SYLLABUS AND BACKGROUND MATERIALS: ENGLISH 145B

 

English 145B (Call 12194) SHAKESPEARE Fall, 1998

Prof. Nelson (DH 101) Early Plays MWF, 11-11:50 a.m.

Office hrs: MWF, 12-12:50 1590-1599 Douglass Hall 206

Office telephone: 278-6920 SYLLABUS Engl Dept: 278-6586


TEXTS: Please use only Folger Library paperback editions of the following: The Taming of the Shrew, Rome and Juliet, A Midsummer Night's Dream, Henry IV, Part One, The Merchant of Venice, Julius Caesar, and As You Like It. If you have other editions of the plays (or a Complete Works edition), please do not use in class. REMINDER: "Don't leave home without it!" It is very important that you bring your appropriate Folger text to class for each class meeting. NOTE: Don't be cheap! Buy all your texts now. Remember that the Hornet Bookstore returns to the publishers all texts still not purchased by early November. Not having purchased the appropriate text or not bringing it to class can be hazardous to your grade. RECOMMENDED OPTIONAL TEXTS: Shakespeare A to Z by Charles Boyce (Dell, 1990); Shakespeare: A Life in Drama by Stanley Wells (Norton, 1995).

 

AUG 31-M-Introductory: Shakes- position of scenes;

peare's life; themes initiation and dis-

and conventions in illusionment

Shakespearean drama; OCT 2-F-Romeo and Juliet: sym- how to read the plays bolic setting; theme

SEP 2-W-The Elizabethan theater and resolution

4-F-The Elizabethan concep- 5-M-FIRST MID-TERM EXAM

tion of the universe; 7-W-A Midsummer Night's

7-M-Labor Day (holiday) Dream: theory of 9-W-The Taming of the Shrew: comedy; introduction

conflict; double plot to the play

11-F-The Taming of the Shrew: 9-F-A Midsummer Night's

Induction as framing de- Dream; multiple plots

vice; battle of the sexes and paired lovers;

14-M-The Taming of the Shrew: satirical elements

"taming" metaphor 12-M-A Midsummer Night's 16-W-The Taming of the Shrew: Dream: the journey imagery; Kate's trans- motif; the loss of

formation innocence

18-F-The Taming of the Shrew: 14-W-A Midsummer Night's

"Kiss me, Kate"; the Dream: "Pyramus and speech on obedience Thisbe"; resolution

21-M-Romeo and Juliet: intro- 16-F-1 Henry IV: basic ele- ductory action; back- ents of the history

ground of the feud play; structure of

23-W-Romeo and Juliet: struc- Act I

ture of Act I 19-M-1 Henry IV: main plot 25-F-Romeo and Juliet: theory and comic subplot;

of tragedy; love story Prince Hal's solilo-

28-M-Romeo and Juliet: Friar quy

Laurence's "balance of 21-W-1 Henry IV: Prince

nature" speech; imagery Hal and Falstaff--

30-W-Romeo and Juliet: the basis of their

turning point--juxta- friendship

OCT 23-F-1 Henry IV: the NOV 20-F-Julius Caesar: the

turning point; funeral orations

Hal's identity 23-M-Julius Caesar: the

26-M-1 Henry IV: Hotspur quarrel scene; Antony;

and honor "pricking" the list

28-W-1 Henry IV: structure, 25-W-Julius Caesar: the

setting, resolution forces of history and 30-F-SECOND MID-TERM EXAM failure of reason;

NOV 2-M-The Merchant of Venice: Caesar's spirit; theme

riddle of the caskets; and resolution

Antonio 27-F-Thanksgiving holiday

4-W-The Merchant of Venice: 30-M-As You Like It: in-

the pound of flesh troduction to the

6-F-The Merchant of Venice: play; basic conflict

Shylock: two views of DEC 2-W-As You Like It: the his characters: as comic love story; Rosalind's villain----as tragic "problems"

hero 4-F-As You Like It: Rosa- 9-M-The Merchant of Venice: lind's "problems" the trial scene; "the con't); the worlds

quality of mercy" of the play; the uses 11-W-The Merchant of Venice: of "adversity" the worlds of the play; 7-M-As You Like It: Ja- journey motif; resolution ques--"All the world's 13-F-Julius Caesar: histori- a stage"; juxtaposi- cal background; Elizabe- tion of scenes

than perspective; intro- 9-W-As You Like It: Rosa- duction to the play lind: the function of 16-M-Julius Caesar: the two her disguise Caesars 11-F-As You Like It: illu- 18-W-Julius Caesar: Brutus as sion and reality; dis- moral idealist (and vil- covery; theme and ain?) resolution

FINAL EXAMINATION: Wednesday, December 16, 1998

10:15 a.m.-12:15 p.m.

 

GOALS OF THE COURSE:


The goals of the course are as follows: to read, study, analyze, and discuss a representative selection of Shakespeare's plays--the early and middle comedies, the early and middle tragedies, and the history play--from roughly the first half of his career as a dramatist, concentrating primarily on critical analysis of the plays but with introductory lectures providing important background information on the Elizabethan age, the Elizabethan theater, and the themes and conventions of Shakespearean drama.

 

ASSIGNMENTS AND REQUIREMENTS

1. Attend all classes. Attendance is mandatory and more than three absences, whether excused or unexcused (with rare exceptions about which you should see me), will progressively lower your grade. Arriving late or leaving early will--after three times--count as one absence. If you do arrive late and were counted absent, be sure to come up after class and have this adjusted; otherwise, you will be counted as absent. RECOMMENDATION: Save your cuts! For those days when you (or, if you are a parent, your child) may be ill or when you need to take care of personal business. Do not cut frivolously and then have no cuts left when you get sick or when your ailing grandmother dies.

2. Do not come to class unprepared! "Reading quizzes" will be given each time we take up a new play. You are expected to have read the play carefully and to be able to participate in class discussion. If you have not read the play, you will fail the reading quiz, and you will have very little idea of what is being discussed. (Reading quizzes cannot be made up, so please don't ask me.) Thus, keep up with all reading assignments.

3. Class protocol: Please do not "borrow time" from this class to catch up on work in other classes or catch up with your correspondence. Do not read other texts while sitting in class or work on workbooks or lecture notes from other courses. Please do not read the Hornet (or any other newspaper) in class. Please do not eat in class. Beverages-- coffee, tea, soft drinks in a cup (not a can or bottle)--are okay, but be sure to carry empty cups out of class with you. BE COURTEOUS: Please do not talk to fellow classmates while the lecture is going on or while there is class discussion; do not think that whispering to a classmate is okay because it is undetected; I do detect it, and it is distracting both to me and to other students. For the same reason, do not "trade notes" (in lieu of whispering) with the person closest to you. That might have been fun in high school, but it's inappropriate in college.

