Robert Greene: [Six Plays] — Background and Themes

Catalog Subjects versus Dramatic Practice

The catalog lists this work under “English drama – Early modern and Elizabethan, 1500-1600” and “Greene, Robert, 1558?-1592.” These broad labels obscure the specific dramatic techniques visible in the excerpts. For instance, Orlando Furioso includes a stage direction: “So he beateth them all in before him, except Orgalio.” This physical comedy—a hero chasing others offstage with a severed leg—belies any simple classification as “historical” or “psychological” fiction. The play also switches registers abruptly: Orlando’s misogynistic rant in verse gives way to prose dialogue with his servant Orgalio, who comically denies being Medor. The catalog’s generic categories do not capture Greene’s blend of high rhetoric and low farce, nor his use of Italian quotations to signal learnedness. Readers should approach the plays expecting a mix of styles that resists neat generic boundaries.

The Editor’s Defense of Greene’s Character

Dickinson’s introduction is a sustained apology for Greene’s life and work. He cites Nash again: “With any notorious crime I never knew him tainted,” and argues that “circumstances as well as natural frailty made Greene what he came to be.” The excerpts do not directly show Greene’s biography, but the editor’s framing shapes how the plays are read. For example, the misogyny in Orlando’s speech—“Base female sex, sprung from black Ate’s loins”—might be taken as personal bitterness, but Dickinson would likely see it as conventional Elizabethan rhetoric. The editor also notes Greene’s “morbid self-consciousness” and “thrifty purpose to turn even his sins to pence,” suggesting that the plays may contain autobiographical echoes. However, the excerpts provide no evidence of Greene’s own life; the editorial lens is a separate layer that readers should weigh critically.

Language and Stagecraft in the Excerpts

The excerpts reveal Greene’s linguistic range. Orlando’s mad speech mixes English and Italian, the latter a direct quotation from Ariosto: “O femminile ingegno, dituttimali sede” (O feminine mind, seat of all evils). This bilingual display would have signaled learning to Elizabethan audiences. The stage directions also show practical dramaturgy: “Draws him in by the leg” and “Re-enter Orlando with a leg” demand physical comedy. The shepherd’s leg becomes a prop, and Orlando’s claim to be Hercules (“I now am mighty Hercules”) adds mock-heroic layers. The verse itself is uneven—some lines are regular iambic pentameter, others prose—suggesting Greene’s willingness to sacrifice metrical polish for theatrical effect. The excerpts do not include the full play, but they indicate that Greene’s language serves character and action more than poetic consistency.

Dickinson’s edition positions Greene as a transitional figure, but the excerpts show a playwright unafraid of crude humor and learned allusion. Readers may find it useful to compare the editor’s biographical claims with the plays’ actual content, noting where the introduction’s defensive tone colors interpretation. The six plays offer varied examples of Greene’s craft, from the romantic comedy of Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay to the historical drama of James the Fourth. This collection invites a reassessment of Greene on his own terms, not just as a footnote to Shakespeare.

I found myself thinking about Dickinson’s introduction to Greene’s strange, angry verse—how he fought so hard to be understood against the noise of his time. It reminded me, oddly, of quieter moments in The Return of Peter Grimm — Themes and Context, where old grievances soften into something almost tender. Both felt like echoes of people speaking past each other, trying to find a way back.