What do you think?
Rate this book
The Malcontent
The Malcontent is an early Jacobean stage play written by the dramatist and satirist John Marston ca. 1603. The play was one of Marston's most successful works. The Malcontent is widely regarded as one of the most significant plays of the English Renaissance; an extensive body of scholarly research and critical commentary has accumulated around it.
106 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1605
6 people are currently reading
419 people want to read
About the author
John Marston
122 books7 followersJohn Marston was an English poet, playwright and satirist during the late Elizabethan and Jacobean periods. His career as a writer lasted a decade, and his work is remembered for its energetic and often obscure style, its contributions to the development of a distinctively Jacobean style in poetry, and its idiosyncratic vocabulary.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
February 3, 2021
The Joys of Cuckolding
2 February 2021
One of the things that struck me with this play were some of the similarities to King Lear, and I note that the Wikipedia Article suggests that it is a prototype of some of Shakespeare’s other plays, one of them mentioned is As You Like It. Of course, As You Like It appeared four years before this play, whereas King Lear appeared three years after (or the first recorded performance was three years after), so I’d probably lean more to seeing this play as influencing King Lear, particularly with some of the characters.
The play is set in the city state of Genoa, and Pietro has taken control of the city from the previous duke, Giovanni Altofronto. However, it comes to light that Pietro’s wife is sleeping with another guy, Mendoza. The interesting thing is that Altofronto disguises himself as a fool, and becomes Pietro’s conscience, particularly at this time where he is depressed because he has been cuckolded (namely his wife is cheating on him). What ends up happening is that Mendoza seizes power, but with the help of Pietro, Altofronto deposes him and takes back his rightful position.
This is sort of why I consider it to be a forerunner of King Lear, not just because we have the fool who is playing the conscience of the king, but that there is a lot of political maneuverings which results in a third person becoming the ruler, only to be quickly deposed. Mind you, there are a lot less deaths in this play than there are in Shakespeare, and I sort of suspect that Shakespeare is one of the few writers that seems to be able to get away with killing off a lot of his characters, particularly the major ones.
One of the things though has to do with the cuckolding of the duke. Look, people certainly don’t like it when it happens to them these days, but there is this idea that back in those days it is an affront to a person’s masculinity, which is why it was considered to be so disastrous. In fact, the way the play moves, Mendoza, the one doing the cuckolding, does eventually take Pietro’s realm, after taking his wife. In a way the suggestion is that if a man cannot control his wife, how is he able to control his realm.
Actually, it certainly does come across that Pietro does become quite a weak character. Like, he steps aside to let Altofronto to take back his kingdom, after helping remove Mendoza. Though, when the big reveal comes, they reveal themselves to their wives, as opposed to Mendoza, though it also suggests that the way to the ruler is through the women that he loves. This was obviously the case with Pietro, but it has has been turned around to hit Mendoza.
Mind you, looking at this play from the modern world, one could argue that there is a bit of sexism in it, especially the idea that a man needs to control his wife (though the insinuation is that it is okay for the man to sleep around). Then again, from my university days, there was this idea that a guy shouldn’t go out with a girl that it is known to cheat, because, yeah, this whole masculinity thing. Yet, it has nothing to do with controlling the woman, but rather the man being good in bed. The idea at university was that your masculinity was defined by how well you could perform, and a cheating girlfriend does a lot to undermine one’s masculinity.
Interestingly though, Altofronto does remind Pietro that there are a number of famous people from legend who had also been cuckolded. There was Arthur, but honestly, things really didn’t turn out all that well for him. There was also Menelaus, whose wife started a war because she ran off with the dashing Paris. Also, there was Heracles, and honestly, nobody ever questioned his masculinity. So, his whole point here was to remind Pietro that things certainly weren’t as bad as it seems, that that he should actually feel bad that his wife had run off with the guy that ended up taking his realm off of him.
2 February 2021
One of the things that struck me with this play were some of the similarities to King Lear, and I note that the Wikipedia Article suggests that it is a prototype of some of Shakespeare’s other plays, one of them mentioned is As You Like It. Of course, As You Like It appeared four years before this play, whereas King Lear appeared three years after (or the first recorded performance was three years after), so I’d probably lean more to seeing this play as influencing King Lear, particularly with some of the characters.
