Conclusions about cycle plays and public displays
So what are the similarities and differences between the medieval cycle plays and the Renaissance public displays?
All of the forms of pageantry were designed specifically to demonstrate a journey. They physically moved through the city, creating a journey in the literal sense in which both performers and audience members participated. The cycle plays and the Royal Entries emulated the journey of Christ entering Jerusalem. They transformed the cities into Jerusalem. The Midsummer Watch and the Lord Mayor's Show, on the other hand, had less of an emphasis on the Biblical journey. The journey they focussed on is one that is rooted in the city and in the power structures. The Lord Mayor's Show in particular began and ended in the Guildhall, emphasizing the power of the mayor and the livery company in charge.
Although the events or progresses did not have the same producers, so to speak, they shared a common purpose: reinforcing power structures and elevating a particular person or deity. All of the pageants were in a sense morality plays. They told tales to teach the audience members lessons. The cycle plays were rooted in the church. Their purpose was to enlighten the audience and glorify God. The Midsummer Watch and the Lord Mayor's Show were designed to demonstrate the power of the mayor and the companies. The Royal Entries were meant to deify the monarchs. All of the pageants in the processions were sponsored by guilds and livery companies, which also reinforced their power in the community.
All of the events, involved the active participation of the audience in that they had to choose how they interacted with the story being told. Many of the Royal Entry processions had stationary pageants, meaning that they did not move at all. The procession simply passed them by. For all of the other events the pageants were part of the procession. The plays or episodes would travel along in a progression and would stop at various stations to perform.
This brings me back to my central questions regarding narrative and spectacle. Each of these civic events was telling a story of some sort, both in the "macro" sense - i.e. the story of the power of the monarchy - and in the "micro" sense, meaning the story of the progression or journey, or the individual stories being told in the pageants. It is easy to see that audience members could understand the macro-story by participating in any part of the public events. The spectacle of them clearly indicated what the larger context was for each of the events. What is still unclear to me is whether or not the story of the journey would be understood by the audience if they did not see the whole cycle or all of the pageants in order. They were, of course, using stories that were well-known. They were Biblical or mythological tales. But they were selected and placed in a certain order for a reason. So what would seeing them out of order do to the experience? If an individual did not see the third or the fifth pageant, would they still be able to discern the meaning?
I do not have answers to these questions, but if I were to provide some sort of conclusion, I would offer that the answers would be different for each form. For the cycle plays, the pageants and the overall journey - the micro and the macro - were linked. It would have been more important for an audience member to have experienced all of the pageants in the cycle in order to make meaning of the journey. The Midsummer Watch pageants did not connect in quite the same way. The journey was the important feature of these events. The pageants were individual plays, so the audience members would not necessarily have needed to see all of them. The Watch pageant stations, however, were set up in neighbourhoods so that the mayor's men could watch over the citizens of London, so it is possible that this creation of smaller communities meant that more people stayed in one place and saw all of the pageants. This, however, is conjecture. The Lord Mayor's Show pageants also did not have a singular thread tying them all together. Similar to the Midsummer Watch, the macro-story was more important than the pageant stories. The Mayor's journey from and back to the source of his power was the essential story that the audience needed to understand. Finally, the Royal Entry processions were more like the cycle plays. They reverted back to the Biblical journey and the choice of placement of the pageant stations was important to that journey. It was about those places as much as it was about the pageant stories themselves. In fact, the locations were more meaningful that the stories. The placement was also associated with the livery company or guild that was sponsoring the particular pageant. For example, the Fishermen's pageant would be near the river. This is the most important distinction between the cycle plays and the Royal Entries even though they seem very closely linked.
It is interesting that in spite of the vast quantities of scholarship about these public events, there are very few conclusions being drawn about their origins and ends and about their inherent nature. It does not seem that these forms progressed from one to the other. They seemed to evolve separately, each stemming from a slightly different place. This is a subject that for me will always peak my interest and it will be something that I will not stop investigating.
