that this would yield the same sort of pleasures. Alas. It presents a nasty world and much of the comedy derives from people getting the better of each other. Yes, it ends in classic comic form with two couples marrying but it still leaves a very bad taste in your mouth

[Gloria C. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Discovery of the month: ✨Jacobean drama✨
Full of obscene puns, jokes and double entendre that make you use your wit constantly 🤯 - my kind of humour.
I love happy endings and these kinds of comedies have what I'm always looking for. I wish I had been able to watch it live at the time it was performed in the Swan cause this is a masterpiece.

[soleil · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is actually my favorite play that we've read so far in my 17th Century Plays class. I liked how intense the characters were since it kept me interested where otherwise I was bored. The rampant misogyny though really depressed me.

[Katie]

Based my entire senior thesis on this play and maternity/bedtricks. A wonderful play and great for close studying of the commodifying of women and the subversion Middleton performs.

[Jessica · Rating 2 out of 5]

Moderately hilarious; abundantly vulgar.

[David Loveland · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting, but the ending was a bit of a Much Ado About Nothing/Measure for Measure Rip-off.

[Rachel]

I can definitely see this being funny when it was written, but oh my gosh every other word is alluding to sex in some way.

[Ana · Rating 3 out of 5]

The cynical humor in this play is most pleasing.

[Indigo Wayworth · Rating 5 out of 5]

Middleton!!! So good!!! I love this so much!!!

Read for ENGL3015 Renaissance Drama, and ENGL 4606 Marriage and Adultery in Early Modern England

[Chris Black · Rating 4 out of 5]

Raunchy, funny, but a bit slow.