DOCSLIB.ORG

Douglas Bruster

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Douglas Bruster DOUGLAS BRUSTER Mody C. Boatright Regents Professor in American and English Literature Distinguished Teaching Professor Department of English, 1 University Station B5000 The University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas 78712-1164 512.471.3635 (Office) ● 512.550.3465 (Mobile) [email protected] CURRICULUM VITAE EDUCATION ______________________________________________________________________________ 1990 Harvard University Ph.D. (English) 1987 Harvard University M.A. (English) 1985 University of Nebraska B.A. (English, History, Latin) ______________________________________________________________________________ APPOINTMENTS ______________________________________________________________________________ 2009- The University of Texas at Austin 2008 Université de Paris X (visiting professor) 1999-2008 The University of Texas at Austin 1995-99 The University of Texas at San Antonio 1991-95 The University of Chicago 1990-91 Harvard University ______________________________________________________________________________ PUBLICATIONS ~ BOOKS _____________________________________________________________________________ v Shakespeare and the Power of Performance: Stage and Page in the Elizabethan Theatre. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. With Robert Weimann. v To Be or Not To Be. London and New York: Continuum, 2007. v Prologues to Shakespeare’s Theatre: Performance and Liminality in Early Modern Drama. London and New York: Routledge, 2004. With Robert Weimann. v Shakespeare and the Question of Culture: Early Modern Literature and the Cultural Turn. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. 1 v Quoting Shakespeare: Form and Culture in Early Modern Drama. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2000. v Drama and the Market in the Age of Shakespeare. (Cambridge Studies in Renaissance Literature and Culture 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. (Reissued, 2005). PUBLICATIONS ~ EDITIONS ______________________________________________________________________________ v The Bankside Shakespeare, revision of The Riverside Shakespeare for Cengage Publishing. General Editor. Forthcoming. v A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Evans Shakespeare Editions. Boston: Wadsworth, 2012. v “Everyman” and “Mankind”. Arden Early Modern Drama Series, co-edited with Eric Rasmussen. London: Arden, 2009. v The Changeling, by Thomas Middleton and William Rowley. Thomas Middleton: The Collected Works, ed. Gary Taylor et al. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. v “Textual Introduction” to The Changeling, Thomas Middleton and Early Modern Textual Culture: A Companion to “The Collected Works”, ed. Gary Taylor et al. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. PUBLICATIONS ~ EDITED BOOKS ______________________________________________________________________________ v Symbolism: An International Journal of Aesthetics. Vol. 6: “Representation.” (Special Topic) New York: AMS Press, 2006. Edited with Robert Weimann. v In the Company of Shakespeare: Essays on Renaissance Literature in Honor of G. Blakemore Evans. Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2002. Edited with Thomas Moisan. PUBLICATIONS ~ CHAPTERS IN BOOKS ______________________________________________________________________________ v “Teaching Form in The Taming of the Shrew.” In Approaches to Teaching Shakespeare’s “The Taming of the Shrew”. Ed. Margaret H. Dupuis and Grace Tiffany (New York: Modern Language Association of America, 2013), pp. 32-39. v “Shakespeare the Stationer.” In Marta Straznicky, ed. Shakespeare’s Stationers: Studies in Cultural Bibliography (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013), pp. 112-131. v “Middleton’s Imagination.” In The Oxford Handbook to Thomas Middleton. Ed. Trish Henley and Gary Taylor. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 518-34. 2 v “The Materiality of Shakespearean Form.” In Shakespeare and Historical Formalism. Ed. Stephen Cohen. (Aldershot, Hampshire and Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate Press, 2007), pp. 31-48. v “Compelling Representation” (Afterword) In Symbolism: An International Journal of Aesthetics. Vol. 6: “Representation” (Special Topic). (New York: AMS Press, 2006), pp. 219-224. v “Teaching Othello as Tragedy and Comedy.” In Approaches to Teaching Shakespeare’s Othello. Ed. Peter Erickson and Maurice Hunt. (New York: The Modern Language Association of America, 2005), pp. 100-107. v “The Politics of Shakespeare’s Prose.” In Rematerializing Shakespeare. Ed. Bryan Reynolds and William West (New York: Palgrave Press, 2005), pp. 95-114. v “The Birth of an Industry.” The Cambridge History of British Theatre; Vol 1: Origins to 1660, ed. Jane Milling and Peter Thomson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 224- 241. v “On a Certain Tendency in Economic Criticism of Shakespeare.” Money and the Age of Shakespeare, ed. Linda Woodbridge (New York: Palgrave, 2003), pp. 67-77. v “The Dramatic Life of Objects in the Early Modern Theater.” Staged Properties in Early Modern English Drama, ed. Natasha Korda and Jonathan Gil Harris (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 67-96. v “Introduction: Weighing the Evidence.” (with Thomas Moisan) In the Company of Shakespeare: Essays on Renaissance Literature in Honor of G. Blakemore Evans. (Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2002), pp. 7-22. v “Shakespeare and the Composite Text.” Renaissance Literature and its Formal Engagements, ed. Mark David Rasmussen (London: Palgrave, 2001), pp. 43-66. v “The New Materialism in Renaissance Studies.” Material Culture and Cultural Materialisms in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, ed. Curtis Perry. Arizona Studies in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, vol. 5 (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2001), pp. 225-238. v “Teaching the Tragi-comedy of Romeo and Juliet.” Approaches to Teaching Shakespeare’s ‘Romeo and Juliet’, ed. Maurice Hunt (New York: MLA Publications, 2000), pp. 59-68. v “Shakespeare and the End of History: Period as Brand Name.” Shakespeare and Modernity: Early Modern to Millennium, ed. Hugh Grady (New York: Routledge, 2000), pp. 168-188. v “The Structural Transformation of Print in Late Elizabethan England.” Print, Manuscript, Performance: The Changing Relations of the Media in Early Modern England, ed. Arthur F. Marotti and Michael D. Bristol (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2000), pp. 49-89. 3 v “The Postmodern Theater of Paul Mazursky’s Tempest.” Shakespeare, Film, Fin de Siècle, ed. Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray (London: Macmillan, 2000), pp. 26-39. v “Why Read Arden?” John Arden and Margaretta D’Arcy: A Casebook, ed. Jonathan Wike (New York: Garland Publishing, 1994), pp. 41-50. PUBLICATIONS ~ ARTICLES ______________________________________________________________________________ v “Shakespeare's Lady 8.” Shakespeare Quarterly 66:1 (2015): 47-88. v “A New Chronology for Shakespeare's Plays” (with Geneviève Smith). Digital Studies in the Humanities (first published online, 9 December 2014). v “The Representation Market in Renaissance London.” Renaissance Drama 41: 1, 2 (2013): 1- 23. v “Shakespeare as Rorschach: A Response to David Hillman.” Shakespeare Quarterly 64.3 (2013): 334-42. v “Shakespearean Spellings and Handwriting in the Additional Passages Printed in the 1602 Spanish Tragedy,” Notes and Queries 60.3 (September, 2013): 420-24. [The research behind this article was mentioned in a front-page story in the New York Times, August 13, 2013. The story was picked up internationally, in print, radio, and web formats. I was invited to expand upon the research by Oxford University Press’s OUPBlog at http://blog.oup.com/2013/08/shakespeares-additional-passage-kyd-spanish-tragedy/ ] v “Christopher Marlowe and the Verse/Prose Bilingual System.” Marlowe Studies 1 (2011): 141- 165. v “Women and the English Morality Play.” Medieval Feminist Forum 45.1 (2009): 57-67. v “The Anti-Americanism of EU Shakespeare.” Shakespearean International Yearbook 8 (2008): 97-106. v “Thomas More’s Richard III and Shakespeare.” Moreana 42.163 (2007 for 2005): 1-14. v “How to Listen to Mamet.” Connotations 15.1-3 (2007 for 2005/6): 177-85. v “The Library of John Marshall.” Private Libraries in Renaissance England 5 (1998), 98-103. v “New Light on the Old Historicism: Shakespeare and the Forms of Historicist Criticism.” 4 Literature and History. Special Issue: ‘Shakespeare and History’ 3rd series. 5:1 (1996), 1-18. v “The Jailer’s Daughter and the Politics of Madwomen’s Language.” Shakespeare Quarterly 46: 3 (1995), 277-300. v “Female-female Eroticism and the Early Modern Stage.” Renaissance Drama 24 (1993 for 1995), 1-32. v “Local Tempest: Shakespeare and the Work of the Early Modern Playhouse.” Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies 25 (1995), 33-53. v “Pound, Frost, and ‘Literary Integrity’ at Harvard.” Paideuma 23 (1994), 237-41. v “‘In a Woman’s Key’: Women’s Speech and Women’s Language in Renaissance Drama.” Exemplaria 4:2 (1992), 235-66. v “‘Come to the Tent’: ‘The Passionate Shepherd,’ Dramatic Rape, and Lyric Time.” Criticism 33 (1991), 49-63. v “‘Nor Plautus Too Light’: Hamlet 1.2.184-85 and Plautus’s Pseudolus.” ANQ 4:3 (1991), 118- 19. v “‘Russet Mantle.’” Notes and Queries 38:1 (1991), 63-4. v “The Changeling and Thomas Watson’s Hecatompathia.” Notes and Queries 40:2 (1991), 222- 24. v “The Horn of Plenty: Cuckoldry and Capital in the Drama of the Age of Shakespeare.” Studies in English Literature 30 (1990), 195-215. v “Comedy and Control: Shakespeare and the Plautine Poeta.” Comparative Drama 24 (1990), 217-31. v “David Mamet and Ben Jonson: City Comedy Past and Present.” Modern Drama 33 (1990),
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Front.Chp:Corel VENTURA
    Book Reviews 145 circumstances, as in his dealings with Polonius, and Rosencrantz and Guild- enstern. Did he not think he was killing the King when he killed Polonius? That too was a chance opportunity. Perhaps Hirsh becomes rather too confined by a rigorous logical analysis, and a literal reading of the texts he deals with. He tends to brush aside all alternatives with an appeal to a logical certainty that does not really exist. A dramatist like Shakespeare is always interested in the dramatic potential of the moment, and may not always be thinking in terms of plot. (But as I suggest above, the textual evidence from plot is ambiguous in the scene.) Perhaps the sentimentalisation of Hamlet’s character (which the author rightly dwells on) is the cause for so many unlikely post-renaissance interpretations of this celebrated soliloquy. But logical rigour can only take us so far, and Hamlet, unlike Brutus, for example, does not think in logical, but emotional terms. ‘How all occasions do inform against me / And spur my dull revenge’ he remarks. Anthony J. Gilbert Claire Jowitt. Voyage Drama and Gender Politics 1589–1642: Real and Imagined Worlds. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2003. Pp 256. For Claire Jowitt, Lecturer in Renaissance literature at University of Wales Aberystwyth, travel drama depicts the exotic and the foreign, but also reveals anxieties about the local and the domestic. In this her first book, Jowitt, using largely new historicist methodology, approaches early modern travel plays as allegories engaged with a discourse of colonialism, and looks in particular for ways in which they depict English concerns about gender, leadership, and national identity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cultural and Ideological Significance of Representations of Boudica During the Reigns of Elizabeth I and James I
    EXETER UNIVERSITY AND UNIVERSITÉ D’ORLÉANS The Cultural and Ideological Significance Of Representations of Boudica During the reigns of Elizabeth I and James I. Submitted by Samantha FRENEE-HUTCHINS to the universities of Exeter and Orléans as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English, June 2009. This thesis is available for library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgment. I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. ..................................... (signature) 2 Abstract in English: This study follows the trail of Boudica from her rediscovery in Classical texts by the humanist scholars of the fifteenth century to her didactic and nationalist representations by Italian, English, Welsh and Scottish historians such as Polydore Virgil, Hector Boece, Humphrey Llwyd, Raphael Holinshed, John Stow, William Camden, John Speed and Edmund Bolton. In the literary domain her story was appropriated under Elizabeth I and James I by poets and playwrights who included James Aske, Edmund Spenser, Ben Jonson, William Shakespeare, A. Gent and John Fletcher. As a political, religious and military figure in the middle of the first century AD this Celtic and regional queen of Norfolk is placed at the beginning of British history. In a gesture of revenge and despair she had united a great number of British tribes and opposed the Roman Empire in a tragic effort to obtain liberty for her family and her people.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    206 Fletcherian Dramatic Achievement Bibliography Primary sources Apology for Actors Thomas Dekker, An Apology for Actors (1612), ed. Richard H. Per- kinson, New York 1941 Aristotle Poetics, tr. W. Hamilton Fyfe, The Loeb Classics Library, Cam- bridge, Mass., London 1927 St Augustine St Augustine, The Teacher, in Against the Academicians; and, The Teach- er, trans. Peter King, Indianapolis, Cambridge 1995 Bellenden The Chronicles of Scotland: Compiled by Hector Boece: Translated into Scots by John Bellenden, 1531, ed. R. W. Chambers and Edith C. Batho, vol. I, Edinburgh and London 1938 Bowers I-X The Dramatic Works in the Beaumont and Fletcher Canon, gen. ed. Fredson Bowers, 10 vols, Cambridge UP 1966–1996 [Cicero] Ad Herennium, tr. Harry Caplan; The Loeb Classical Library, Cambridge, Mass., London 1954 Demetrius and Enanthe MS John Fletcher, Demetrius and Enanthe, ed. Margaret McLaren Cook and F. P. Wilson, The Malone Society Reprints 1950 (1951) Dio Dio Cassius, Dio’s Roman History, tr. Earnest Cary, vol. vii, The Loeb Classical Library, Cambridge, Mass., London 1961 Faithful Friends The Faithful Friends, ed. G. R. Proudfoot and G. M. Pinciss, The Malone Society Reprints 1970 (1975) Henslowe’s Diary Henslowe’s Diary, ed. R. A. Foakes, 2nd edition, Cambridge UP 2002. Howard-Hill (1980) Sir John Van Olden Barnavelt: by John Fletcher and Philip Massinger, ed. T. H. Howard-Hill, The Malone Society Reprints 1979 (1980) Bonduca MS Bonduca: by John Fletcher, ed. W. W. Greg, The Malone Society Re- prints, 1951 Mann Thomas Mann, Doctor Faustus, tr. H. T. Lowe-Porter, Everyman’s Library, vol.80, 1992 Masque of Queens Ben Jonson, The Masque of Queens (1609), published in his Workes (1616): 945–964 Meres Francis Meres, Palladis Tamia (1598), Scholars’ Facsimiles & Re- prints, New York 1938 Metrical Boece (1858) The Buik of the Chroniclis of Scotland; or, A Metrical Version of the History of Hector Boece; By William Stewart (1535), ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Sejanus, the King's Men Altar Scenes, and the Theatrical Production Of
    2952 Early Theatre 20.2 (2017), 77–98 http://dx.doi.org/10.12745/et.20.2.2952 John Kuhn Sejanus, the King’s Men Altar Scenes, and the Theatrical Production of Paganism This article traces the lineage of the popular performance set-piece of the ‘oracular altar scene’ from its inception in Jonson’s Sejanus through its frequent reuse by the King’s Men and their imitators later in the century. By doing so, it demonstrates how material practices of reuse in the seventeenth-century theatre helped shape the produc- tion of popular knowledge about the nature of ‘pagan’ ritual and its practitioners in the Stuart era of intensified antiquarian discovery and colonial expansion. The fifth act of Ben Jonson’s Sejanus, a Jacobean tragedy set in decadent imper- ial Rome, contains a striking moment of intersection between antiquarianism and performance, as the play’s scheming, eponymous favourite agrees to propiti- ate a statue of the goddess Fortuna, grudgingly seeking divine advice about his political fortunes. Accompanied by the music of flutes and trumpets, a priest incants lines translated from Seneca while performing complex rituals of lustra- tion (washing his hands), libation (eating and administering honey and milk to the participants), and propitiation (placing milk, honey, and burning poppy on the altar bearing Fortuna’s statue), all as Sejanus looks on. Surprisingly, these distinctly alien, non-Christian religious rites produce true future knowledge: the hitherto sessile statue of the goddess (probably a company member in a statue costume) miraculously becomes animated and turns her face away. The predic- tion implied by this silent rejection — that Sejanus has lost her favour and his luck has run out — is quickly vindicated for the audience in the next scene, when the favourite’s downfall begins.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Seminar Abstracts: the King's Men and Their Playwrights
    1 2019 Seminar Abstracts: The King’s Men and Their Playwrights Meghan C. Andrews, Lycoming College James J. Marino, Cleveland State University “Astonishing Presence”: Writing for a Boy Actress of the King’s Men, c. 1610-1616 Roberta Barker, Dalhousie University Although scholarship has acknowledged the influence of leading actors such as Richard Burbage on the plays created for the King’s Men, less attention has been paid to the ways in which the gifts and limitations of individual boy actors may have affected the company’s playwrights. Thanks to the work of scholars such as David Kathman and Martin Wiggins, however, it is now more feasible than ever to identify the periods during which specific boys served their apprenticeships with the company and the plays in which they likely performed. Building on that scholarship, my paper will focus on the repertoire of Richard Robinson (c.1597-1648) during his reign as one of the King’s Men’s leading actors of female roles. Surviving evidence shows that Robinson played the Lady in Middleton’s Second Maiden’s Tragedy in 1611 and that he appeared in Jonson’s Catiline (1611) and Fletcher’s Bonduca (c.1612-14). Using a methodology first envisioned in 1699, when one of the interlocutors in James Wright’s Historia Histrionica dreamt of reconstructing the acting of pre-Civil War London by “gues[sing] at the action of the Men, by the Parts which we now read in the Old Plays” (3), I work from this evidence to suggest that Robinson excelled in the roles of nobly born, defiant tragic heroines: women of “astonishing presence,” as Helvetius says of the Lady in The Second Maiden’s Tragedy (2.1.74).
    [Show full text]
  • ANNE BARTON Anne Barton 1933–2013
    ANNE BARTON Anne Barton 1933–2013 IN 1953 SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY, then, as now, one of the two leading academic Shakespeare journals in the world, published an article concisely titled ‘Love’s Labour’s Lost’.1 The list of contributors identified the author as ‘Miss Bobbyann Roesen, a Senior at Bryn Mawr’, who ‘is the first under- graduate to contribute an essay to Shakespeare Quarterly. She attended the Shakespeare Institute at Stratford-upon-Avon in the summer of 1952 and hopes to pursue graduate studies in Renaissance literature at Oxford or Cambridge.’2 Looking back forty years later, the former Miss Roesen, now Anne Barton, had ‘a few qualms and misgivings’ about reprinting the article in a collection of some of her pieces. As usual, her estimate of her own work was accurate, if too modest: As an essay drawing fresh attention to a play extraordinarily neglected or mis- represented before that date, it does not seem to me negligible. Both its high estimate of the comedy and the particular reading it advances are things in which I still believe. But, however influential it may have been, it is now a period piece, written in a style all too redolent of a youthful passion for Walter Pater.3 Undoubtedly influential and far from negligible, the article not only continues to read well, for all its Paterisms, but also continues to seem an extraordinary accomplishment for an undergraduate. There is, through- out, a remarkable ability to close-read Shakespeare carefully and with sus- tained sensitivity, to see how the language is working on the page and how 1 Bobbyann Roesen, ‘Love’s Labour’s Lost’, Shakespeare Quarterly, 4 (1953), 411–26.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Shakespeare Accessible to the High School Student: a Study of Language and Relationships in Hamlet and the Taming of the Shrew
    Making Shakespeare Accessible to the High School Student: A Study of Language and Relationships in Hamlet and The Taming of the Shrew Virginia Kay Jones INTRODUCTION Having taught for over thirty years at an inner city high school, I have tried not only to shape my curriculum to my students‘ needs but also to make the study of British literature relevant to my students‘ lives. The teaching of Shakespeare is always a challenge. I have taught Romeo and Juliet, Julius Caesar, Macbeth, The Taming of the Shrew, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, and Hamlet—all with varying degrees of success. For the past few years, Hamlet has been my focal point for the spring semester of senior English. Although my students enjoy the play—often stating that it is the first Shakespearean play that they have liked—I feel that I can do more than what I am doing. By just reading and discussing a play, a student cannot appreciate the essence of the work. My students love language. They can improvise rap and create beautiful poetry with little prompting. However, they are afraid to tackle Shakespeare. I intend to design a unit that will make the study of Shakespeare more accessible to my students by helping them ―come to terms‖ with the language. My students also love to act, so I want to teach Shakespeare with a more performance-based approach. Additionally, I want to expose my students to Shakespearean comedy as well as tragedy. A unit designed around the theme of relationships (male-female, sibling, and parent-child) is the thread to connect Hamlet and The Taming of the Shrew and make them more relevant to today‘s students.
    [Show full text]
  • Corrected Final Dissertation
    Thomas Middleton’s Middle Way: Political Irony and Jacobean Drama by Mark Kaethler A Thesis presented to the University of Guelph In partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Literary/Theatre Studies in English Guelph, Ontario, Canada © Mark Kaethler, January, 2016 ABSTRACT THOMAS MIDDLETON’S MIDDLE WAY: POLITICAL IRONY AND JACOBEAN DRAMA Mark Kaethler Advisor: Co-Advisor: University of Guelph, 2016 Mark Fortier Paul Mulholland The dissertation examines Thomas Middleton’s political irony in his drama. It differentiates this irony from the broad phrase “Middletonian irony” or the various kinds of irony featured in his oeuvre by observing its connection to what Sir Francis Bacon calls a “crossroads,” which produces opera basilica—works for the monarch to resolve. Middleton and Rowley’s definition of ironia in The World Tossed at Tennis (1620) in which the eye looks “two ways at once” positions the envisioned royal audience at such a crossroads. In doing so, Middleton and Rowley revise rhetorical definitions of irony that promote an inferred meaning which trumps literal interpretations; they instead favour a third meaning with their analogy of the tailor who stitches two previous habits into a new fashion with his needle. Rulers are thus encouraged to abandon singular, entrenched political habits in favour of new and mutually constituted fashions of governance. The course to which Middleton directs rulers and audiences here and elsewhere resembles the tradition of the via media with its projected balance, but its remaining tension infuses that outcome with the ongoing oscillation of the via diversa. In this manner Middleton’s political irony expands upon Bacon’s idea of “perpetual renovation” by seeing governance as a theatrical continuum of historical emulation and revision.
    [Show full text]
  • VII Shakespeare
    VII Shakespeare BRETT GREATLEY-HIRSCH, PETER J. SMITH, ELISABETTA TARANTINO, DOMENICO LOVASCIO, SHIRLEY BELL, CHRISTIAN GRIFFITHS, KATE WILKINSON, SHEILAGH ILONA O’BRIEN, AND LOUISE POWELL This chapter has three sections: 1. Editions and Textual Studies; 2. Shakespeare in the Theatre; 3. Criticism. Section 1 is by Brett Greatley- Hirsch; section 2 is by Peter J. Smith; section 3(a) is by Elisabetta Tarantino; section 3(b) is by Domenico Lovascio; section 3(c) is by Shirley Bell; section 3(d) is by Christian Griffiths; section 3(e) is by Kate Wilkinson; section 3(f) is by Sheilagh Ilona O’Brien; section 3(g) is by Louise Powell. 1. Editions and Textual Studies Readers will, I hope, forgive the relative brevity and narrow scope of this section as a necessary consequence of accepting the YWES brief three-quarters into the year. To avoid piecemeal, superficial treatment of the full range of this year’s offerings in Shakespearean textual studies, I limit my focus to a more manageable section of scholarship: studies in authorship attribution and the apocrypha. My discussion thus excludes a great deal of interesting and important work across a field whose vibrancy and rapid evolution is reflected by the range of topics brought together in Margaret Jane Kidnie and Sonia Massai’s Shakespeare and Textual Studies (CUP). My capacity as interim caretaker of this section similarly does not allow me to give the third edition of The Norton Shakespeare (Norton) and three impressive monographs — Laura Estill’s Dramatic Extracts in Seventeenth-Century English Manuscripts (UDelP), Judith Milhous and Robert D.
    [Show full text]
  • From Source to Play: Bonduca
    95 Chapter 5 From Source to Play: Bonduca In reconstructing the hypothetical processes of composing Bonduca, I will use the hypothetically authentic compositional stage of Elizabethan play-writing, the Plat (see Chapter 3 ‘Plats and Plays’). The gradual stages cover generally different types of dramatic work. The composition of the Plat requires the ability to form the crucial dramatic situation that would best convey the import. Realizing the Plat in dialogues needs verbal dexterity in carrying out the potential of the play: creating character, thought, dramatic situation, and a feeling for detail. Although in reality it is doubtful if these stages are kept apart physically—or if the historical Fletcher really separated them—it is helpful to keep them apart for the sake of an intrinsic, analytical study of technique.1 Although Clifford Leech (1962) claims that Fletcher was taking great liberty in dramatizing Briton history, the preceding chapter has shown that there is rather little material that could not be traced down to chronicles. Perhaps, what Leech re- fers to is Fletcher’s characteristic ‘onstage presence’, a specific ‘world’ of a mostly ignoble and ludicrous character, petty conflicts against a background of sublime and honourable action. Fletcher does not present the play’s protagonists, Bon- duca, Caratach or Junius, as heroes. The exuberant Bonduca of the very start is slighted by the second speech of the play—Caratach’s disdainful retort. Caratach is presented in the play as a naive idealist, and Junius is a general laughing stock altogether. It may be said without much distortion that Fletcher gives no noble notion of history; his legends are unsettlingly physical, sensual and replete with foolish individuals.
    [Show full text]
  • Hamlet (The New Cambridge Shakespeare, Philip Edwards Ed., 2E, 2003)
    Hamlet Prince of Denmark Edited by Philip Edwards An international team of scholars offers: . modernized, easily accessible texts • ample commentary and introductions . attention to the theatrical qualities of each play and its stage history . informative illustrations Hamlet Philip Edwards aims to bring the reader, playgoer and director of Hamlet into the closest possible contact with Shakespeare's most famous and most perplexing play. He concentrates on essentials, dealing succinctly with the huge volume of commentary and controversy which the play has provoked and offering a way forward which enables us once again to recognise its full tragic energy. The introduction and commentary reveal an author with a lively awareness of the importance of perceiving the play as a theatrical document, one which comes to life, which is completed only in performance.' Review of English Studies For this updated edition, Robert Hapgood Cover design by Paul Oldman, based has added a new section on prevailing on a draining by David Hockney, critical and performance approaches to reproduced by permission of tlie Hamlet. He discusses recent film and stage performances, actors of the Hamlet role as well as directors of the play; his account of new scholarship stresses the role of remembering and forgetting in the play, and the impact of feminist and performance studies. CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS www.cambridge.org THE NEW CAMBRIDGE SHAKESPEARE GENERAL EDITOR Brian Gibbons, University of Munster ASSOCIATE GENERAL EDITOR A. R. Braunmuller, University of California, Los Angeles From the publication of the first volumes in 1984 the General Editor of the New Cambridge Shakespeare was Philip Brockbank and the Associate General Editors were Brian Gibbons and Robin Hood.
    [Show full text]
  • King Richard III: Updated Edition Edited by Janis Lull Frontmatter More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-73556-8 - King Richard III: Updated Edition Edited by Janis Lull Frontmatter More information THE NEW CAMBRIDGE SHAKESPEARE general editor Brian Gibbons associate general editor A. R. Braunmuller, University of California, Los Angeles From the publication of the first volumes in 1984 the General Editor of the New Cambridge Shakespeare was Philip Brockbank and the Associate General Editors were Brian Gibbons and Robin Hood. From 1990 to 1994 the General Editor was Brian Gibbons and the Associate General Editors were A. R. Braunmuller and Robin Hood. KING RICHARD III King Richard III is one of Shakespeare’s most popular and frequently performed plays. Janis Lull’s introduction to this new edition, based on the First Folio, emphasises the play’s tragic themes – individual identity, determinism and choice – and stresses the importance of women’s roles in the play. It also underscores the special relationship between Richard III and Macbeth, demonstrating that the later tragedy re-examines issues raised in the earlier one. A thorough performance history of stage and film versions of Richard III shows how the text has been cut, rewritten and reshaped by directors and actors to enhance the role of Richard at the expense of other parts, especially those of the women. This updated edition contains a new introductory section covering recent criticism and performances – including the RSC cycles of the history plays – of this perennially popular play. The notes define the play’s language in terms easily accessible
    [Show full text]