ACT 4 SCENE 5
Lines 1-150: In Aufidius' house, the servants are in attendance at a feast. Coriolanus enters and the servingmen try to make him leave. When they cannot, one goes to fetch Aufidius while the others trade insults with Coriolanus. Aufidius questions him, seeing that although he has a "grim appearance," Coriolanus "show'st a noble vessel." The tension builds until Coriolanus reveals his identity. He explains his circumstances to Aufidius and reveals that "in mere spite" to his "banishers" he has come to fight with him against the "cankered" Rome. He acknowledges that Aufidius may cut his throat and accepts his fate if so. In another of the play's swift reversals, Aufidius claims that "each word" Coriolanus has spoken has "weeded" out the "root of ancient envy" from his heart. He expresses his delight before inviting him to meet the senators he is entertaining as they prepare their attack on Rome's territories. He goes on to invite Coriolanus to take "one half of [his] commission," and advise them how best to defeat Rome.
Lines 151-234: The two servingmen discuss what has just occurred. As they argue over who is the better soldier, Aufidius or Coriolanus, a third man arrives to report that Coriolanus has been well received by the senators, "as if he were son and heir to Mars." He comments that, in accepting Coriolanus' offer and giving him power, Aufidius has made himself "but one half of what he was yesterday," a dangerous position. They agree, however, that "peace is nothing but to rust iron" and that they had rather be at war, an opinion that suits the martial tone of the play.
ACT 4 SCENE 6
Lines 1-96: Sicinius and Brutus gloat that there has been no news of Coriolanus, and that there has been peace in Rome since his departure. Menenius arrives and they observe that "Coriolanus is not much missed." He is forced to admit that "All's well," but wishes that Coriolanus had been more moderate. He has heard nothing from his friend, and neither has Volumnia nor Virgilia. Several citizens exchange pleasantries with the tribunes, who again take the opportunity to gloat over the "happier time" and criticize Coriolanus for helping to create civil unrest with his pride and ambition, insisting that he was aiming for "one sole throne." An Aedile brings the news that a slave claims that "the Volsces with two several powers Are entered in the Roman territories." Menenius says that it is Aufidius taking advantage of Coriolanus' absence, but the tribunes refuse to believe it until a messenger brings confirmation. He adds that Coriolanus has "joined with Aufidius" and "vows revenge" on Rome. It is Menenius' turn to deny the report, but a second messenger arrives to announce that Coriolanus, "Associated with Aufidius, rages Upon [their] territories."
Lines 97-190: Cominius arrives and says that the Volscians view Coriolanus as "their god." He and Menenius accuse the tribunes of bringing this upon their country through their treatment of Coriolanus. Menenius says that unless "noble" Coriolanus has "mercy" they are "all undone." Sicinius and Brutus feebly deny responsibility. Several citizens arrive and Menenius points out to them that they cast up their "stinking greasy caps" in joy when Coriolanus was exiled, and now they have no one to fight for them. The citizens also deny responsibility, but Menenius is scornful. He and Cominius leave for the Capitol and Sicinius and Brutus follow, hoping the rumors are untrue.
ACT 4 SCENE 7
Aufidius listens as his lieutenant describes Coriolanus' influence over the Volscian troops, which, he says, eclipses Aufidius' own power. Aufidius acknowledges this but says he "cannot help it now" without ruining their plans to take Rome. He adds that Coriolanus "bears himself more proudlier" than he anticipated. The lieutenant wishes that Aufidius had not joined with Coriolanus, but he reassures him that he will defeat Coriolanus eventually, and in the meantime Coriolanus is fighting "dragon-like" for the Volsces. Coriolanus is necessary for them to "carry Rome": he will take it easily, but his pride and inflexible nature will be his downfall. Aufidius swears that when Coriolanus has defeated Rome, he will defeat Coriolanus.
ACT 5 SCENE 1
Menenius will not ask Coriolanus for mercy, arguing that it should be those who banished him that do so. Cominius tried but Coriolanus refused to acknowledge him, or to answer to any name, considering himself "titleless, Till he had forged himself a name o'th'fire Of burning Rome." He refused to consider mercy for his "private friends" or even his family, telling Cominius that he could not separate "one poor grain or two" from "a pile / Of noisome musty chaff," an image that evokes the opening of the play and the role of the tribunes and citizens in recent events. Menenius points out that Sicinius and Brutus are responsible. They appeal to his patriotism, asking him to speak with Coriolanus, and he relents. After he has left, Cominius tells the tribunes that Coriolanus "will never hear" Menenius, as his sense of betrayal by Rome is too great. He adds that Volumnia and Virgilia may perhaps solicit him "For mercy to his country" and they go to urge the women to try.
