Search results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 763 items for :

  • Manchester Shakespeare x
  • Refine by access: All content x
Clear All
Matthew Steggle

For thee ô Essex and thy noble line, Euer most great, yet greater then it was, Thou sun-shine, drying widdowes teared eyne, The Columb which supports a royall masse; Thou excellent, deriu’d from most diuine, The work ELIZAS power hath brought to passe: To

in Essex
An archaeological biography

This book provides an abundance of fresh insights into Shakespeare's life in relation to his lost family home, New Place. It first covers the first 6,000 years of the site, from its prehistoric beginnings through its development into a plot within the economic context of early medieval Stratford-upon-Avon, and the construction of the first timber-framed building. The book then describes the construction and distinctive features of Hugh Clopton's brick-and-timber house, the first New Place. Stratford-upon-Avon gave Shakespeare a deeply rooted love of family, loyal neighbours and friends, and although he came to enjoy a prominent social standing there, he probably had little or no time at all for its puritanical side. The book provides a cultural, religious and economic context for Shakespeare's upbringing; education, work, marriage, and early investments up to his son, Hamnet's death, and his father, John Shakespeare, being made a gentleman. It discusses the importance of New Place to Shakespeare and his family during the nineteen years he owned it and spent time there. The book also takes us to just beyond the death of Shakespeare's granddaughter, Elizabeth, Lady Bernard, the last direct descendant of Shakespeare to live in the house. It further gives an account of James Halliwell's acquisition of the site, his archaeology and how New Place has become an important focus for the local community, not least during the 'Dig for Shakespeare'.

Abstract only
John Drakakis

: William’s chief guides for rhetoric were the Ad Herennium (then thought to be Cicero’s) for general information, Quintilian for theory, Erasmus’s Copia for variety and elegance, and Susenbrotus for tropes and figures of speech. It is not clear that he ever read a work by Cicero other than Tusculan Disputations ; his texts at school were few. 5 Honan’s reference to Shakespeare’s institutionally cultivated ‘memory’ raises a fundamental question to which we shall return, although the

in Shakespeare’s resources
John Drakakis

issue is how we identify and categorise these fundamental discontinuities, and how in the process of their persistent collision they generate meanings. This is not simply a matter of interpreting an otherwise stable text, or performance, or indeed, the operations of the dramatist’s ‘mind’, 13 rather it is a question of how those discursive elements enter the text, and the representational work that they perform and the meanings they generate in the process of trafficking . Janet Clare has done admirable service in bringing

in Shakespeare’s resources
John Drakakis

into the imagination of the poet, so to recreate the moment of vision and the process of composition as to apprehend the work of art in its totality. 4 His choice of Croce as a support appears to have been maintained throughout the project, perhaps because from the outset the Italian philosopher emphasised an essential connection between ‘history’ and ‘art’. 5 Bullough’s ‘narrative and dramatic sources’ are themselves a kind of history in that they aim to demonstrate what the dramatist

in Shakespeare’s resources
Abstract only
The elephant in the graveyard
John Drakakis

modern idea of ‘Shakespeare as reader’ to introduce a variety of qualifications and speculations (my italics): The term ‘reading’, of course , covers a wide variety of interactions. As a working man of the theatre, Shakespeare must have read, consulted, written, doctored, revised, watched, rehearsed, and acted in hundreds of scenes and plays. He worked alone and with other writers and actors; he knew well the repertory of his own company as well as those of the competition. As we might

in Shakespeare’s resources
Abstract only
John Drakakis

Williams’s critique of the quasi-metaphysical category of langue that had played so important a part in structuralist thinking about language since Saussure. Here, however, it appears as part of a critique of ‘historical priority’ that is the precursor to an acceptance of the link between ‘individual greatness’ and the concept of ‘originality’: The ancients themselves were preceded by even more ancient artists whose work and names are lost. The claim to historical priority is vitiated since no human

in Shakespeare’s resources
Abstract only
John Drakakis

process the originary structure ossifies the dynamic role of the ‘first reader’ as a historical producer of dramatic writing. In this connection Derrida goes on to make an important observation: We would search the ‘public’ in vain for the first reader: i.e. the first author of a work. And the ‘sociology of literature’ is blind to the war and the ruses perpetuated by the author who reads and by the first reader who dictates, for at stake here is the origin of the work itself. The sociality of

in Shakespeare’s resources
John Drakakis

comic exposure of the business of representation itself. This distancing of the fable performs a similar function to that of the representation of the Nine Worthies, except that in A Midsummer Night’s Dream both the onstage and offstage audiences are already assured of a traditional comic conclusion. Night, darkness and the triple Hecate’s team notwithstanding, violence and death are kept at bay. Here Shakespeare uses stock theatrical situations and the formulae embedded in them to work through definitions of comedy that

in Shakespeare’s resources
John Drakakis

’. Furthermore, he uses the phrase ‘aesthetic communication’ to indicate ‘the basis common to it and other social forms’ and to point out the connection between the uniqueness of this particular form of communication and the social conditions that generate it. ‘To understand this special form of social communication’, Volosinov argues, is ‘precisely the task of a sociological poetics’. In this way, the critic avoids what he calls ‘the fetishization of the artistic work artifact’, which ignores ‘the social essence of art’. 4 In

in Shakespeare’s resources