The play is set in the city state of Genoa, and Pietro has taken control of the city from the previous duke, Giovanni Altofronto. However, it comes to light that Pietro’s wife is sleeping with another guy, Mendoza. The interesting thing is that Altofronto disguises himself as a fool, and becomes Pietro’s conscience, particularly at this time where he is depressed because he has been cuckolded (namely his wife is cheating on him). What ends up happening is that Mendoza seizes power, but with the help of Pietro, Altofronto deposes him and takes back his rightful position.
This is sort of why I consider it to be a forerunner of King Lear, not just because we have the fool who is playing the conscience of the king, but that there is a lot of political maneuverings which results in a third person becoming the ruler, only to be quickly deposed. Mind you, there are a lot less deaths in this play than there are in Shakespeare, and I sort of suspect that Shakespeare is one of the few writers that seems to be able to get away with killing off a lot of his characters, particularly the major ones.
One of the things though has to do with the cuckolding of the duke. Look, people certainly don’t like it when it happens to them these days, but there is this idea that back in those days it is an affront to a person’s masculinity, which is why it was considered to be so disastrous. In fact, the way the play moves, Mendoza, the one doing the cuckolding, does eventually take Pietro’s realm, after taking his wife. In a way the suggestion is that if a man cannot control his wife, how is he able to control his realm.
Actually, it certainly does come across that Pietro does become quite a weak character. Like, he steps aside to let Altofronto to take back his kingdom, after helping remove Mendoza. Though, when the big reveal comes, they reveal themselves to their wives, as opposed to Mendoza, though it also suggests that the way to the ruler is through the women that he loves. This was obviously the case with Pietro, but it has has been turned around to hit Mendoza.
Mind you, looking at this play from the modern world, one could argue that there is a bit of sexism in it, especially the idea that a man needs to control his wife (though the insinuation is that it is okay for the man to sleep around). Then again, from my university days, there was this idea that a guy shouldn’t go out with a girl that it is known to cheat, because, yeah, this whole masculinity thing. Yet, it has nothing to do with controlling the woman, but rather the man being good in bed. The idea at university was that your masculinity was defined by how well you could perform, and a cheating girlfriend does a lot to undermine one’s masculinity.
Interestingly though, Altofronto does remind Pietro that there are a number of famous people from legend who had also been cuckolded. There was Arthur, but honestly, things really didn’t turn out all that well for him. There was also Menelaus, whose wife started a war because she ran off with the dashing Paris. Also, there was Heracles, and honestly, nobody ever questioned his masculinity. So, his whole point here was to remind Pietro that things certainly weren’t as bad as it seems, that that he should actually feel bad that his wife had run off with the guy that ended up taking his realm off of him.
May 20, 2013
The strength of this play is in the language, not the plot or charcaterisation or dramatic tension (although to be fair one should make judgements about plays which one has only read with caution: Shakespeare's comedies tend to look tame in print). The Malcontent closely parallels Tourneur's (if it is Tourneur) Revenger's Tragedy, which itself is in someways a pastiche of Hamlet, so a pastiche of pastiche then. This play shares with Middleton's plays an uneasy and uncertain relationship between a high moral tone and bawdy language and puns. I am never sure whether the writer is enjoying the bawdiness and dishonestly adds the high moral sentiment, or on the contrary is preaching and feels obliged to add bawdy for the sake of popularity, or, a third possibility, is himself ambivalent, indulging in high jinks and in practically the same stroke of his hectic quill, condemning sin, at once condemning and revelling in the "sweet sheets, wax lights, bed-posts, cambric smocks, villainous curtains, arras pictures, oiled hinges, and all the tongue-tied lasciviousnes witnesses of great creatures' wantoness. What salvation can you expect?" Act1 Scene Viii 36-41
Well what indeed? But is all this serious? It cannot be entirely serious, noone who writes lines like "I'll fall like a sponge into water to suck up, to suck up. Howl again. I'll go to church and come to you." is altogether serious, although the comedy is so bizarre as to be ever so slightly sinister. The clown's mask can so easilöy slip. We are so close to evil and bad dreams and the language of bawdy can slip into terror and nightmare. It does not but it comes close enough to brush us with the touch of impedning doom: the judgement, so the writer surely belived, which awaits us all: that rebuke which cannot be gainsaid.
