Introduction
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Notes Introduction 1. Act, scene, and line numbers are, unless otherwise indicated, keyed to The RSC Shakespeare: Complete Works, ed. by Jonathan Bate and Eric Rasmussen (London: Palgrave, 2007). 2. Lytton Strachey, ‘Shakespeare’s Final Period’, in Book and Characters, French and English (London: Chatto & Windus, 1922), pp. 47–64. Compare Gordon McMullan, Shakespeare and the Idea of Late Writing: Authorship in the Proximity of Death (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), p. 54, p. 96, and p. 162. 3. Frank McGuinness, ‘Foreword’, in Shakespeare and Ireland: History, Politics, Culture, ed. by Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray (London: Macmillan, 1997), pp. xi–xii (p. xi). 4. Mark Thornton Burnett, ‘Introduction’, in ibid., pp. 1–5 (p. 1). 5. Janet Clare and Stephen O’Neill, ‘Introduction: Interpreting Shakespeare in Ireland’, in Shakespeare and the Irish Writer, ed. by Janet Clare and Stephen O’Neill (Dublin: University College Dublin Press, 2010), pp. 1–23 (pp. 1 and 2). 6. See Declan Kiberd, Inventing Ireland: The Literature of the Modern Nation (London: Vintage, 1996), pp. 268–85. 7. Robin E. Bates, Shakespeare and the Cultural Colonization of Ireland (New York: Routledge, 2008), p. 33. 8. Ibid., p. 9. 9. Rebecca Steinberger, Shakespeare and Twentieth-Century Irish Drama: Conceptualizing Identity and Staging Boundaries (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008), p. 1. 10. See Yeats, ‘The Celtic Element in Literature’, in Early Essays (2007), ed. by George Bornstein and Richard J. Finneran, The Collected Works of W.B. Yeats, ed. by George Mills Harper and George Bornstein, 14 vols (New York: Scribner, 1990–2008), IV, pp. 128–38, for an early defence. See Ben Levitas, The Theatre of Nation: Irish Drama and Cultural Nationalism 1890–1916 (Oxford: Clarendon, 2002), for a discussion of his ongoing antagonism with D.P. Moran in this context. Moran established his weekly review in 1900 with the help of Irish economist Father Thomas Finlay and a dissident fac- tion of the Gaelic League in Dublin to serve as a clericalist rival to Arthur Griffith’s secularist newspaper, United Irishman. 11. ‘Hamlet among the Celts’, The Leader, 2 July 1904, pp. 300–2. 12. Patrick Maume, ‘Introduction’, in D.P. Moran, The Philosophy of Irish Ireland, ed. by Patrick Maume (Dublin: University College Dublin Press, 2006), pp. vii–xxxi (p. xvi). 13. ‘The Bigots of the Wood’, The Leader, 29 October 1904, pp. 152–3. 14. Moran, Irish Ireland, pp. 100–1. 15. Ibid., p. 102. 16. Ibid., pp. 102–3. 175 176 Notes 17. Ibid., p. 103. 18. Ibid., p. 79. 19. Ibid., pp. 21–2. 20. Ibid., p. 22. 21. See Matthew Creasy, ‘“Hamlet among The Celts”: Shakespeare and Irish Ireland’, in Clare and O’Neill, Shakespeare and the Irish Writer, pp. 79–94. Creasy points out that these initials stand for ‘A Man Who Was There’, the pseudonym used by the satirist John Swift (p. 83). He also provides a more complete account of Swift’s contributions to The Leader’s regular series of political travesties than those discussed here. 22. Michel Foucault, ‘What is an Author?’, in The Foucault Reader, ed. by Paul Rabinow and trans. by Josué Harari (New York: Pantheon Books, 1984), pp. 101–20 (p. 108). 23. Jean I. Marsden, ed. The Appropriation of Shakespeare: Post-Renaissance Reconstructions of the Works and the Myth (London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991), p. 8. 24. Graham Holderness, ‘“Dressing Old Words New”: Shakespeare, Science, and Appropriation’, Borrowers and Lenders 1.2 (Fall/Winter, 2005), § II. This discussion owes a great deal to his section on the many recent studies of Shakespeare and appropriation that I have also referenced here. 25. Christy Desmet, ‘Introduction’, in Shakespeare and Appropriation, ed. by Christy Desmet and Robert Sawyer (London: Routledge), pp. 1–12 (p. 4). 26. Ibid., p. 12. 27. Holderness, ‘“Dressing Old Words New”’, § III. 28. Desmet, ‘Introduction’, pp. 3 and 10. 1 Matthew Arnold 1. See the ‘Preface’ to The Afternoon Lectures on English Literature, 1st series, ed. by Robert Henry Martley and Richard Denny Urlin (London: Bell and Daldy; Dublin: Hodges, Smith and McGee, 1863). 2. See James Byrne, ‘On the Influence of the National Character on English Literature’, in The Afternoon Lectures on English Literature, 1st series, pp. 3–40. 3. Ibid., p. 24. 4. Ernest Renan, Poetry of the Celtic Races and Other Essays, trans. by William G. Hutchinson (London: W. Scott, 1896), p. 8. 5. As Roy Foster has observed, the Fenians’ ‘importance was to sustain repub- lican separatism as part of the political language of mid-nineteenth-century Ireland; and, in a sense, to make it respectable’. See Foster, Modern Ireland 1600–1972 (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1988), p. 395. 6. See Richard English, Irish Freedom: The History of Nationalism in Ireland (London: Macmillan, 2006), pp. 179–92. 7. The Irish People, 20 January 1866. Quoted in ibid., p. 180. 8. ‘The Ancient Fenians and Fenian Literature’, Cornhill Magazine, January 1866, pp. 121–8 (pp. 121 and 125). 9. The Letters of Matthew Arnold, ed. by Cecil Y. Lang, 6 vols (Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia, 1996–2001), III, p. 55. Notes 177 10. Matthew Arnold, On the Study of Celtic Literature, in Lectures and Essays in Criticism, The Complete Prose Works of Matthew Arnold, ed. by R.H. Super, 11 vols (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1960–77), III, pp. 291–386 (p. 386). Indeed, these are the last words of Arnold’s lectures to his Oxford audience. 11. In 1965, Rachel Bromwich identified ‘two separate forms’ that Arnold’s influence took. The first she developed out of the immediate impact that Arnold’s ideas registered ‘upon critics and poets writing in English’, an influence that Yeats would qualify with his essay on ‘The Celtic Element in Literature’ (1897, 1902). ‘The second, and the more fruitful and permanent result of his lectures’, she argued, ‘was that he inaugurated in this country [England] a dispassionate and scholarly attitude towards Celtic Studies, which made possible their acceptance here as a serious academic discipline.’ See Rachel Bromwich, Matthew Arnold and Celtic Literature: A Retrospect, 1865–1965 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1965), p. 1. 12. Joep Leerssen, ‘Englishness, Ethnicity and Matthew Arnold’, European Journal of English Studies, 10.1 (2006), 63–79 (p. 74). 13. As Seamus Deane observes, ‘Gaelic poetry was widely thought to be in itself a guarantee of authentic feeling with the corollary, felt since the 1760s, that English literature could well do with a new access of “primitive” energy to restore to it a lost, pristine vigour’. See Deane, Celtic Revivals: Essays in Modern Irish Literature, 1880–1980 (London: Faber and Faber, 1985), p. 14. 14. Arnold, ‘Introduction to On the Study of Celtic Literature’, The Complete Prose Works of Matthew Arnold, III, pp. 387–95 (p. 393). 15. Arnold, Letters, III, p. 29. 16. Willy Maley, ‘British Ill Done? Recent Work on Shakespeare and British, English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh Identities’, Literature Compass 3.3 (2006), 487–512 (p. 493). 17. Leerssen, ‘Englishness, Ethnicity and Matthew Arnold’, p. 65. 18. Arnold, On the Study of Celtic Literature, p. 378. 19. Arnold, ‘Introduction to On the Study of Celtic Literature’, p. 393. See Deane, ‘Arnold, Burke and the Celts’, in Celtic Revivals (pp. 21–7) for a discussion of how Arnold drew on Edmund Burke’s political writings in these lectures and his Irish Essays (1882). 20. Arnold, On the Study of Celtic Literature, pp. 339–49. 21. Ibid., p. 344. 22. Ibid., 379. 23. Ibid., p. 378, p. 379. 24. Ibid., p. 383. 25. Philip Edwards, ‘Shakespeare and the Politics of the Irish Revival’, in The Internationalism of Irish Literature and Drama, ed. by Joseph McMinn, Irish Literary Studies Series 41 (Gerrards Cross: Colin Smythe, 1992), pp. 46–62 (p. 51). 26. Quoted in Arnold, On the Study of Celtic Literature, p. 340–1. 27. Leerssen, ‘Englishness, Ethnicity and Matthew Arnold’, p. 69. 28. Arnold, On the Study of Celtic Literature, p. 299, note. 29. Ibid., p. 376. 30. Ibid., p. 363. 31. Reproduced from Arnold’s lectures, p. 379. 178 Notes 32. Arnold, On the Study of Celtic Literature, p. 380. 33. Ibid., p. 379. Arnold’s italics. 34. These references pile one ‘and’ on another, as Terence Hawkes might have argued, building up to the present ‘and’ of Jessica’s escape into the night with her ‘unthrift love’. As Hawkes has argued in Meaning by Shakespeare, ‘repetition, or the generation of more of the same, itself becomes the basis for change and the construction of difference’. See Hawkes, Meaning by Shakespeare (London: Routledge, 1992), p. 22. 35. Arnold, On the Study of Celtic Literature, p. 380. 36. Ibid., p. 358. 37. To distinguish between Thomas Arnold (1795–1842) and his son Matthew (1822–88), I refer to the former as Dr Arnold – he had his doctorate in divinity – and the latter as simply Arnold. 38. Thomas Hughes, Tom Brown’s Schooldays (London: Dent, 1957), p. 65. 39. John Honey, Does Accent Matter? The Pygmalion Factor (London: Faber and Faber, 1991), p. 26. 40. Ibid., p. 27. 41. Arnold, Letters, II, p. 329. 42. Arnold, On the Study of Celtic Literature, p. 347. 43. Kiberd, Inventing Ireland, p. 30. 44. Arnold, Letters, I, p. 105. 45. Arnold, Culture and Anarchy, in The Complete Prose Works of Matthew Arnold, V, passim. 46. Leerssen in ‘Englishness, Ethnicity and Matthew Arnold’ (p. 71) has sug- gested the same, but places the inflection on the conflict between Arnold and his father. Therefore, the balance tilts towards the Teutonic in Leerssen’s estimation of Arnold’s ancestry. 47. E.H. Coleridge, Life and Correspondence of John Duke Lord Coleridge, Lord Chief Justice of England, 2 vols (London: Heinemann, 1904), I, p.