Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T18:12:42.637Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part XXV - Shakespeare and the Critics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2019

By
Lars Engle
Edited by
Bruce R. Smith
Edited in association with
Katherine Rowe
With
Ton Hoenselaars ,
Akiko Kusunoki ,
Andrew Murphy  and
Aimara da Cunha Resende
Bruce R. Smith
Affiliation:
University of Southern California
Katherine Rowe
Affiliation:
Smith College, Massachusetts
Ton Hoenselaars
Affiliation:
Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
Akiko Kusunoki
Affiliation:
Tokyo Woman’s Christian University, Japan
Andrew Murphy
Affiliation:
Trinity College Dublin
Aimara da Cunha Resende
Affiliation:
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brazil
Get access

Keywords

authorshipcommentaryjudgmentliterary criticismAdorno, Theodoraesthetics (aesthetic, aestheticism)Altman, Joel B.BanquoBardolatryBooth, StephenBrooks, CleanthBurke, KennethColeridge, Samuel TaylordeconstructionEmpson, WilliamFerdinandfigurative languageform (formal, formalism)Frye, NorthropgenreGrady, HughGreenblatt, Stephenimage (images, imagery)Johnson, SamuelLady MacbethMacbeth (the character)Macbeth (the play)MacduffmetaphorA Midsummer Night’s DreamMirandaneoclassicism (neoclassical)new aestheticism (new aestheticist)New Criticism (New Critical)new formalism (new formalist)new historicism (new historicist)organic form (organicism)Parker, PatriciaProsperopunsRestorationrhetoric (rhetorical)Romanticism (Romantic)Rymer, ThomasThe TempestVendler, HelenCavell, StanleyDerrida, JacquesEagleton, TerenceethicsgeniusHegel, Georg Wilhelm FriedrichJohnson, Samuelmoralityphilosophypoliticscultural criticismcultural turndeconstructionDerrida, Jacquesformalismlanguagelinguistic criticismlinguistic turnNew Materialismpresentismspeech act theoryWittgenstein, LudwigArendt, HannahAristotleBradley, A. C.catharsisColeridge, Samuel TaylorDaemonethosFreud, SigmundHazlitt, WilliamKnights, L. C.Lacan, JacquesmelancholypersonpersonapsychoanalysispsychologyauthorshipbiographyCallaghan, DympnaShakespeareShakespeare and religionShakespeare and sexualityShakespeare’s CatholicismShakespeare’s lifetrajectorytrendscomedyhistoryliterary criticismMarxismmaterialistpoliticalShakespearetragedyagencybisexual, colonialismconstructionismcosmopolitanismessentialismethnicityfemininityfeminismgaygenderglobalizationhistoricismhomohistoryhomosexualityhybridityidentityidentity politicsimperialismLGBT studieslesbianmasculinitymaterialismnationalitypeople of colorobjectificationOrientalismpostcolonialismpresentismqueer theoryracesexual orientationsubjectivitytransgendertranssexualunhistoricismaudiencecontextnew historicismperceptionperformancephenomenareaderreceptionscholarstraditionaffectaudience reactioncognitionemotiongeohumoral maphistorical phenomenologyhumorsneurophilosophysonnet 94
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Guide to the Worlds of Shakespeare , pp. 1729 - 1802
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Sources cited

Beckett, Samuel. Waiting for Godot: A Tragicomedy in Two Acts. New York: Grove, 1954.Google Scholar
Bloom, Harold. The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry. New York: Oxford UP, 1973.Google Scholar
Clark, William. Academic Charisma and the Rise of the Research University. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2006.Google Scholar
Coetzee, J. M. Youth. London: Secker and Warburg, 2002.Google Scholar
Engle, Lars. “William Empson.” Great Shakespeareans: Empson, Wilson, Knight, Barber, Kott. Ed. Grady, Hugh. London: Continuum, 2012. 14–57.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis. The Standard Edition, trans. and ed. Strachey, James. New York: Norton, 1965.Google Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. “Centres, Kings, and Charisma: Reflections on the Symbolics of Power.” Culture and Its Creators. Ed. ben-David, Joseph and Clark, Terry Nicholas. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1977. 150–71.Google Scholar
Guillory, John. Cultural Capital. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helgerson, Richard. Self-Crowned Laureates: Spenser, Jonson, Milton and the Literary System. Berkeley: U of California P, 1983.Google Scholar
Johnson, Samuel. “Preface to Shakespeare.” Eighteenth Century Essays on Shakespeare. Ed. Smith, D. Nichol. Oxford: Clarendon, 1903. 170–219.Google Scholar
Jonson, Ben. Poems of Ben Jonson. Ed. Johnston, George Burke. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1968.Google Scholar
Kermode, Frank. “Introduction.” Selected Prose of T. S. Eliot. New York: Harcourt, 1975. 11–30.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: U Chicago Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Rorty, Richard. Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, Max. Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Trans. and ed. Parsons, Talcott. New York: Free Press, 1964.Google Scholar
Wilde, Oscar. The Picture of Dorian Gray. Ann Arbor: Borders Classics, 2006.Google Scholar

Further reading

Bate, Jonathan. The Genius of Shakespeare: Tenth Anniversary Edition. New York: Oxford UP, 2008.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1986.Google Scholar
Eastman, Arthur. A Short History of Shakespearean Criticism. New York: Random House, 1968.Google Scholar
Smith, Barbara Herrnstein. Contingencies of Value: Alternative Perspectives for Critical Theory. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1988.Google Scholar
Winnicott, D. W. Playing and Reality. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2005.Google Scholar