The play is an outpuring of the inventory of cupidity. the punning, sententiousness, invectivecursing and raging never lets up. This writer likes to wear his learning on his (I imagine) perfumed and cambric sleeve: we are invited to spend happy hours chasing up a profusion of classical and dialectical references as well as what seem to be insider jokes. It never stops. The style seems to me to be South European, of what the English sometimes call "the firey Latin temperament" and it is no surprise to learn that Marston's mother was Italian and his sources largely Italian too. This and much like it reads more like the translation of the invective of a Neopolitan housewife than anything more nearly English:
"Come down, thou ragged cur, and snarl here. I give thy dogged sullines free liberty; trot about and bespurtle whom thou pleasest." (Act1 Scene ii 10-12)All the characters seem to be very loud. Reading The Malconent I have the impression that they are shouting at one another most of the time, like neighbours in a street in Brindisi.
Thou art an arrant knave-
Who I? I have been a sergeant man-
Thou art very poor-
As Job, an alchemist or a poet-
The duke hates thee-
As Irishmen do bum-cracks-
Thou has lost his amity-
As pleasing as maids lose their virginity-
"I wonder what religion thou art of?" asks one character and I wonder too.
I read that Marston became a priest, no doubt his sermons were popular.
This pastiche of pastiches concludes with a tour de force (is this a spoiler?) it is a revenge tragedy in which nobody dies! There are no severed heads, no bodies concealed in chests or duchesss murdered or prices poisoned or hapless suitors stabbed. Nobody is led away to execution. The Machiavellan villain Mendoza is pardoned. Is this Marston's answer to Machiavelli and does Marston share Portia's words of wisodm about mercy?
The underlying theme of this play, its Leitmotiv as it were, is not revenge after all, it is rebuke. The characters never cease rebuking one another but in the most colourful language possible. We all stand rebuked for our sins and even I John Marston am fascinated by sin while I condemn it like the proverbial rabbit before the serpent. Sin fascinates even as it repels.
But the sin is not too heinous, or is it? We are not presented with genuine suffering. Is it that the world was too full of suffering beyond words, the executions, terror, disease and horror of the time, for Marstoin to do more than rebuke and make fun of fallen Man?
How poor are the repetitive four letter expletives of the ragtag and botail underclass of today when compared to the outpourings of abuse indulged in by the cacophonous protagonists of "The Malcontent".
I should like to see this performed or at least hear it performed and wonder at the rebuke meted out to all, among others Medame Maquerelle who lies in "the old Cunnycourt" for if "all is damnation, wickedness extreme and there is no faith in man" then let us all be rebuked and acknowledge that "mature discretion is the life of state". "The whore goes down with the stews and the punk comes up with the puritan." And we take this wisdom home, the last line of this strange romp of a play:
"He that knows most, knows how much he wanteth"
Even that final rebuke is not without its ambiguity. Master Marston sir: can you not be serious without making a pun and can you never make a joke without being somehow ultimately a little serious?
Well what indeed? But is all this serious? It cannot be entirely serious, noone who writes lines like "I'll fall like a sponge into water to suck up, to suck up. Howl again. I'll go to church and come to you." is altogether serious, although the comedy is so bizarre as to be ever so slightly sinister. The clown's mask can so easilöy slip. We are so close to evil and bad dreams and the language of bawdy can slip into terror and nightmare. It does not but it comes close enough to brush us with the touch of impedning doom: the judgement, so the writer surely belived, which awaits us all: that rebuke which cannot be gainsaid.
The play is an outpuring of the inventory of cupidity. the punning, sententiousness, invectivecursing and raging never lets up. This writer likes to wear his learning on his (I imagine) perfumed and cambric sleeve: we are invited to spend happy hours chasing up a profusion of classical and dialectical references as well as what seem to be insider jokes. It never stops. The style seems to me to be South European, of what the English sometimes call "the firey Latin temperament" and it is no surprise to learn that Marston's mother was Italian and his sources largely Italian too. This and much like it reads more like the translation of the invective of a Neopolitan housewife than anything more nearly English:
"Come down, thou ragged cur, and snarl here. I give thy dogged sullines free liberty; trot about and bespurtle whom thou pleasest." (Act1 Scene ii 10-12)All the characters seem to be very loud. Reading The Malconent I have the impression that they are shouting at one another most of the time, like neighbours in a street in Brindisi.