4. Other requirements: Two in-class, mid-term exams and an in-class final exam. Please use blue books (small size preferred) and write in pen and ink--blue or black. Each mid- term will consist of two medium-length essay questions, one on each of the two plays that you will be responsible for on each of the two exams. You will be asked to write on the thematic (i.e., pertaining to the theme) significance of a group of scenes or episodes, on important images and/or symbols in the play, on character conflict, on ironic situations, or on structural parallels. The final exam will be similar, except that you will be asked to answer three questions, one each for each of the three plays you will be responsible for on that exam. All the exams will include optional questions (i.e., you may be provided with three questions on a given play and asked to answer only one of them). Each exam will cover only the plays discussed up to that time. In other words, the first exam will be on the first two plays; the second exam will be on the next two plays; and the final exam will be on the last three plays. (Thus, the final exam will not be comprehensive.)

5. "Competent Prose" Requirement: On the exams, you are expected to write competently and clearly; your essays should be reasonably well-organized with specific support for main points; your essays should also be relatively free of errors in usage and mechanics. Contrary to what many people believe, what you say (content) is largely inseparable from how you say it (style).

6. Grades: your grade in the course will be based on the "reading quizzes," the two mid-term exams, and the final exam. (If you have absences in excess of the three allowed, that also will be figured into your final grade.) The reading quizzes count half as much as one mid-term exam. The final exam will count one and a half times as much as one mid-term exam. If you have questions during the semester about your grade average, you should ask me. Below is a method of computing your grades in the course:

 

grades during the semester:

 

 

 

 

 

Total points = 24.2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7. Value of attendance, participation in class discussion: regular attendance cannot help your grade, but excessive absences can certainly hurt your grade. Class participation in discussion is important, especially if you are a borderline case, that is, if you are hovering between, say, a B- and a C+ or an A- and a B+.

REMINDER: If you would like your final exam and course grade mailed to you, please leave a self-addressed, stamped (two $.32) envelope in blue book of final exam or else leave in my faculty mailbox in English 105 by Friday after the final.

Rough Chronology of Shakespeare's Plays


NOTE: Scholars are not certain of the precise dates during which Shakespeare wrote the plays. There is more evidence for the dates of some plays than others. The dates that are listed below represent the general consensus of Shakespearean scholarship. Even within this consensus, there is still disagreement about the dates of particular plays. The chief authority for the authorship of Shakespeare's plays is the "First Folio" edition, published in 1623, a collection of the plays by John Heming (or Hemings) and Henry Condell, two of Shakespeare's colleagues in his theatrical company, The King's Men.

 

1589-90 (revised 1594-95) Henry VI, Part I

1590-91 Henry VI, Part II

1590-91 Henry VI, Part III

1592-93 Richard III

1592-94 The Comedy of Errors

1593-94 Titus Andronicus

1593-94 The Taming of the Shrew

1594 The Two Gentlemen of Verona

1594-95 (revised 1597) Love's Labour's Lost

1594-96 King John

1595 Richard II

1595-96 Romeo and Juliet

1595-96 A Midsummer Night's Dream

1596-97 Henry IV, Part One

1596-97 The Merchant of Venice

1597 (revised 1600-01) The Merry Wives of Windsor

1598 Henry IV, Part Two

1598-99 Much Ado About Nothing

1599 Henry V

1599 Julius Caesar

1599 As You Like It

1600-01 Hamlet

1601-02 Twelfth Night

1601-02 Troilus and Cressida

1602-03 All's Well That Ends Well

1604 Measure for Measure

1604 Othello

1605 King Lear

1606 Macbeth

1606-07 Antony and Cleopatra

1607-08 Coriolaus

1607-08 Timon of Athens

1607-08 Pericles

1609-10 Cymbeline

1610-11 The Winter's Tale

1611 The Tempest

1612-13 Henry VIII

1613 (collaboration with John Fletcher) The Two Noble Kinsmen

(NOTE: Shakespeare may have contributed a few scenes to Edward III (1692-95), one or two additions to Sir Thomas More (1594-95), and collaborated with Fletcher on a lost play, Cardenio (1612-13).

English 145B&C Professor Nelson

SHAKESPEARE'S LIFE AND WORK

THEMES AND CONVENTIONS IN SHAKESPEAREAN DRAMA


I. LIFE AND WORK

A. LIFE (1564-1616)


William Shakespeare was born in a provincial English town, Stratford, in Warwickshire. His father, John Shakespeare, was a successful tradesman (primarily a "glover," one who dealt in leather goods) who also held various political offices in Stratford, including that of Chief Bailiff (roughly our equivalent of Mayor). We don't know much about William Shakespeare, but we do know more about him than we do many of his contemporary dramatists. He probably attended grammar school at Stratford, where he would have studied Latin and Greek and the classics. He may have helped out with his father's business as he was growing up. He probably saw performances of plays in Stratford put on by groups of traveling players. He may have taught school for two or so years, at ages 20 and 21. We do know that in 1582, at age 18, he married a woman eight years older than he, Anne Hathaway, 26. They had three children, a daughter, Susanna, and fraternal twins, Hamnet and Judith. The daughters lived into adulthood, but Hamnet died in 1596 at age 11. No one is certain when Shakespeare came to London, but it was probably sometime in the late 1580's (1588 is regarded as the most probable year). He didn't bring his family--at least not permanently. He seems to have lived alternately in London and Stratford during his twenty-year career as a playwright, but for most of that period he lived in London. In approximately 1611, after having established himself as a successful playwright and shareholder in the theater company to which he belonged, Shakespeare "retired" from the theater and returned to his home in Stratford, where he lived until his death in 1616 at age 52.


B. KINDS OF PLAYS HE WROTE


Shakespeare wrote 37 plays, 38 if you count The Two Noble Kinsman (on which he probably collaborated with John Fletcher). Our chief source for his plays is the so-called First Folio, published in 1623; there, his plays were collected by two friends and former colleagues of his in the theater, John Heminges and Henry Condell, and thus preserved for posterity.


Shakespeare wrote all the kinds of plays that were popular during the Elizabethan-Jacobean era--comedies, history plays, tragedies, and tragi-comedies (which are now commonly referred to as "dramatic romances"). He was a great experimenter who lived during an experimental age. The Renaissance in Englandbeen traditionally regarded as an age of transition and marks the shift from the medieval to the modern world. Shakespeare's age inherited the philosophical and religious assumptions of the Middle Ages and continued to live by them. At the same time, the age felt the impact of the new knowledge brought about by the first stages of the scientific revolution, and thus experienced a good deal of social change, enjoyed a degree of economic prosperity (though there was much peasant unrest), and witnessed a marked change in religious observance and tradition because of England's split with the Roman Catholic Church in 1534 (in accordance with the Act of Supremacy) forcefully carried out by Elizabeth's father, Henry VIII.


Shakespeare probably began (sometime between 1589-92) with the writing of history plays, although no one knows for certain. We do know that by 1590-92 he was in London and that he had joined a company of players later called The Lord Chamberlain's Men. He stayed with this company during the remainder of his career (it later became the King's Men under the patronage of James I, who succeeded Elizabeth on the throne in 1603), and eventually became a shareholder in it. He also acted, probably directed (though people did not use the term "director" in Shakespeare's time), and of course wrote plays for the company, producing whatever was popular at the time as well as helping to establish popular trends himself. He was a very successful playwright and businessman in his own lifetime, so much so that he purchased New Place, the next- to-largest house in Stratford, and also purchased additional land as well. In 1597 he purchased a coat-of-arms for the Shakespeare family, thus raising him and his father to the rank of "gentleman."