Sources cited

Altman, Joel B. The Improbability of Othello: Rhetorical Anthropology and Shakespearean Selfhood. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altman, Joel B. The Tudor Play of Mind: Rhetorical Inquiry and the Development of Elizabethan Drama. Berkeley: U of California P, 1978.Google Scholar
Barber, C. L. Shakespeare’s Festive Comedy: A Study of Dramatic Form and Its Relation to Social Custom. 1959. New ed. Intro. Greenblatt, Stephen. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barish, Jonas A. Ben Jonson and the Language of Prose Comedy. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1960.Google Scholar
Booth, Stephen. “Shakespeare’s Language and the Language of Shakespeare’s Time.” Shakespeare Survey 50 (1997): 1–17.Google Scholar
Bradley, A. C. Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, Macbeth. 1904. 4th ed. Ed. Shaughnessy, Robert. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, Cleanth. The Well Wrought Urn: Studies in the Structure of Poetry. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World, 1947.Google Scholar
Brooks, Cleanth, and Warren, Robert Penn. Understanding Poetry. 3rd ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1960.Google Scholar
Burke, Kenneth. Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. Ed. Newstok, Scott. West Lafayette: Parlor, 2007.Google Scholar
Cohen, Stephen, ed. Shakespeare and Historical Formalism. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007.Google Scholar
Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. Biographia Literaria. Ed. Engell, James and Bate, W. Jackson. 2 vols. The Collected Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge 7. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1983.Google Scholar
Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. Coleridge’s Criticism of Shakespeare. Ed. Foakes, R. A.. Detroit: Wayne State UP, 1989.Google Scholar
Dubrow, Heather. A Happier Eden: Politics and Marriage in the Stuart Epithalamium. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1990.Google Scholar
Empson, William. Seven Types of Ambiguity. 1930. New York: New Directions, 1947.Google Scholar
Empson, William. The Structure of Complex Words. 1951. Intro. Culler, Jonathan. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1989.Google Scholar
Frye, Northrop. Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays. 1957. Updated ed. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2000.Google Scholar
Frye, Northrop. Fools of Time: Studies in Shakespearean Tragedy. 1967. New ed. Toronto: U of Toronto P, 1996.Google Scholar
Frye, Northrop. A Natural Perspective: The Development of Shakespearean Comedy and Romance. 1965. New ed. New York: Columbia UP, 1995.Google Scholar
Grady, Hugh. Shakespeare and Impure Aesthetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenblatt, Stephen. Introduction. The Forms of Power and the Power of Forms in the Renaissance. Spec. issue of Genre 15 (1982): 3–6.Google Scholar
Heilman, Robert B. Magic in the Web: Action and Language in Othello. Lexington: U of Kentucky P, 1956.Google Scholar
Heilman, Robert B. This Great Stage: Image and Structure in King Lear. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State UP, 1948.Google Scholar
Johnson, Samuel. Johnson on Shakespeare. 2 vols. The Yale Edition of the Works of Samuel Johnson 7 and 8. New Haven: Yale UP, 1968.Google Scholar
Joseph, Sister Miriam. Shakespeare’s Use of the Arts of Language. New York: Columbia UP, 1947.Google Scholar
Kermode, Frank. Shakespeare’s Language. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2000.Google Scholar
Levin, Richard. New Readings vs. Old Plays: Recent Trends in the Reinterpretation of English Renaissance Drama. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1979.Google Scholar
Levinson, Marjorie. “What Is New Formalism?” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 122 (2007): 558–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyne, Raphael. Shakespeare, Rhetoric and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.Google Scholar
Mahood, M. M. Shakespeare’s Wordplay. 1957. New ed. London: Routledge, 2001.Google Scholar
McDonald, Russ. Shakespeare and the Arts of Language. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2001.Google Scholar
McDonald, Russ. Shakespeare’s Late Style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, Patricia. Shakespeare From the Margins: Language, Culture, Context. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1997.Google Scholar
Pope, Alexander. “The Art of Sinking.” The Twickenham Edition of the Poems of Alexander Pope. Vol. 6. Ed. Ault, Norman and Butt, John. New Haven: Yale UP, 1954.Google Scholar
Ransom, John Crowe. The New Criticism. Norfolk: New Directions, 1941.Google Scholar
Rasmussen, Mark David, ed. Renaissance Literature and Its Formal Engagements. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Gary. Reimagining Shakespeare: A Cultural History from the Restoration to the Present. New York: Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1989.Google Scholar
Vendler, Helen. The Art of Shakespeare’s Sonnets. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1997.Google Scholar
Vickers, Brian. The Artistry of Shakespeare’s Prose. 1968. New ed. London: Routledge, 2008.Google Scholar
Vickers, Brian, ed. Shakespeare: The Critical Heritage. 6 vols. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1974–81.Google Scholar
Wright, George T. Shakespeare’s Metrical Art. Berkeley: U of California Press, 1988.Google Scholar

Further reading

Badawi, M. M. Coleridge, Critic of Shakespeare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Bate, Jonathan, ed. The Romantics on Shakespeare. London: Penguin, 1992.Google Scholar
Grady, Hugh. The Modernist Shakespeare: Critical Texts in a Material World. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991.Google Scholar
McDonald, Russ. Shakespeare: An Anthology of Criticism and Theory, 1945–2000. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2004.Google Scholar
Parker, G. F. Johnson’s Shakespeare. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1989.Google Scholar
Taylor, Michael. Shakespeare Criticism in the Twentieth Century. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2001.Google Scholar

Sources cited

Attridge, Derek. The Singularity of Literature. London: Routledge, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, Harold. Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human. London: Fourth Estate Limited, 1999.Google Scholar
Bristol, Michael, ed. Shakespeare and Moral Agency. New York: Continuum, 2010.Google Scholar
Bruns, Gerald. “Stanley Cavell’s Shakespeare.” Critical Inquiry 16 (1990): 612–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavell, Stanley. Disowning Knowledge in Seven Plays of Shakespeare. Updated ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Critchley, Simon. Infinitely Demanding: Ethics of Commitment, Politics of Resistance. London: Verso, 2008.Google Scholar
Critchley, Simon. Very Little ... Almost Nothing: Death, Philosophy, Literature. London: Routledge, 1997.Google Scholar
de Grazia, Margreta. “Shakespeare in Quotation Marks.” The Appropriation of Shakespeare: Post-Renaissance Reconstructions of the Works and the Myth. Ed. Marsden, J. I.. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991. 57–71.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning, and the New International. Trans. Kamuf, Peggy. London: Routledge, 1994.Google Scholar
Dollimore, Jonathan. “Art in Time of War; towards a Contemporary Aesthetic.” The New Aestheticism. Ed. Joughin, John and Malpas, Simon. Manchester: Manchester UP, 2003. 36–50.Google Scholar
Eagleton, Terence. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996.Google Scholar
Hand, Seán, ed. The Levinas Reader. Oxford: Blackwell, 1989.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. “Dramatic Poetry.” Philosophers on Shakespeare. Ed. Kottman, Paul. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2009.Google Scholar
Herder, Johann Gottfried. “Shakespeare.” Philosophers on Shakespeare. Ed. Kottman, Paul. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2009.Google Scholar
Johnson, Samuel. “Preface and Notes to King Lear.” Shakespeare: King Lear (Casebook). Ed. Kermode, Frank. 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1992.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. The Critique of Judgement. Trans. Meredith, James Creed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1991.Google Scholar
Keats, John. Letters of John Keats to His Family and Friends. Ed. Colvin, Sidney. London: Macmillan and Co., 1891.Google Scholar
Kottman, Paul A., ed. Philosophers on Shakespeare. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2009.Google Scholar
Levinas, Emmanuel. “There Is: Existence without Existents.” The Levinas Reader. Ed. Hand, Seán. Oxford: Blackwell, 1989.Google Scholar
Levinas, Emmanuel. Time and the Other [and Additional Essays]. Trans. Cohen, Richard A.. Pittsburgh: Duquesne UP, 1987.Google Scholar
Montagu, Elizabeth. Essay on the Writings and Genius of Shakespeare. London: 1769.Google Scholar
Schlegel, Friedrich. On the Study of Greek Poetry. Trans. Barnett, Stuart. Albany: SUNY P, 2001.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Culture and Value. Ed. von Wright, G. H.. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.Google Scholar
Young, Edward. Conjectures on Original Composition. London: 1759.Google Scholar

Further reading

Attridge, Derek. “Innovation, Literature, Ethics: Relating to the Other.” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 114.1 (1999): 20–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowie, Andrew. “Shakespeare, Tragedy, and the Philosophical Discourse of Modernity.” Philosophical Variations: Music As “Philosophical Language.” Malmö: NSU P, 2010.Google Scholar
Cutrofello, Andrew. “Kant’s Debate with Herder about the Philosophical Significance of the Genius of Shakespeare.” Philosophy Compass 3.1 (2008): 66–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gjesdal, Kristin. “Reading Shakespeare – Reading Modernity.” Angelaki 9.3 (2004): 17–31.Google Scholar
Grady, Hugh, ed. Shakespeare and Modernity: Early Modern to Millennium. London: Routledge, 2000.Google Scholar
Hartman, Geoffrey. “Shakespeare and the Ethical Question: Leo Löwenthal in Memoriam.” English Literary History 63.1 (1996): 1–23.Google Scholar
Heller, Agnes. The Time Is Out of Joint: Shakespeare As Philosopher of History. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2002.Google Scholar
Joughin, John, ed. Philosophical Shakespeares. London: Routledge, 2000.Google Scholar
Rhu, Larry. Stanley Cavell’s American Dream: Shakespeare, Philosophy, and Hollywood Movies. New York: Fordham UP, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zamir, Tzachi. Double Vision: Moral Philosophy and Shakespearean Drama. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2008.Google Scholar