Thou art an arrant knave-
Who I? I have been a sergeant man-
Thou art very poor-
As Job, an alchemist or a poet-
The duke hates thee-
As Irishmen do bum-cracks-
Thou has lost his amity-
As pleasing as maids lose their virginity-
"I wonder what religion thou art of?" asks one character and I wonder too.
I read that Marston became a priest, no doubt his sermons were popular.
This pastiche of pastiches concludes with a tour de force (is this a spoiler?) it is a revenge tragedy in which nobody dies! There are no severed heads, no bodies concealed in chests or duchesss murdered or prices poisoned or hapless suitors stabbed. Nobody is led away to execution. The Machiavellan villain Mendoza is pardoned. Is this Marston's answer to Machiavelli and does Marston share Portia's words of wisodm about mercy?
The underlying theme of this play, its Leitmotiv as it were, is not revenge after all, it is rebuke. The characters never cease rebuking one another but in the most colourful language possible. We all stand rebuked for our sins and even I John Marston am fascinated by sin while I condemn it like the proverbial rabbit before the serpent. Sin fascinates even as it repels.
But the sin is not too heinous, or is it? We are not presented with genuine suffering. Is it that the world was too full of suffering beyond words, the executions, terror, disease and horror of the time, for Marstoin to do more than rebuke and make fun of fallen Man?
How poor are the repetitive four letter expletives of the ragtag and botail underclass of today when compared to the outpourings of abuse indulged in by the cacophonous protagonists of "The Malcontent".
I should like to see this performed or at least hear it performed and wonder at the rebuke meted out to all, among others Medame Maquerelle who lies in "the old Cunnycourt" for if "all is damnation, wickedness extreme and there is no faith in man" then let us all be rebuked and acknowledge that "mature discretion is the life of state". "The whore goes down with the stews and the punk comes up with the puritan." And we take this wisdom home, the last line of this strange romp of a play:
"He that knows most, knows how much he wanteth"
Even that final rebuke is not without its ambiguity. Master Marston sir: can you not be serious without making a pun and can you never make a joke without being somehow ultimately a little serious?
June 6, 2017
Given the current political climate, I wouldn’t be remotely surprised to see an uptick in stagings of Marston’s masterful satiric drama on corruption and (im)morality.
Originally staged by the Children of the Chapel, in recent years theatres are again casting the play with young (usually teenage) actors in order to highlight the satire and ridiculousness of Marston’s court.
The tale of a deposed duke who masquerades as a courtier to gain back his lost dukedom, The Malcontent revels in the debauched court of Genoa. It’s also, in an odd way, a somewhat hopeful message of the human condition and our shared humanity. Highly recommended.
Originally staged by the Children of the Chapel, in recent years theatres are again casting the play with young (usually teenage) actors in order to highlight the satire and ridiculousness of Marston’s court.
The tale of a deposed duke who masquerades as a courtier to gain back his lost dukedom, The Malcontent revels in the debauched court of Genoa. It’s also, in an odd way, a somewhat hopeful message of the human condition and our shared humanity. Highly recommended.
October 23, 2022
This a completely delightful play. It's a tragicomic satire masquerading as a revenge tragedy, even going to the trouble of citing Hamlet several times and liberally quoting (and making fun of) Seneca. It's easy to see why Webster and the King's Men took it from the boys performing over at the Blackfriars, but this was just as perfect a play for the Children of the Revels. Everyone threatens to murder other people, and the play's villain (he's called Mendoza) is truly evil, plotting to kill five people at least through the course of The Malcontent, but the play refuses to let anyone die, offering fun and games, tricks and disguises, instead of the tragic twists, woodcocks, and springes of the usual revenge tragedy.
August 24, 2023
3.5 stars.
A romantic comedy in which Antonio disguises himself as a female to reach his lover Mellida and elope with her. At the end of this play, Mellida’s father reconciles with Antonio’s father and announces the marriage of Antonio and Mellida.
It's a revenge tragedy with many elements of other famous tragedies including Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
Arguably, it's John Marston's most successful play, and one of the most significant plays of the English Renaissance period.
A romantic comedy in which Antonio disguises himself as a female to reach his lover Mellida and elope with her. At the end of this play, Mellida’s father reconciles with Antonio’s father and announces the marriage of Antonio and Mellida.
It's a revenge tragedy with many elements of other famous tragedies including Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
Arguably, it's John Marston's most successful play, and one of the most significant plays of the English Renaissance period.