In any case, Shakespeare wrote comedies and histories first--these were among the most popular plays at the time. He probably began with what later came to be called the "First Tetralogy" (consisting of four plays, Henry VI, Part One, Henry VI, Part Two, Henry VI, Part Three, and Richard III), tracing the background and struggles of rival families for the crown during the so-called "War of the Roses" in fifteenth-century England. Most scholars believe these early plays were written between 1590 and 1593, and were followed in 1593-94 by the early comedies, The Comedy of Errors and The Taming of the Shrew. He then tried his hand at tragedy and produced a blood-and-thunder potboiler called Titus Andronicus, capitalizing on the popularity of "blood" or revenge tragedies of the time. About 1594-95, he wrote two other comedies, The Two Gentlemen of Verona and Love's Labour's Lost. Then he wrote his first successful tragedy, Romeo and Juliet and at about the same time also wrote what would become a very popular comedy, A Midsummer Night's Dream. This latter has a structure similar to Romeo and Juliet and may be a parody of it (though no one is sure which play was written first).


During the period between 1592-94, the theaters were closed on account of an outbreak of bubonic plague. Probably because of this, Shakespeare turned to poetry and wrote two narrative poems, Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece, three other minor poems, and then he produced the famous Sonnets (154 in all), though no one is sure of the precise dates on which the sonnets were written.


After the theaters re-opened in 1595, he seems to have concentrated almost exclusively on the writing of plays. Perhaps his poetry was more highly regarded than his plays during this period--we should remember that theaters, actors, and playwrights were not greatly respected in the Elizabethan age. In fact, the theaters were considered by Puritans to be disreputable houses of sin, so much so that the City Council of London forbade the building of playhouses within the city limits of London. (At this time, about 100,000 people lived within the city limits, and another 100,000 lived in the surrounding suburbs). Thus, the first theaters were built in the suburbs outside of London proper. Gradually, the most well- known theaters came to be those located on the Bankside (the south side of the Thames River, which the citizenry reached by crossing London Bridge). It was on the Bankside where Shakespeare's company eventually built the famous Globe Playhouse in 1599.


Between 1595-99, Shakespeare wrote the so-called "Second Tetralogy" (consisting of four plays, Richard II, Henry IV, Part One, Henry IV, Part Two, and Henry V), which covers a period of time in English history (1379-1402) before the First Tetralogy, and deals with the forced abdication and eventual murder of Richard II, the rise to power of the politically shrewd and devious Henry IV, and culminates in the coming of age of the great Henry V, the "ideal Christian king." During this same time, Shakespeare also wrote another history play, King John, dealing with events in late twelfth-century England, and two popular and successful romantic comedies, The Merchant of Venice and Much Ado About Nothing. Then, almost at mid-point in his career, he wrote his first "Roman" tragedy, Julius Caesar, and his two greatest comedies, As You Like It and Twelfth Night. During this same period (1599-1601), he also wrote a minor, "domestic" comedy, The Merry Wives of Windsor (as the story has it, at Queen Elizabeth's request).


At the beginning of the seventeenth century--and marking the second half of his active career as a playwright--Shakespeare wrote the great tragedies--the so-called "Big Four"--Hamlet (1600-01), Othello (1604-05), King Lear (1605-06), and Macbeth (1605-06). During this same period, he also wrote the "dark" comedies and/or problem plays--Troilus and Cressida, All's Well That Ends Well, and Measure for Measure. (Sometimes, other of his plays, such as Hamlet, Julius Caesar, and especially Timon of Athens, are included in the "problem play" category.) As the King's Men, under James I's patronage, Shakespeare's company became the most prominent theater group in London.


After 1606, Shakespeare wrote two more "Roman" plays, both tragedies--Antony and Cleopatra and Coriolanus. Then, toward the end of his career, between 1608 and 1611-12, Shakespeare turned to the writing of the "romances"--Pericles, Cymbeline, The Winter's Tale, and culminating in The Tempest, which he probably wrote in Stratford, for by that time he had retired to his home in New Place. Then (approximately 1612-13), as though by special plea from his company, he wrote another history play, Henry VIII, which he may have written with a collaborator, John Fletcher. He may have also collaborated with Fletcher on The Two Noble Kinsman, a play which is not always listed in the Shakespeare canon.

 

II. THEMES AND CONVENTIONS IN SHAKESPEAREAN DRAMA


A. CONVENTIONS

 

1. The Principle of Alternation


The most notable stage convention employed by Shakespeare is his use of the double or multiple plot, a structural technique not typical of classical tragedy or comedy (these latter usually had a single plot). But Elizabethan drama was not just influenced by Greek and Roman classical drama but also by native English drama that had evolved out of the so-called morality, mystery, and miracle plays put on by various trade guilds during the Middle Ages, and by the Interlude, a later form that grew out of these three early forms. These native dramas, which began with primarily religious and didactic themes, eventually mixed comic and serious scenes and were generally, if not episodic, very loosely structured. Writers and playgoers became as interested in the variety and entertainment provided by such plays as they were in the religious or moral lessons the plays presumed to teach. Thus Shakespeare and his contemporaries inherited from this earlier era a tendency toward experimentation and dramatic alternation of scenes.


The principle of alternation became the chief dramatic convention employed by Shakespeare, and most scholars believe he brought it to perfection. He alternates serious and comic scenes in his plays, or he alternates the main plot with the sub-plot or sub-plots. He juxtaposes scenes in such a way that one helps explain the other, or is in ironic contrast to the other (e.g., as Act II of Romeo and Juliet ends, Friar Laurence is leading the two young lovers into his cell to perform the ceremony of marriage, and the atmosphere is one of tenderness and hope for the future; this is immediately followed by the ominous first scene of Act III when, during the intense heat of mid-day, Benvolio and Mercutio, while restlessly roaming the streets, encounter Tybalt and his supporters, become involved in a fierce quarrel resulting in first Mercutio's death, then Tybalt's death, and finally Romeo's banishment).

The principle of alternation offers many advantages in comparison to the play which has a single, straightforward structure and plot; it provides more variety, more possibilities for exploring different segments of experience, and seems to include more of life and the multiple perspectives we often have in viewing life and its contradictions. It also gives the plays a greater sense of adventure, suspense, and pace, as well as a sense of being all-inclusive, because the plays seem to take in as much of the world as they can.


