They used almost the same dramatic conventions and techniques. According to you, in what way is Shakespeare different from Christopher Marlowe?
The scope of verses and character are two. Marlowe's lines often reach rhetorical perfection but nuances are often not there. His characters tend to have fewer sides than Shakespeares and lack the latter's ambiguity and philosophical comparisons. Henry V is Shakespeare's nod to Marlowe.
Indeed Stanley. It's about depth, the convention and the departure from the convention.
Zied Ben Amor
I have read that Christopher Marlowe was deemed the towering figure of his time and I can’t wrap my head around this notion. I have taught both to undergrads and taught their poetry as well as their plays and in my opinion, Marlowe pales next to the least read of Shakespeare’s works. As to why I think so, there’s plenty that I can’t pin down in a short answer. Shakespeare’s literature is far more sophisticated, timeless, mature, aware, intelligent, etc. There’s no way Marlowe compares to the Bard.
Worth noting that Shakespeare's use of comedy, even in his tragedies, led many not to realise his overall greatness. Marlowe used little if any comedy and gave the impression of higher aims rather than a more limited scope. Although his verse was written to be exclaimed, it has none of the verbal dexterity of Shakespeare or not much. We remember some of his rhetoric 'face that launched a thousand ships', but not much.
I love Marlowe but I adore Shakespeare. This is my way of starting the debate by playing with the words of Alexandre Pop's famous quote. I was once intrigued with how the twist of fate has made Marlowe disappear from the artistic scene at such early age; killed in a brawl over a bar tab . Some critics went further to suggest that the gigantic image of the Bard wouldn't have crystalized had Marlowe stayed a contemporary rival!
For one thing, the depth, breadth, and sheer density of William Shakespeare's entire performative oeuvre from historical to tragic to comedic dramatic works provides the most remarkable and striking contrast to Christopher Marlowe's work, which nonetheless epitomizes the best of the English Renaissance revenge play. In some respects, it might be stated that Shakespeare is a magna cum laude graduate of the Universal School of World Dramatic Texts, while Christopher Marlowe is a summa cum laude graduate of Great Britain's School of Drama!
Marlowe's classical and theological studies have provided him with much deeper insight into the meaning of the Renaissance, hence he is best in being the perfect image of awaking. Marlowe's verse is seen as more poetic, despite the fact that he has written much lesser than what Shakespeare has achieved. Shakespeare's plays and poetry have dealt with more issues of general human activities than Marlowe's. But certainly, they are equally great pillars of the Renaissance England.
Marlowe was an over reacher and Shakespeare is Romantic. But no Marlowe no Shakespeare@Zied Ben Amo
Mubasher Mahdi : Shakespeare, a Romantic? The Bard died in 1616; The Romantic Period is 1780 to 1830?
The major difference between the two lies in their lyrical experience and, consequently, in the quality of their verse. Shakespeare became principally different from Marlowe in the plays written just after the plague years, when he started to practice sonneteering. Three of his first masterpieces, written within a year in1595 in three major genres, reveal the difference; Romeo and Juliet, Midsummer Night's Dream, Richard II. Since that time Marlowe's 'mighty line' had grown archaic.
As an ambitious man, the majority of Marlowe's plays convey an autobiographical note.
