Margreta de Grazia

Subject and object in Renaissance culture

Introduction Margreta de Grazia, Maureen Quilligan and Peter Stallybrass Part I. Priority of Objects: 1. The ideology of superfluous things: King Lear as period piece Margreta de Grazia 2. Rude mechanicals Patricia Parker 3. Spensers domestic domain: poetry property and the Early Modern subject Louis A. Montrose Part II. Materialisations: 4. Gendering the Crown Stephen Orgel 5. The unauthored 1539 volume in which is printed the Hecatomphile, The Flowers of French Poetry and Other Soothing Things Nancy J. Vickers 6. Dematerialisations: textile and textual properties in Ovid, Sandys, and Spenser Ann Rosalind Jones Part III. Appropriations: 7. Freedom service and the trade in slaves: the problem of labour in Paradise Lost Maureen Quilligan 8. Feathers and flies: Aphra Behn and the seventeenth-century trade in exotica Margaret W. Ferguson 9. Unlearning the Aztec Cantares (Preliminaries to a postcolonial history) Gary Tomlinson Part IV. Fetishisms: 10. Worn worlds: clothes and identity on the Renaissance stage Peter Stallybrass 11. The Countess of Pembrokes literal translation Jonathan Goldberg 12. Remnants of the sacred in early modern England Stephen Greenblatt Part V. Objections: 13. The insincerity of women Marjorie Garber 14. Desire is death Jonathan Dollimore Index.

Shakespeare Verbatim: The Reproduction of Authenticity and the 1790 Apparatus.

Thank you very much for reading shakespeare verbatim the reproduction of authenticity and the 1790 apparatus. Maybe you have knowledge that, people have search hundreds times for their chosen readings like this shakespeare verbatim the reproduction of authenticity and the 1790 apparatus, but end up in infectious downloads. Rather than enjoying a good book with a cup of tea in the afternoon, instead they are facing with some malicious bugs inside their desktop computer.

The Scandal of Shakespeare’s Sonnets

Of all the many defences against the scandal of Shakespeare’s Sonnets-Platonism, for example, or the Renaissance ideal of friendship – John Benson’s is undoubtedly the most radical. In order to cover up the fact that the first 126 of the Sonnets were written to a male, Benson in his 1640 Poems: Written by Wil Shake-speare. Gent . changed masculine pronouns to feminine and introduced titles which directed sonnets to the young man to a mistress. By these simple editorial interventions, he succeeded in converting a shameful homosexual love to an acceptable heterosexual one, a conversion reproduced in the numerous reprintings of the 1640 Poems up through the eighteenth century. The source for this account is Hyder E. Rollins’s authoritative 1944 variorum Sonnets, the first edition to detail Benson’s pronominal changes and titular insertions. Subsequent editions have reproduced his conclusions, for example John Kerrigan’s 1986 edition which faults Benson for inflicting on the Sonnets ‘a series of unforgivable injuries’, above all ‘a single recurring revision: he emended the masculine pronouns used of the friend in 1 to 126 to “her”, “hers”, and “she”’. With varying degrees of indignation and amusement, critical works on the Sonnets have repeated the charge. The charge, however, is wrong. Benson did not attempt to convert a male beloved to a female. To begin with, the number of his alterations has been greatly exaggerated. Of the seventy-five titles Benson assigned to Shakespeares sonnets, only three of them direct sonnets from the first group of the 1609 Quarto (sonnets 1-126) to a woman. Furthermore, because none of the sonnets in question specifies the gender of the beloved, Benson had no reason to believe a male addressee was intended.

Shakespeare's Timeline

Until the eighteenth century, Shakespeare had no life, and certainly not one that extended from 1564 to 1616. Such a life became possible and desirable once Shakespeare’s life and works could be imagined on a chronological continuum. “A Chart of Biography,” devised in 1765, strikingly illustrates the compulsion to organize lives in the order of chronological time. It represents 2000 eminent lives with 2000 lines, each the result of connecting the individual’s birthdate with their deathdate. Malone, too, aimed to give Shakespeare a full and extended life, “a uniform and continued narrative,” by amassing all relevant dated materials (from official documents to titlepages) and stringing them together chronologically. Future biographers would refine the task. But surely some thought should be given to the fact that the works in all four seventeenth-century Folio circulated without an author’s life of any sort. Indeed before there was a life prefacing the works, there were the epistles and elegies of the Folio preliminaries declaiming again and again the author’s death.

Thinking with Shakespeare: Essays on Politics and Life (review)

447 November 1908 (where the risks of bad weather would have been comparable to the problems of an English summer), from pseudo-Greek theaters in schools to the beloved institution of the Open-Air Theatre in Regent’s Park in London, the belief that Shakespeare ought to be played outdoors, justified by the authority of the form of the Globe, has been at the heart of English amateur Shakespeare. After the long perspective of these histories, Dobson places all these forms of amateur performance as still current, still energetically performed by adults who might know better and children under adults’ adoring gaze, by the British at home and abroad, in private theatricals and in “am dram” societies countrywide. There is nothing new in Rosalind being played in 2007 by a girl aged ten as part of the Dressing-Up Box Theatre Company’s As You Like It, nor in the 1991 performance of Midsummer Night’s Dream by (who else?) the staff theater group of the Council of Europe, nor in the terrible production of Romeo “glimpsed” in the film Hot Fuzz (2007). But then that is part of the point: amateur performance does not seek the new with any of the frenetic searching that is so much a part of professional theater’s need for difference and innovation. It seeks the reassurance of tradition, the nostalgia of replication, and the comforts of a particular configuration of English culture, always something seen as being in danger of being lost. As Dobson, himself a child of enthusiastic amateur Shakespeare actors and a frequent participant in such shows, concludes, “Shakespeare has suited and indulged such amateur actors and their audiences with endless generosity” (217). Now it is up to the entire field of study of Shakespeare and performance to respond to Dobson’s magnificent and generous account.

Shakespeare and the Grammar of Forgiveness (review)

276 is never actually plague. Rather, it is the “pestilent desires” that the playhouses propagate or the “infectious sight of playes” that the antitheatrical tracts warn against (DeWall, 134). The tight spaces of the theaters contaminate morals, and the antitheatricalists appropriate plague terms in their prescriptions for moral health. The theater can also appropriate plague for more benign uses, as DeWall and Berggren observe. Lovesickness, due to the close attachment of lovers, is repeatedly troped in terms of plague:

La matérialité du texte shakespearien

Dieser Beitrag will zeigen, das die Konstruktion des Skakespearschen Textes in den Editionen und in der modernen Kritik implizit auf vier Kategorien beruht, die der Zeit nach der Aufklarung angehoren : das einzigartige Werk, das bestimmte Wort, die einheitliche Person und der eigenstandige Autor. Untersucht man die ersten Editionen der Stucke, die im Shakespearschen Kanon entstanden, so stellt sich heraus, das jede dieser Kategorien unzeitgemas ist. Was heute als ein einmaliges Stuck betrachtet wird, resultiert in Wirklichkeit aus einem Amalgam zahlreicher Texte der Renaissance. Was reproduziert wird als bestimmtes Wort, resultiert aus einer Streichung lexikalischer Ubergange, die moderne Handschriften der Zeit sowie die fruhen Drucke kennzeichnen. Was als Einheit der Person interpretiert wird, setzt eine Psychologie voraus, die den bescheidenen Anmerkungen in den ersten Drucken fremd ist. Schlieslich gestattet es die dem Autor zugeschriebene Souveranitat nicht zu verstehen, wie sehr die Produktion von Theatertexten damais das Ergebnis mehrfacher Zusammenarbeit war. Das Ziel des Beitrags ist, die Kennzeichen der Renaissance-Drucktexte nicht anhand moderner Kategorien, sondern diesen entgegengesetzt zu entwickeln.