Sources cited

Adamson, Sylvia, Hunter, Lynette, Magnusson, Lynne, Thompson, Ann, and Wells, Katie, eds. Reading Shakespeare’s Dramatic Language: A Guide. The Arden Shakespeare. London: Cengage, 2001.Google Scholar
Atkins, G. Douglas, and Bergeron, David M., eds. Shakespeare and Deconstruction. New York: P. Lang, 1989.Google Scholar
Austin, J. L. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon, 1975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkan, Leonard, Cormack, Bradin, and Keilen, Sean, eds. The Forms of Renaissance Thought: New Essays in Literature and Culture. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruster, Douglas. Shakespeare and the Question of Culture: Early Modern Literature and the Cultural Turn. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, Judith. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex.” New York: Routledge, 1993.Google Scholar
Cohen, Stephen, ed. Shakespeare and Historical Formalism. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. “Aphorism Countertime.” 1986. Acts of Literature. Ed. Attridge, Derek. New York: Routledge, 1992. 414–33.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. “As If I Were Dead: An Interview with Jacques Derrida.” Applying: To Derrida. Ed. Brannigan, John, Robbins, Ruth, and Wolfreys, Julian. London: Macmillan, 1996. 212–26.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. Limited Inc. Evanston: Northwestern UP, 1988.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. “Psyche: Invention of the Other.” 1984. Trans. Porter, Catherine. Psyche: Inventions of the Other. Ed. Kamuf, Peggy and Rottenberg, Elizabeth. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2007.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. Specters of Marx. Trans. Kamuf, Peggy. New York: Routledge, 1994.Google Scholar
Drakakis, John, ed. Alternative Shakespeares. London: Methuen, 1985.Google Scholar
Elam, Keir. Shakespeare’s Universe of Discourse: Language-Games in the Comedies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984.Google Scholar
Fineman, Joel. The Subjectivity Effect in Western Literary Tradition: Essays Toward the Release of Shakespeare’s Will. Cambridge: MIT P, 1991.Google Scholar
Fish, Stanley. “How to Do Things with Austin and Searle: Speech Act Theory and Literary Criticism.” Modern Language Notes 91 (1976): 983–1025.Google Scholar
Halpern, Richard. “An Impure History of Ghosts: Derrida, Marx, Shakespeare.” Marxist Shakespeares. Ed. Howard, Jean E. and Shershow, Scott Cutler. London: Routledge, 2001. 31–52.Google Scholar
Grady, Hugh, and Hawkes, Terence. Presentist Shakespeares. London: Routledge, 2007.Google Scholar
Grice, Paul. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1989.Google Scholar
Herman, Vimala. Dramatic Discourse: Dialogue as Interaction in Plays. London: Routledge, 1995.Google Scholar
Magnusson, Lynne. Shakespeare and Social Dialogue: Dramatic Language and Elizabethan Letters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
McDonald, Russ, ed. Shakespeare: An Anthology of Criticism and Theory, 1945–2000. Malden: Blackwell, 2004.Google Scholar
McDonald, Russ. Shakespeare Reread: The Texts in New Contexts. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1994.Google Scholar
Miller, J. Hillis. “The Triumph of Theory.” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 102 (1987): 281–91.Google Scholar
Montrose, Louis A. “The Elizabethan Subject in the Spenserian Text.” Literary Theory/Renaissance Texts. Ed. Parker, Patricia and Quint, David. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1986. 303–40.Google Scholar
Parker, Patricia, and Hartmann, Geoffrey, eds. Shakespeare and the Question of Theory. London: Methuen, 1985.Google Scholar
Rasmussen, Mark David, ed. Renaissance Literature and Its Formal Engagements. New York: Palgrave, 2002.Google Scholar
Schalkwyk, David. Literature and the Touch of the Real. Newark: U of Delaware P, 2004.Google Scholar
Schalkwyk, David. Speech and Performance in Shakespeare’s Sonnets and Plays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations. Trans. Anscombe, G. E. M.. Oxford: Blackwell, 1953.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. 1921. Trans. Ogden, C. K.. London: Routledge, 1992.Google Scholar

Further reading

Searle, John. “Reiterating the Differences: A Reply to Derrida.” Glyph 1 (1977): 172–208.Google Scholar
Searle, John. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Notebooks 1914–1916. Trans. Anscombe, G. E. M.. Ed. von Wright, G. H. and Anscombe, G. E. M.. Oxford: Blackwell, 1979.Google Scholar

Sources cited

Arendt, Hannah. The Human Condition. 1958. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1998.Google Scholar
Aristotle, . Poetics and Nichomachean Ethics. Ed. Barnes, Jonathan. 2 vols. Complete Works of Aristotle. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1984.Google Scholar
Beckwith, Sarah. Shakespeare and the Grammar of Forgiveness. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 2011.Google Scholar
Bevington, David. From Mankinde to Marlowe: Growth of Structure in the Popular Drama of Tudor England. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1968.Google Scholar
Bradley, A. C. Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, and Macbeth. 1904. Rpt. New York: Noonday, 1955.Google Scholar
Cavell, Stanley. Disowning Knowledge in Seven Plays by Shakespeare. 1987. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Mary Cowden. The Girlhood of Shakespeare’s Heroines. New York: Putnam, 1874.Google Scholar
Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. Coleridge’s Criticism of Shakespeare. Ed. Foakes, R. A.. London: Continuum, 2001.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works. Ed. Strachey, James. 25 vols. London: Hogarth, 1957.Google Scholar
Gibson, James J. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. New York: Taylor and Francis, 1986.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Jonathan. Shakespeare’s Hand. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 2003.Google Scholar
Gross, Kenneth. Shakespeare Is Shylock. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2006.Google Scholar
Hazlitt, William. Characters of Shakespeare’s Plays and Lectures on the English Poets. London: Macmillan and Co., 1920.Google Scholar
Kantorowicz, Ernst. The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theology. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1957.Google Scholar
Knights, Lionel Charles. How Many Children Had Lady Macbeth? An Essay in the Theory and Practice of Shakespeare Criticism. Cambridge: G. Fraser, the Minority Press, 1933.Google Scholar
Kott, Jan. Shakespeare Our Contemporary. New York: Doubleday, 1964.Google Scholar
Kottman, Paul. A Politics of the Scene. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2008.Google Scholar
Nevo, Ruth. Shakespeare’s Other Language. London: Methuen, 1987.Google Scholar
Noë, Alvin. Action in Perception. Cambridge: MIT P, 2004.Google Scholar
Palfrey, Simon. Doing Shakespeare. London: Methuen, 2005.Google Scholar
Paster, Gail Kern. Humoring the Body: Emotions and the Shakespearean Stage. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2004.Google Scholar
Reinhard, Kenneth, and Lupton, Julia Reinhard. After Oedipus: Shakespeare in Psychoanalysis. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1993. Rpt. Aurora: Davies, 2009.Google Scholar
Theophrastus, . Characters. Trans. Rusten, Jeffrey. Loeb Library. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 2003.Google Scholar
Zupančič, Alenka. The Odd One In: On Comedy. Cambridge: MIT, 2008.Google Scholar

