Search results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 1,825 items for :

  • "Authorship" x
  • Refine by access: All content x
Clear All
Abstract only
James Doelman

7 Authorship In his introduction to Kipling’s poetry, T. S. Eliot wrote that epigrams, like hymns, are ‘extremely objective types of verse: they can and should be charged with intense feeling, but it must be a feeling that can be completely shared’.1 Once again, they are ‘what all might say’, as Puttenham expressed it. Given such a perception, to whom does an epigram, satiric or otherwise, belong? As explored in Chapter 1, authorial detachment, if not anonymity, lies at the roots of the epigram tradition. Ancient epitaphs and monumentary distichs mark first of

in The epigram in England, 1590–1640
Abstract only
Anish Kapoor as British/Asian/artist
Alpesh Kantilal Patel

Authorship: Anish Kapoor as British/Asian/artist I’m Indian. My sensibility is Indian. And I welcome that, rejoice in that, but the great battle nowadays is to occupy an aesthetic territory that isn’t linked to nationality. (Anish Kapoor)1 Being an artist is more than being an Indian artist. I feel supportive to that kind of endeavour … it needs to happen once; I hope it is never necessary again. (Anish Kapoor)2 Both the statements above are by India-born, England-based artist Anish Kapoor. The first was made during the opening ceremony of his first solo

in Productive failure
Abstract only
Winterbottom and a body of work
Brian McFarlane
Deane Williams

articles written about Winterbottom, one detects an ongoing struggle to link Winterbottom with a particular style or approach to filmmaking; even the notion of an oeuvre is seen to be at odds with his eclectic use of genre and different modes of realism. In this chapter we will seek some methods to deal with the notion of authorship in relation to Michael Winterbottom, to understand his work better in relation to traditional

in Michael Winterbottom
Abstract only
Sam Rohdie

Authorship Je fais … de Hawks, le plus grand cinéaste, Griffith excepté, naquit en Amérique, bien supérieur à mon goût à Ford, généralement plus estimé. Ce dernier m’ennuie (qu’y puis-je?) tandis que l’autre me ravit … … j’aime le cinéma, parce que je crois qu’il est le fruit non du hasard mais de l’art et du génie de hommes, parce que je pense qu’on ne peut aimer profondément aucun film si l’on n’aime ­profondément ceux de Howard Hawks. (I regard Hawks as the greatest filmmaker born in America with the exception of Griffith, far superior in my judgement to

in Film modernism
Jonathan Bignell

in literature, or later, beyond television in either radio or literature since radio inherited cultural cachet as television overtook it as the most popular medium, brought with it the desire to establish authorship as a marker of value. For Coward (1987: 79), ‘the higher the evaluation of the medium as an art , the more likely you are to find the quest to establish an author for a work.’ So once authorship attains cultural value and significance for a broadcasting institution, legitimating a medium’s claims, it becomes one of the forces contesting the means of

in Beckett on screen
Abstract only
Andrew Dix

Genre criticism represents film studies at perhaps its least personalised, dealing with substantial bodies of films (musicals, epics and so on) and tending in the process to suspend, or at least downplay, interest in the creative contributions made by individuals. Such concern, however, returns with a vengeance in debates over film authorship. Yet, as we will uncover in this chapter, identifying the authors of films is an area of inquiry that has proved both conceptually challenging and historically mutable. Can a film even be said to have an author in

in Beginning film studies (second edition)
Darren Freebury- Jones

present. We will return to Mueller’s data for unique tetragrams plus later, in relation to Shakespeare’s verbal debts to the additional plays I assign solely to Kyd. Firstly, in light of these findings, it is necessary to evaluate claims for Shakespeare’s part authorship of one of these additional plays, namely Arden of Faversham . The argument for Shakespeare’s hand in Arden

in Shakespeare’s tutor

This book discusses the extent of John Lyly's importance for early modern authorship in three parts: prose fiction, drama and reception. The first two parts study Lyly's impact on early modern culture, focusing on prose fiction and drama respectively. In each part, the first chapter assesses Lyly's originality and the second chapter assesses the impact of that authorship upon the print market for each of those literary forms. These two parts demonstrate how Lyly's work was innovative and was received and commodified by his contemporaries. The third part of the book examines Lyly's reception history up to the present day, focusing on nineteenth-century uses of the word euphuism as part of a debate over appropriate literary male style. The dynamic relationship between performance and text creates the market for two basic kinds of English literature: printed single-story fiction and printed drama. Lyly's dramaturgical stories are as elusive and protean as his prose fiction. At the same time that his character Euphues was being reworked and commodified by print writers and publishers, Lyly reworked and innovated ways to create fictional worlds and characters in the theatre.

John Izod
Karl Magee
Kathryn Hannan
, and
Isabelle Gourdin-Sangouard

above) 1 As Stephen Crofts has shown, notions of the film director as auteur had surfaced sporadically in Europe for thirty years prior to the moment often taken as the concept’s source – the publication in 1954 of François Truffaut’s ‘Une Certaine Tendance du cinéma français’. 2 Crofts believes that ideas of authorship originated in Europe because a larger proportion of

in Lindsay Anderson
Richard Bellings, James Shirley and Henry Burnell
Marie-Louise Coolahan

5 Renaissance Dublin and the construction of literary authorship: Richard Bellings, James Shirley and Henry Burnell Marie-Louise Coolahan That quintessentially Renaissance literary project – the ­humanist ­dialogue translated – was apparently undertaken in Dublin in the early 1580s by the colonial administrator and writer Lodowick Bryskett. Not published until 1606, Bryskett’s A discourse of civill life (adapted from the Italian Giambattista Giraldi Cinthio’s Tre dialoghi della vita civile of 1565) was careful to represent its author at the centre of another

in Dublin