ACT 5 SCENE 2
At the Volscian camp, Menenius asks to speak to Coriolanus. The watchmen tell him that their new general will not talk with anyone from Rome, despite Menenius' assurances that he is a good friend of Coriolanus. They tell him that Rome has "pushed out" its "very defender" through "violent popular ignorance" and now cannot hope that a "decayed dotant" such as Menenius will prevent his revenge. As Menenius begs to be allowed in, Coriolanus and Aufidius arrive. Menenius tells the watchman that his "son Coriolanus" will punish him for trying to stop their meeting, then turns to Coriolanus, weeping, to beg for his mercy, reiterating the paternal role he has played in his life. Coriolanus tells him to go away, adding that he "know[s] not" "Wife, mother, child." He gives Menenius a letter but will not hear him speak, and the generals leave again. The watchmen mock Menenius.
ACT 5 SCENE 3
Lines 1-141: Coriolanus and Aufidius discuss their attack on Rome and Coriolanus asks Aufidius to tell the Volscian senators how he has conducted himself. Aufidius confirms that Coriolanus has worked only to Volscian ends and has not admitted any "private whisper" from his former friends. Coriolanus says that he will not yield, even to Menenius who, he acknowledges, loved him "above the measure of a father." They are interrupted by the arrival of Volumnia, Virgilia, and his son, young Martius. Clearly moved, Coriolanus wills himself to "out affection" and refuses to "obey instinct." He is cold toward them but softens as his wife kisses him and his mother and son kneel before him. He begs them not to ask what he cannot grant but his mother pleads with him to hear them. His resolve hardens and he says she must speak before Aufidius and the Volsces as he will "Hear nought from Rome in private." Volumnia makes an emotional speech, saying that in order to attack Rome Coriolanus must march over his mother's body. Virgilia threatens the same but young Martius says that he will not be trodden on, but will run away and return to fight his father when he is "bigger." Coriolanus replies he has "sat too long" and starts to leave.
Lines 142-223: Volumnia tries again, arguing that he could be known for showing noble mercy toward Rome, rather than for destroying it. She urges Coriolanus to "speak" to her, and Virgilia and young Martius to "speak" to him, placing words above action for the first time. Again they kneel before him and Coriolanus silently takes his mother's hand before agreeing to "frame convenient peace" between Volsces and Rome. He asks Aufidius if he could have refused such a request and Aufidius says that he was moved, but adds in an aside that he is glad Coriolanus has acted in this way as it gives him an excuse to destroy him.
ACT 5 SCENE 4
In Rome, Menenius is pessimistic about the possibility that Coriolanus' family can sway him, saying that "There is no more mercy in him than there is milk in a male tiger." A messenger arrives, telling Sicinius to flee to the safety of his home: the plebeians have Brutus and are threatening to kill him if Volumnia and Virgilia cannot move Coriolanus. A second messenger brings the news that "the ladies have prevailed, / The Volscians are dislodged, and Martius gone." Celebrations are heard and Menenius hurries to meet the women, saying that Volumnia is "worth" a "city full of tribunes."
ACT 5 SCENE 5
Volumnia and Virgilia are welc
omed into Rome in triumph.