Further reading

Adelman, Janet. Suffocating Mothers: Fantasies of Maternal Origin in Shakespeare’s Plays, Hamlet to The Tempest. New York: Routledge, 1992.Google Scholar
Armstrong, Philip. Shakespeare in Psychoanalysis. London: Routledge, 2001.Google Scholar
Daniel, Drew. The Melancholy Assemblage: Affect and Epistemology in the English Renaissance. New York: Fordham UP, 2013.Google Scholar
Fineman, Joel. The Subjectivity Effect in Western Literary Tradition: Essays Towards the Release of Shakespeare’s Will. Cambridge: MIT P, 1991.Google Scholar
Harris, Jonathan Gil. Shakespeare and Literary Theory. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2010.Google Scholar
Holland, Norman. Psychoanalysis and Shakespeare. New York: Octagon Books, 1976.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Murray, and Kahn, Coppélia, eds. Representing Shakespeare: New Psychoanalytic Essays. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1980.Google Scholar
Žižek, Slavoj. Enjoy Your Symptom! London: Routledge, 2001.Google Scholar

Sources cited

Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare: The Biography. London: Chatto and Windus, 2005.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. A. Shakespeare’s Imagination. London: L. Drummond, 1946.Google Scholar
Asquith, Clare. Shadowplay: The Hidden Beliefs and Coded Politics of William Shakespeare. New York: PublicAffairs, 2006.Google Scholar
Aubrey, John. Brief Lives, Chiefly of Contemporaries, Set Down by John Aubrey, between the years 1669 & 1696. 1813. Ed. Clark, Andrew. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1898.Google Scholar
Baker, Oliver. In Shakespeare’s Warwickshire and the Unknown Years. London: Simpkin Marshall, 1938.Google Scholar
Baker, William. William Shakespeare. New York: Continuum, 2009.Google Scholar
Baldwin, T. W. William Shakespere’s Small Latine and Lesse Greeke. 2 vols. Urbana: U Illinois P, 1944.Google Scholar
Barber, C. L., and Wheeler, Richard P.. The Whole Journey: Shakespeare’s Power of Development. Berkeley: U of California P, 1986.Google Scholar
Bate, Jonathan. Soul of the Age: A Biography of the Mind of William Shakespeare. New York: Random House, 2009.Google Scholar
Bearman, Robert. “Was William Shakespeare William Shakeshafte? revisited.” Shakespeare Quarterly 53.1 (spring 2002): 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bevington, David M. Shakespeare: The Seven Ages of Human Experience. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2002.Google Scholar
Bevington, David M. Shakespeare and Biography. Oxford Shakespeare Topics. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2010.Google Scholar
Bryson, Bill. Shakespeare: The World as Stage. Eminent Lives Series. New York: Atlas Books/HarperCollins, 2007.Google Scholar
Burgess, Anthony. Shakespeare. London: Cape, 1970.Google Scholar
Chambers, E. K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1930.Google Scholar
Cheney, Patrick. Shakespeare, National Poet-Playwright. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.Google Scholar
Duncan-Jones, Katherine. Shakespeare’s Life and World. London: Folio Society, 2004.Google Scholar
Duncan-Jones, Katherine. Ungentle Shakespeare: Scenes from His Life. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2001.Google Scholar
Dutton, Richard. William Shakespeare: A Literary Life. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eccles, Mark. Shakespeare in Warwickshire. Madison: U Wisconsin P, 1961.Google Scholar
Ellis, David. “Why There Should Be No More Biographies of Shakespeare.” Mapping the Self: Space, Identity, Discourse in British Auto/Biography. Ed. Regard, Frédéric. Saint-Étienne: Publications de l’Universitié Saint-Étienne, 2003.Google Scholar
Evans, N. E. Shakespeare in the Public Records. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1964.Google Scholar
Finnis, John, and Martin, Patrick. “Another Turn for the Turtle.” Times Literary Supplement [London] 18 April 2003.Google Scholar
Greenblatt, Stephen. Hamlet in Purgatory. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2001.Google Scholar
Greenblatt, Stephen. Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare. New York: Norton, 2004.Google Scholar
Greer, Germaine. Shakespeare’s Wife. New York: HarperCollins, 2008.Google Scholar
Hammerschmidt-Hummel, Hildegard. Life and Times of William Shakespeare, 1564–1616. Trans. Bance, Alan. London: Chaucer P, 2007.Google Scholar
Holden, Anthony. William Shakespeare: His Life and Work. New York: Little, Brown, 1999.Google Scholar
Honan, Park. Shakespeare: A Life: A Life. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1998.Google Scholar
Honigmann, E. A. J. Shakespeare: The Lost Years. Totowa: Barnes and Noble, 1985.Google Scholar
Hughes, Ted. Shakespeare and the Goddess of Complete Being. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1992.Google Scholar
Kay, Dennis. Shakespeare: His Life, Work, and Era. New York: Morrow, 1992.Google Scholar
Kay, Dennis. William Shakespeare: His Life and Times. Twayne’s English Authors Series 513. New York: Twayne, 1995.Google Scholar
Kerrigan, William. “The Personal Shakespeare: Three Clues.” Shakespeare’s Personality. Ed. Holland, Norman et al. Berkeley: U of California P, 1989.Google Scholar
Knapp, Jeffrey. Shakespeare Only. Chicago: U Chicago P, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knapp, Jeffrey. Shakespeare’s Tribe, Church, Nation and Theatre in Renaissance England. Chicago: U Chicago P, 2002.Google Scholar
Lambert, Daniel Henry. Cartae Shakespeareanae: Shakespeare Documents. London: Bell, 1904.Google Scholar
Matus, Irvin Leigh. Shakespeare, in Fact. New York: Continuum, 2009.Google Scholar
McCurdy, Harold Grier. The Personality of Shakespeare. New Haven: Yale UP, 1953.Google Scholar
Milward, Peter. Shakespeare’s Religious Background. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1973.Google Scholar
Milward, Peter. Shakespeare the Papist. Naples, FL: Ave Maria U, 2005.Google Scholar
Neilson, William Allan, and Thorndike, Ashely Horace. The Facts about Shakespeare. New York: Macmillan, 1931.Google Scholar
Nicholl, Charles. The Lodger Shakespeare: His Life on Silver Street. New York: Viking, 2008.Google Scholar
Nuttall, A. D. Shakespeare the Thinker. New Haven, CT: Yale UP, 2007.Google Scholar
Pearce, Joseph. The Quest for Shakespeare: The Bard of Avon and the Church of Rome. San Francisco: Ignatius P, 2008.Google Scholar
Rowe, Nicholas. “Some Account of the Life, etc. of Mr. William Shakespeare.” The Works of Mr. William Shakespeare. Vol. 1. London: Tonson, 1709.Google Scholar
Rowse, A. L. William Shakespeare: A Biography. New York: Harper and Row, 1963.Google Scholar
Sams, Eric. The Real Shakespeare: Retrieving the Early Years, 1564–1594. New Haven: Yale UP, 1997.Google Scholar
Schoenbaum, Samuel. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life. Rev. ed. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1987.Google Scholar
Schoenbaum, Samuel. William Shakespeare: A Documentary Life. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1975.Google Scholar
Shapiro, James S. A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare, 1599. New York: HarperCollins, 2005.Google Scholar
Shapiro, James S. Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare? New York: Simon and Schuster, 2010.Google Scholar
Southworth, John. Shakespeare the Player: A Life in the Theatre. Phoenix Mill: Sutton, 2000.Google Scholar
Taylor, Gary. “The Cultural Politics of Maybe.” Theatre and Religion: Lancastrian Shakespeare. Manchester: Manchester UP, 2003. 242–58.Google Scholar
Thomson, Peter. Shakespeare’s Professional Career. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
Waterfield, John. The Heart of His Mystery: Shakespeare and the Catholic Faith in England under Elizabeth and James. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 2009.Google Scholar
Weis, René. Shakespeare Revealed: A Biography. London: Murray, 2007.Google Scholar
Wells, Stanley. Shakespeare: A Dramatic Life. London: Sinclair Stevenson, 1994.Google Scholar
Wells, Stanley. Shakespeare: For All Time. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2003.Google Scholar
Wells, Stanley. Shakespeare: The Poet and His Plays. London: Methuen, 1997.Google Scholar
Wells, Stanley. Shakespeare and Co.: Christopher Marlowe, Thomas Dekker, Thomas Middleton, John Fletcher, and the Other Players in His Story. New York: Pantheon, 2006.Google Scholar
Willbern, David. “What Is Shakespeare?” Shakespeare’s Personality. Ed. Holland, Norman et. al. Berkeley: U of California P, 1989. 226–43.Google Scholar
Wilson, Ian. Shakespeare, the Evidence: Unlocking the Mysteries of the Man and His Work. New York: St. Martin’s, 1994.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. Dover. The Essential Shakespeare: A Biographical Adventure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1932.Google Scholar
Wilson, Richard. Secret Shakespeare: Studies in Theatre, Religion and Resistance. Manchester: Manchester U P, 2004.Google Scholar
Wood, Michael. Shakespeare. New York: Basic Books, 2003.Google Scholar