Moreover, Shakespeare almost always integrated the main plot and the sub-plot thematically, in contrast to some of his contemporaries, who would provide the sub-plot merely for its own sake (usually for slapstick comedy and the laughs it would provide), without bothering to relate it to the thematic concerns of the main plot. In Shakespeare, the sub-plot usually performs one of two functions: 1) it provides ironic and often mocking commentary on the action of the main plot (e.g., in Henry IV, Part One, the stagecoach robbery engineered by Prince Hal and Falstaff, with Hal playing a practical joke on Falstaff for the fun of it, is a way of satirizing and exposing the much more serious political robbery plotted by the Percies in their attempts to seize the crown); 2) if similar in narrative or story line, the sub-plot serves to reinforce and amplify the action of the main plot (e.g., in King Lear, the sub-plot involving Gloucester and his two sons, one loyal but pursued by Gloucester as a fugitive, the other villainous and treacherous but mistakenly trusted by Gloucester, is parallel to the action of the main plot, in which Lear rewards the two daughters, Goneril and Regan, who later betray him and plot his destruction, and banishes the daughter, Cordelia, who truly loves him). In some instances, the sub-plot will do both.


2. Other Conventions


a. The Soliloquy: this convention, no longer used today, was almost essential to playwrights in Shakespeare's age, and was taken for granted by the audience. In the soliloquy, a character--usually alone on stage--speaks to himself, voicing his private thoughts out loud. This convention enabled the playwright to establish character motivation, provide important plot information, or advance the conflict in the plot. It is important to remember that, in soliloquies, the character is almost always telling the truth as he or she knows it, since there is no reason for the character to lie to himself unless the point of the soliloquy is to reveal the character's own self-deception (rare in Shakespeare's plays). Consequently, the information provided by the soliloquy is almost always reliable, and the playwright, with dramatic economy, can quickly convey to the audience the motives for the character's actions. (Thus, in Hamlet's first soliloquy in Act I, scene ii--"O, that this too, too sullied flesh would melt, thaw, and resolve itself into a dew" [1.2.133-164]--the audience quickly grasps Hamlet's state of mind and understands why he is in a state of deep despair--not only due to the shock of his father's untimely death but, even more shattering, the hasty re-marriage of his mother to Hamlet's despised uncle, Claudius. In addition, we see and feel Hamlet's helplessness in doing anything about the situation.)


b. The Five-Act Structure: Shakespeare's plays are divided into five acts (in contrast to the conventional modern play, which is usually divided into three acts, with a ten to fifteen minute intermission coming somewhere after the curtain falls in the middle of the second act), and provide continuous, uninterrupted action. (Remember that Elizabethan playhouses, constructed in such a way that the platform stage jutted out into the middle of the theater, with the audience standing on the ground or in seated galleries on three sides of the stage, had no curtain). Shakespeare, like his contemporaries, derived this form from the five-act structure of classical Roman drama. Ordinarily, in writing his plays, Shakespeare provided no scene divisions (and did not always provide act divisions); such divisions in printed texts of the plays have been provided by later editors. Since there was no curtain and no sets, the usual way to indicate that one scene was over and another scene (often involving another group of characters with the action occurring in a different location) was beginning was to have all the players in the first scene exit from the stage while another set of characters came on the stage from another entrance.


Ordinarily, in a Shakespeare play, Act I introduces most of the important characters and sets up the basic problem or conflict. Act II extends and enlarges the conflict. Then Act III provides the turning point, i.e., some action or series of actions which become irreversible. In other words, the main character or characters can't go back to some earlier stance after they have committed the action that represents the turning point. (For example, the turning point in Romeo and Juliet occurs when Romeo kills Tybalt in Act III, Scene I. This act is irreversible, the audience senses that Romeo's action taints the idealized love that he and Juliet have discovered, and that all subsequent events in the play, including the tragic deaths of the two lovers, are the logical and inevitable result of this turning point.) Of course, practically speaking, one could argue that there are many "turning points" in Shakespeare's plays, beginning in the very first act, but that would be using the term in its broadest sense.


We could apply Aristotle's term, "rising action," to describe the events of Acts I and II, where the conflict is introduced and enlarged and reaches a kind of culmination in the turning point in Act III. We could also use Aristotle's term, "falling action," to refer to the latter part of the play. In particular, Act IV is the act that tends to slow down the action of the play while it depicts the consequences of the turning point. In Shakespeare's tragedies, it is often in Act IV where one finds the pathos of the play emphasized. For example, in Act IV of Hamlet, the emphasis is on Ophelia and her insanity and eventual suicide. She is a figure of pathos rather than of tragedy (i.e., we feel sorry for her and pity her because she is largely the innocent victim of forces she doesn't understand). Similarly, in Othello, the emphasis in Act IV is on the innocence and bewilderment of Desdemona, who doesn't understand Othello's harsh treatment of her. In Act V, the action of the play comes to a climax. In the tragedies and history plays, the climax is the action that the turning point inevitably leads to, and it is usually quite forceful and ends the play with great dramatic and emotional impact. In the comedies and romances, the climax brings about the resolution of all the comic (or tragi-comic) confusion that has come before it, as disguises are stripped away and the truth is revealed, with the play ending in harmony and celebration.

Whether tragedy, comedy, history, or romance, the action in the play will have unity if there is meaning to the action (i.e., if the action, whether it occurs in the main plot or sub-plot, is related to the meaning or possible theme of the play). For this unity to be realized, there must be a central conflict or problem that unites all the separate episodes in the play. In the best of Shakespeare's plays, the action comes out of characters and their motives and choices. For example, in the great Shakespearean tragedies, the tragedy arises from character, from the moral choices that the protagonists make; in less effective Shakespearean tragedies, the tragedy often arises from circumstances or from overly- contrived plot developments, and the protagonists seem more like victims of those circumstances. These guidelines are generally true for Shakespeare's tragedies and in a broader sense are true of all of his plays, even though in the comedies, for example, external circumstances and plot contrivances--the comic irrationalities that often characterize life--will be more prominent.

In any case, whether comedy, tragedy, history, or romance, the audience or reader should never make the mistake of attributing to Shakespeare himself the impulses, beliefs, and feelings of his characters.


B. Themes


1. In tragedy: an heroic individual places himself in opposition to the conventional rules of society or to the moral order of the universe (or both). He is doomed to lose, but in doing so, he attains a heightened sense of nobility, a greatness of character, that is largely affirmative. Usually, we expect the tragic hero to be his own moral agent, that is, he chooses his destiny or at least partly chooses it; he is not merely the victim of circumstance or fate. (One of the criticisms of Romeo and Juliet is that the hero and heroine are more the victims of circumstance or fate than they are responsible for their own tragic ends through the choices they make, though recent criticism has tended to emphasize the way they suffer the consequences of their choices, while, because of their immaturity, they do not seem to acknowledge the responsibility for those choices.)

Often, the choice the tragic protagonist makes--and the suffering he endures because of it--brings him to an awareness of what he has done. He makes discoveries about the meaning of human experience he hadn't realized before. For example, in King Lear, Lear begins as arrogant and prideful, but through incredible suffering, awakens to a new and much more human sense of self while acknowledging his previous follies. (Such "self-discovery" is not always the case, however. Some critics feel that Brutus and Othello learn very little about their "flaws" or acknowledge their own responsibility in their downfalls, and that such a lack of recognition or insight is part of their respective tragedies.)