February 23, 2024
oh, cutthroat friendship is the rankest villainy!
June 15, 2025
The first half was a little rocky, but by the second half we were SO back, baby!
January 4, 2018
As stated by M.L. Wine in the introduction to the University of Nebraska Press edition, “Though it includes near-murders, virtue in distress, moral reclamations, a Machiavellian villain, and dissolute and corrupt specimens of mankind, The Malcontent is actually a very funny play. Malevole’s game of outfoxing the villains and of underlining the moral sickness and absurdity of the flunkies who adorn the court of Genoa is at once reassuring and entertaining; a number of scenes have no direct relationship to the major action and are clearly comic; and the sheer verbal fecundity of some of the most bitter and satirical passages renders even the ‘hideous imagination’ of Malevole and other characters in the play hilarious.” I don’t think there is a better way to describe this play.
Despite the comedy in the others, I do love the bitterly sarcastic lines of Malevole the best:
“Sects, sects. I have seen seeming Piety change her robe so oft that sure none but some arch-devil can shape her a new petticoat.”
“’Tis well held desperation, no zeal,
Hopeless to strive with fate. Peace! Temporize!
Hope, hope, that never forsak’st the wretch’st man,
Yet bidd’st me live and lurk in this disguise!
What, play I well the free-breath’d discontent?
Why, man, we are all philosophical monarchs
Or natural fools.”
“In none but usurers and brokers; they deceive no man. Men take ‘em for bloodsuckers, and so they are! Now God deliver me from my friends!”
All in all, this is a classic play and one that would be enjoyed by any drama lover.
See my other reviews here!
Despite the comedy in the others, I do love the bitterly sarcastic lines of Malevole the best:
“Sects, sects. I have seen seeming Piety change her robe so oft that sure none but some arch-devil can shape her a new petticoat.”
“’Tis well held desperation, no zeal,
Hopeless to strive with fate. Peace! Temporize!
Hope, hope, that never forsak’st the wretch’st man,
Yet bidd’st me live and lurk in this disguise!
What, play I well the free-breath’d discontent?
Why, man, we are all philosophical monarchs
Or natural fools.”
“In none but usurers and brokers; they deceive no man. Men take ‘em for bloodsuckers, and so they are! Now God deliver me from my friends!”
All in all, this is a classic play and one that would be enjoyed by any drama lover.
See my other reviews here!
August 31, 2013
Really good satire. Begins with an unrefined theatre lover hopping onstage to instruct the actors and talk about how the Trojan Horse part of the Iliad could have been bettered with some garlic, ends with the reaction of the friend to a disguised man's grand unveiling being "...we're friends of course I knew it was you". On point.
June 29, 2009
So I realize this is a very famous and important play, but I didn't like it very much. The plot was confusing and it lacked any sort of climax. I am hoping that the other revenge dramas that I read this summer will redeem the genre for me.
January 13, 2018
This had such a promising start but then it dragged on, too much plot getting in the way of the story. Double crosses, triple crosses, multiple plots, double dukes, double disguises, and just far too much that by the end, I just wanted someone to die.
July 13, 2010
Intriguing.
October 28, 2012
A weirdly post-modern play that was pretty funny.
December 27, 2012
Very good, slightly dated, student edition of a great play.
November 1, 2015
very confusing
July 5, 2025
The back cover of my copy of The Malcontent (actually a selection of Marston’s plays) suggests that Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure was influenced by The Malcontent. That is certainly possible, but the claim is tenuous. There is a Duke (or former Duke) posing undercover, who acts as a manipulative force for good, and there is some extra-marital sex, and there the connection ends.
Nonetheless, critics cannot help suggesting that The Malcontent influenced Shakespeare. What about the deposed Duke in The Tempest? Was Malevole the inspiration for Jacques in As You Like It? What about Shakespeare’s tragedies?
All this is possible of course, but I consider it more likely that Marston was acting in imitation of Shakespeare. Shakespeare had already used misanthropic and discontented characters as a way of commenting on the behaviour of court life in Richard III and Hamlet, the latter being a play from which Marston shamelessly plagiarises. Shakespeare did not need to look to Marston for malcontents. He could re-read his earlier plays.
Of course, we cannot help comparing any of Shakespeare’s contemporaries to the great man himself. Where did Shakespeare get his ideas? What is it about Shakespeare’s plays that causes us to consider him superior to his contemporaries?
