"Just and Sharp Vengeance": The Question of Justice in the Underworld in the "Spanish Tragedy" .52-3). about Don Andrea's fate, whether he should spend his eternity "walking with lovers in our fields of love", or whether he "must go to the martial fields" (1.1.42, 47). in the play he can easily be overlooked for the revenge plots that take place between the living characters, his importance should not be understated Don Andrea serves as the instigator and chorus for the revenge plots, which are all under the title of his own Revenge is so important, why can't the underworld decide where to spend eternity? Many episodes of the play suggest that the underworld operates as an inefficient system. The question is thus one of Kyd's intentions: The Spanish Tragedy is either a well-intentioned but unflattering depiction of the underworld, or a deliberate declaration of its inefficiency. Questioning and exploring the fairness and efficiency of the underworld, this essay argues that the conflict surrounding Don Andrea's fate positions the play as a critique of the dominant conception of the afterlife in 16th-century England. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The most problematic depiction of justice in the underworld occurs at the end of the show, when Don Andrea condemns all of his friends and enemies to their fate in the underworld. He asks if he "can gather [his] friends in a pleasant way, / And on [his] enemies work just and sharp vengeance" and states his desire to "be judge and condemn them to disorders" (4.5.15-6, 29 - 30). Although the opera centers on Don Andrea's quest for revenge, it is unclear who or what gives him the authority to decide the fate of others, particularly the fate of those who were not involved in his death. While his acts against the characters directly involved in his death are readable as acts of revenge, it is less clear why Don Andrea assumes authority over the fate of those not involved. Kyd therefore represents underworld justice as a system that is not based on impartiality: no character expresses any objective judgment on the relationship between the characters' morality and their eternal condemnation. When Don Andrea explains in detail how he will grant "sweet pleasure to the eternal days" to Bel-Imperia, Isabella and Hieronimo (who commit murder, suicide and both respectively) and after sadistically explaining (in gruesome detail) his plan to damn the rest , Revenge simply agrees, stating “then let us hasten to meet thy friends and foes: / To put thy friends at ease, the rest in trouble” (4.5.24, 45-6). He takes it upon himself to carry out Don Andrea's will, without any evidence to guarantee the correctness of his judgement. The work also questions the relationship between justice and revenge. Why is Don Andrea allowed to avenge his death? Why is he sent to Revenge? The main justification of the text is that Don Andrea's death was itself unjust, caused by "young Don Balthazar with merciless rage, / Taking advantage of his enemy's anguish" (1.4.23-4). It may be relevant that Andrew was briefly barred from entering the underworld due to his "burial rites not being performed" in a timely manner, but Horace later provides a poignantaccount of how he buried his dear friend (1.1.21). . The only apparent objection to the justice of Andrea's death is that Don Balthazar was unsportsmanlike in the murder. However, it must be remembered that Andrea's death occurred on the battlefield, where everyone participates in conscious anticipation of their own murder. Andrea, after all, was ambushed and killed as Horace was, or even secretly poisoned as so many characters are in revenge comedies. Andrea knew what was at stake. The ambiguity surrounding Don Andrea's fate forces readers to question the efficiency and usefulness of the underworld system. Since Kyd's sixteenth-century audience would expect to see the underworld represented as the legitimate reality of the afterlife, it is provocative that the work presents the process of justice in the underworld as based on inconsistent and even flippant judgments. For example, Pluto allowed Don Andrea's fate to be decided by Proserpina, when he "begged that she alone could give [Don Andrea his] destiny", whereupon "Pluto was pleased, and sealed it with a kiss" ( 1.1.79-80). The inherent meaninglessness of the scenario – Pluto determining a man's fate according to the fantasy of his lover – calls into question the legitimacy of the underworld. How could such an indecisive and somewhat arbitrary system be functional? It is also significant that the roles occupied by Don Andrea - lover and soldier - are not mutually exclusive. Yet, Kyd presents that duality as sufficient to cause confusion and indecision in the underworld, leaving Don Andrea without a determined destiny. When "the manner of [Don Andrea's] life and death" was discussed, Minos describes that he "lived and died in love, / And for his love he tried the fortune of wars, / And by the fortune of war he lost both love and life,” after which Rhadamanth and Aeacus argue over different interpretations (1.1.37-40). Could something as insignificant as the coexistence of a lover and a soldier be enough to unravel the underworld system? Of course, the discussion between Rhadamanth and Aeacus over Don Andrea's fate is not proof that his fate cannot be decided, as they decided to send him to Pluto for sentencing. Yet the fact that Pluto does not take the decision seriously and allows Proserpina's whim to decide his fate, as well as the fact that Don Andrea's fate has not yet been revealed at the end of the opera implies that Don Andrea's fate it is actually uncertain. The underworld is unable to understand Don Andrea's character because he simultaneously occupies the role of lover and fighter. How can someone's fate be decided in such black and white terms? The fact that this question is what fuels the conflict over Don Andrea's fate suggests that Kyd undermines the concept of gangland justice by portraying it as an inefficient method of determining one's eternal destiny. The very structure of the work alludes to the imperfection of the underworld. In particular, the work presents revenge as devastating and endless. For most characters, "though death has ended their misery, / [vengeance] will begin their unending tragedy" (4.5.47-8). The fact that Don Andrea's thirst for revenge can determine the fate of so many characters raises the possibility of an infinite regress. If Don Andrea can condemn other characters after (and because of) his death, it follows that every character who dies will be given the power to take revenge in the afterlife, a situation that could lead to mass death and destruction. The plot of the play, therefore, depends on the idea of revenge as destructive and infinite - after all, revenge causes the death of most of the characters

