Lord Byron is most prominently known and celebrated as a poet and cultural icon. His long poems (Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage, Don Juan, The Giaour) helped define the British Romantic movement, and he inspired generations of writers, including Mary and Percy Shelley, Letitia Landon, Tennyson, the Bronte sisters, and many others. He was also personally involved in the national liberation movements of Italy and Greece, and he became a symbol for these revolutions.
As a student, I was familiar with Byron’s poetic and political legacy from the time I first encountered Byron’s writings in high school. But I was surprised to learn of Byron’s interest and involvement in the theater. I was even more surprised to discover how little Byron’s contribution to the theater is taught in traditional British survey courses and upper-level courses in Romanticism. So, as a Byron scholar, I try to bring some light to Byron’s dramas whenever I can. Specifically, I use Byron’s dramas to help students think about the nature of drama and theater and how to portray characters on stage.
Byron and the Theater
Byron was a prolific dramatist and theater enthusiast. During his years of fame, he served as a board member at the Drury Lane Theater, and he helped select plays for production. He also wrote eight dramas – more than any other Romantic poet – using a range of dramatic forms. Several of his plays were produced by leading 19th-century actors, and the plays had long production histories throughout the 19th century.
Byron’s dramas have also influenced literary and theater studies. He coined the term “a mental theater,” and this idea helped define the concept of a “closet drama,” which is a play that is produced for a small audience or is a play that is meant to be read rather than performed. Some of Byron’s dramas – particularly Manfred – are considered canonical texts of the Romantic literary movement, and they are rivaled only by Percy Shelley’s The Cenci and Prometheus Unbound in their importance to the period.
As a result, I believe the prominence and influence of Byron’s dramas make them central to the study of Byron’s literary and cultural legacy and also to Romanticism more generally.
Marino Faliero
In 1821, Byron published the historical drama Marino Faliero, which is about a 14th-century Venetian Doge (ruler or mayor of Venice) who joins a group of conspirators and plots to overthrow (murder) the Venetian Senate. Byron was inspired to write this play when he visited Faliero’s monument in Venice, and he learned about Faliero’s history. He also saw many parallel’s between Faliero’s plot to overthrow the Venetian Senate and a recent (failed) revolutionary attempt in London known as the Cato Street Conspiracy, and he used this historical drama to reflect on these recent events.
In the drama, a senator writes an offensive slur against Faliero’s wife (Angiolina), and the senator is sentenced with a light punishment. This infuriates Faliero because he believes the punishment should have been much stronger, and he feels personally insulted that is family’s honor was not taken more seriously. In response, he joins a group of conspirators, and he uses their ploy to take revenge against the Senate.
Throughout the drama, Angiolina stands up against the Doge’s anger, and she recommends forgiveness. By doing so, she offers an alternative response, and, politically speaking, her recommendation comes across as promoting traditional political reform instead of violence. Angiolina criticizes the Doge’s plan for violence, and, by extension, many scholars argue that she is also advancing Byron’s criticism of the Cato Street Conspiracy (which attempted to reform England through a massacre of the Parliament). This stance makes Angiolina the moral authority of the drama, and she provides a vision of political reform that stands in contrast to these violent revolutionaries.
However, when the drama was staged at Drury Lane Theatre, the political criticism was greatly curtailed. For example, in Byron’s drama, the Doge complains that his authority was “trampled” and “degraded” by the light punishment. The conspirators also criticize senators as oppressive tyrants by calling them scorpions and snakes. All of these lines were cut from the performance script, and without them, there is no clear political reason for why the Doge and the conspirators should rebel against the Senate. Without these statements of political dissatisfaction, there is no reason for Angiolina to condemn the rebellion.
Much of Angiolina’s criticism was also cut, because her political criticism was no longer necessary. These cuts fundamentally transformed her character. She was no longer a Roman matron who presented a vision of personal and political action. Instead, what remained of her character was only the portion where he lamented that her husband was overreacting to an offensive comment made about her.
These changes transformed the drama from an intellectual debate about violence as a tool for radical political reform to the story of an innocent woman’s wounded virtue and the failed attempt of her infuriated husband to find justice.
The Two Foscari
A second Venetian drama, The Two Foscari, published in 1822, depicts another revenge plot in 15th-century Venice. In this drama, a powerful senator named Loredano schemes against the Doge’s only son (named Jacopo), who is accused of treason. The drama has a backstory that is not completely revealed, but it seems like Jacopo was caught collaborating with an enemy leader, or perhaps the letters were forged. Also, Loredano believes the Foscaris have previously murdered members of his family, and he is possibly using Jacopo’s treason as an opportunity to take revenge on the Foscari family.
What makes the drama suspenseful and interesting is that we see Loredano manipulate the judicial system in totally legal ways so he can have his revenge. The Doge (Jacopo’s father) is aware of this, but he is unable to stop the process. And he is ultimately forced to lead a judicial proceeding that sentences his son to death. Eventually, he too dies because he is overcome with grief.
Throughout Byron’s drama, there is much to criticize, and Marina (Jacopo’s wife) presents much of the criticism. She criticizes Loredano for his cruelty, other senators for following his lead, and the whole judicial system for allowing this injustice/revenge. She also criticizes the Doge for putting his civic duty ahead of the duty to his family and his son. And she criticizes Jacopo (who refuses to run away with Marina) for stoically accepting his punishment for this made-up charge of treason and for claiming that it is patriotic to follow the Senate’s punishment.
This criticism aligns Marina’s character to both the conspirators from Marino Faliero, who criticize the Venetian state, and also to Angiolina, who serves as the moral center of the play. This criticism makes Marina a powerful character. She criticizes the beliefs of the Foscari by arguing that their patriotism to Venice should not be more important than their love of the family. And she presents political criticism against the state when she points out that the judicial process is being manipulated for personal revenge.
The Two Foscari does not have a long stage history (it was produced in London at the Covent Garden Theatre in 1838-39), but it too was greatly transformed. Theater managers eliminated much of Marina’s political criticism (as they had done with Angiolina in Marino Faliero), and the drama was transformed into a family tragedy. The revised play depicts the consequences of Jacopo’s treason: he brings grief and sadness to his father and his wife. Loredano continues to enact his revenge in the staged version, but Marina’s criticism of him and of the Venetian state was softened. Instead, Marina’s powerful role as critic and moral authority was transformed into that of a mourner for her husband and the Foscari family.
Teaching Drama
Byron’s dramas and the changes that were implemented for the London theaters provide rich opportunities for discussion with students. Here are a few examples:
1. How does the written text of a “drama” differ from the “performance script” of a stage play?
Both of these dramas have two versions: Byron’s text and the performance script. The drama is characterized by long speeches that portray the character’s thoughts and inner psychology in elaborate poetic form. This style of writing aligns Romantic drama with cliche version of Romantic drama as “poetry in dramatic form.” Students use these textual differences to explore the question of whether Byron (and other Romantic poets) are writing scripts for the theater or only dramatic poetry.
In contrast, the performance script must provide opportunities for action and dialog on stage. Some of the text that was altered helps create a more entertaining theatrical experience (for example, long speeches were cut to allow for more on-stage action). But many cuts to the text also fundamentally changed the political situation and the identity of female characters. Students review these changes, and they evaluate whether theater managers were trying to make the play more entertaining, or if they were attempting alter the political content of the play and the gender identity/role of specific characters.
2. What was Byron’s political stance, and how did this compare to the prevailing political atmosphere at the time?
Some scholars have argued that Byron aligned himself with violent revolutionaries in these dramas. They argue that Byron presented his own political opinion when characters criticized the Senate and pursued a violent rebellion. But other scholars argue that Byron aligned himself with more conservative voices, such as Angiolina and Marina, and that he meant to criticize, not condone, the actions of these violent characters. Whatever Byron’s stance may have been, theater managers removed many of the political, revolutionary aspects of the dramas, and they transformed them into stories about families, private relationships, jealousy, revenge, and individual suffering.
Students analyze the political commentary of Byron’s drama, and they try to decide which stance Byron was taking. They also compare the two versions of the drama, and they evaluate whether theater managers were attempting to tone down the political commentary, or if they were trying to make the plays more entertaining and more politically acceptable by transforming them into family stories of love, revenge, and suffering. By examining the politics of both versions, students evaluate Byron’s political beliefs, they compare his political beliefs to the prevailing attitude of the time, and they reflect on the expectations of audiences and theater managers.
3. What is Byron’s depiction of women?
Many readers and scholars have criticized Byron for his under-developed or negative depiction of female characters in his poetry. They also point out offensive statements Byron made about women in his private letters. Because of this, Byron has been accused of sexism and misogyny, and his writings have been considered “dangerous” and “inappropriate” for young women to read. Yet, his historical dramas depict powerful female characters who feel empowered to speak against senators, criticize political institutions, and serve as the moral authority of the drama.
After reading these dramas, students analyze Byron’s depiction of female characters, and they compare their analysis to that of Romantic scholars. Students also compare how these characters were portrayed on the stage, and they evaluate whether theater managers were correcting Byron’s faults or if they were trying to portray these characters so they could conform to expectations of Victorian femininity?
Lirim Neziroski, Ph.D., MBA is a higher education administrator, education consultant, and previous faculty member with expertise in higher education leadership, instructional technology, curriculum development, academic assessment, and leadership of academic and online programs. Contact Lirim for consulting, individual mentoring, assistance with writing and editing, and public speaking services.
Lirim Neziroski 
Leave a comment