ACT 5 SCENE 6
Aufidius sends attendants with written accusations against Coriolanus to the lords of Corioles. He asks them to come to the marketplace where he will "vouch the truth" of his written statement to the commoners. His conspirators arrive and offer to kill Coriolanus but he says they must follow public opinion. The conspirators advise him that public opinion is divided between him and Coriolanus but that, if one falls, the other will become "heir of all." Aufidius is aware of this and outlines his case against Coriolanus: he will argue that he "pawned" his own honor for him only to find that Coriolanus "sold the blood and labour" of the Volscian army for women's tears. Again, the conspirators urge Coriolanus' death, and the lords arrive, angry with Coriolanus for making the treaty with Rome. Coriolanus enters, claiming he is a Volscian soldier, no longer "infected" with the love of Rome, and presents them with the peace treaty. Aufidius calls Coriolanus a "traitor" and reverts to calling him "Martius" rather than giving him a "stol'n name." They argue, and Aufidius provokes Coriolanus' pride and temper. The conspirators call for his death with the crowd who are swayed by the moment. Despite a lord calling for peace, the crowd are bloodthirsty and Coriolanus and Aufidius draw their swords. The conspirators draw also and kill Coriolanus. Aufidius, who has brought about his enemy's death without acting himself, stands on the body. The lords reprove him but Aufidius says he will answer to the senate. The lords order that Coriolanus be mourned as a "noble corpse" and Aufidius agrees, helping to bear the body away.
CORIOLANUS
IN PERFORMANCE:
THE RSC AND BEYOND
The best way to understand a Shakespeare play is to see it or ideally to participate in it. By examining a range of productions, we may gain a sense of the extraordinary variety of approaches and interpretations that are possible--a variety that gives Shakespeare his unique capacity to be reinvented and made "our contemporary" four centuries after his death.
We begin with a brief overview of the play's theatrical and cinematic life, offering historical perspectives on how it has been performed. We then analyze in more detail a series of productions staged over the last half century by the Royal Shakespeare Company. The sense of dialogue between productions that can only occur when a company is dedicated to the revival and investigation of the Shakespeare canon over a long period, together with the uniquely comprehensive archival resource of promptbooks, program notes, reviews, and interviews held on behalf of the RSC at the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust in Stratford-upon-Avon, allows an "RSC stage history" to become a crucible in which the chemistry of the play can be explored.
Finally, we go to the horse's mouth. Modern theater is dominated by the figure of the director, who must hold together the whole play, whereas the actor must concentrate on his or her part. The director's viewpoint is therefore especially valuable. Shakespeare's plasticity is wonderfully revealed when we hear directors of highly successful productions answering the same questions in very different ways.
FOUR CENTURIES OF CORIOLANUS: AN OVERVIEW
One must admit that it will never achieve popularity purely as a stage production. For a stage production must always make strong calls upon the emotionalism of the audience, whereas here the appeal is almost entirely to the intellect.30
These words of one reviewer epitomize long-held feelings toward Coriolanus, an infrequently revived play more respected than loved in performance. Yet theater-makers bold enough to tackle it have found Coriolanus a striking and powerful political tool, and the play has particularly thrived in adaptation and translation.
No performance is recorded until 1681 when Nahum Tate's The Ingratitude of a Commonwealth was performed at Drury Lane's Theatre Royal. Tate's adaptation was explicitly political:
What offence to any good Subject in Stygmatizing on the Stage, those Troublers of the State, that out of private Interest or Mallice, Seduce the Multitude to Ingratitude, against Persons that are not only plac't in Rightful Power above them; but also the Heroes and Defenders of their Country ... The moral therefore of these Scenes being to Recommend Submission and Adherence to Establisht Lawful Power.31
The new character of Nigridius, a former officer of Coriolanus who defects to Aufidius, increases the element of "ingratitude" in Coriolanus' murder. Aufidius is killed by Coriolanus and dies taunting him. Coriolanus watches his wife and son die, and in his bathetic dying lines he embraces his dead family and hopes for a peaceful afterlife. Tate's adaptation met with little success, his attempts to inject sentiment into a play normally considered intellectual falling flat.
John Dennis's The Invader of his Country, or the Fatal Resentment premiered at Drury Lane in 1719. Again, Aufidius dies first, but here pleads for forgiveness from Coriolanus, who is then beset by vengeful Volscian tribunes. Virgilia and Volumnia watch in horror as Coriolanus dies and Cominius delivers a very different moral from Tate's, warning that traitors inevitably get their deserts.
