Every Man In His Humor (2nd version) | Page 3

the
list of actors prefixed to the comedy in the folio of Jonson's works,
1616. But it is a mistake to infer, because Shakespeare's name stands
first in the list of actors and the elder Kno'well first in the 'dramatis
personae', that Shakespeare took that particular part. The order of a list
of Elizabethan players was generally that of their importance or priority
as shareholders in the company and seldom if ever corresponded to the
list of characters.
"Every Man in His Humour" was an immediate success, and with it
Jonson's reputation as one of the leading dramatists of his time was
established once and for all. This could have been by no means
Jonson's earliest comedy, and we have just learned that he was already
reputed one of "our best in tragedy." Indeed, one of Jonson's extant
comedies, "The Case is Altered," but one never claimed by him or
published as his, must certainly have preceded "Every Man in His
Humour" on the stage. The former play may be described as a comedy
modelled on the Latin plays of Plautus. (It combines, in fact, situations
derived from the "Captivi" and the "Aulularia" of that dramatist). But

the pretty story of the beggar-maiden, Rachel, and her suitors, Jonson
found, not among the classics, but in the ideals of romantic love which
Shakespeare had already popularised on the stage. Jonson never again
produced so fresh and lovable a feminine personage as Rachel,
although in other respects "The Case is Altered" is not a conspicuous
play, and, save for the satirising of Antony Munday in the person of
Antonio Balladino and Gabriel Harvey as well, is perhaps the least
characteristic of the comedies of Jonson.
"Every Man in His Humour," probably first acted late in the summer of
1598 and at the Curtain, is commonly regarded as an epoch-making
play; and this view is not unjustified. As to plot, it tells little more than
how an intercepted letter enabled a father to follow his supposedly
studious son to London, and there observe his life with the gallants of
the time. The real quality of this comedy is in its personages and in the
theory upon which they are conceived. Ben Jonson had theories about
poetry and the drama, and he was neither chary in talking of them nor
in experimenting with them in his plays. This makes Jonson, like
Dryden in his time, and Wordsworth much later, an author to reckon
with; particularly when we remember that many of Jonson's notions
came for a time definitely to prevail and to modify the whole trend of
English poetry. First of all Jonson was a classicist, that is, he believed
in restraint and precedent in art in opposition to the prevalent
ungoverned and irresponsible Renaissance spirit. Jonson believed that
there was a professional way of doing things which might be reached
by a study of the best examples, and he found these examples for the
most part among the ancients. To confine our attention to the drama,
Jonson objected to the amateurishness and haphazard nature of many
contemporary plays, and set himself to do something different; and the
first and most striking thing that he evolved was his conception and
practice of the comedy of humours.
As Jonson has been much misrepresented in this matter, let us quote his
own words as to "humour." A humour, according to Jonson, was a bias
of disposition, a warp, so to speak, in character by which
"Some one peculiar quality Doth so possess a man, that it doth draw All
his affects, his spirits, and his powers, In their confluctions, all to run
one way."
But continuing, Jonson is careful to add:

"But that a rook by wearing a pied feather, The cable hat-band, or the
three-piled ruff, A yard of shoe-tie, or the Switzers knot On his French
garters, should affect a humour! O, it is more than most ridiculous."
Jonson's comedy of humours, in a word, conceived of stage personages
on the basis of a ruling trait or passion (a notable simplification of
actual life be it observed in passing); and, placing these typified traits
in juxtaposition in their conflict and contrast, struck the spark of
comedy. Downright, as his name indicates, is "a plain squire";
Bobadill's humour is that of the braggart who is incidentally, and with
delightfully comic effect, a coward; Brainworm's humour is the finding
out of things to the end of fooling everybody: of course he is fooled in
the end himself. But it was not Jonson's theories alone that made the
success of "Every Man in His Humour." The play is admirably written
and each character is vividly conceived, and with a firm touch based on
observation of the men of the London of the day. Jonson was neither in
this, his