ESSAYS

Essay on The Significance of Apparel in 17th Century Drama

ONLINE EXAMPLE OF ONE OF OUR CUSTOM ESSAYS

INTRODUCTION

Clothing in the 17th century was a crucial part of social and cultural life of British people, as it revealed their position in society. Representatives of the upper class wore sophisticated and expensive clothes made of splendid fabrics, while the lower class wore simpler garments, although they often tried to imitate fashion style of rich people. Apparel, the costumes that the actors utilised during theatrical performances, was very costly, because it was the expression of the 17th century British fashion, and people attended theatres to watch it. As Jean Howard (1994) puts it, theatrical "spectacles were commodities which the public paid money to see and over which, consequently, they exercised a certain degree of control" (p.4). Thus, during Elizabethan and Jacobean era acting companies put up much money in actors' apparel, sometimes the costumes exceeded the overall cost of the whole play. Some apparel was taken from the nobility, and the actors usually wore these expensive garments in everyday life.

Such exquisite apparel satisfied audiences' demands on realism, and costumes for the drama were more extravagant than costumes made for other plays, because they conformed to historical accuracy of events. In this regard, the 17th century drama was especially characterised by the practice of cross-dressing. This can be explained by the fact that the change of clothes reflected people's wish to overcome a particular social position. However, as the actors in those times were males, their cross-dressing expressed certain underlying reasons. For instance, Moll Cutpurse, the principal character of The Roaring Girl by Thomas Dekker and Thomas Middleton (1955), constantly cross-dresses throughout the play. This female embodies a real woman Mary Frith who wore male clothes and was known for her criminal behaviour. Therefore, cross-dressing of Moll is of great importance for the drama, as it reveals women's attempts to rise against their traditional roles and established standards of behaviour. Such wear of male clothes signifies female freedom, but, as Mary Beth Rose (1984) states, it also deprives such women as Moll of the "full social acceptance" (p.386).

As boys performed the roles of women, they implicitly reflected the fear of society over the changes in social and sexual positions of females. Contrary to Shakespeare's plays, cross-dressing of Moll reveals the character's identity; despite her disguise, her female identity is obvious throughout the play. Moll's male clothes only intensify her strength and freedom, thus her apparel shows her principles and social position, her attitude towards certain issues and relations with people. As Moll claims, "marriage is but a chopping and changing, where a maiden looses one head, and has a worse ith place" (Dekker & Middleton, 1955 2.2.41-43). Cross-dressing of Moll is utilised to portray the character's struggle against certain social norms; when she rejects the idea of changing her clothes and the style of behaviour, she wants to point at the equal positions of men and women in society.

Simultaneously, her disguise allows Moll to become a part of various social classes and to observe life from different positions. According to Howard (1994), such behaviour and disguise reveal women's rejection of the patriarchal system and male domination. The change of apparel was considered as the change of the traditional gender division, and if a woman wore male clothes, she was thought to betray her own nature. Jean Howard (1988) mentions a spinster Dorothy Clayton who was arrested, because "contrary to all honesty and womanhood [she] commonly goes about the City appareled in man's attire" (p.420). In this context, the 17th century drama reflects that the wear of male clothes was associated with female sexuality. Moll's male apparel is regarded by people as a sign of her failure, that's why society condemns this female in various crimes, such as prostitution and theft.

Thus, apparel occupies an important position in the drama of that period, as it allows the playwrights to uncover some social events and relations between genders. In particular, the drama shows that society of the 17th century regarded apparel as a tool that could assert social and gender principles, and, if a person rejected the established norms for clothing, he/she was thought to oppose to other social norms, such as marriage. As Catherine Belsey (1985) puts it, "Marriage becomes in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the site of a paradoxical struggle to create a private realm and to take control of it in the interests of a public good" (p.130). As a result, such person was excluded from society, because he/she didn't follow the appropriate style of life. According to Howard (1991), "[she] doubts that [in the public theatre] only women's chastity or women's reputations were at risk… The very practice of play going put women in positions potentially unsettling to patriarchal control" (p.72).

Pointing at the importance of apparel, Dekker and Middleton (1955) implicitly criticise wrong ideologies of society towards genders. According to the playwrights, changes of apparel demonstrate various social and cultural changes: "Now in the time of spruceness, our plays follow the niceness of our garments" (Dekker & Middleton, 1955 2.6-7). At the beginning of the play Dekker and Middleton (1955) show that Mary Fitzallard, another female character, is "disguised like a sempster" (1.1.16), her simple apparel reveals her belonging to a low class, although Mary's disguise is aimed at achieving a certain goal. As Mary realises that social norms prevent her from marrying a person she loves, she decides to change her apparel. Each time when Moll and Mary change their clothes, they stress on the significance of apparel in society they live. Their clothing shows their lifestyle and traits of character, simultaneously it uncovers foolishness of those people who are preoccupied with the established fashion standards. Sir Alexander is not able to understand Moll's wear of male clothes; he considers that such action destroys the traditional division of genders. His opinion of Moll is mainly based on her apparel, he identifies this female character with her clothing, failing to realise her true self.

Read other essays

All of our sample essays were written by students and then submitted to us to display and help others. Thanks to all the students who have submitted their work to us.