Further reading

Callaghan, Dympna. Who Was William Shakespeare? An Introduction to the Life and Works. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013.Google Scholar

Sources cited

Badiou, Alain. “The Democratic Emblem.” Democracy in What State? Ed. Agamben, Giorgio et al. New York: Columbia UP, 2011. 6–15.Google Scholar
Bellow, Saul. Seize the Day. London: Penguin, 2006.Google Scholar
Blake, William. The Portable Blake. Ed. Kazin, Alfred. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1974.Google Scholar
Cohen, Walter. Drama of a Nation: Public Theater in Renaissance England and Spain. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1985.Google Scholar
Danby, John F. Poets on Fortune’s Hill: Studies in Sidney, Shakespeare, Beaumont and Fletcher. Port Washington: Kennikat, 1966.Google Scholar
Dollimore, Jonathan. Radical Tragedy: Religion, Ideology, and Power in the Drama of Shakespeare and His Contemporaries. 3rd ed. Eagleton, Foreword Terry. Houndmills: Palgrave, 2004.Google Scholar
Fischer, Ernst. The Necessity of Art: A Marxist Approach. Trans. Bostock, Anna. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1963.Google Scholar
Hawkes, Terence. Meaning by Shakespeare. London: Routledge, 1992.Google Scholar
Holbrook, Peter. “Shakespeare, ‘The Cause of the People,’ and The Chartist Circular 1839–1842.” Textual Practice 20.2 (2006): 203–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, Jean E. The Stage and Social Struggle in Early Modern England. London: Routledge, 1994.Google Scholar
Jameson, Fredric. The Political Unconscious: Narrative As a Socially Symbolic Act. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1981.Google Scholar
Johnson, Samuel. Lives of the English Poets. 2 vols. Introd. Archer-Hind, L.. London: Dent, 1964.Google Scholar
Johnson, Samuel. “Preface to the Edition of Shakespeare’s Plays.” Samuel Johnson on Shakespeare. Ed. Woudhuysen, H. R.. London: Penguin, 1989.Google Scholar
Keats, John. Letters of John Keats: A Selection. Ed. Gittings, R.. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1992.Google Scholar
Kettle, Arnold. “From Hamlet to Lear.” Literature and Liberation: Selected Essays. Ed. Martin, Graham and Owens, W. R.. Introd. Nandy, Dipak. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1988.Google Scholar
Kolakowski, Leszek. Main Currents of Marxism: Its Rise, Growth, and Dissolution. 3 vols. Trans. Falla, P. S.. Oxford: Clarendon, 1978.Google Scholar
Marx, Karl. The Portable Karl Marx. Ed. Kamenka, Eugene. New York: Penguin, 1983.Google Scholar
Prawer, S. S. Karl Marx and World Literature. Oxford: Clarendon, 1976.Google Scholar
Timpanaro, Sebastiano. On Materialism. Trans. Garner, Lawrence. London: NLB, 1975.Google Scholar

Further reading

Badiou, Alain. “Democratic Materialism and the Materialist Dialectic.” Radical Philosophy 135 (March–April 2005): 20–24.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, Graham. Misrepresentations: Shakespeare and the Materialists. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1993.Google Scholar
Egan, Gabriel. Shakespeare and Marx. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2004.Google Scholar
Hadfield, Andrew. Shakespeare and Republicanism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.Google Scholar
Howard, Jean E., and Shershow, Scott Cutler, eds. Marxist Shakespeares. London: Routledge, 2001.Google Scholar
Ingleby, C. M., et al. The Shakespeare Allusion-Book: A Collection of Allusions to Shakespeare from 1591 to 1700. 2 vols. London: Humphrey Milford/Oxford UP, 1932.Google Scholar
Kettle, Arnold, ed. Shakespeare in a Changing World. London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1964.Google Scholar
Ryan, Kiernan. Shakespeare. 3rd ed. Houndmills: Palgrave, 2002.Google Scholar
Ryan, Kiernan. Shakespeare’s Comedies. Houndmills: Palgrave, 2009.Google Scholar
Vickers, Brian. Appropriating Shakespeare: Contemporary Critical Quarrels. New Haven: Yale UP, 1994.Google Scholar
Weimann, Robert. Shakespeare and the Popular Tradition in the Theater: Studies in the Social Dimension of Dramatic Form and Function. Ed. Schwartz, Robert. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1978.Google Scholar
White, R. S. “Shakespeare and Marx.” Shakespeare Survey 45 (1993): 89–100.Google Scholar

Sources cited

Barker, Francis, and Hulme, Peter. “Nymphs and Reapers Heavily Vanish: The Discursive Con-texts of The Tempest.” Alternative Shakespeares. Ed. Drakakis, John. London: Methuen, 1985. 195–209.Google Scholar
Belsey, Catherine. The Subject of Tragedy: Identity and Difference in Renaissance Drama. London: Methuen, 1985.Google Scholar
Bhabha, Homi K. The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge, 1994.Google Scholar
Boose, Lynda E. “The Family in Shakespeare Studies; or – Studies in the Family of Shakespeareans; or – the Politics of Politics.” Renaissance Quarterly 40 (1987): 707–42.Google Scholar
Bray, Alan. Homosexuality in Renaissance England. 1982. Rpt. New York: Columbia UP, 1995.Google Scholar
Brown, Paul. “‘This Thing of Darkness I Acknowledge Mine’: The Tempest and the Discourse of Colonialism.” Political Shakespeare: Essays in Cultural Materialism. Ed. Dollimore, Jonathan and Sinfield, Alan. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1985. 48–71.Google Scholar
Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge, 1990.Google Scholar
Butler, Judith. The Psychic Life of Power: Theories of Subjection. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1997.Google Scholar
Callaghan, Dympna. Introduction. A Feminist Companion to Shakespeare. Ed. Callaghan, Dympna. Malden: Blackwell, 2000. xi–xxiv.Google Scholar
Cartelli, Thomas. Repositioning Shakespeare: National Formations, Postcolonial Appropriations. London: Routledge, 1999.Google Scholar
Chakrabarty, Dipesh. Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2007.Google Scholar
Charnes, Linda. “Uncivil Unions.” Presentism, Gender and Sexuality and Shakespeare. Ed. Gajowski, Evelyn. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. 195–206.Google Scholar
Dionne, Craig, and Kapadia, Parmita, eds. Native Shakespeares: Indigenous Appropriations on a Global Stage. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008.Google Scholar
Dollimore, Jonathan. “Shakespeare Understudies: The Sodomite, the Prostitute, the Transvestite and Their Critics.” Political Shakespeare: Essays in Cultural Materialism. Ed. Dollimore, Jonathan, Sinfield, Alan, and Williams, Raymond. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1994. 129–52.Google Scholar
Dusinberre, Juliet. Shakespeare and the Nature of Women. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1975. 3rd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.Google Scholar
Eagleton, Terry. Ideology: An Introduction. Updated ed. London: Verso, 2007.Google Scholar
Erickson, Peter. “Rewriting the Renaissance, Rewriting Ourselves.” Shakespeare Quarterly 38 (1987): 327–37.Google Scholar
Fanon, Franz. Black Skin, White Masks. 1967. Rev. ed. New York: Grove, 2008.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality. Vol. 1. 1976. New York: Vinage, 1990.Google Scholar
Gajowski, Evelyn. Presentism, Gender, and Sexuality in Shakespeare. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Jonathan, and Menon, Madhavi. “Queering History”: The Changing Profession.” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 120 (2005): 1608–17.Google Scholar
Greenblatt, Stephen. Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of Social Energy in Renaissance England. Berkeley: U of California P, 1989.Google Scholar
Hall, Kim F. Things of Darkness: Economies of Race and Gender in Early Modern England. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1995.Google Scholar
Halperin, David. One Hundred Years of Sexuality and Other Essays on Greek Love. London: Routledge, 1990.Google Scholar
Hawkes, Terence. Shakespeare in the Present. London: Routledge, 2002.Google Scholar
Hendricks, Margo, and Parker, Patricia, eds. Women, “Race,” and Writing in the Early Modern Period. London: Routledge, 1994.Google Scholar
Howard, Jean, ed. “English Cosmopolitanism and the Early Modern Moment” [forum]. Shakespeare Studies 35 (2007).Google Scholar
Jankowski, Theodora. Pure Resistance: Queer Virginity in Early Modern English Drama. Philadelphia: U Pennsylvania P, 2000.Google Scholar
Jardine, Lisa. Still Harping on Daughters: Women and Drama in the Age of Shakespeare. 2nd ed. New York: Columbia UP, 1989.Google Scholar
Kahn, Coppélia. Man’s Estate: Masculine Identity in Shakespeare. Berkeley: U of California P, 1981.Google Scholar
Lentricchia, Frank. Criticism and Social Change. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1983. Rpt. 1985.Google Scholar
Lenz, Carolyn Ruth Swift, Greene, Gayle, and Neely, Carol Thomas. Introduction. The Woman’s Part: Feminist Criticism of Shakespeare. Ed. Lenz, Carolyn Ruth Swift, Greene, Gayle, and Neely, Carol Thomas. Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1980. 1–16.Google Scholar
Little, Arthur L. Jr. “‘A Local Habitation and a Name’: Presence, Witnessing, and Queer Marriage in Shakespeare’s Romantic Comedies.” Presentism, Gender, and Sexuality in Shakespeare. Ed. Gajowski, Evelyn. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. 207–36.Google Scholar
Little, Arthur. L. Jr. Shakespeare Jungle Fever: National-Imperial Re-Visions of Race, Rape, and Sacrifice. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2000.Google Scholar
Loomba, Ania. Colonialism/Postcolonialism. London: Routledge, 1998.Google Scholar
Loomba, Ania. Gender, Race, Renaissance Drama. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1989.Google Scholar
Loomba, Ania, and Orkin, Martin, eds. Postcolonial Shakespeares. London: Routledge, 1998.Google Scholar
McLuskie, Kathleen. “The Patriarchal Bard: Feminist Criticism and Shakespeare: King Lear and Measure for Measure.” Political Shakespeare: Essays in Cultural Materialism. Ed. Dollimore, Jonathan and Sinfield, Alan. Manchester: U of Manchester P, 1985. 88–108.Google Scholar
McLuskie, Kathleen. Unhistorical Shakespeare: Queer Theory in Shakespearean Literature and Film. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.Google Scholar
Neely, Carol Thomas. Broken Nuptials in Shakespeare’s Plays. Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1985.Google Scholar
Neely, Carol Thomas. “Constructing the Subject: Feminist Practice and the New Renaissance Discourses.” English Literary Renaissance 18 (1988): 5–18.Google Scholar
Newman, Karen. “‘And Wash the Ethiop White’: Femininity and the Monstrous in Othello.” Shakespeare Reproduced: The Text in History and Ideology. Ed. Howard, Jean E. and O’Connor, Marion F.. New York: Methuen, 1987. 141–62.Google Scholar
Novy, Marianne. Love’s Argument: Gender Relations in Shakespeare. Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina P, 1984.Google Scholar
Orlin, Lena Cowen. “A Case for Anecdotalism in Women’s History.” English Literary Renaissance 31.1 (2001): 52–77.Google Scholar
Pequigney, Joseph. Such Is My Love: A Study of Shakespeare’s Sonnets. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1985.Google Scholar
Rackin, Phyllis. Shakespeare and Women. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2005.Google Scholar
Raman, Shankar. Renaissance Literature and Postcolonial Studies. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 2011.Google Scholar
Rich, Adrienne. “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence.” Blood, Bread, and Poetry. New York: Norton, 1994. 167−87.Google Scholar
Sachdev, Rachana. “Sycorax in Algiers.” A Feminist Companion to Shakespeare. Ed. Callaghan, Dympna. Oxford: Blackwells, 2000. 208−25.Google Scholar
Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Vintage, 1978.Google Scholar
Schwarz, Kathryn. Tough Love: Amazon Encounters in the English Renaissance. Durham: Duke UP, 2000.Google Scholar
Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky. Tendencies. Durham: Duke UP, 1993.Google Scholar
Sinfield, Alan. “How to Read The Merchant of Venice without Being Heterosexist.” Alternative Shakespeares II. Ed. Hawkes, T. and Drakakis, J.. London: Routledge, 1996. 122−39.Google Scholar
Sinfield, Alan. Shakespeare, Authority, Sexuality: Unfinished Business in Cultural Materialism. London: Routledge, 2006.Google Scholar
Singh, Jyotsna, ed. A Companion to the Global Renaissance. Malden: Blackwell, 2009.Google Scholar
Smith, Bruce R. Homosexual Desire in Shakespeare’s England: A Cultural Poetics. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1991.Google Scholar
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. “Can the Subaltern Speak?” Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Ed. Nelson, Cary and Grossberg, Lawrence. Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1988.Google Scholar
Stanton, Kay. Shakespeare’s “Whores”: Erotics, Politics, and Poetics. 2014.Google Scholar
Stockton, Will. Playing Dirty: Sexuality and Waste in Early Modern England. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 2011.Google Scholar
Traub, Valerie. The Renaissance of Lesbianism in Early Modern England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
Vaughan, Alden, and Vaughan, Virginia. Shakespeare’s Caliban. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.Google Scholar

Further reading

Gajowski, Evelyn, and Rackin, Phyllis, eds. The Merry Wives of Windsor: New Critical Essays. London: Routledge, 2014.Google Scholar
Grady, Hugh, and DiPietro, Cary, eds. Shakespeare and the Urgency of Now. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.Google Scholar
Howard, Jean E., and Rackin, Phyllis. Engendering a Nation. London: Routledge, 1997.Google Scholar
Loomba, Ania. Shakespeare, Race, and Colonialism. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2010.Google Scholar
Menon, Madhavi, ed. Shakesqueer: A Queer Companion to the Complete Works of Shakespeare. Durham: Duke UP, 2011.Google Scholar
Traub, Valerie. Thinking Sex with the Early Moderns. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 2015.Google Scholar

Sources cited

American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. New York: American Psychiatric P, 1994.Google Scholar
Bate, Jonathan. Shakespearean Constitutions: Politics, Theatre, Criticism, 1730–1830. Oxford: Clarendon, 1989.Google Scholar
Bentley, G. E. The Jacobean and Caroline Stage. 7 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1941–68.Google Scholar
Bloom, Gina. Voice in Motion: Staging Gender, Shaping Sound in Early Modern England. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 2007.Google Scholar
Bradbook, Muriel. Elizabethan Stage Conditions: A Study of Their Place in the Interpretation of Shakespeare’s Plays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1932.Google Scholar
Brown, John Russell. Shakespeare’s Plays in Performance. London: Edwin Arnold, 1966.Google Scholar
Chambers, E. K. The Elizabethan Stage. 4 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1923.Google Scholar
Cook, Ann Jennalie. The Privileged Playgoers of Shakespeare’s London, 1576–1642. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1981.Google Scholar
Crane, Mary Thomas. Shakespeare’s Brain: Reading with Cognitive Theory. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2001.Google Scholar
de Grazia, Margreta. Shakespeare Verbatim: The Reproduction of Authenticity and the 1790 Apparatus. Oxford: Clarendon, 1991.Google Scholar
Diehl, Huston. Staging Reform, Reforming the Stage: Protestantism and Popular Theater in Early Modern England. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1997.Google Scholar
Dobson, Michael. The Making of the National Poet: Shakespeare, Adaptation and Authorship, 1660–1769. Oxford: Clarendon, 1992.Google Scholar
Empson, William. “Hamlet when New.” Sewanee Review 61 (1953): 15–42; and “Hamlet when New (Part II).” Sewanee Review 61 (1953): 185–205.Google Scholar
Fish, Stanley. Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1980.Google Scholar
Fish, Stanley. Surprised by Sin: The Reader in Paradise Lost. New York: St. Martin’s, 1967.Google Scholar
Folkerth, Wes. The Sound of Shakespeare. New York: Routledge, 2002.Google Scholar
Goldman, Michael. Shakespeare and the Energies of Drama. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1972.Google Scholar
Grady, Hugh. Modernist Shakespeare: Critical Texts in a Material World. Oxford: Clarendon, 1991.Google Scholar
Granville-Barker, Harley. Prefaces to Shakespeare. 2 vols. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1946–47.Google Scholar
Gurr, Andrew. Playgoing in Shakespeare’s London. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.Google Scholar
Gurr, Andrew. The Shakespearean Stage, 1574–1642. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
Halpern, Richard. Shakespeare among the Moderns. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1997.Google Scholar
Harbage, Alfred. Shakespeare’s Audience. New York: Columbia UP, 1941.Google Scholar
Helgerson, Richard. Forms of Nationhood: The Elizabethan Writing of England. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1992.Google Scholar
Hodgdon, Barbara. The Shakespeare Trade: Performances and Appropriations. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 1998.Google Scholar
Howard, Jean. The Stage and Social Struggle in Early Modern England. New York: Routledge, 1994.Google Scholar
Iser, Wolfgang. The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1978.Google Scholar
Iser, Wolfgang. The Implied Reader: Patterns of Communication in Prose Fiction from Bunyan to Beckett. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1974.Google Scholar
Iser, Wolfgang. Prospecting: From Reader Response to Literary Anthropology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1989.Google Scholar
Lamb, Charles. “On the Tragedies of Shakespeare, Considered with Reference to Their Fitness for Stage Representation.” William Shakespeare’s King Lear; A Sourcebook. Ed. Ioppolo, Grace. London: Routledge, 2003. 50–51.Google Scholar
Lander, Jesse. Inventing Polemic: Religion, Print, and Literary Culture in Early Modern England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
Lyne, Raphael. Shakespeare, Rhetoric, and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcus, Leah. Unediting the Renaissance: Shakespeare, Marlowe, Milton. London: Routledge, 1996.Google Scholar
O’Connell, Michael. The Idolatrous Eye: Iconoclasm and Theater in Early Modern England. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000.Google Scholar
Paster, Gail Kern. The Body Embarrassed: Drama and the Disciplines of Shame in Early Modern England. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1993.Google Scholar
Paster, Gail Kern. Humoring the Body: Emotions and the Shakespearean Stage. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2004.Google Scholar
Paster, Gail Kern, Rowe, Katherine, and Floyd-Wilson, Mary, eds. Reading the Early Modern Passions: Essays in the Cultural History of Emotion. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 2004.Google Scholar
Shakespeare, William. The Tragicall Historie of Hamlet Prince of Denmarke. London: Printed for N. L. and Iohn Trundell, 1603.Google Scholar
Smith, Bruce R. The Acoustic World of Early Modern England: Attending to the O-Factor. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1999.Google Scholar
Smith, Bruce R. “Hearing Green: Logomarginality in Hamlet.” Early Modern Literary Studies 7.1 (May 2001). http://extra.shu.ac.uk/emls/07-1/logomarg/conclus.htm.Google Scholar
Stern, Tiffany. Documents of Performance in Early Modern England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.Google Scholar
Stern, Tiffany, and Palfrey, Simon. Shakespeare in Parts. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2007.Google Scholar
Styan, J. L. The Shakespeare Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Taylor, Gary. Reinventing Shakespeare: A Cultural History, from the Restoration to the Present. New York: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1989.Google Scholar
Tribble, Evelyn, and Sutton, John. “Cognitive Ecology as a Framework for Shakespearean Studies.” Shakespeare Studies 39 (2011): 94–103.Google Scholar
Worthen, William. Shakespeare and the Authority of Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
Worthen, William. Shakespeare and the Force of Modern Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
Worthen, William, and Hodgdon, Barbara, eds. A Companion to Shakespeare and Performance. Oxford: Blackwell, 2005.Google Scholar
Yachnin, Paul, and Dawson, Anthony. The Culture of Playgoing in Shakespeare’s England: A Collaborative Debate. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.Google Scholar

