Comment on the significance of
the Fifth Act of The Duchess of Malfi.
There is a good
deal of criticism regarding the necessity of the fifth act of the Duchess of
Malfi. Some critics are of the opinion that had the Duchess of Malfi ended with
the fourth act the tragic impression would have been yet deeper and more
harmonious than it is. Consequently the fifth act has repeatedly been criticized
as an unnecessary cluttering of the stage with corpses. It is true that with
the death of the Duchess the true interest of the play is over for Antonio is
admittedly a shadowy character as to whose fate we are rather indifferent. Lord
David Cecil says that the fifth act may be justified from the moral point of
view. It is this act that all the evil doers get their due punishment. Yet from
the structural point of view the fifth act cannot be justified and there is no
denying the fact that the tragedy would have gained in intensity, if the play
has ended with the strangling of the Duchess.
Act v has been
considered a superfluity, for according to a general dramatic practice, a
tragedy ends with the death of the hero, and the punishment of the villain.
Thus Shakespeare’s Hamlet ends with the death of Hamlet himself and the
accomplishment of his revenge. Macbeth ends with the death of Macbeth
who is at once the hero and the villain of the play. Othello ends with
the death of Othello and the discovery of villainy of Iago who is to receive
his just punishment. In The Duchess of Malfi the heroine is cruelly
murdered in the forth act but the villains continue to live. No doubt act iv is
a powerful ‘tour de force’ having great theatrical effectiveness but a tragedy
must not end with the villains still living. It would be something unethical.
Hence the fifth act showing the punishment of the villains is necessary for the
rounding off the action of the drama