One quality that The Malcontent shares with Shakespeare’s comedies is that it seems close to being a tragedy. As with Measure for Measure, court intrigue could potentially lead to someone being executed. The machinations of Don John in Much Ado About Nothing break up the innocent laughter of the main characters and frays their loyalties, casting a pall over the final happy ending and reconciliation.
Similarly, a reported death at the end of Love’s Labour’s Lost causes the play to close on a bitter-sweet note. In All’s Well That Ends Well, the unworthy hero deserts his wife, making the happy ending seem like more than he deserves. The enchantments in A Midsummer Night’s Dream push the characters into conflict and betrayal, which thankfully never strays beyond the humorous. And so on.
In The Malcontent, events that seem about to turn tragic are muted at the last moment, lending the play its unusual tone. In the second act, a man is run through with a sword. He lies prone while the other characters make plans for further acts of revenge. Then unexpectedly towards the end of the scene, Malevole discovers that the ‘dead man’ is only wounded, and he takes him away to recover. The reader of the play discovers the uses of carefully reading stage directions which did not confirm he was dead.
Later, Malevole is asked to murder the Duke, the very man who deposed him from the Duchy. Malevole could use treat this deed as Pietro’s just desserts and carry out the deed, but instead he uses the chance to protect Pietro and pave the way for Pietro’s repentance and renunciation of his ill-gotten Duchy.
The basic idea of the play is that Malevole acts as a malcontent, a mysterious new guest at the court of Genoa who rails against the courtiers instead of flattering them, and who is accepted in the court on those terms, because he is entertaining. In fact, Malevole is Altofronto, the former Duke of Genoa who was deposed. He is using the disguise to make his comeback. As ever in plays of this age, the disguise is effective enough to ensure that nobody recognises him, not even his wife.
Under Duke Pietro, the court is a corrupt place where the married women are having affairs. Malevole uses this to undermine Pietro by informing him about his wife’s infidelities. Aurelia is having affairs with two men. This allows Pietro’s heir Mendoza to put the blame on the other lover, Ferneze.
After he escapes the consequences of his adultery, Mendoza begins to scheme to bring about the overthrow of Pietro so that he can become the Duke. The rest of the play is dedicated to the various scheming and counter-scheming of Mendoza and Malevole to seize the duchy for themselves. Mendoza’s plans are villainous and murderous. Malevole’s are cynical, but justifiable.
As with all plays containing a misanthropic character, the speeches by that character are hugely entertaining, as they cut through the hypocrisies of respectable society. It has been suggested that Marston was satirising the new Jacobean order established after the death of Queen Elizabeth I and the succession of James I. Most of the observations made by Malevole could apply to any royal or noble court, however, and Marston may have been literally satirising the corruption of the Genoese court.
This is a play that I might change my mind about if I saw a good production of it, or read it a few times. On a first read, I found the play interesting, but it seems derivative of Hamlet, tonally confused, and lacking in any brilliantly memorable scenes. I may see if I can find a production of it on YouTube or somewhere else, and decide if I like it better after watching that.
Nonetheless, critics cannot help suggesting that The Malcontent influenced Shakespeare. What about the deposed Duke in The Tempest? Was Malevole the inspiration for Jacques in As You Like It? What about Shakespeare’s tragedies?
All this is possible of course, but I consider it more likely that Marston was acting in imitation of Shakespeare. Shakespeare had already used misanthropic and discontented characters as a way of commenting on the behaviour of court life in Richard III and Hamlet, the latter being a play from which Marston shamelessly plagiarises. Shakespeare did not need to look to Marston for malcontents. He could re-read his earlier plays.
Of course, we cannot help comparing any of Shakespeare’s contemporaries to the great man himself. Where did Shakespeare get his ideas? What is it about Shakespeare’s plays that causes us to consider him superior to his contemporaries?
One quality that The Malcontent shares with Shakespeare’s comedies is that it seems close to being a tragedy. As with Measure for Measure, court intrigue could potentially lead to someone being executed. The machinations of Don John in Much Ado About Nothing break up the innocent laughter of the main characters and frays their loyalties, casting a pall over the final happy ending and reconciliation.