Further reading

Cartelli, Thomas. Repositioning Shakespeare: National Formations, Postcolonial Appropriations. New York: Routledge, 1999.Google Scholar
Floyd-Wilson, Mary. English Ethnicity and Race in Early Modern Drama. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
Loomba, Ania, and Orkin, Martin, eds. Post-Colonial Shakespeares. New York: Routledge, 1998.Google Scholar
Radway, Janice. “What’s the Matter with Reception Study? Some Thoughts on the Disciplinary Origins, Conceptual Constraints, and Persistent Viability of a Paradigm.” New Directions in American Reception Study. Ed. Goldstein, Philip and Machor, James. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2008. 327–51.Google Scholar
Singh, Jyotsna, and Gitanjali, Shahani. “Postcolonial Shakespeare Revisited.” Shakespeare 6.1 (2010): 127–38.Google Scholar
Smith, Bruce R. The Key of Green: Passion and Perception in Renaissance Culture. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2009.Google Scholar
Smith, Bruce R. “Premodern Sexualities.” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 115 (2000): 318–29.Google Scholar
Tribble, Evelyn, and Keene, Nicholas. Cognitive Ecologies and the History of Remembering: Religion, Education and Memory in Early Modern England. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.Google Scholar

Sources cited

Brennan, Teresa. The Transmission of Affect. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 2004.Google Scholar
Clough, Patricia Ticineto. Introduction. The Affective Turn: Theorizing the Social. Ed. Clough, Patricia Ticineto with Halley, Jean. Durham: Duke UP, 2007. 1–33.Google Scholar
Cook, Amy. “Interplay: The Method and Potential of a Cognitive Scientific Approach to Theatre.” Theatre Journal 59 (2007): 579–94.Google Scholar
Cook, Amy. “Staging Nothing: Hamlet and Cognitive Science.” SubStance 35.2 (2006): 83–99.Google Scholar
Crane, Mary Thomas. Shakespeare’s Brain. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2000.Google Scholar
Damasio, Antonio. Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain. 1994. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 2005.Google Scholar
Enterline, Lynn. Shakespeare’s Schoolroom: Rhetoric, Discipline, Emotion. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 2012.Google Scholar
Floyd-Wilson, Mary. English Ethnicity and Race in Early Modern Drama. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
Floyd-Wilson, Mary, and Sullivan, Garrett A., eds. Environment and Embodiment in Early Modern England. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.Google Scholar
Fox, Cora. Ovid and the Politics of Emotion in Elizabethan England. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.Google Scholar
Hogan, Patrick Colm, and Pandit, Lalita, eds. “Cognitive Shakespeare: Criticism and Theory in the Age of Neuroscience.” College Literature 33.1 (2006): 1–249.Google Scholar
James, Heather. “Dido’s Ear: Tragedy and the Politics of Response.” Shakespeare Quarterly 52.3 (2001): 360–82.Google Scholar
Kiernan, Pauline. Shakespeare’s Theory of Drama. 1996. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
Kinney, Arthur F. Shakespeare’s Webs: Networks of Meaning in Renaissance Drama. London: Routledge, 2004.Google Scholar
Mullaney, Steven. “Affective Technologies: Toward an Emotional Logic of the Elizabethan Stage.” Environment and Embodiment in Early Modern England. Ed. Floyd-Wilson, Mary and Sullivan, Garrett A.. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. 71–89.Google Scholar
Oatley, Keith. “Simulation of Substance and Shadow: Inner Emotions and Outer Behavior in Shakespeare’s Psychology of Character.” College Literature 33.1 (2006): 15–33.Google Scholar
Pandit, Lalita. “Emotion, Perception and Anagnorisis in The Comedy of Errors: A Cognitive Perspective.” College Literature 33.1 (2006): 94–126.Google Scholar
Paster, Gail Kern. The Body Embarrassed: Drama and the Disciplines of Shame in Early Modern England. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1993.Google Scholar
Paster, Gail Kern. Humoring the Body: Emotions and the Shakespearean Stage. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2004.Google Scholar
Pollard, Tanya. Drugs and Theater in Early Modern England. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2005.Google Scholar
Richardson, Alan, and Steen, Francis F., eds. “Literature and the Cognitive Revolution.” Poetics Today 23.1 (2002): 1–182.Google Scholar
Roach, Joseph. The Player’s Passion: Studies in the Science of Acting. Newark: U of Delaware P, 1985.Google Scholar
Rowe, Katherine. “Minds in Company: Shakespearean Tragic Emotions.” A Companion to Shakespeare’s Works. Vol. 1: The Tragedies. Ed. Dutton, Richard and Howard, Jean E.. Oxford: Blackwell, 2003. 47–72.Google Scholar
Schoenfeldt, Michael. Bodies and Selves in Early Modern England: Physiology and Inwardness in Spenser, Shakespeare, Herbert, and Milton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Smith, Bruce R. “E/loco/com/motion.” From Script to Stage in Earl Modern England. Ed. Holland, Peter and Orgel, Stephen. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.Google Scholar
Smith, Bruce R. The Key of Green: Passion and Perception in Renaissance Culture. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2009.Google Scholar
Spolsky, Ellen. Word vs Image: Cognitive Hunger in Shakespeare’s England. New York: Palgrave/St. Martin’s, 2007.Google Scholar
Strier, Richard. “Against the Rule of Reason: Praise of Passion from Petrarch to Luther to Shakespeare to Herbert.” Reading the Early Modern Passions: Essays in the Cultural History of Emotion. Ed. Paster, Gail Kern, Rowe, Katherine, and Floyd-Wilson, Mary. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 2004. 23–42.Google Scholar
Sutton, John. “Spongy Brains and Material Memories.” Environment and Embodiment in Early Modern England. Ed. Floyd-Wilson, Mary and Sullivan, Garrett A.. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. 14–34.Google Scholar
Tilmouth, Christopher. Passion’s Triumph over Reason: A History of the Moral Imagination from Spenser to Rochester. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.Google Scholar
Tribble, Evelyn. Cognition in the Globe: Attention and Memory in Shakespeare’s Theatre. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.Google Scholar
Vaught, Jennifer. Masculinity and Emotion in Early Modern English Literature. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2008.Google Scholar
Wright, Thomas. The Passions of the Mind in General. London: 1614.Google Scholar
Yachnin, Paul. “Performing Publicity.” Shakespeare Bulletin 28.2 (2010): 201–19.Google Scholar

Further reading

Craik, Katherine A. Reading Sensations in Early Modern England. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007.Google Scholar
Craik, Katharine A., and Pollard, Tonya, eds. Shakespearean Sensations: Experiencing Literature in Early Modern England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.Google Scholar
Dugan, Holly. “Shakespeare and the Senses.” Literature Compass 6.3 (2009): 726–40.Google Scholar
Gallagher, Lowell, and Raman, Shankar, eds. Knowing Shakespeare: Senses, Embodiment and Cognition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.Google Scholar
Greenfield, Matthew, with Floyd-Wilson, Mary, Paster, Gail Kern, Pollard, Tanya, Rowe, Katherine, and Yates, Julian. “Shakespeare and Embodiment: An E-Conversation.” Literature Compass 2 (2005): 1–13.Google Scholar
Karim-Cooper, Farah, and Stern, Tiffany, eds. Shakespeare’s Theatres and the Effects of Performance. London: The Arden Shakespeare, 2013.Google Scholar
Rublack, Ulinka. “Fluxes: The Early Modern Body and the Emotions.” History Workshop Journal 53.1 (1993): 1–16.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×