The Subversive Desire of English Renaissance Revenge Tragedy

Abstract

The most important factor that made English renaissance revenge tragedy so popular at that time was not only the sensational violence and bloodshed on the stage but also its representation of the chaotic political and religious problems in the late Tudor Dynasty. People in the Tudor and Stuart Dynasty wanted effective government and religious stability, but they were not achieved. The contemporary dramatists criticized and mocked the chaotic political and social condition, using the setting of other countries, and satisfied the audience’s subversive desire. Revenge tragedy was the most effective means to deliver this political desire by characterizing the immorality of the ruling class and by maximizing the revenger’s suffering. Even though the revengers cannot avoid the destruction, their subversive madness and mockery could give off Dionysiac desire and pleasure beyond moral order. When we see the renaissance revenge tragedy in the perspective of Christianity, revenge tragedy can be interpreted within the God-centered conservative view. The Christian belief at that time prohibited private revenge. The protagonist of the renaissance revenge tragedy feels conflict between the private revenge and God’s providence. If he gives up his private revenge and depends on God’s justice and law of the country, he does not get the tragic end. However, if he commits private revenge, he cannot but undergo the destruction. Based on this view, revenge tragedy can be the good means to deliver the moral lesson, which emphasizes God's providence and justice ahead the revenger’s desire and emotion. However, renaissance revenge tragedy reveals the subversive desire which makes the God-centered morals and ruling order suspicious. The revenger is portrayed as a hero. He is not just the incarnation of revenge but the hero who reveals the reality of the corrupt power. The revenger’s painful choice and private revenge involve the political meaning that suspects and criticize God’s or the king’s justice. When the king and the law are not able to take the role of carrying out justice, the revenger’s private vengeance and destruction becomes the good means to bring the audience into the political recognition of social injustice.