Search results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 285 items for :

  • "recognition" x
  • Manchester Shakespeare x
  • Refine by access: All content x
Clear All
Abstract only
John Drakakis

retrieved through literary reconstruction. Indeed, Burrow is one in a long line of scholars whose discomfort with the methods of traditional source study have emerged in their recognition of the limitations of a linear approach to the problem, but who have not fully appreciated the tension between oral and literary language that might be involved. 23 Bruce R. Smith has observed that Shakespeare’s contemporary Ben Jonson entertained a ‘literate view’ of language as ‘a body’. 24 This is true, but only up to a point. However

in Shakespeare’s resources
Abstract only
Shakespeare, Jonson and the circulation of theatrical ideas
John Drakakis

offer a field of social action to this process of expulsion’. 30 From this we can confirm that intertextuality goes beyond Janet Clare’s commonsense, empirico-historical account of the relationship between texts to expose the ways in which their mutual interaction generates new, alternative and, in some cases, potentially subversive meanings for which the terms ‘source’ and ‘influence’ are wholly inadequate. Clare argues that the ‘pleasure’ stimulated by and ‘bound up with the recognition of intertextualities of

in Shakespeare’s resources
Abstract only
John Drakakis

writing as drama requires an entirely different discipline. 5 Tóibín’s task, unlike that of Barker, is that of the adapter, of shifting narratives from one genre (classical tragedy) to another (the modern novel), engaging in what Julie Sanders describes as ‘a transpositional practice, casting a specific genre into another generic mode, an act of re-vision in itself’. 6 Tóibín clearly shares with the literate reader a recognition of the genealogy of his own narrative, but by positioning the

in Shakespeare’s resources
John Drakakis

Kristeva, in order for dialogism to function it needs to be embedded in language. But the relationships it calls into being are in fundamental tension with each other, arising not from their identity with each other but from their difference . Moreover, that tension is not primarily a stimulus to pleasure derived from a recognition of their origins – one of the sentiments aroused by source study – but the locus of a political tension, whether its roots lie in gender formation, or more generally in the division of society into

in Shakespeare’s resources
John Drakakis

of The Mousetrap in Hamlet to illustrate the following argument: The idea that a play can and inevitably does take part in the affairs of a society requires an abandonment of the notion of the primacy, or, in practical terms, of the existence of any transcendental ‘meaning’ located within it, able finally to subsume, surpass or determine all others. It calls instead for a recognition of the degree to which all texts are contextualised by history. And that leads in the direction of

in Shakespeare’s resources
John Drakakis

demands, providing the models for continual expansion. The over-riding telos of the project seems to have been to trace Shakespeare’s own texts back to their ‘sources’ or origins in order to locate and clarify the permanent, trans-historical ‘truths’ that they embody. The linkage between ‘source’ and ‘truth’ savours of a kind of textual theology, designed to return the texts, as we have already seen, to the moments of their creation. Implicit in Bullough’s method was the recognition of a dynamic interaction between

in Shakespeare’s resources
Abstract only
The speaker, his soul, and the poem as stage
Angelika Zirker

recognition or anagnorisis that death will be overcome, that the speaker will be saved, that the love of God will prevail. Two of the sonnets bring together the elements outlined here in a drama of salvation: Holy Sonnet ‘Oh my black Soule’ and Holy Sonnet ‘This is my Playes last Scene’; they follow immediately on each other in all manuscript versions of the Holy Sonnets 12 and are both concerned with a speaker who imagines that the moment of his death

in William Shakespeare and John Donne
Victoria Coldham-Fussell

maligned. Just as the reputation of female warriors is in the hands of poets, so too, we may infer, is the poet’s reputation in the hands of those more powerful than he. In drawing a flattering parallel between Britomart and Elizabeth (the one a model of ‘warlike puissance’, the other of ‘wisedom’; ii.3.1–3), the narrator would seem to gesture toward the queen as precisely the figure of fame-bestowing power he has in mind. She stands to benefit from his recognition of female virtue, he from reciprocal goodwill in the form of patronage and protection against ‘foolish men

in Comic Spenser

Ralph Knevet's Supplement of the Faery Queene (1635) is a narrative and allegorical work, which weaves together a complex collection of tales and episodes, featuring knights, ladies, sorcerers, monsters, vertiginous fortresses and deadly battles – a chivalric romp in Spenser's cod medieval style. The poem shadows recent English history, and the major military and political events of the Thirty Years War. But the Supplement is also an ambitiously intertextual poem, weaving together materials from mythic, literary, historical, scientific, theological, and many other kinds of written sources. Its encyclopaedic ambitions combine with Knevet's historical focus to produce an allegorical epic poem of considerable interest and power.

This new edition of Knevet's Supplement, the first scholarly text of the poem ever published, situates it in its literary, historical, biographical, and intellectual contexts. An extensive introduction and copious critical commentary, positioned at the back of the book, will enable students and scholars alike to access Knevet's complicated and enigmatic meanings, structures, and allusions.

Steve Sohmer

King reads out a report of the scale of the English victory at Agincourt, Exeter exclaims, ‘’Tis wonderful!’, that is, miraculous (4.8.114). Henry immediately declares, ‘Come, go we in procession to the village: And be it death proclaimed through our host To boast of this or take that praise from God Which is his only’ (115–18). Candlemas celebrates two acts of recognition

in Reading Shakespeare’s mind