Topic > "Just and Sharp Vengeance": The Question of Justice in the Underworld in the "Spanish Tragedy" .52-3). about Don Andrea's fate, whether he should spend his eternity "walking with lovers in our fields of love", or whether he "must go to the martial fields" (1.1.42, 47). in the play he can easily be overlooked for the revenge plots that take place between the living characters, his importance should not be understated Don Andrea serves as the instigator and chorus for the revenge plots, which are all under the title of his own Revenge is so important, why can't the underworld decide where to spend eternity? Many episodes of the play suggest that the underworld operates as an inefficient system. The question is thus one of Kyd's intentions: The Spanish Tragedy is either a well-intentioned but unflattering depiction of the underworld, or a deliberate declaration of its inefficiency. Questioning and exploring the fairness and efficiency of the underworld, this essay argues that the conflict surrounding Don Andrea's fate positions the play as a critique of the dominant conception of the afterlife in 16th-century England. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The most problematic depiction of justice in the underworld occurs at the end of the show, when Don Andrea condemns all of his friends and enemies to their fate in the underworld. He asks if he "can gather [his] friends in a pleasant way, / And on [his] enemies work just and sharp vengeance" and states his desire to "be judge and condemn them to disorders" (4.5.15-6, 29 - 30). Although the opera centers on Don Andrea's quest for revenge, it is unclear who or what gives him the authority to decide the fate of others, particularly the fate of those who were not involved in his death. While his acts against the characters directly involved in his death are readable as acts of revenge, it is less clear why Don Andrea assumes authority over the fate of those not involved. Kyd therefore represents underworld justice as a system that is not based on impartiality: no character expresses any objective judgment on the relationship between the characters' morality and their eternal condemnation. When Don Andrea explains in detail how he will grant "sweet pleasure to the eternal days" to Bel-Imperia, Isabella and Hieronimo (who commit murder, suicide and both respectively) and after sadistically explaining (in gruesome detail) his plan to damn the rest , Revenge simply agrees, stating “then let us hasten to meet thy friends and foes: / To put thy friends at ease, the rest in trouble” (4.5.24, 45-6). He takes it upon himself to carry out Don Andrea's will, without any evidence to guarantee the correctness of his judgement. The work also questions the relationship between justice and revenge. Why is Don Andrea allowed to avenge his death? Why is he sent to Revenge? The main justification of the text is that Don Andrea's death was itself unjust, caused by "young Don Balthazar with merciless rage, / Taking advantage of his enemy's anguish" (1.4.23-4). It may be relevant that Andrew was briefly barred from entering the underworld due to his "burial rites not being performed" in a timely manner, but Horace later provides a poignantaccount of how he buried his dear friend (1.1.21). . The only apparent objection to the justice of Andrea's death is that Don Balthazar was unsportsmanlike in the murder. However, it must be remembered that Andrea's death occurred on the battlefield, where everyone participates in conscious anticipation of their own murder. Andrea, after all, was ambushed and killed as Horace was, or even secretly poisoned as so many characters are in revenge comedies. Andrea knew what was at stake. The ambiguity surrounding Don Andrea's fate forces readers to question the efficiency and usefulness of the underworld system. Since Kyd's sixteenth-century audience would expect to see the underworld represented as the legitimate reality of the afterlife, it is provocative that the work presents the process of justice in the underworld as based on inconsistent and even flippant judgments. For example, Pluto allowed Don Andrea's fate to be decided by Proserpina, when he "begged that she alone could give [Don Andrea his] destiny", whereupon "Pluto was pleased, and sealed it with a kiss" ( 1.1.79-80). The inherent meaninglessness of the scenario – Pluto determining a man's fate according to the fantasy of his lover – calls into question the legitimacy of the underworld. How could such an indecisive and somewhat arbitrary system be functional? It is also significant that the roles occupied by Don Andrea - lover and soldier - are not mutually exclusive. Yet, Kyd presents that duality as sufficient to cause confusion and indecision in the underworld, leaving Don Andrea without a determined destiny. When "the manner of [Don Andrea's] life and death" was discussed, Minos describes that he "lived and died in love, / And for his love he tried the fortune of wars, / And by the fortune of war he lost both love and life,” after which Rhadamanth and Aeacus argue over different interpretations (1.1.37-40). Could something as insignificant as the coexistence of a lover and a soldier be enough to unravel the underworld system? Of course, the discussion between Rhadamanth and Aeacus over Don Andrea's fate is not proof that his fate cannot be decided, as they decided to send him to Pluto for sentencing. Yet the fact that Pluto does not take the decision seriously and allows Proserpina's whim to decide his fate, as well as the fact that Don Andrea's fate has not yet been revealed at the end of the opera implies that Don Andrea's fate it is actually uncertain. The underworld is unable to understand Don Andrea's character because he simultaneously occupies the role of lover and fighter. How can someone's fate be decided in such black and white terms? The fact that this question is what fuels the conflict over Don Andrea's fate suggests that Kyd undermines the concept of gangland justice by portraying it as an inefficient method of determining one's eternal destiny. The very structure of the work alludes to the imperfection of the underworld. In particular, the work presents revenge as devastating and endless. For most characters, "though death has ended their misery, / [vengeance] will begin their unending tragedy" (4.5.47-8). The fact that Don Andrea's thirst for revenge can determine the fate of so many characters raises the possibility of an infinite regress. If Don Andrea can condemn other characters after (and because of) his death, it follows that every character who dies will be given the power to take revenge in the afterlife, a situation that could lead to mass death and destruction. The plot of the play, therefore, depends on the idea of revenge as destructive and infinite - after all, revenge causes the death of most of the characters - but the, 1998.