From 1749, Coriolanus held the stage in a version by James Thomson based on Livy rather than Shakespeare, reworking the story as neoclassical tragedy. This was hugely influential on subsequent performances of Shakespeare's play. A conflation of Shakespeare and Thomson was staged by Thomas Sheridan at Dublin's Smock Alley Theatre in 1752 and London in 1754. The advertisement explains:
Shakespear's [sic] play was purely historical, and had little or no plot. Thomson's plot was regular, but too much of the epic kind, and wanted business. [The adaptor] thought, by blending these, a piece might be produced, which, tho' not perfect, might furnish great entertainment to, and keep up the attention of an audience.32
The centerpiece of this version was a spectacular Roman ovation featuring 118 supernumeraries. Aufidius was finally allowed to survive until the end to speak Coriolanus' epitaph. Volumnia is here the name of Coriolanus' wife while his mother is renamed Veturia--symptomatic, perhaps, of a critical tradition that thought of Volumnia and Virgilia as two types of "wife" to Coriolanus.
John Philip Kemble's Coriolanus; or, the Roman Matron at Drury Lane was the actor's crowning achievement. It drew heavily on Sheridan, incorporating lines from Thomson and the spectacular ovation. Kemble's team drew on advances in archaeology and art criticism to create a spectacular, historically authentic Roman world. The text acted as a vehicle for Kemble's austere Coriolanus and Sarah Siddons's Volumnia, who drew a dagger on herself in the melodramatic climax to the supplication scene. It was in this role that Kemble bade farewell to the stage in 1817, and his performance was mimicked for decades to come, notably by Charles Macready. It was Kemble's text, too, that formed the basis of the first professional American production in Philadelphia in 1796.
In 1820, Robert Elliston directed Edmund Kean in a production that attempted to break from Kemble's influence by opting to
stage the play as a celebration of bourgeois individualism ... Elliston and Kean begged sympathy for a Romantic noble savage, a creature of primordial integrity victimized by corruption at both ends of the social scale.33
Cutting all of Thomson, the production claimed to recapture Shakespeare's spirit, but still acted primarily as a study of the lead role, in which Kean was unfavorably compared with Kemble. The production nevertheless reasserted the case for Shakespeare's text, and Kean went some way toward humanizing the character. However, John Vandenhoff, Kean's successor at Drury Lane, was another Coriolanus in the Kemble mold, perpetuating the classically austere tradition through the provinces and American tours over the next thirty years.
Samuel Phelps took over at Drury Lane from 1848. His efforts to create realistic scenery extended to distinguishing between Roman and Volscian cultures, and while the spectacular elements once again dominated attention, "Phelps took pains not only to establish Martius as loving husband and dutiful son, but made him an affectionate and demonstrative father as well,"34 succeeding in the domestic as well as the heroic.
A succession of productions following Kemble's text dominated the North American stage during the n
ineteenth century, including those of Thomas Abthorpe Cooper (1799) and Edwin Forrest from 1838 to 1864, who reinvented the play as heroic melodrama. The Italian actor Tommaso Salvini toured his acclaimed and fiery Coriolanus around the country in 1885-86, but the play remained even less popular in the United States than in Britain.
Coriolanus made its Stratford-upon-Avon debut in August 1893. Lawrence Alma-Tadema's historically accurate designs were universally praised, a grand ovation with spoils of war provided spectacle, and Frank Benson's redefining performance "displayed a good deal of noble thought and subtle spirit, and it grew in strength and form as it proceeded to its tragic ending."35 Alice Chapin's Volumnia, an "Amazonian scold," was felt to be "wanting both in force and feeling," while Mrs. Benson's Virgilia was played for sympathetic pathos.
Benson continued in the role until 1919. Chapin was replaced by Genevieve Ward, "a remarkable actress of the old tradition,"36 and the final performance of this production was presented as excerpts focusing on mother and son. The Telegraph commented, "It is easy to understand the attraction of 'Coriolanus' for Sir Frank Benson at this moment. Patriotism rings through it, and civic virtue."37 Benson's production had long outlasted Henry Irving's competing Lyceum production, in which both he and Ellen Terry were badly miscast.
Coriolanus was next performed in Stratford in 1926 in a temporary theater only a month after the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre burned down. Ethel Carrington's "fierce and determined" Volumnia was praised, while George Skillan's Coriolanus "humanised the part from its aloofness, and gave it force."38 Politically, it was "as fine a picture of a Tory as has ever been committed to paper," and while reviewers assumed that Shakespeare's sympathies were "obviously and strongly on the side of Coriolanus," the production suggested this was "not ambiguously so."39 Producer W. Bridges-Adams utilized his large crowd to maximum effect: