Shadows and the Substance of Shakespearean Drama

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Shadows and the Substance of Shakespearean Drama Shadows and the Substance of Shakespearean Drama by Janine Harper A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of English University of Toronto © Copyright by Janine Harper 2018 Shadows and the Substance of Shakespearean Drama Janine Harper Doctor of Philosophy Department of English University of Toronto 2018 Abstract England in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries was the stage for explorations of the physics of light and its representation in art. Although much critical attention has been paid to this interest in light, there has not yet been sufficient attention to the concurrent fascination with its absence as epitomized by shadows. I argue in this dissertation that the phenomenon of the shadow existed as a powerful trope for artistic and literary expression in the period; I conceive of the Renaissance shadow not, however, just as a figure of negativity or privation, but also as one of doubling and of excess in English usage. My study identifies three prominent and interconnected senses of shadows that are of special importance to Renaissance dramatists such as Shakespeare, Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher, Richard Brome, and John Webster. I investigate debates surrounding the nature of the “shades” of ghosts, familiars, and other supernatural phenomena as they are discussed by natural scientists and demonologists, and as they are staged in Hamlet, Macbeth, and The Late Lancashire Witches. The problems of imitation, subordination, and spectrality that haunt these plays also figure in staged relations of social “shadowing” that obtain between speakers and mediators in Measure for Measure and The Merchant of ii iii Venice, and between masters and servants in The Tempest and The Duchess of Malfi. As synonyms for the forms and practices of art, shadows are associated with popular denigrations of visual and rhetorical art; in Cymbeline and Philaster, they also evoke the anxiety surrounding art’s power to betray its objects with unfaithful semblances and to encourage scandalous acts of imitation. In examining these works, I show how the discourse of shadows reveals the liminal spaces and hidden undersides of early modern scientific, philosophical, and theatrical cultures. Attention to the shadow, its cognate terms, and its related phenomena engages debates that captivated dramatists at the turn of the seventeenth century regarding the operations of the mind; the unstable boundaries between science, magic, and art; and the social value of the theatre itself as a site of highly affective language and gesture. Acknowledgements This dissertation would not have been possible without the support of my committee, for whom I have nothing but the highest respect and deepest gratitude. I am indebted to my supervisor, Elizabeth Harvey, for seeing my thesis from its vague beginnings through to its completion as a body of work that we were both excited to discuss, and for helping me to reach that point with thoughtful and encouraging questions and suggestions at our many meetings over the years. Likewise, I am grateful to Katherine Larson, who was always ready with keen advice and new reading material, and who also encouraged me to hone my pedagogical skills in ways that complemented my dissertation work. Many thanks go, too, to Lynne Magnusson, whose enthusiastic support for my project came with much-needed pushes to think outside my comfort zone, clarify my reasoning, and tighten up my close readings. Last—but certainly not least—I am grateful to Liza Blake and Mary Thomas Crane, my internal and external examiners, respectively, whose insightful questions not only made for an exciting conversation in my defense, but also helped to illuminate new directions for my work to take in the coming years. This project was also made possible by the generous financial support of numerous funding bodies. I want to acknowledge the support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, which funded my work with Canada Graduate Scholarships at the master’s and doctoral level, and the Ontario Graduate Scholarship program, which provided me with financial support in the fifth year of my studies. My project was also supported by the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Arts and Science and School of Graduate Studies, which provided me with conference travel grants, and by the Shakespeare Association of America, whose Graduate Student Travel Awards allowed me to attend annual meetings and engage in productive seminar conversations with fellow Shakespeare scholars. I am grateful as well to the Department of English for selecting me as the recipient of the Avie Bennett Scholarship and Viola Whitney Pratt Memorial Scholarship, and for continuing to support my research in my sixth year with the Doctoral Completion Award. iv v I am indebted to a nigh-innumerable array of friends and colleagues whom I have been lucky to know, work with, and share ideas with over the years. I owe my thanks to the many members of the Shakespeare Association of America—and especially to Drew Daniel, Subha Mukherji, Elizabeth Swann, and Adam Zucker—who generously read and offered insightful advice on early drafts of these chapters. I offer my warmest thanks, too, to Jeremy Lopez for acting as a pedagogical role model and a source of alternatives to my own critical reading methods during our many years of shared undergraduate Shakespeare teaching. I am grateful to Alexandra Johnston, Sally-Beth MacLean, Carolyn Black, Patrick Gregory, Kathy Chung, and the other members and associates of the Records of Early English Drama office here at the University of Toronto—not simply for taking me on and empowering me to contribute meaningfully to REED’s digital humanities projects, but also for giving me years of good conversation and moral support. I am eternally grateful, too, to the friends and colleagues within my doctoral cohort who cared for and supported me over these past seven years, and who were always willing to examine my drafts with a much-needed external perspective. Among these friends, I want to single out Jeff Espie, John Estabillo, Deni Kasa, and Sarah Star, who joined me in our very first dissertation workshop group and who may not realize how instrumental their thoughtful critiques were to the transformation of my early drafts into successful chapters. My love and thanks go out, too, to all the members of the movie night crew for being there for me during those long weeks of writing and revising, and for laughing with me at the many curiosities that I pulled out of old plays and treatises over the years. Finally, my deepest gratitude goes to my parents, Craig and Peggy Harper, whose support gave me the courage to begin this academic journey, and whose encouragement helped me to see it through. Table of Contents Introduction: Foreshadowing………………………………………………………….. 1 I: Ambitious substances……………………………………………………......... 1 II: “thy fair imperfect shade” ………………………………………………........ 8 III: “I’ll call thee Hamlet” …………………………………………………......... 21 Chapter 1: Describing the Demonic in Macbeth and The Late Lancashire Witches….. 32 I: Renaissance witches, at home and abroad…………………………………….. 37 Witchy words and white magics ………………………………………. 37 The shadowy universe…………………………………………………. 42 Lancashire’s “crisis of mediation”…………………………………….. 45 II: Dark demonological matters…………………………………………………. 47 Representative “shaddowes”…………………………………………... 47 Fantastical printings…………………………………………………… 51 III: Witchcraft, testimony, and forensic drama………………………………….. 55 Macbeth’s solipsistic shadows………………………………………… 55 Arthur’s imaginative empiricism……………………………………… 61 IV: Communal errors, bodily truths……………………………………………... 66 Bloody witnesses………………………………………………………. 66 Self-incriminating speakers……………………………………………. 68 “The future in the instant”……………………………………………... 71 Brome and Heywood’s loose judicial ends……………………………. 75 Chapter 2: Cymbeline and Philaster’s Rhetorical Shadows ………………………….. 80 I: The rhetorical shadow…………………………………………………………. 84 Rhetoric’s “coulours and shadowing”…………………………………. 84 Innogen’s shadow……………………………………………………… 88 Italian passions and English passivity…………………………………. 95 Artificial Arethusas……………………………………………………. 100 II: The shadow of Narcissus…………………………………………………….. 104 Revisionary histories…………………………………………………... 104 vi vii “It is a woman!”……………………………………………………….. 109 “Harmless lightning”.………………………………………………….. 113 Chapter 3: Shakespeare’s Shady Echoes……………………………………………… 120 I: Talking heads and substitutes…………………………………………………. 123 Sonic shadows…………………………………………………………. 123 The “logic of deferral”………………………………………………… 128 Supplements and substitutes…………………………………………... 132 II: Echoes of Narcissus………………………………………………………….. 135 Dubious echoes………………………………………………………... 135 Shakespeare’s bad listeners……………………………………………. 140 Conversation and seduction…………………………………………… 143 III: Selfhood and sycophancy…………………………………………………… 148 “Good echoes”………………………………………………………… 148 Shady self-conduct.……………………………………………………. 153 Chapter 4: The Servant in the Shadows……………………………………………….. 158 I: The inevitable shadow………………………………………………………… 163 Servants and their substances………………………………………….. 163 Service and ambition…………………………………………………... 166 II: Erotic servitude……………………………………………………………….. 173 “this patient log-man”…………………………………………………. 173 “a lord of mis-rule”……………………………………………………. 179 III: Servants and other selves……………………………………………………. 185 “I would hang on their ears like a horse-leech”……………………….. 185 “another my selfe”…………………………………………………….. 188 IV:
Recommended publications
  • 6 X 10.Three Lines .P65
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-51530-6 - Rhetoric beyond Words: Delight and Persuasion in the Arts of the Middle Ages Edited by Mary Carruthers Index More information Index Abelard, Peter 133, 160, 174, 250–1, 275 and ductus 215, 216, 228, 239–43 Commentaria in Epistolam Pauli ad and memory 215–16, 231, 233, 239–43 Romanos 252–4 and scholasticism 20–8 Commentary on Boethius’ De differentiis arrangement (dispositio) in 36–8, 229–30 topicis 202, 251 as concept in rhetorical discourse 4, 26, 27, Easter liturgy for Paraclete 256–63 32, 190–1 Letter 5 257–8 borrows rhetorical vocabulary 4, 7, 36–7 on rhetoric 202, 251–63 compared to poetry 26, 190–1 accent see inflection Aristotle 24–5, 131 Accursius (Bolognese jurist) 125 influence of Physics and Metaphysics Ackerman, James S. 40 21–2, 24–5 acting 161–3, 166–7 on epistēmē, téchnē and empeiría 1–2 compared to oratory 10, 127, 157–8 on ethos, logos and pathos 7 masks and 158–9 Rhetoric 2, 7, 36, 127, 128 actio see delivery theory of causality 21–2, 24–5 Adam of Dryburgh (Adam Scot), De tripartite Topics 202 tabernaculo 233, 242 Arnulf of St Ghislain 65 Aelred of Rievaulx (abbot) 124, 133–5 arrangement (dispositio) De spiritali amicitia 134 and ductus 196, 199–206, 229–30, 263 agency as mapping 191–2 of audiences 2, 165–6 Geoffrey of Vinsauf on 190–2 of ductus 199–206 in architecture 36–8, 229–30 of roads 191 personified as ‘Deduccion’ 205–6 of the work itself 201–2 Quintilian on 4, 230 shared by composer and performer 88 see also consilium; ductus; maps, mapping; Agrippa (Roman emperor) 281–3
    [Show full text]
  • The Future Francis Beaumont
    3340 Early Theatre 20.2 (2017), 201–222 http://dx.doi.org/10.12745/et.20.2.3340 Eoin Price The Future Francis Beaumont This essay attends to Beaumont’s recent performance and reception history, docu- menting a range of academic and popular responses to demonstrate the challenges and affordances of engaging with Beaumont’s plays. The first section examines sev- eral twenty-first century performances of Beaumont plays, focusing especially on the Globe’s stimulating production of The Knight of the Burning Pestle. The second sec- tion considers how Beaumont was both acknowledged and ignored in 2016, the year of his 400th anniversary. The final section suggests some avenues for further research into the performance of Beaumont’s plays. In 1613, illness caused one of the greatest writers of the age to retire from play- wrighting, paving the way for his principal collaborator, John Fletcher, to become the main dramatist for the King’s Men, the company for whom he had writ- ten some of his most popular plays. Three years later, the London literary scene mourned his death. Tributes continued for decades and he was ultimately hon- oured with the posthumous publication of a handsome folio of his works. This is the familiar story of William Shakespeare. It is also the unfamiliar story of Francis Beaumont. The comparison of the two authors’ deaths I have just offered entails a degree of contrivance. Beaumont seemingly retired because he was incapacitated by a stroke, but Shakespeare’s reasons for retiring, and indeed, the nature of his retire- ment, are much less clear.
    [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]
  • Rhetorik Und Aufmerksamkeit. Die Fünf Officia Oratoris (PDF)
    Rhetorik und Aufmerksamkeit. Die fünf officia oratoris (Melanie Möller, FU Berlin) Terminologie der Aufmerksamkeit: • gr. : προσέχειν (τòν νοῦν) • attendere, intendere, contendere, (tendere) • anim(um) advertere • erigere, incitare, excitare, movere • videre, audire • observare, intueri Dialogi Berolinenses 2018: „Rhetorik und Aufmerksamkeit“ (Melanie Möller) 2 Rezeptionshaltungen: benivolus, attentus, docilis Prozess der „Interattention“ (B. Waldenfels, Phänomenologie der Aufmerksamkeit, Frankfurt a.M. 2004) Dialogi Berolinenses 2018: „Rhetorik und Aufmerksamkeit“ (Melanie Möller) 3 officia oratoris/partes rhetorices inventio „Auffindung“ dispositio „Anordnung“ elocutio „Vertextung“ memoria „Auswendiglernen“ (Mnemotechnik) actio/pronuntiatio „Vortrag“ Dialogi Berolinenses 2018: „Rhetorik und Aufmerksamkeit“ (Melanie Möller) 4 inv. 1, 9: partes autem eae, quas plerique dixerunt, „Die Teile aber sind diejenigen, die die meisten inventio, dispositio, elocutio, memoria, angeführt haben: Auffindung, Anordnung, pronuntiatio. inventio est excogitatio rerum stilistische Durchformung, Auswendiglernen, verarum aut veri similium, quae causam Vortrag. Beim ‚Auffinden‘ handelt es sich um das probabilem reddant; dispositio est rerum Ersinnen wahrer oder wahrheitsähnlicher inventarum in ordinem distributio; elocutio est Gegebenheiten, die den Fall plausibel machen idoneorum verborum ad inventionem sollen; unter ‚Anordnung‘ verstehen wir die accommodatio; memoria est firma animi rerum Verteilung der aufgefundenen Argumente auf ac verborum ad inventionem
    [Show full text]
  • Oratoria, Retórica, Oralidad
    [Publicado en Oralia. Análisis del discurso oral, 2, 1999, pp. 7-25.] RETÓRICA Y ORALIDAD TOMÁS ALBALADEJO Universidad Autónoma de Madrid 1. RETÓRICA Y ORATORIA EN RELACIÓN CON LA ORALIDAD. La retórica nació como técnica de la construcción y comunicación oral de discursos lingüísticos con la finalidad de influir en los oyentes. La relación de la retórica con la oralidad es evidente desde sus orígenes y está apoyada por las denominaciones mismas que han recibido históricamente los distintos componentes de la comunicación retórica: 'rhétor' es la palabra que designa en griego al orador, 'akroatés' es el oyente y 'lógos', relacionado con 'légo' ('decir'), es el discurso. 'Rhétor' es traducido al latín por 'orator', 'akroatés' por 'auditor' y 'lógos' por 'oratio'. Por su parte, el nombre griego de la disciplina, 'tékhne rhetoriké', es traducido al latín por 'ars oratoria'. De este modo, 'tékhne rhetoriké' y 'ars oratoria', así como los sustantivos españoles 'retórica' y 'oratoria', funcionan como expresiones equivalentes. La retórica es definida por Quintiliano como «ars bene dicendi» (Quintiliano Institutio oratoria: 2, 17, 27), como arte o técnica de hablar bien, con la consiguiente asociación a la oralidad. La relación entre retórica y oralidad se hace patente en la expresión latina y española 'oratoria'. Sin embargo, las inicialmente equivalentes expresiones 'retórica' y 'oratoria' presentan una divergencia en la medida 2 en que el término 'retórica' se ha ido especializando para la configuración teórica de la técnica del discurso lingüístico persuasivo y 'oratoria' se ha concretado en la práctica comunicativa oral propia de esa técnica, si bien se trata de una divergencia que no es absoluta, pues pueden encontrarse empleos de 'retórica' y de 'oratoria' como sinónimos.
    [Show full text]
  • DIE TEXTVARIANTEN VON BEAUMONT UND FLETCHERS „PHILASTER, OR LOVE LIES -BLEEDING" Etc., NEBST EINER ZUSAMMENSTELLUNG DEE AUSGABEN UND LITTERATUR IHRER WERKE
    DIE TEXTVARIANTEN VON BEAUMONT UND FLETCHERS „PHILASTER, OR LOVE LIES -BLEEDING" etc., NEBST EINER ZUSAMMENSTELLUNG DEE AUSGABEN UND LITTERATUR IHRER WERKE. m. BONDUCA. Dyce, Fleay und Boyle halten Fletcher für den alleinigen Verfasser dieser tragödie, über deren inhalt und quellen ich bereits früher einmal in den „Englischen Studien" , l berichtet habe. Nach Weber ist das stück ein gemeinschaft- liches produkt Beaumonts und Fletchers, und Darley lässt die frage der Verfasserschaft unentschieden. Entstanden ist es noch vor 1619, dem todesjahre des schauspielere Burbadge1, welcher eine der rollen des dramas, vermutlich die des Cara- tach, gespielt hat.2 Der erste druck findet sich in der folioausgabe von 1647 (A) ohne personen-Verzeichnis, der zweite mit einem solchen in der folio von 1679 (B) und der dritte ist eine quartaus- gabe vom jähre 1718, welche Dyce nicht erwähnt. Dieselbe schliesst sich eng an B an und ist betitelt: 1 „' Richard Burbadge Player was buried the XVI«i of Marche [1618 —19 — his place of residence having been] Holly well St.' I copy this entry literatim from the Register of Burials belonging to St. Leonard's Church Shoreditch." (D). 2 Vergl. Folio 1679: The principal actors were — Richard Burbadge. William Ostler. Henry Condel. John Lowin. William Egglestone. John Vnderwood. Nicholas Toolie. Richard Robinson. Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services Authenticated Download Date | 5/29/15 10:51 AM 422 BENNO LEONHARDT, Bondvca. A Tragedy. Written by Mr. Francis Beau- mont and Mr. John Fletcher. London, Printed for J. T. And sold by J. Brown at the Black Swan without Temple- Bar.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Romans to the Normans on the English Renaissance Stage
    From the Romans to the Normans on the English Renaissance Stage Lisa Hopkins EARLY DRAMA, ART, AND MUSIC From the Romans to the Normans on the English Renaissance Stage EARLY DRAMA, ART, AND MUSIC Series Editors David Bevington University of Chicago Robert Clark Kansas State University Jesse Hurlbut Brigham Young University Alexandra Johnston University of Toronto Veronique B. Plesch Colby College ME Medieval Institute Publications is a program of The Medieval Institute, College of Arts and Sciences From the Romans to the Normans on the English Renaissance Stage by Lisa Hopkins Early Drama, Art, and Music MedievaL InsTITUTE PUBLICATIOns Western Michigan University Kalamazoo Copyright © 2017 by the Board of Trustees of Western Michigan University Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data are available from the Library of Congress. ISBN: 9781580442794 eISBN: 9781580442800 All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this book may be reproduced, stored in, or introduced into a retrieval system, or trans- mitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the written permission of both the copyright owner and the author of the book. Every effort has been made to obtain permission to use all copyrighted illustrations reproduced in this book. Nonetheless, whosoever believes to have rights to this material is advised to contact the publisher. Chapter 6 Valiant Welshwomen: When Britain Came Back N The MYTH OF the essential continuity of the island’s inhabitants, Ino nation loomed larger than the Welsh, to the extent that they might be referred to simply as “the British,” as in R.
    [Show full text]
  • Studying and Teaching “Law As Rhetoric”: a Place to Stand
    Scholarly Commons @ UNLV Boyd Law Scholarly Works Faculty Scholarship 2010 Studying and Teaching “Law as Rhetoric”: A Place to Stand Linda L. Berger University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub Part of the Legal Education Commons, Legal Writing and Research Commons, and the Other Law Commons Recommended Citation Berger, Linda L., "Studying and Teaching “Law as Rhetoric”: A Place to Stand" (2010). Scholarly Works. 664. https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/664 This Article is brought to you by the Scholarly Commons @ UNLV Boyd Law, an institutional repository administered by the Wiener-Rogers Law Library at the William S. Boyd School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STUDYING AND TEACHING "LAW AS RHETORIC": A PLACE TO STAND Linda L. Berger* The first of these [attacks on rhetoric], the attack from above, argues for a politics of reason whose indisputable truths can only be obscured by the rhetorician's passionate appeals. This is the position that Socrates defends. The second, the attack from below, insists that the rhetorician's invocation of truth and justice is a sham, a technique for gaining power whose success requires that its practitioners either fail to understand what they are doing or deliberately conceal it. This is the line of attack forcefully pressed by Callicles ..... Gorgias stands between these two, between Socrates and Callicles, and the question is, does he have any ground on which to stand? Does the craft of rhetoric have a separate and legitimate place in human life, in between pure reason and pure power?' INTRODUCTION As they begin law study, students "undergo a linguistic rup- ture, a change in how they view and use language." 2 The change affects not only their understanding of language use, but also 3 their ideas about how the law works and its place for them.
    [Show full text]
  • Politics of English Drama, 1603-1660
    Staging Republic and Empire: Politics of English Drama, 1603-1660 by Judy Hyo Jung Park This thesis/dissertation document has been electronically approved by the following individuals: Cohen,Walter Isaac (Chairperson) Kalas,Rayna M (Minor Member) Lorenz,Philip A (Minor Member) Brown,Laura Schaefer (Minor Member) Murray,Timothy Conway (Minor Member) STAGING REPUBLIC AND EMPIRE: POLITICS OF ENGLISH DRAMA, 1603-1660 A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Judy Hyo Jung Park August 2010 © 2010 Judy Hyo Jung Park STAGING REPUBLIC AND EMPIRE: POLITICS OF ENGLISH DRAMA, 1603-1660 Judy Hyo Jung Park, Ph.D. Cornell University 2010 This study argues that the classical legal concepts of dominium and imperium, ownership and rule, illuminate the political tensions of seventeenth century English drama. The concept of imperium was central to seventeenth century debates over the terms of international commerce, setting important precedents for the development of modern international law. Geopolitical disputes over dominium and imperium shadow the developing conflict between republican, monarchical, and imperial models of the English state from the Stuart monarchy to the post-revolutionary English republic. In the drama of the early to mid-seventeenth century, we can trace the emergence of designs for an imperial English state well before the Restoration and the eighteenth century. Moving from the reign of James I to the Protectorate under Oliver Cromwell, this study reevaluates the genres of tragicomedy, closet drama, topical drama, and operatic masques, analyzing Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher’s Philaster and A King and No King, Elizabeth Cary’s The Tragedy of Mariam, Philip Massinger and John Fletcher’s The Tragedy of Sir John van Olden Barnavelt, and William Davenant’s The Siege of Rhodes.
    [Show full text]
  • Renaissance Drama- Unit I
    Renaissance Drama- Unit I 1 Background 2 The Elizabethan and Jacobean Ages 3 Offshoots of Renaissance Drama 4 Major poets of this Age 5 Elizabethan Prose 6 Elizabethan Drama 7 Other Playwrights during this period 8 Conclusion 9 Important Questions 1 Background 1.1 Introduction to Renaissance Drama: Renaissance" literally means "rebirth." It refers especially to the rebirth of learning that began in Italy in the fourteenth century, spread to the north, including England, by the sixteenth century, and ended in the north in the mid-seventeenth century (earlier in Italy). During this period, there was an enormous renewal of interest in and study of classical antiquity. Yet the Renaissance was more than a "rebirth." It was also an age of new discoveries, both geographical (exploration of the New World) and intellectual. Both kinds of discovery resulted in changes of tremendous import for Western civilization. In science, for example, Copernicus (1473-1543) attempted to prove that the sun rather than the earth was at the center of the planetary system, thus radically altering the cosmic world view that had dominated antiquity and the Middle Ages. In religion, Martin Luther (1483-1546) challenged and ultimately caused the division of one of the major institutions that had united Europe throughout the Middle Ages--the Church. In fact, Renaissance thinkers often thought of themselves as ushering in the modern age, as distinct from the ancient and medieval eras Study of the Renaissance might well center on five interrelated issues. First, although Renaissance thinkers often tried to associate themselves with classical antiquity and to dissociate themselves from the Middle Ages, important continuities with their recent past, such as belief in the Great Chain of Being, were still much in evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Arden Shakespeare
    v^ THE ARDEN SHAKESPEARE GENERAL EDITOR : W. J. CRAIG CYMBELINE 'U THE WORKS OF SHAKESPEARE CYMBELINE EDITED BY EDWARD DOWDEN I METHUEN AND CO. 36 ESSEX STREET: STRAND LONDON 1903 CONTENTS I'AGK Introduction • vii Cymbeline I Additional Note • • .212 INTRODUCTION The play of Cymbeliyte was printed for the first time in the Folio of 1623, where it is placed among the tragedies, and is the last play in the volume. It is there divided throughout into acts and scenes. I have found the text often difficult to ascertain, and have felt how much cause there is to regret that we possess no Quarto, by which to test the readings of the Folio and correct some of its errors. It has seemed best to be con- servative of the original text, where very strong reasons do not appear for departure from it. But I have accepted some alterations in punctuation suggested by Vaughan and others —alterations which in some instances affect the mean- ing of the passages. With respect to the collation of the Folios, for which I have used my own copies of F 2 and F 4, and the Cam- bridge edition and Mr. Craig's New Shakspere Society edition for F 3, I have noted what appears to me of im- portance and nothing more. It would have been easier to have asked the printers to set up Mr. Craig's complete collation, than to pick out the various readings which seem to me to deserve attention. The variations of the later Folios from the first do not in my eyes possess in general vii VIU INTRODUCTION even the value of editorial alterations, for the greater number of them are due to the carelessness of seventeenth-century printers.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Cambridge University Press 0521228786 - Cymbeline Edited by Martin Butler Excerpt More information INTRODUCTION Cymbeline is one of Shakespeare’s longest and richest plays. Its capaciousness is its great virtue. It ranges from the nightmare claustrophobia of Innogen’s bedroom to the epic violence of Romano-British battle; it juxtaposes the innocent prude Posthumus, the refined brute Cloten, and the nonchalant hero Guiderius; it accommodates Iachimo’s corrosive cynicism and Jupiter’s transcendental affirmations. Its stagecraft is multi- levelled, and its texture is densely allusive, reflecting the bewildering array of sources on which it draws; its generic affinities link it with all parts of the canon. Yet despite this astonishing variety, its narrative grips and compels, rising inexorably from a naive tale of sundered lovers to a peripeteia of dazzling artfulness. The Victorian critics who supposed the ageing Shakespeare was writing in a mood of philosophic calm or cata- tonic boredom could scarcely have been more mistaken. Cymbeline was produced by a dramatist working at the height of his powers.1 These days Cymbeline has no shortage of able advocates, but it remains a difficult play to see whole, and has frequently been dismissed as muddled and overcomplicated. The most disparaging appraisal came, famously, from Dr Johnson:2 This play has many just sentiments, some natural dialogues, and some pleasing scenes, but they are obtained at the expense of much incongruity. To remark the folly of the fiction, the absurdity of the conduct, the confusion of the names and manners of different times, and the impossibility of the events in any system of life, were to waste criticism upon unresisting imbecility, upon faults too evident for detection, and too gross for aggravation.
    [Show full text]