Similarly, a reported death at the end of Love’s Labour’s Lost causes the play to close on a bitter-sweet note. In All’s Well That Ends Well, the unworthy hero deserts his wife, making the happy ending seem like more than he deserves. The enchantments in A Midsummer Night’s Dream push the characters into conflict and betrayal, which thankfully never strays beyond the humorous. And so on.
In The Malcontent, events that seem about to turn tragic are muted at the last moment, lending the play its unusual tone. In the second act, a man is run through with a sword. He lies prone while the other characters make plans for further acts of revenge. Then unexpectedly towards the end of the scene, Malevole discovers that the ‘dead man’ is only wounded, and he takes him away to recover. The reader of the play discovers the uses of carefully reading stage directions which did not confirm he was dead.
Later, Malevole is asked to murder the Duke, the very man who deposed him from the Duchy. Malevole could use treat this deed as Pietro’s just desserts and carry out the deed, but instead he uses the chance to protect Pietro and pave the way for Pietro’s repentance and renunciation of his ill-gotten Duchy.
The basic idea of the play is that Malevole acts as a malcontent, a mysterious new guest at the court of Genoa who rails against the courtiers instead of flattering them, and who is accepted in the court on those terms, because he is entertaining. In fact, Malevole is Altofronto, the former Duke of Genoa who was deposed. He is using the disguise to make his comeback. As ever in plays of this age, the disguise is effective enough to ensure that nobody recognises him, not even his wife.
Under Duke Pietro, the court is a corrupt place where the married women are having affairs. Malevole uses this to undermine Pietro by informing him about his wife’s infidelities. Aurelia is having affairs with two men. This allows Pietro’s heir Mendoza to put the blame on the other lover, Ferneze.
After he escapes the consequences of his adultery, Mendoza begins to scheme to bring about the overthrow of Pietro so that he can become the Duke. The rest of the play is dedicated to the various scheming and counter-scheming of Mendoza and Malevole to seize the duchy for themselves. Mendoza’s plans are villainous and murderous. Malevole’s are cynical, but justifiable.
As with all plays containing a misanthropic character, the speeches by that character are hugely entertaining, as they cut through the hypocrisies of respectable society. It has been suggested that Marston was satirising the new Jacobean order established after the death of Queen Elizabeth I and the succession of James I. Most of the observations made by Malevole could apply to any royal or noble court, however, and Marston may have been literally satirising the corruption of the Genoese court.
This is a play that I might change my mind about if I saw a good production of it, or read it a few times. On a first read, I found the play interesting, but it seems derivative of Hamlet, tonally confused, and lacking in any brilliantly memorable scenes. I may see if I can find a production of it on YouTube or somewhere else, and decide if I like it better after watching that.
October 22, 2023
The Malcontent is often billed as Marston's masterpiece, and one can see why. Funny (there are some wonderful insults, and some ludicrous scenes) and there is some lovely Machiavellian evil from the character Mendoza. Good ultimately triumphs (I don't think I'm giving any spoilers here) and everyone ends up with the correct wife at the end, and there is a lot of smut from the "bawd" Maquerelle and the virgin wives.
Originally performed by the Boy's Company of St Paul's, it is clear that the amount of smut and filth "children" were allowed to perform in those days (in a Church school) was way more than you'd let them get away with now, and people paid way more to see children perform this than to see adult actors do the plays of Shakespeare or Marlowe. When I was growing up, I'd watch Carry On films which were full of smut and innuendo: the world has changed.
Originally performed by the Boy's Company of St Paul's, it is clear that the amount of smut and filth "children" were allowed to perform in those days (in a Church school) was way more than you'd let them get away with now, and people paid way more to see children perform this than to see adult actors do the plays of Shakespeare or Marlowe. When I was growing up, I'd watch Carry On films which were full of smut and innuendo: the world has changed.
January 7, 2025
A very influential and popular play, The Malcontent is a complicated intrigue which pits the ousted Duke Altofront of Genoa, disguised as a “malcontent” named Malvole, against the usurper, Duke Pietro, and his favorite, Mendoza. The plot and characters are not historical. A central element in the intrigue is the adultery of Duke Pietro’s Duchess Aurelia with Mendoza. The play is called a “tragicomedy” and there is a happy ending with the rightful Duke restored, the usurper voluntarily giving up the throne and reconciled with Aurelia, Mendoza banished, and even the seemingly killed characters proving to be alive after all. The play is full of witty dialogue, which makes it better than the plot description would suggest.
