Paying £s to Gain Pounds: James, Feasting, and Morality

One article that I just thought was so interesting today was Leah Sinanoglou Marcus’s “The Occasion of Ben Jonson’s Pleasure Reconciled to Virtue.” Admittedly, I think that part of the reason why I enjoyed this article so much was because it talked a lot about food: specifically, about how lavish food was during James I’s reign. Courtiers would frequently spend £1000 or more for a feast (287), which is incredible! Marcus uses food as an example of the way that James I actually encouraged temperance from his court: in the way of food, James urged them to dine moderately. “Let all your food bee simple, without composition or sauces,” he urges Charles (288). Nevertheless, his courtiers continued to spend lavishly (288). In her article, Marcus examines this and a few other examples in order to show how the debauchery of James I’s court was, in many cases, not his fault. James I attempted to walk the line of virtue, and he wrote documents such as The Book of Sports in order to explain acceptable pastimes in terms of good, Protestant values (277). Despite these, he was villainized by people on both sides of the religious spectrum. The premise of Marcus’s article is that Jonson’s masque, Pleasure Reconciled to Virtue, was a celebration of James I’s actual, moralistic policies, but that nobody appreciated Jonson’s message—not even James himself.

This article is an interesting contrast to the thesis I am trying to build, which is that James I’s image was not strong enough to define a confident morality, so others stepped in and tried to define their own—especially writers. In this article, Marcus is arguing that Jonson used masques like Pleasure Reconciled to Virtue to celebrate James I’s morality: thus, an artist trying to build up the morality of the king. The question is, why didn’t this work? Was it, as Marcus suggests, because Jonson overestimated his audience (293)? Was it because James’s persona was not brave and chivalrous enough to claim respect from his citizens? Was it because courtiers simply weren’t interested in being moralized to? Again, I think of The Knight of the Burning Pestle, which was not successful because its satire rested confusingly on its audience. While they do not appreciate being moralized to in play format, they do appreciate and respect sermons, such as Donne’s. This makes me wonder about artists and their claiming of morality, especially in conjunction with the Puritan takeover later in the century. Is it the clash between these claims to morality that necessitate the closing of the theaters? What is the public opinion of the people toward artists claiming morality, the king claiming morality, and religious preachers claiming morality? I personally know that I will be examining these questions more fully as I continue to work on this paper.

Caleb, if you’re still working on masques and antimasques, I would recommend this article if you want to read a discussion about where James I stood on religious festivals or luxurious feasts. I’m leaving the citation information below. To everyone else: happy researching!

Marcus, Leah Sinanoglou. “The Occasion of Ben Jonson’s Pleasure Reconciled to Virtue.” Studies in English Literature (Rice) 19 (1979): 271-293. Ebsco. Web. 25 April 2015.