Sometimes, the tragic hero doesn't choose the predicament he finds himself in--as in the case of Hamlet--but he does make choices in working himself out of the predicament. In tragedy, although the fate of a whole people or nation or society--or even the fate of the cosmos--might be at stake, the focus is nevertheless on the tragic hero and his problem. We see his intense individualism and feel his sense of his own greatness. The themes of all of Shakespeare's tragedies have to do with the conflict between individualism and the social order, or between individualism and the rules of society, or between individualism and the moral laws of the universe. The immense changes in the larger culture of Renaissance England brought this rising sense of individualism into existence. In other words, man became more aware of himself as an individual, and there was a growing belief in the legitimacy of individual rights, feelings, and conscience. The age (roughly 1500-1620) was still a long way from the political revolutions brought on by the rising belief in individual freedom and rights which culminated in the struggle for democracy in both America and France in the late 18th century, but the Renaissance and the Puritan Revolution that temporarily established the Commonwealth Era (1649-1660), represent early stages of it.

Ordinarily, in tragedy, the hero will not compromise. Somewhere along the way, he draws the line and refuses to be conciliatory. This lack of compromise in part causes his death. (For example, Hamlet could have compromised and "gone along" with Claudius' takeover of the throne, but he didn't.) Thus, tragedy often emphasizes the end of something. There is a sense of finality about it--that a particular era, a particular period of turmoil, a particular way of life--is over. (In spite of this, at the end of the tragedies--and this is also true of the history plays--someone will deliver a speech about the noble dead and the coming restoration of order, and then the dead are carried out.)

2. In comedy: the emphasis is on how to live in human society. Although there may be references to the larger moral order governed by a benevolent providence, the central concern has to do with human beings learning how to live together in reasonable harmony in the social order. So the tendency in comedy is to be practical, conciliatory, with the characters willing to compromise. Such traits makes Shakespeare's comedies sound realistic, but in fact Shakespearean comedy is primarily romantic and often deals with idealized, pastoral worlds, yet at the end of a given play, the action almost always returns the characters to "reality." In other words, the play has what we might call a realistic base, since what the comedy usually says is that we have to live in this world, with all its drawbacks (rather than living in some never-never land) and that we might as well make the best of it. (As a way of resolving this romantic-realistic split in Shakespeare's comedies, some critics argue that the comedies dramatize the reconciliation between realism and romance and suggest that Shakespeare is indicating that both qualities are essential to a full realization of life's possibilities.)


Shakespeare's comedies usually end in reunion and a sense of reconciliation, symbolized by marriage or some other festive, life-affirming occasion. (Thus, the action is still idealized even when the play emphasizes the necessity of returning to reality.) As a result, at the end of the play, the audience has a sense of something beginning--a new life in marriage, a new or re-vitalized society forming around the young people in the play, and also a sense of continuity in life and in society. The comedies--and this is also true of the romances- -are often related by symbolic elements in the plays to the seasonal cycle in nature--to the idea that nature is constantly renewing itself from spring-summer to autumn-winter to the return of spring again. Thus, in Shakespeare's comedies, we have and an emphasis on pragmatic concerns, but also a mythic celebration of life and its possibilities.


3. In the history plays: Shakespeare's history plays represent a kind of hybrid genre, comprised of a mixture of tragedy, comedy, and romance. The typical theme of Shakespeare's history plays centers on the loss of order in the state as the forces of disorder (usually represented by a usurper to the throne, or by rebels who believe they have a legal claim to the throne, or by irreconcilable political and/or philosophical differences between the two warring factions) attempt to overthrow established authority and seize power for themselves. The prevailing belief during Shakespeare's time was that everything in the universe was arranged by a hierarchical principle of order in accordance with providential design--whether in the heavens, in the world of nature, or in human society--and that each area of creation was tied to every other by a set of natural, interlocking relationships. (For example, just as the king was the chief ruler of the state, so the sun was the king of the planets, the lion the king of beasts in the animal world, gold the "king" of metals, and so on.) Often the Elizabethan "world picture" has been described by the metaphorical "Great Chain of Being" wherein the top link of the chain is located in Heaven and then the chain progresses down through the order of angels, then to the order of man (the highest of the animals because he possesses the God-given faculty of reason), then to the creatures of the animal kingdom, then to plant life and organic material, then to inorganic and inanimate matter, and finally to nothingness. Thus, anytime man disturbed this order by attempting to seize a position in society he was not entitled to in accordance with divine law, he, in effect, rattled the chain, and the reverberations could be felt all the way up and down it, thus affecting the order in nature and in the universe itself.


Because the history play is a kind of hybrid creation, it does not constitute a separate literary genre. Some, like Richard II and Richard III, resemble tragedies. Still others, like Henry IV, Part One, are almost dominated by the comic realism of a character like Falstaff. But the reason they are called "history plays" is that they are chiefly concerned with historical and political developments that many Elizabethans believed helped shape the England of Shakespeare's day. The plays were peculiar to this period (between roughly 1590 and 1620) and were written not just by Shakespeare but by many of his contemporaries as well. There had been no group of plays like this written before and there has been no group of plays like this written since. (Although an occasional, isolated example of the history play might turn up in a given period, this hybrid genre has never been revived.) The usual explanation for the development of the history play in Shakespeare's time is that such plays evolved out of the growing sense of nationalism, loyalty, and patriotism in England, as the English people became more and more aware of their collective identity as a nation. After all, the Renaissance era represents England's "coming of age" and the people of Shakespeare's time had an interest and fascination in their own history and wanted to know--even if the history was in part "fictionalized"--how they got where they were. In addition, they were especially interested in the theory of kingship (i.e., what makes a "good" king, what makes a "bad" king), and thus the history plays focus on English monarchs at critical periods in England's history. Shakespeare's most notable history plays--comprising the First and Second Tetralogies--dramatize the consequences of overthrowing established authority and the disorder and civil strife such illegal usurpations of authority lead to. But in the Second Tetralogy, Shakespeare is also interested in tracing the "education to kingship" of England's supposedly ideal king, Henry V, while in the First Tetralogy, he concentrates on the disastrous consequences that the rebellion against established authority can lead to.


Some critics (most notably, E.M.W. Tillyard) see these plays approvingly as largely propaganda--hymns of patriotism written by Shakespeare, the loyal subject, to his nation and his queen. But most students of Shakespeare believe it is a mistake to view the plays in this simplistic and reductive way, since Shakespeare seemed primarily concerned with dramatizing the shift from the "timeless" feudal world of the 1300's to the modern-day, Machiavellian world of "power politics" employed by both Richard III (primarily a villain) and, paradoxically, by Henry V (primarily a hero). Critics argue that the plays dramatize the very real conflict between traditional and idealistic values still believed in by the English on the one hand, and the increasing commitment to the idea of realpolitik (the German term meaning the exercise of political realism, necessity, and expediency) on the other hand, a practice which was more and more becoming the basis on which "policy" was determined in Elizabethan England, and which most believe largely governs policy-making in government today.


