Shakespeare and Co.: Christopher Marlowe, Thomas Dekker, Ben Jonson, Thomas Middleton, John Fletcher, and the Other Players in His Story.

by Stanley Wells

From one of our most distinguished Shakespeare scholars. here is a fascinating. lively. anecdotal work of forensic biography that firmly places Shakespeare within the hectic. exhilarating world in which he lived and wrote. Theater in Shakespeare's day was a burgeoning “growth industry. Everyone knew everyone else. and they all sought to learn. borrow or steal from one another. As Stanley Wells To see Shakespeare as one among a great company is only to enhance our sense of what made him unique. ”Wells explores Elizabethan and Jacobean theater. both behind the scenes and in front of the curtain. He examines how the great actors of the time influenced Shakespeare's work. He writes about the lives and works of the other major writers of Shakespeare's day and discusses Shakespeare's relationships-sometimes collaborative-with each of them.

Genres: Shakespeare, History, Nonfiction, Biography, Literature, Literary Criticism, Theatre

Hardcover

First published August 3, 2006

About the author

Stanley William Wells, CBE, is a Shakespeare scholar and Chairman of the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust

Reviews

[Jonfaith · Rating 3 out of 5]

As in a ruin we it call
One thing to be blown up, or fall;
Or to our end like way may have
By a flash of lightning, or a wave;
So Love’s inflamèd shaft or brand
May kill as soon as Death’s cold hand;
Except Love’s fires the virtue have
To fight the frost out of the grave -- Ben Jonson

The heartland is frozen this darkened morn. There may be a few giggles about now in that special place in Hell.

This was an elusive book. Wells attempts to grasp Shakespeare and his contemporaries and situate such into a tight focus, unfortunately without much supporting documentation. What is left is conjecture. I thoroughly enjoyed the sections featuring Marlowe and Jonson. The areas where Wells attempts to divine the collaboration of Fletcher and Middleton into later works from the Bard proved a bit ponderous. This isn't a scholarly analysis but a popular survey larded with some informed guessing.

[Wendy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an engaging overview of Shakespeare's relationships with his contemporaries. I particularly enjoyed the chapter on how Shakespeare might have been influenced by the skills and personalities of the actors he wrote for, as well as various discussions of Shakespeare's collaborations. I had no idea that Shakespeare had collaborated with other writers on Pericles, Timon of Athens, and Measure for Measure, among other works. Nor did I know that the text of Macbeth as we now have it probably contains a number of revisions made by Thomas Middleton.

Wells is good at presenting the big picture and at providing colorful details without getting bogged down in minutiae. This is a great book for general readers who happen to be a bit curious about Shakespeare and his time. For those who want to dig deeper, there are extensive notes, a bibliography, and a small selection of period documents reproduced at the back of the book.

The major downside of this book is that reading it will fill you with curiosity about a great many plays that are rarely read these days and even more rarely performed.

[Brian Willis · Rating 4 out of 5]

The monolith that is Shakespeare bestrides his narrow world like a Colossus, but the truth is that Shakespeare worked and, indeed, collaborated with a number of talented playwrights who wrote impressive plays that should be recognized. Although Marlowe and Jonson's stories are fairly well known, this book excels especially when telling the lesser known stories of Dekker, Middleton, Fletcher and Beaumont, and Webster. If you would like to know more about those other playwrights, but especially without searching out lengthy or obscure biographies, this book is perfect for you, giving brief biographies as well as appreciative excerpts of the best of these works of Shakespeare's peers.

[Graham Bear · Rating 4 out of 5]

An inquiry into Shakespeare's Contemporaries

I didn't think I would read another book about Shakespeare. However it gave me insight into Shakespeare's collaborators , actors and his literary heirs.. I have a greater respect for these colleagues who contributed to Shakespeare's plays.

[Chris · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wells writes so passionately and intelligently about his favorite works of Shakespeare’s contemporaries that I’ve had to add almost 40 new plays poems and pamphlets from the era. And I love any book that encourages me to read more. Excited to refer back to this book as I dig through these other works.

[Leslie · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is primarily intended for a generalist rather than a specialist audience. In both content and style, it's best suited to someone who knows the plays but wants to know more about the context within which they were written and performed. Theatre is an inherently collaborative project, and this book usefully reminds readers of how inseparable Shakespeare is from the Elizabethan theatre world. It's a good reminder, too, if any is needed, of how dopey the idea that someone else secretly wrote his plays really is. In this environment, that would have been impossible.

[Jason Wilson · Rating 4 out of 5]

In teretsing look at Shakespeare's contemporary writers, how the influenced and worked with each other, and the Elizabethan theatre.

[Julia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very helpful introduction to the theatrical milieu of Shakespeare.

[Colin Cox · Rating 3 out of 5]

Despite its deficiencies, Stanley Wells’ Shakespeare & Co. is a useful little book. Shakespeare & Co. is not the first book to place Shakespeare in conversation with his Early Modern contemporaries, and for that reason, it falls a little flat. Nevertheless, Wells effectively communicates the broad and esoteric parameters of a dense genre of academic scholarship.

At its best, Shakespeare & Co. is an engaging exploration of composition practices and the difficulty of staging plays in a social environment that, at times, was openly hostile toward playwrights and the theater. These limitations; therefore, required a fair amount of flexibility. Wells writes, “There were virtually no purpose-built playhouses outside London; performances took place in guildhalls, great and not-so-great houses, schoolrooms and even in churches. This required flexibility of staging…Texts had to be adjusted at short notice to suit the shifting circumstances” (21). The gap between a clean, flawless production (of course, not every production was clean, and if proof is necessary, count the number of times the Globe caught fire) and the myriad of problems that arise prior to a production are vast, and Wells succinctly dramatizes that dynamic. This larger conversation about production conditions demonstrates the precariousness of being a playwright in the late 16th and early 17th century. Wells writes, “The conditions in which the greatest plays of the English drama were produced did not make for an easy life for those who wrote and performed them. Yet it was a system that worked, perhaps because rather than in spite of its improvisatory and tumultuous nature” (27). While Wells may overindulge by offering his reader unnecessary and tangential narratives about the lives of the playwrights in question, the larger point he wants to make about the connectivity of these figures is clear and compelling.

The figures selected for Shakespeare & Co. were not done so in a slapdash fashion. As Wells demonstrates, Shakespeare was a member, a significant member to be sure, but a member nonetheless of a close collection of playwrights, poets, and actors. According to Wells, this dynamic is visible in the self-referentiality housed in the texts written during this period. When exploring Thomas Dekker’s connection to this literary community, Wells writes, “Dekker’s language is many-sourced. There is a degree of self-referentiality in the plays of Shakespeare’s time…Playgoers enjoyed being reminded of previous visits to the theatre” (111). Similarly, Ben Jonson’s comedic sensibilities offer an interesting point of contrast to a colossal figure such as Shakespeare. Unlike Shakespeare’s tragicomedies, Jonson’s comedies "are harder edged, more topical, but more classical in origin and dramatic style” (147). More than anything, these sorts of ideas challenge the ways in which Shakespeare’s canon irons out any deviations and anomalies. Despite what Shakespeare’s canon passively suggests, the Early Modern stage is not homogeneous.

Wells possesses legitimate academic credentials, but this book knows what it is.

[Rob]

“Shakespeare’s tragedies have dominated the English theatrical tradition, creating expectations which lessen the chances of success of others which, though they may be no less brilliant in themselves, are written in a different mode.” - Shakespeare & Co.
This is a great reference to the greater London scene around Shakespeare as he is churning out his plays (1592-1613) by focusing on his fellow successful tradesmen. Out of all the scenes and settings of Shakespeare do we rarely find London and almost never in his present time. His contemporaries paint an often rowdy, bawdy version of peasants, cut-purses, aristocrats, scoundrels and travelers of then present-day London, jostling, quarreling, grifting amongst each other offering a more direct and noisy social satire that fleshes out more color from the streets plus a glimpse of some of the characters who may have filled the playhouses of the day. Along with 1599; a year in the life, 1606; year of Lear (Shapiro), this is a must for anyone passionate about Will Shakespeare.

[Oliver · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kyd, Lyly, Marlowe, Middleton, Fletcher, Beaumont, Jonson. Some of those names are known, while others are obscure, but all were contemporary dramatists of Wm. Shakespeare. This book focuses on these "other" writers who borrowed and collaborated with each other and with the Bard of Avon (I did not know that several of Shakespeare's plays were co-written). There is also discussion of theater life in the 16th and 17th centuries--e.g., writing plays could prove quite profitable and, oh yeah, the women flocked to these guys. Further, the book points out the social milieu under which these plays were written and performed, notably the need to comply with royal censors--or face prison or worse; the role that the plague played in when/where the plays arose. All that being said, the book, for me, was somewhat of a slog. Wells presupposes the reader has great knowledge and recollection of Shakespeare's plays, something I do not have.

[C. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very comprehensive. Wells tells an compelling story of the playwrights who came before and after Shakespeare. It weaves a context in which Shakespeare found inspiration, collaborators, and people who were in turn inspired by him. Wells doesn't only focus on the playwrights and their plays (so many new texts to put on my 'to read' list!!!) but also on the society in which they lived.
It doesn't necessarily change the way in which you read Shakespeare's plays, but it does give you a renewed understanding of how the plays came to be, how contemporary audiences reacted to them, and what sets them apart from other plays written at the same time.
All in all a fascinating read. One of those books you won't regret buying and will find yourself returning to time and again.

[Tom · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not much is known about the life of William Shakespeare. He didn't leave behind a memoir or anything. We don't even know definitively what he thought about much of anything. All we have are his poetry and his plays. This book seeks to explain a bit about who Shakespeare might have been by talking about the various writers and actors he worked with, construing a picture of Shakespeare indirectly given what we know about other writers of his era. It's interesting. I don't think this book will teach you much about Shakespeare the man, but I did learn a bit about the time period thanks to what is known about other writers from that era.