I am quoting a dialogue from " Othello " : I have plucked the kisses of emotions from her lips. Moreover, ages in English literature are not so rigidly defined. Shakespeare ' s loftines and his grand style along with his fabulous verse makes his readers intoxicated@ Ahmed Hassan
To reply the question I would like to first convey my concern about anwering. I am not in favour to comapre the great people of any branch, because they are all great in their own perspectives. Shakespeare and Christopher Marlowe are contemporary and Marlowe is far more educated (University wits) than Shakespeare, yet the world knows Hamlet, Macbeth, Romeo and Juiiet, but very few people know Tamburlaine the Great; Dido, Queen of Carthage; Edward II; The Massacre at Paris; and The Jew of Malta, why? Becuse shakespeare could relate to the contemporary people more closely than Marlowe. Marlowe's genius and highly congnitive mind prevented him to produce literature for common people.William Shakespeare and Christopher Marlowe were both writers of the Elizabethan stage, living in the same town of London, at the same time, and they wrote plays while working with the same people. Their strongest similarity was in their work. They both had an innate ability to write about love, great tragedies, comedies, drama and poetry with a similar style called blank verse. Before Marlowe’s time, blank verse was not an accepted verse for drama, but he was able to substitute the regular stresses of earlier blank verses and created a more departed, sincere verse. Shakespeare later followed Marlowe’s example and was able to master the ordinary rhythm of this new style of…show more content… On the other hand Shakespeare was self-schooled after the age of 15, showed little interest in current ideals or philosophic ideas. Shakespeare used his personal observation and experiences to understand human nature. He had amore objective view of reality than Marlowe did. When we compare some of Marlowe’s tragedies with those of Shakespeare’s we discover several more similarities. Both Marlowe and Shakespeare create their hero’s as tragic heroes with some sort of flaw in their character that eventually causes their demise, a demise that would cause feelings of pity for the hero. One difference in the two writers is that Shakespeare liked to use the supernatural to enhance the sense of mystery, for example the witches in Macbeth or the ghost in Hamlet. Where as Marlowe’s tragedies had no such mystery and one could follow the course of the events and foresee the tragic doom without much difficulty. The two writers also differed when it came to some of their development of characters. Shakespeare was far superior to Marlowe in the developing the internal and spiritual conflict in the minds of his heroes. Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Macbeth for example are far more well rounded individuals than those in Marlowe’s writings. Also it should be noted that Shakespeare was able to supply a lot of secondary characters in his tragedies like Horatio or Kent, as well as several female characters like Cleopatra, Desdemona, Lady Macbeth and others. Shakespeare explored vareid direction of human nature, revenge and love. He was less interested in didactic writing and he was successful in digging the conflicts of his heroes which the spectator could feel with empathy. Marlow was rather conservative and his Dr. Faustus or Tumberlaine all had fallen and fallen for their own folly. Shakesprear's characters rather modern in nature and their folly is of decision and Hamartia. Speciality of Shakespreare which is the fundamental quality of him , I think, is common subject choice. Shakespreare was genius but Marlowe was erudite. One thing I would also to add that Shakespeare wrote under professional point of view, to earn his bread and butter, and Marlowe had no such demand. Shakespeae was more dilligent. Upto the age or 29-30 if we compare Shakespreare and Marlowe, we can asily see by the time of 1593-94 Shakespeare wrote 3Chronology
- The Two Gentlemen of Verona (1589–1591)
- The Taming of the Shrew (1590–1591)
- Henry VI, Part 2 (1591)
- Henry VI, Part 3 (1591)
- Henry VI, Part 1 (1591–1592)
- Titus Andronicus (1591–1592)
- Richard III (1592–1593)
- Edward III (1592–1593)
- The Comedy of Errors (1594) Where as Marlowe had a few. These are the personal differences of the two different people of same time, but not qualitative distinction.
They were contemporaries, but Marlowe was senior in terms of maturity and stagecraft. Without doubt, they were collaborators; some say that Shakespeare was greatly influenced by Marlowe, his senior. This argument dovetails well into the theory advanced by some that Shakespearean scripts have multiple authors.
For interesting "factional" revelations on Marlowe-Shakespeare collaboration, see the movie Shakespeare in Love (1998).
Marlowe in Edward the Second proved again he was a master in the mechanics of bitterness, empathy mixed with depictions of unmitigated ferocity. Marlowe's obsession with cruelty -compare Barabas with Shylock - ultimately diminished his tragic protagonists' complexity as humans and the intricacy and variety of influeneces on his character's decisions. Brutus in Julius Caesar, however, is like a Marlowe character in betraying his own noble nature as a means to what he misconceived as a higher mission.