4. In romance: Shakespeare's dramatic romances (consisting of four plays--Pericles, Cymbeline, The Winter's Tale, and The Tempest), sometimes referred to as "tragi-comedies" because they contain both tragic and comic elements, are more accurately categorized under the heading of romance because they follow the conventions commonly associated with the genre of romance. According to Irving Ribner (in his introduction to Shakespeare's Pericles, in the Kittredge-Ribner edition of The Complete Works of Shakespeare, published by Xerox), romance is usually set in the highly idealized, magical world of fairy tale, "with its evocation of the strange and miraculous," and ordinarily involves "the passage of long periods of time, with the growth of children to maturity, the compassing of great geographical distances," and the suspension of the natural laws that govern the operations of nature and man (p. 1429).


Some critics speculate that Shakespeare turned to romance as a way of transcending the implications raised by his tragedies. In his romances, Shakespeare asks us to take the fairy-tale narratives seriously because of the symbolic meaning each conveys. As Ribner points out, in his romances Shakespeare "provides answers to the problems of human suffering such as cannot be found in the tragic world of King Lear and Macbeth" (p. 1429). For in the romances, evil and human malice are overcome by the greater power of love and goodness, and the final note is one of harmony and reconciliation. Ribner notes that to his romances Shakespeare added one element which is distinctively his own: "a structure of two parallel plots, the one involving parents and the other their children" (p. 1429).

The reason for these parallel plots is that, symbolically, Shakespeare draws an analogy between the cyclical rhythms of nature and the cyclical rhythms of human life. That is, just as nature is renewed in the spring after a winter of death and decay, so in human society the evils committed by the parents or elders of one generation are overcome by the promise of a new birth of human goodness as represented in the children of the next generation. For example, in Shakespeare's last and greatest romance, The Tempest, the young lovers, Ferdinand and Miranda, represent the way in which the rebirth of life, love, and goodness seems to rise out of the evils committed by the parents and elders of the previous generation, indicating that just as winter is necessary to the renewal of the cyclical processes of nature in the spring, so too is death (and the tragedy and suffering often associated with death) essential to the rebirth of life and love in the world of human society.

STUDY QUESTIONS FOR FIRST MID-TERM EXAM

 

A. THE TAMING OF THE SHREW.


1. Can you explain the relationship between the Induction and the main play?

2. Can you discuss and explain the thematic significance of the imagery in the play? For example, can you analyze the meaning of Petruchio's use of expansive images in describing himself as a wooer (p. 54, 1.2.66-67 and p. 83, 2.1.137-144, in New Folger)? Gremio's description of Kate as a "fiend from hell" (p. 37, 1.1.90 in New Folger). The second meaning of "shrew" as a rodent and predatory animal? Petruchio's image of dove and buzzard (p. 89, 2.1.220 in New Folger) during his "wit battle" with Kate? Petruchio's use of clothes imagery (p. 123, 3.2.120 and p. 175, 4.3.177-178 in New Folger)? Hortensio's reference to Bianca as a falcon who is "ranging" (p. 115, 3.2.94 in New Folger)) and his reference to her as a "haggard" (p. 155, 4.2.37-40 in New Folger)? Tranio and Gremio's piling up of images of greed--wealth, land, money--in their competition for Bianca's hand (p. 101-103, 2.1.366-407 in New Folger). Kate's use of "lord" and "subject" in her speech near the end of the play (p. 219-221, 5.2.152-195, in New Folger)?

3. Can you explain what is meant by the phrase "battle of the sexes" and then apply it to this play? Can you explain the feminist argument that defends Kate and her situation in the play? Can you think about arguments for and against this idea?

4. What is Petruchio's two-fold strategy in "taming" Kate? Can you contrast Petruchio's approach with Lucentio's strategy in wooing Bianca?

5. What is meant by the phrase, the "motif of supposes," in relationship to the meaning of the play. How does this motif include disguise, deception, and role-playing? If you "suppose" or pretend to be someone else, what can happen? Sometimes the "supposing" or pose is just a device to gain an advantage, but sometimes "supposing" goes much deeper. What is the point of the motif of "supposes" in understanding the play?

6. Can you trace Kate's "transformation" from shrew to loving wife? (Be sure to point to specific examples--at least three or four--throughout the play.)


B. ROMEO AND JULIET.


1. Can you describe the atmosphere of the play and the way Shakespeare establishes ominous overtones of the feud hovering over the play, and the danger, death, and disorder the feud can bring? Can you also demonstrate how the feud affects the love of Romeo and Juliet?

2. Can you explain the structural motifs in the play and the way the "principle of alternation" works, i.e. Shakespeare's way of juxtaposing scenes so that meaning emerges from the juxtaposition? Can you point to key places in the play where this occurs?

3. Can you analyze the characters of Romeo and Juliet, the Nurse, Friar Laurence, Tybalt, and Mercutio? What are they like, what do they want, and why do they do what they do?

4. Can you explain the arguments both for and against the idea that Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy of circumstance? Or a tragedy of choice? A good way to "research" this argument is to make a list of all the circumstances in the play that affect the outcome and then all the points in the play where Romeo and Juliet choose a course of action (i.e., at any of these points, either of them could have stepped back and decided not to go any further in their relationship)? Can you point specifically to these places in the play?

5. Can you explain the function of setting and imagery in the play and show how both help to reveal meaning?

Sample "Medium-Length" Essay Written in Response to Exam Question


Essay Question on Hamlet: Explain the meaning of the "graveyard scene" and try to account for Hamlet's transformation.


Essay Response (written by John Watson, senior English major):


The graveyard scene reflects Hamlet's maturing and movement toward a more universal and cosmic view of his personal relationship to the larger order of things. In this scene, Hamlet reflects on the universal facts of life and death. Ironically, he comes to understand Gertrude's admonishment of him earlier in the play when she says, "Everything that lives must die." Now, in the graveyard scene, Yorick, Alexander the Great, Caesar, and yes, even Hamlet's father, as well as Hamlet himself, have died or will die.


The use of the gravedigger and his graveyard humor reduces the idea of death from its more frightening aspect (as displayed early in the play with the ghost's inability to describe the horrors of the afterlife and Hamlet's fear of death in his "To be or not to be" soliloquy) to a more mature and reasoned approach.


Hamlet's transformation may be accounted for by his own psychological nature. He is reflective, trained in the views and intellectual thought of the time. By his forced removal to England upon Claudius' order, Hamlet is removed from the closeness of the events at Court and thus has a breathing space to reflect upon his own fate.


His literal voyage upon the sea to England may be seen as a symbolic voyage across the sea of consciousness. His consciousness is definitely altered upon his return to Denmark. He is able to see himself in relationship to a larger, cosmic order.


He is an intelligent, reflective man who has been required to examine very carefully his beliefs and, indeed, himself. The "pressure-cooker" atmosphere of events after the death of his father--the early marriage of his mother to his uncle, the ghost's revelation of the events surrounding his own (the ghost's) death, the further revelation by Claudius himself that he (Claudius) is indeed guilty--all force Hamlet to examine, in detail, the meaning of it all.