[Mark Phillips · Rating 5 out of 5]

Chock full of amazing details about the milieu that Shakespeare interacted with daily. Wells certainly knows his stuff. The analyses of plays both popular and obscure are enlightening, especially in how the changing fashions and innovations of his contemporaries affected Shakespeare's development. The only complaint I have is that I wanted more. I would've liked similar treatments of Anthony Munday and Henry Chettle for instance. Made me want to seek out a whole slew of plays. A nice touch was describing some notable modern performances of some of these lesser-known plays.

[Mark Streeter · Rating 4 out of 5]

A little academic, with a bit of textual analyses, but not so much as to put the reader to sleep. Eye opening in how much of the Elizabeathan-Jacobean era of drama this set of writers covered. Also, keen on the instances of collaboration Shakespeare engaged in, often in a "master-apprentice" relationship with those who would come into their own in the time after the Bard's retirement and death.

[Abel Guerrero · Rating 4 out of 5]

Written in a brisk, engaging style, this book provides a useful overview of how Shakespeare fits into the theatrical scene of his day. There's some very interesting content about collaboration, along with biographical accounts of his contemporaries' lives, works, and writing styles.

[Nathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow! Wells is a very good writer and this book was engaging, fascinating, and well-written! I leaned more about Shakespeare, more about some other playwrights I knew little about, and was introduced to playwrights I had never heard of! So glad I read this book!!!

[Rick Mathis · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was a little disappointed in this one. It’s an interesting topic but the writing and execution left something to be desired. Many sentences are long and unwieldy. The book could have used a good editor.

[Ilia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read this in a flash. Stanley Wells is a good-humoured guide to the careers of Shakespeare’s contemporaries and collaborators. I came out wanting to read more Elizabethan and Jacobean plays, which is surely the intention of the book.

[Ella · Rating 4 out of 5]

Super fun and gossipy, and I totally want to read some Marlowe and Webster now.

[Rachel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pleasantly written series of anecdotes about Renaissance playwrights, full of wit and understanding.

[Gill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some bits I knew already - this is a very good general introduction for the non-specialist.

[Stoic_quin · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting overview of overlooked playwrights from the era - explaining their world & inspirations.

[Huw · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating stuff, brilliantly written.

[James Kelly · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely brilliant Wellsian research and story-telling about the lives and work of Shakespeare's peers. Excellent and informative, but also readable for all.

[Joyce · Rating 4 out of 5]

nice overview of the other stars who made up shakespeare's firmament, makes one hunger to get to the plays themselves, which is the important thing

[Bardfilm · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent book for understanding Shakespeare in the context of his contemporary dramatists. Pleasurable reading based on hard-gained scholarship. Ideal in many ways.

[Jay Amari · Rating 5 out of 5]

Stanley Wells has compiled a wealth of documented material to support the presence of William Shakespeare and his peers Christopher Marlowe, Thomas Dekker, Ben Jonson, Thomas Middleton, John Fletcher and many unknown performers, and writers who were all working the late 1500s and early 1600s in Elizabethan and Jacobean England.

Wells is clearly a Stratfordian, and his adherence to this is supported by many documented points from the period. His dedication to the authenticity of the Shakespeare authorship goes against much of the Oxfordian theory, but he is always sure to balance it with much of what the other writers were doing at the time, and even documents much of the un-credited material that many of the silent writing partners of Shakespeare offered.

The atmosphere in which Shakespeare and his sometime rivals and perhaps writing partners was rife with political intrigue and religious bias to the point that playwrights could be imprisoned and even executed for writing certain tracts that were considered anti-government or seditious religious materials. This is one of the reads that may shed more light on the readers interest in Renaissance Theatre and the writers who excelled during the period.

[Simon Harrison · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm ashamed to say that I know people (who otherwise live "normal" lives) who think Shakespeare did not exist. I am therefore required to keep my Shakespeare knowledge up to date, even as my sanity and will to continue decline.
A solid read. (Why don't the conspiracy theorists take on Fletcher or Beaumont? Because it wouldn't get them any attention. Idiots.)

[Ed · Rating 3 out of 5]

Stanley Wells knocks everyone off his pedestal in this linked collection of articles and shows us how the competitive cut and thrust of the burgeoning theater business was carried out. It is a welcome summing up of some of his work over the past several decades in which he has had a very successful career as a Shakespeare scholar. He has written a lot, been honored by the great and the good in the Shakespeare biz and has edited TWO collected works. There is nothing terribly new here--he is of the opinion that Marlowe was killed in a drunken brawl and not as part of a greater conspiracy by Essex and that he was only denounced by Kyd after a day of torture. Robert Greene shows up to use a few of his dying breaths to accused Shadespeare plagarism.

What makes this book exciting is the picture that Wells paints of the English theater at the end of the 16th century and beginning of the 17th. Plays were written, learned, blocked and put on stage constantly. Companies vied with each other to get the most popular actors and the best dramatists. Royal and noble patronage was available and avidly sought and everyone had to stay a step ahead of the Lord Chancellor. It was time that shaped our language and literature, intensely creative and insanely competitive. No one knew what they were doing, of course--no one said "That Hamlet is quite a play. I'll bet that people will be reading it 400 years from now."

Wells depicts this literary and dramatic explosion very well--it is clear that he not only knows his subject backward and forward but loves it as well.