Book contents
- The New Cambridge Shakespeare
- The New Cambridge Shakespeare
- The Two Noble Kinsmen
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Illustrations
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations and Conventions
- Introduction
- Note on the text
- The Two Noble Kinsmen
- Supplementary Notes
- Textual analysis
- Appendix: Productions, Staged Readings, And Recordings, 1928 to 2011
- Reading List
- References
Reading List
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
Book contents
- The New Cambridge Shakespeare
- The New Cambridge Shakespeare
- The Two Noble Kinsmen
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Illustrations
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations and Conventions
- Introduction
- Note on the text
- The Two Noble Kinsmen
- Supplementary Notes
- Textual analysis
- Appendix: Productions, Staged Readings, And Recordings, 1928 to 2011
- Reading List
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Two Noble Kinsmen , pp. 227 - 229Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2012
References
Abrams, Richard. ‘Gender Confusion and Sexual Politics in The Two Noble Kinsmen’, in Themes in Drama 7, ed. Redmond, James, 1985, pp. 69–76Google Scholar
Abrams, Richard. ‘The Two Noble Kinsmen as Bourgeois Drama,’ in Frey (ed.), pp. 145–62Google Scholar
Berggren, Paula S. ‘“For what we lack, / We laugh”: Incompletion and The Two Noble Kinsmen’, MLS 14 (1984), 3–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boitani, Piero. ‘The Genius to Improve an Invention: Transformations of the Knight’s Tale ’, in Morse, Ruth and Windeatt, Barry (eds.), Chaucer Traditions, 1990, pp. 185–98Google Scholar
Bonelli, Elena. ‘The Elizabethan (Ma)Lady: Lovesickness and the Medicalization of Desire in The Two Noble Kinsmen’, Textus 6 (1993), 43–55Google Scholar
Bradbrook, M.C. ‘Shakespeare and his Collaborators’, in Leech, Clifford and Margeson, J. M. R. (eds.), Shakespeare 1971: Proceedings of the World Shakespeare Congress, Vancouver, 1972, pp. 21–36Google Scholar
Bruster, Douglas. ‘The Jailer’s Daughter and the Politics of Madwomen’s Language’, SQ 46 (1995), 277–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelpearl, Philip. ‘Two Distincts, Division None: Shakespeare and Fletcher’s The Two Noble Kinsmen of 1613’ in Parker, R. B. and Zitner, S. P. (eds.), Elizabethan Theater: Essays in Honor of S. Schoenbaum, 1996, pp. 184–99Google Scholar
Frey, Charles H. ‘Collaborating with Shakespeare: After the Final Play’, in Frey (ed.), pp. 31–44Google Scholar
Hadorn, Peter T. ‘The Two Noble Kinsmen and the Problem of Chivalry’, Studies in Medievalism 4 (1992), 45–57Google Scholar
Hamlin, Will. ‘A Select Bibliographical Guide to The Two Noble Kinsmen’, in Frey (ed.), pp. 186–216Google Scholar
Hedrick, Donald K. ‘“Be Rough with Me”: The Collaborative Arenas of The Two Noble Kinsmen’, in Frey (ed.), pp. 45–77Google Scholar
Herman, Peter C. “‘Is This Winning?”: Prince Henry’s Death and the Problem of Chivalry in The Two Noble Kinsmen’, SoAR 62 (1997), 1–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littledale, Harold (ed.), The Two Noble Kinsmen, The New Shakspere Society. Part 1 Ser. 2, no. 8, 1876. Part 2 Ser. 2, no. 15, 1885Google Scholar
Mallette, Richard. ‘Same-Sex Erotic Friendship in The Two Noble Kinsmen’, RenD 26 (1995), 29–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMullan, Gordon. ‘A Rose for Emilia: Collaborative Relations in The Two Noble Kinsmen ’, in Gordon McMullan (ed.), Renaissance Configurations: Voices/Bodies/Spaces, 1580 -1690, 1998, pp. 129–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metz, G. H. ‘The Two Noble Kinsmen on the Twentieth-Century Stage’, THStud. 4 (1984), 63–9Google Scholar
Mulryne, J. R. ‘Shakespeare’s Knight’s Tale: Two Noble Kinsmen and the Tradition of Chivalry’, in Jones-Davies, M. T. (ed.), Le Roman de Chevalerie au Temps de la Renaissance, 1987, pp. 75–106Google Scholar
Potter, Lois. ‘Topicality or Politics? The Two Noble Kinsmen, 1613–34’, in Gordon McMullan and Jonathan Hope (eds.), The Politics of Tragicomedy: Shakespeare and After, 1992, pp. 77–91Google Scholar
Proudfoot, Richard. ‘Shakespeare and the New Dramatists of the King’s Men, 1606–1613’, in Brown, John Russell and Harris, Bernard (eds.), Later Shakespeare, Stratford-upon-Avon Studies 8, 1966, pp. 235–61Google Scholar
Richmond, Hugh. ‘Performance as Criticism: The Two Noble Kinsmen’, in Frey (ed.), pp. 163–85Google Scholar
Roberts, Jeanne Addison. ‘Crises of Male Self-Definition in The Two Noble Kinsmen’, in Frey (ed.), pp. 133–44Google Scholar
Shannon, Laurie. Sovereign Amity: Figures of Friendship in Shakespearean Contexts, 2002Google Scholar
Shewring, Margaret. ‘The Two Noble Kinsmen Revived: Chivalric Romance and Modern Performance Images’, in Jones-Davies, M. T. (ed.), Le Roman de Chevalerie au Temps de la Renaissance, 1987, pp. 107–32Google Scholar
Vickers, Brian. Shakespeare, Co-Author: A Historical Study of Five Collaborative Plays, 2002Google Scholar
Waith, Eugene M. ‘Shakespeare and Fletcher on Love and Friendship’, S.St. 18 (1986), 235–50Google Scholar
Weller, Barry. ‘The Two Noble Kinsmen, the Friendship Tradition, and the Flight from Eros’, in Frey (ed.), pp. 93–108Google Scholar
Werstine, Paul. ‘On the Compositors of The Two Noble Kinsmen’, in Frey (ed.), pp. 6–30Google Scholar
Wickham, Glynne. ‘The Two Noble Kinsmen, or A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Part II?’, in Hibbard, G. R. (ed.), The Elizabethan Theatre, VII, 1980, 167–96Google Scholar