A standard diagram of the classical description of tragedy, with a second diagram representing Hamlet's development, is illuminating:

 

action of

the play

Hamlet's

development

 

Hamlet begins the play in a melancholy state. Yet, he is still a moral person, if somewhat immature. After the revelation by the ghost of his uncle's guilt, Hamlet begins a descent into a murderous and immoral pit. This corresponds to Act III, the point of crisis in the play. Hamlet is here at his worst: he "pours" poison in Claudius' ear (figuratively) in the play-within-the-play, destroys Ophelia (though her suicide comes later), and rants and raves at his mother.

 

By the beginning of Act V, scene i, the graveyard scene, he has risen to a higher and greater understanding of his own fate and his relationship to the cosmos.


(NOTE: This essay took up four pages in a small-sized blue book using normal-sized handwriting.)

ON THE SHAKESPEARE AUTHORSHIP "CONTROVERSY"


Students in my Shakespeare classes frequently ask me about the Shakespeare authorship "controversy." (I need to tell you immediately that among Shakespeare teachers and scholars, there is no controversy.) Let us say that one of your friends or relatives has heard that you are taking a course in Shakespeare, and the first thing he or she says is something like the following: "Well, I hear he didn't even write the plays." You immediately feel on the defensive, as if you are supposed to have a ready answer to this question.


The people who raise this question are usually not interested in the plays, but the question of authorship really intrigues them-- perhaps because of the current interest in "conspiracy theories."


The argument on the part of the "anti-Stratfordians," as they have come to be called , is that a country rube with the equivalent of a high school education who was from a small town in a rural county could not possibly have had the knowledge or sophistication to write about kings and princes or about court life and political intrigue. Only someone from the aristocracy or the nobility--well- educated and well-connected--could have the knowledge and ability to write so familiarly and effectively about the highest levels of society.


And this same nobleman could not afford to put his name on the plays because, in the first place, playwrights were looked down upon as not being respectable (nobles such as Sir Philip Sidney wrote poems but not plays); in the second place, the real author could not afford to be identified because too many of the plays hint at knowledge of political secrets, court scandals, and "inside information" that could cause considerable trouble for the author.

Have you noticed by now that the anti-Stratfordian position is basically an elitist one--a form of intellectual and social snobbery?


The current candidate touted by the anti-Stratfordians is Edward De Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford (thus sometimes the group is referred to as the "Oxfordians"). The "Oxfordian theory" was first put forth by J. Thomas Looney in his book, "Shakespeare" Identified in Edward De Vere, the Seventeenth Earl of Oxford, published in 1920. DeVere replaced Francis Bacon, an earlier candidate in "popularity." Other candidates have been Christopher Marlowe--even though he died at age 29 in 1593--and Queen Elizabeth!

A major drawback of the Oxfordian claim is that Edward DeVere died in 1604--the period when Shakespeare was writing some of his greatest plays.


Thus, we return to the question, "How does a student of Shakespeare respond when a friend or relative claims that someone else wrote

the plays"? The way I respond to this question is to point out that there are over 100 documented references to Shakespeare and well over 50 literary allusions to his work in published writings by his contemporaries. In other words, contrary to the impression emphasized by the Oxfordians, there is no special mystery to Shakespeare's life. In fact, it is unusually well-documented for a commoner of his era. (See also the discussion in the introductory material under "Shakespeare's Life" by the editors of our New Folger Library texts: "...the documents that exist that provide evidence for the facts of Shakespeare's life tie him inextricably to the body of plays and poems that bear his name" (bottom of p. xxxii and top of p. xxxiii in the New Folger edition of The Taming of the Shrew).

But many people don't want to believe that a "commoner" who was a sound and practical man and made a good deal of money from playwrighting and from being a charter member of his theatrical company could have written the plays. Hence, as pointed out in the Introduction to the Riverside Shakespeare, "the strange proliferation of irresponsible theories proposing rival candidates for the authorship of Shakespeare's work, most of them with aristocratic titles."

The second way that I respond is to say that I know of no reputable scholar or specialist in Shakespeare studies who believes that someone else wrote the plays. Nevertheless, the anti-Stratfordian or Oxfordian theory has now become an industry and people can make quite a bit of money by writing books, holding meetings, and giving talks about this supposed "controversy." Thus, the movement is not likely to die.

And finally, I point out that two fellow members of his theatrical company, John Heming(s) and Henry Condell, collected thirty-six of Shakespeare's plays (all but two) and published them in 1623 in the volume known throughout the world as the First Folio, seven years after Shakespeare's death. In the prefatory material to this volume there exists tribute after tribute to Shakespeare from his friends and fellow actors, playwrights, and poets, including the famous poem, "To the Memory of My Beloved Master, William Shakespeare," by Ben Jonson. Anyone who knows anything about Ben Jonson would be aware that Jonson could not possibly be part of a conspiracy or "cover up" to protect a nobleman who had been dead for nineteen years.

SHAKESPEARE: A BASIC BIBLIOGRAPHY


"Complete Works" Editions


Alexander, Peter, editor. Shakespeare: The Complete Works. Collins, 1951. This one-volume, hard-bound edition continues to be highly regarded by textual scholars as representing one of the most authoritative editions produced in this century.

 

Barnet, Sylvan, general editor. The Complete Signet Classic Shakespeare. Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1972. The previously issued individual paperback volumes of the Signet edition were brought together in a one-volume, hard-bound edition with individual critical essays for each play.

 

Bevington, David, editor. The Complete Works of Shakespeare. Harper-Collins, 1992. This edition involves a complete reediting and resetting of the earlier edition edited by Hardin Craig in 1951. Includes critical commentaries for each play. A highly regarded edition by a respected scholar.


Evans, G. Blakemore, general editor. The Riverside Shakespeare. Houghton-Mifflin, 1974. Second Edition, 1996. A scholarly and distinguished "Complete Works" edition, highly regarded. Includes critical commentary for each play.

 

Greenblatt, Stephen, general editor. The Norton Shakespeare: Based on the Oxford Edition. Norton, 1997. The most recent Complete Works edition, with its own apparatus and introductory commentaries.


Harbage, Alfred, general editor. William Shakespeare: The Complete Works. (Also called The Complete Pelican Shakespeare.) Penguin, 1969. Brings together in a single, hard-bound volume which represents a revision of the individual "Pelican" paperback editions of the plays. Includes a commentary for each play.

 

Kittredge, George Lyman. The Complete Works of Shakespeare. 1936. Revised by Irving Ribner, Xerox, 1971. The "Kittredge Shakespeare" was highly influential and several generations of college students in the 1930's, 1940's, and 1950's grew up with this text. Ribner changed some of Kittredge's famous glossary and notes--not always for the better--but this is still an important and useful edition, with excellent introductory apparatus. Now known as "The Kittredge-Ribner Shakespeare."