All of the forms of pageantry were designed specifically to demonstrate a journey. They physically moved through the city, creating a journey in the literal sense in which both performers and audience members participated. The cycle plays and the Royal Entries emulated the journey of Christ entering Jerusalem. They transformed the cities into Jerusalem. The Midsummer Watch and the Lord Mayor's Show, on the other hand, had less of an emphasis on the Biblical journey. The journey they focussed on is one that is rooted in the city and in the power structures. The Lord Mayor's Show in particular began and ended in the Guildhall, emphasizing the power of the mayor and the livery company in charge.
Although the events or progresses did not have the same producers, so to speak, they shared a common purpose: reinforcing power structures and elevating a particular person or deity. All of the pageants were in a sense morality plays. They told tales to teach the audience members lessons. The cycle plays were rooted in the church. Their purpose was to enlighten the audience and glorify God. The Midsummer Watch and the Lord Mayor's Show were designed to demonstrate the power of the mayor and the companies. The Royal Entries were meant to deify the monarchs. All of the pageants in the processions were sponsored by guilds and livery companies, which also reinforced their power in the community.
All of the events, involved the active participation of the audience in that they had to choose how they interacted with the story being told. Many of the Royal Entry processions had stationary pageants, meaning that they did not move at all. The procession simply passed them by. For all of the other events the pageants were part of the procession. The plays or episodes would travel along in a progression and would stop at various stations to perform.
This brings me back to my central questions regarding narrative and spectacle. Each of these civic events was telling a story of some sort, both in the "macro" sense - i.e. the story of the power of the monarchy - and in the "micro" sense, meaning the story of the progression or journey, or the individual stories being told in the pageants. It is easy to see that audience members could understand the macro-story by participating in any part of the public events. The spectacle of them clearly indicated what the larger context was for each of the events. What is still unclear to me is whether or not the story of the journey would be understood by the audience if they did not see the whole cycle or all of the pageants in order. They were, of course, using stories that were well-known. They were Biblical or mythological tales. But they were selected and placed in a certain order for a reason. So what would seeing them out of order do to the experience? If an individual did not see the third or the fifth pageant, would they still be able to discern the meaning?
I do not have answers to these questions, but if I were to provide some sort of conclusion, I would offer that the answers would be different for each form. For the cycle plays, the pageants and the overall journey - the micro and the macro - were linked. It would have been more important for an audience member to have experienced all of the pageants in the cycle in order to make meaning of the journey. The Midsummer Watch pageants did not connect in quite the same way. The journey was the important feature of these events. The pageants were individual plays, so the audience members would not necessarily have needed to see all of them. The Watch pageant stations, however, were set up in neighbourhoods so that the mayor's men could watch over the citizens of London, so it is possible that this creation of smaller communities meant that more people stayed in one place and saw all of the pageants. This, however, is conjecture. The Lord Mayor's Show pageants also did not have a singular thread tying them all together. Similar to the Midsummer Watch, the macro-story was more important than the pageant stories. The Mayor's journey from and back to the source of his power was the essential story that the audience needed to understand. Finally, the Royal Entry processions were more like the cycle plays. They reverted back to the Biblical journey and the choice of placement of the pageant stations was important to that journey. It was about those places as much as it was about the pageant stories themselves. In fact, the locations were more meaningful that the stories. The placement was also associated with the livery company or guild that was sponsoring the particular pageant. For example, the Fishermen's pageant would be near the river. This is the most important distinction between the cycle plays and the Royal Entries even though they seem very closely linked.
It is interesting that in spite of the vast quantities of scholarship about these public events, there are very few conclusions being drawn about their origins and ends and about their inherent nature. It does not seem that these forms progressed from one to the other. They seemed to evolve separately, each stemming from a slightly different place. This is a subject that for me will always peak my interest and it will be something that I will not stop investigating.