Well,many critics already regard Marlowe as genius par excellence .Not to mention him being one of the University Wits ,this elevated his rank equally to-if not-over Shakespeare.@Zied bin Amor
an Marlovian theory in Shakespeare's authorship holds that the Elizabethan poet and playwright Christopher Marlowe was the principal author of the poems and plays attributed to him by William Shakespeare. Moreover, the theory holds that Marlow did not die Deptford on May 30, 1593, as historical records indicate, but that his death was a falsified one.
The Marlophones (as those who support the theory are usually called) base their argument on the presumed deviations surrounding Marlowe's reported death and on the significant influence that, according to most scholars, Marlowe's work had on Shakespeare's works. They also point to the coincidence that although they were born only two months earlier, the first time that William Shakespeare was known to be associated with any literary work at all was with the publication of Venus and Adonis only a week or two after Marlowe's death.
Marlowe's death may be shrouded in mystery but more importantly his absence from Cambridge and then award of his degree on the intervention of Queen Elizabeth is still more a mystery. But on his death the remarks of Pope Gregory are also questionable@Ali Muhammad
Born in the same year, William Shakespeare and Christopher Marlowe provide a great study in compare and contrast. But the most important difference is that Marlowe has worked on some amazing translations of Ovid and Lucan. If Marlowe would have lived longer, we would have received many invaluable translations of the World Literature much early.
In terms of their mastery of Eglish, they stand on the same ground. But when it comes to tackling human nature, Marlowe seems to be interested in the darker side of it whereas Shakespeare tries to shed light on all its constituents.
Kamal Bhattacharyya Part of your answer is simply plagiarized from: https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Compare-Contrast-Shakespeare-and-Marlowe-PK4USXSDJ3DQ
You didn't even think to edit out the telltale "…show more content…" which appeared on the webpage.
It was an essay and information and contents were taken from several sources, it is not a research paper, you should be aware of the fact that any article when declare radical but taken from others is called plagiarism. And I did not claim my article to be my own.
Kamal Bhattacharyya When you copy-and-paste and post on a public forum you should still indicate your sources. Why? Well, for starters someone might wish to cite your post (see the links below) and if it's largely culled from other sources the content would be misattributed to you.
https://utas.libguides.com/c.php?g=498348&p=3412833
https://rasmussen.libanswers.com/faq/90544
Preeti Oza : Having suffered Latin in high school, I noticed that all of Shakespeare's Roman plays were taken from Livy. (Nothing to his detriment, just an observation).
Marlowe is a great university wit who proved his presence beside Shakespeare. Yet,the difference lies in the fact that Shakespeare wrote about immortal subject matters that till now we find applicable and acceptable too.
According to my knowledge the source of Shakespeare's history plays is " Plutarch " @Mark Sitkowski
I am interested in the authorship controversy. I am not a partisan in that long-standing debate. I will note in Shakespeare's column that I have clients in prison with no high school diploma who read complex literature deeply and extensively. One is on death row. I just hope as many now feel confirmed that it was truly Shakespeare and not the Earl of Oxford, who was brilliant but a reprobate.
Mubasher Mahdi : Plutarch's relevant work was a comparison of famous Greeks with famous Romans. I guess Livy's histories run parallel and include the same personages so, perhaps, we're both right.
Christopher Marlowe was always getting into trouble serious enough for him to be imprisoned several times. In striking contrast, William Shakespeare had a happy marriage and a normal home life, for the most part, and he kept a busy full-time work schedule writing poetical and well-researched dramatic works, as well as performing as a professional stage actor.
The main topic in this brief article at the Utah Shakespeare Festival website is "The Controversy of Shakespeare and Marlowe":
https://www.bard.org/news/the-controversy-of-shakespeare-and-marlowe
"THE CONTROVERSY OF SHAKESPEARE AND MARLOWE"
May 02, 2017 24 Likes
BY BROOKE VLASICH
📷Christopher Marlowe
"Any celebrity can tell you that with a great deal of fame and respect comes something else: controversy. William Shakespeare is no exception, and speculation continually follows the playwright, especially since we know so little about him. Only a few certain facts are known, and even fewer documents survive regarding Shakespeare. But Shakespeare isn’t the only playwright during his time period to be surrounded by speculation. His contemporary, Christopher Marlowe, is a victim of the same circumstances. Rumors about Marlowe range from espionage to collaboration. Who exactly was Marlowe and what connections does he have to Shakespeare? Join us as we take a closer look into both of these mysterious playwrights. According to Bill Bryson’s biography Shakespeare: The Illustrated and Updated Edition, we cannot be exactly certain when Shakespeare arrived in London, but we do know that Marlowe was an upcoming playwright in the 1590s, especially after Tamburlaine the Great. Unfortunately, Marlowe also had a short temper, and in September 1589, he became involved in a fight with innkeeper William Bradley. Playwright friend Thomas Watson stepped in and killed Bradley in a duel. Both Marlowe and Watson ended up in prison, and this wasn’t the only time Marlowe ran into trouble with the law. In 1593, anti-immigration notices featured lines from popular dramas, including Marlowe’s Tamburlaine the Great, to dissuade people from seeing these shows.
Marlowe was also accused by author Thomas Kyd of being an atheist, which led to questioning before the Privy Council. After all this, Marlowe still argued over a bill at a bar and began stabbing another bar patron who in self-defense turned the knife on Marlowe and killed him. He was only twenty-nine years old. At this point in time, Shakespeare was gaining a great deal of recognition for his poetry and had the patronage of an aristocrat, but he decided to return to theatre by writing comedies including Love’s Labour’s Lost, The Two Gentlemen of Verona, and The Comedy of Errors. Marlowe, however, had focused on ambitious dramas including The Jew of Malta and The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus. Marlowe’s death has left historians and literary scholars wondering what would have happened if he had lived.
📷William Shakespeare
Some believe Marlowe was assassinated by a request from the Crown. Others think that Marlowe’s death was faked, and that he is the real author of Shakespeare’s plays. The theory behind this is that Marlowe faked his death, escaped, and hid so he could continue to work under the patronage of Thomas Walsingham.
During Shakespeare and Marlowe’s time in London, the theatrical scene was incredibly busy with intense demands on playwrights and actors. Shakespeare in Love which is enjoying a regional premiere at the Festival this summer, develops the possibility of collaboration between the two playwrights, which was common as playwrights struggled to keep up with the pace of theatrical productions. The play suggests a relationship between Shakespeare and Marlowe as Marlowe mentors the new playwright while he woos Viola and writes his masterpiece Romeo and Juliet. Putting Shakespeare in Love, is this story of Marlowe true? Was Marlowe’s death faked so he could continue to write the literary masterpieces we attribute to Shakespeare? Bryson indicates that the man behind this theory, Calvin Hoffman, opened Thomas Walsingham’s tomb to uncover manuscripts and letters to prove his case. He found no materials, however, but still made this case in The Murder of the Man Who Was ‘Shakespeare.’
Whether or not the accusations are true, one thing is certain: Whomever [sic*] wrote Shakespeare’s work, whether it was the playwright or not, the elaborate words, plotlines, and characters continue to resonate with audiences, directors, and actors worldwide. Both the compilation of plays from Shakespeare and Marlowe will always be integrated in our lives and our world as we continue to study, perform, and experience them."
*To be grammatically correct, the subject of this sentence should be "Whoever". Evidently, the author of this interestingly-written piece is a student whose effort to achieve 'perfection' is nonetheless praiseworthy.
Source link:
https://www.bard.org/news/the-controversy-of-shakespeare-and-marlowe
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publications