The play, another re-read, was in the Brooke and Paradise, and Kinney anthologies.
The play, another re-read, was in the Brooke and Paradise, and Kinney anthologies.
July 11, 2025
This is probably not that deep but it is very enjoyable, and a hit that may have inspired Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure and The Tempest. Malevole’s diatribes against courtly corruption are leavened by Marston’s predilection for clowning – the far-fetched plotting is accompanied by an ironic smirk, and never gets as rancid and bitter as later Jacobean revenge dramas from Webster and Ford. A highlight from the period.
April 15, 2020
I'm sorry but I hated this. And to think this play initially came from the mouths of children! It makes me wonder if they knew what some of the words they spoke meant, because at times this play made some filthy (and rude) remarks.
June 16, 2025
Had a hard time getting into this one. It suffered a little bit from having a few of the main characters have fairly similar looking names. There were some clever phrases, though, and some pretty good snatches here and there.
September 28, 2023
I’m still confused
July 21, 2024
Good value for money in the ebook of the New Mermaids Edition of Marston's most famous and arguably best play. The text of the play isn't hyperlinked however.
November 4, 2025
don't ask me about a single event in this play.
December 9, 2019
A favourite of the plays I've read this year for university. Don't get me wrong, I'm still not a massive fan of plays by any stretch of the imagination. However, I liked this more than the rest. It centres mainly on the banished Duke Altofronto who has returned to his court under the guise of Malevole. As Malevole he is an oxymoron of a man. Whilst he's incredibly charismatic he's also described as monstrous and likened to Lucifer on more than one occasion. The entire plot follows Altofronto/Malevole as he manipulates people to regain his power.
I'd like to read a novelisation of this.
www.a-novel-idea.co.uk
I'd like to read a novelisation of this.
www.a-novel-idea.co.uk
February 15, 2024
As crazy as most Early Modern tragicomedies - so many disguises and deaths that turn out not to have happened - but fine writing and pace. Some elements added by John Webster when it was acquired for performance in the Globe.
Read as part of the Shakespeare Institute readathon 2019, #Websterthon.
ETA: And re-read on Zoom as part of the SI "Extra Mile" readathon in the weird lockdown summer of 2020.
ETAA: And again on Zoom, the 'A' Text, as performed by the Children of the Chapel Royal/Queen's Revels either in early 1603, before the Queen died, or summer 1604, after a plague closure. Possibly my favourite Marston play, written when he was producing work for both of the Boys' Companies. Bonkers, and with so many twists and turns you lose track of who's dead and who's just resting, but the writing just glows.
And yet again on Zoom, the revised version performed in 1604 with Webster's additions. Love the Induction, quite possibly the first instance of named actors playing themselves.
Read as part of the Shakespeare Institute readathon 2019, #Websterthon.
ETA: And re-read on Zoom as part of the SI "Extra Mile" readathon in the weird lockdown summer of 2020.
ETAA: And again on Zoom, the 'A' Text, as performed by the Children of the Chapel Royal/Queen's Revels either in early 1603, before the Queen died, or summer 1604, after a plague closure. Possibly my favourite Marston play, written when he was producing work for both of the Boys' Companies. Bonkers, and with so many twists and turns you lose track of who's dead and who's just resting, but the writing just glows.
And yet again on Zoom, the revised version performed in 1604 with Webster's additions. Love the Induction, quite possibly the first instance of named actors playing themselves.
February 23, 2023
Ok, Aaron convinced me to bump this to 5 stars. It’s a pretty great satire on a Jacobean revenge tragedy, with hilarious disguises and wacky hijinks. We discussed what kind of a trope character is Malevole the disaffected antick genius, who basically regains his lost-by-treachery dukedom and then some by trickery.
Some great lines: ‘Shall we murder him?’ ‘Instantly.’
"do you know me? I am Medam Maquerelle, I lie in the old cunny court."
"Oh do not rant do not turne plaier, there's more of them than can well live one by another alreadie."
Some great lines: ‘Shall we murder him?’ ‘Instantly.’
"do you know me? I am Medam Maquerelle, I lie in the old cunny court."
"Oh do not rant do not turne plaier, there's more of them than can well live one by another alreadie."
October 3, 2012
This is a masterpiece of early modern English literature. Read it now.
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews