Javascript must be enabled to continue!
The Alchemical Imagination in Ben Jonson’s The Alchemist
View through CrossRef
This paper explores the alchemical imagination in Ben Jonson’s The Alchemist . In the Renaissance, alchemy was a kind of natural philosophy that contributed to the development of modern science. As The Alchemist was a product of widespread alchemical knowledge in Renaissance England, there are multiple symbolic representations of alchemy in the play. Subtle and Face define each other as a homunculus that is created by Paracelsus and looks like a human being but much smaller. Paracelsus, an alchemist and physician in the Renaissance, mentions that a homunculus is created by art (i.e. alchemy), putting the semen of a man in a cucurbit to putrefy along with horse dung for forty days. Thus, the play implies that Face and Subtle can be homunculi created in the great cucurbit, London, corrupted both morally and physically. The behaviour of characters filled with desire accelerates corruption in London, which is important for regeneration in the play as Paracelsus describes corruption as the first step and an essential process for regeneration. In the meantime, the dramatis personae experience the process of transmutation in Lovewit’s mansion, which is not only an imaginary space but also a space of transmutation. Therefore, Lovewit’s mansion becomes both a theatre and laboratory in which the characters attempt to transform their identities. With regard to this, John Shanahan argues that The Alchemist represents two cultures between arts and sciences. Therefore, the play seems to represent the influence that alchemy has on society and, as Justin Kolb explains, is a product of alchemical practices and thought in Renaissance England.
The British and American Language and Literature Association of Korea
Title: The Alchemical Imagination in Ben Jonson’s The Alchemist
Description:
This paper explores the alchemical imagination in Ben Jonson’s The Alchemist .
In the Renaissance, alchemy was a kind of natural philosophy that contributed to the development of modern science.
As The Alchemist was a product of widespread alchemical knowledge in Renaissance England, there are multiple symbolic representations of alchemy in the play.
Subtle and Face define each other as a homunculus that is created by Paracelsus and looks like a human being but much smaller.
Paracelsus, an alchemist and physician in the Renaissance, mentions that a homunculus is created by art (i.
e.
alchemy), putting the semen of a man in a cucurbit to putrefy along with horse dung for forty days.
Thus, the play implies that Face and Subtle can be homunculi created in the great cucurbit, London, corrupted both morally and physically.
The behaviour of characters filled with desire accelerates corruption in London, which is important for regeneration in the play as Paracelsus describes corruption as the first step and an essential process for regeneration.
In the meantime, the dramatis personae experience the process of transmutation in Lovewit’s mansion, which is not only an imaginary space but also a space of transmutation.
Therefore, Lovewit’s mansion becomes both a theatre and laboratory in which the characters attempt to transform their identities.
With regard to this, John Shanahan argues that The Alchemist represents two cultures between arts and sciences.
Therefore, the play seems to represent the influence that alchemy has on society and, as Justin Kolb explains, is a product of alchemical practices and thought in Renaissance England.
Related Results
Ben Jonson on Father Thomas Wright
Ben Jonson on Father Thomas Wright
This article reassesses Ben Jonson's relationship to the Roman-Catholic priest and missionary Thomas Wright (c. 1561–1623). Wright plays two roles in critical accounts of Jonson's ...
Judging Jonson: Ben Jonson's Satirical Self-Defense in Poetaster
Judging Jonson: Ben Jonson's Satirical Self-Defense in Poetaster
This essay argues that Ben Jonson's antagonism with his audience in the comical satires was at least in part related to his translation of the satirist to the theater. Whereas prin...
“Red silence”: Ben Jonson and the Breath of Sound
“Red silence”: Ben Jonson and the Breath of Sound
In the prologue to Every Man in His Humour, Ben Jonson dismissed sound effects in favour of the spoken word; yet, throughout his work, Jonson uses sound to shocking and even violen...
Against Stanley Fish on Ben Jonson and the Community of the Same
Against Stanley Fish on Ben Jonson and the Community of the Same
In his classic essay “Authors-Readers: Ben Jonson and the Community of the Same,” Stanley Fish argues, primarily on the basis of a series of close readings, that (1) Jonson's poetr...
“Are all diseases dead”: The Likelihood of an Attribution to Ben Jonson
“Are all diseases dead”: The Likelihood of an Attribution to Ben Jonson
Arents S288 (Acc. No. 5442), pp. 87–88, and Rosenbach 239/27, p. 327, attribute the poem that begins “Are all diseases dead nor will death say” to Ben Jonson. While A.S.W. Rosenbac...
Jonson and Performance
Jonson and Performance
Abstract
For Una Ellis-Fermor, there is a ‘deeply inherent non-dramatic principle’ in the drama of Ben Jonson, a fundamental dislike of theatricality, and a pursuit ...
Ben Jonson's Reception of Lucian
Ben Jonson's Reception of Lucian
Throughout his career Ben Jonson drew variously upon Lucian, whom he encountered in the mythographies as well as in several Greek and Latin editions he owned. Jonson's receptions t...
Jonson’s Patrons
Jonson’s Patrons
AbstractIn a landmark essay published in 1984, Stanley Fish offered a reading of Jonson’s non-dramatic works in which he argued that Jonson persistently sought to imagine an altern...