Wells, Stanley and Gary Taylor, editors. William Shakespeare: The Complete Works. Oxford University Press, 1986. With two additional volumes: 1) an original-spelling edition of the plays; 2) William Shakespeare: A Textual Companion. (Complete Works edition also available in paperback in three volumes under the titles: The Oxford Shakespeare: Comedies; The Oxford Shakespeare: Tragedies; The Oxford Shakespeare: Histories.) The recent and controversial edition of Shakespeare's work. It involves a complete re-thinking and re-editing of the plays. The editors have made some radical departures from the standard procedures in Shakespeare editions and have not been timid in their decisions. Does not include critical commentaries on the plays.

Individual editions (in paperback):

 

Andrews, John F., ed. The Everyman Shakespeare. Scholarly but economical editions of the plays, edited by the former editor of Shakespeare Quarterly. Series not yet complete. J.M. Dent, 1993--


Bevington, David, ed. Bantam Shakespeare. Bantam, 1988. Inexpensive editions of the plays.


Barnet, Sylvan, general editor. Signet Classic Shakespeare. New American Library, 1963. Updated and revised, 1989.

 


Brockbank, Philip, general editor. The New Cambridge Shakespeare. Cambridge University Press, 1985--. Scholarly and respected individual editions of the plays; series not yet complete.

 

Brooks, Harold F., Harold Jenkins, and Brian Morris. The New Arden Shakespeare. Metheun & Co., Limited, 1951--; Random House, 1951--. The most scholarly of the individual editions of the plays, containing both extensive background information and extended critical analysis in the individual introductions to the plays.

 

Harbage, Alfred, general editor. The Pelican Shakespeare. Penguin, 1969.


Mowat, Barbara A. and Paul Werstine, eds. The New Folger Library Shakespeare. A complete re-editing and new approach to the plays, designed to replace the older Folger General Readers Shakespeare, edited by Louis B. Wright and Virginia A. LaMar. Especially useful for high school and college level students. Series not yet complete. Pocket Books, 1992--


Spencer, T.J.B. and Stanley Wells, general editors. The New Penguin Shakespeare. Penguin, 1967--. Scholarly and sensible individual editions of the plays; series not yet complete.


Wells, Stanley, general editor. The Oxford Shakespeare. Fairly recent and respected editions of the plays; series not yet complete. Oxford University Press, 1984--


Bibliography and Reference Guides


Bergeron, David M. and Geraldo U. DeSousa. Shakespeare: A Study and Research Guide. 3rd edition. University Press of Kansas, 1995.

Berman, Ronald. A Reader's Guide to Shakespeare's Plays.

 

Bevington, David. Shakespeare. AHM Publishing, 1978.

 

Champion, Larry S. The Essential Shakespeare: An Annotative Bibliography of Major Modern Studies. G.K. Hall, 1986. (Covers the period 1900-1984.)

Ebisch, Walter and Leon Schucking. A Shakespeare Bibliography. Clarendon Press, 1931. Supplement. Clarendon Press, 1937.

Jaggard, William. Shakespeare Bibliography. Shakespeare Press, 1911 (with later reprints).

McClean, Andrew M. Shakespeare: Annotated Bibliographies and Guide for Teachers. National Council of Teachers of English, 1980. (For high school and college teachers.)

McManaway, James G. and Jeanne Addison Roberts. A Selective Bibliography of Shakespeare. University Press of Virginia, 1975. (Covers the period 1930-1970.)

Smith, Gordon Ross. A Classified Shakespeare Bibliography, 1936- 1958. Penn State University Press, 1963.

Wells, Stanley, editor. Shakespeare: A Bibliographical Guide. New edition. Oxford University Press, 1990.

 

Special Collections


Folger Shakespeare Library. Catalog of the Shakespeare Colle ction s. Two volum es. G.K. Hall, 1972.


Annual Bibliographies in Scholarly Journals


English Association. The Year's Work in English Studies. Since 1919/20. Annual bibliography in narrative form; includes a summary and evaluation of materials published in English studies on Shakespeare.

Folger Shakespeare Library. Shakespeare Quarterly. Publishes annual bibliography of Shakespeare studies since 1950.

Modern Humanities Research Association. Annual Bibliography of English Language and Literature. Since 1920. Surveys nearly 800 journals and inclues an annual bibliography of Shakespeare.

Publications of the Modern Language Association. The MLA Inter natio nal Bibli ograp hy. Publi shed annua lly since 1922. Inclu des an exten sive bibli ograp hy of Shake spear e studi es.

University of Michigan. Dissertation Abstracts International. A guide to Ph.D. dissertations in literature, beginning in 1938. Includes a section on Shakespeare.

 

Concordances

(A concordance records each word that an author uses, where he or she uses it, and the frequency of usage.)


Harvard University Press. The Harvard Concordance to Shakespeare. 1973.

Spevack, Marvin. A Complete and Systematic Concordance to the Works of Shakespeare. 9 volumes. Olms, 1968-80.

 

Shakespeare's Language


Abbott, E.A. A Shakespearian Grammar. 1870; reprint, 1966. (Still the standard grammar on Shakespeare.)

Brooks, G.L. The Language of Shakespeare. Andre Deutsch, 1976.

 

Cercignani,Fausto. Shakespeare's Works and Elizabethan

Pronunciation. Disputes some of Kokeritz's conclusions.

Colman, E.A.M. The Dramatic Use of Bawdy in Shakespeare. Longman, 1964.

Ekwall, Eilert. Shakespeare's Vocabulary: Its Etymological Elements. 1903. Reprint, AMS Press, 1966.

Kokeritz, Helge. Shakespeare's Pronunciation. Yale University Press, 1953.

Onions, C.T. A Shakespeare Glossary. Clarendon Press, 1911.

 

Partridge, Eric. Shakespeare's Bawdy. Second edition. Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1968. (Lists words suspected of bawdy and obscene meaning.)


Proverbs


Dent, R.W. Shakespeare's Proverbial Language. University of California Press, 1981.

Tilley, Morris. A Dictionary of Proverbs in Enland in the

Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.

 


Encyclopedias, Reference Books, Guides


Bate, John. How to Find Out About Shakespeare. Pergammon Press, 1968. (Focuses on materials for research.)

Campbell, Oscar J. and Edward H. Quinn. The Reader's Encyclopedia of Shakespeare. Crowell, 1966. (A very useful and informative reference book.)

Clark, Sandra and T.H. Long. The New Century Shakespeare Handbook. Prentice-Hall, 1974.

Halliday, F.E. A Shakespeare Companion, 1564-1964. Second edition. Duckworth, 1964. (Also in paperback.)

Martin, Michael P. and Richard C. Harries. The Concise

 


Handbooks


Alden, Raymond M. A Shakespeare Handbook. 1932. Revised by Oscar J. Campbell. Libraries Press, 1970.

Barnet, Syvan. A Short Guide to Shakespeare. Harcourt, Brace, 1974.

Boyce, Charles. Shakespeare A to Z. Dell, 1990.

Frye, Roland M. Shakespeare: The Art of the Dramatist. Houghton Mifflin, 1970.

Hyland, Peter. An Introduction to Shakespeare: The Dramatist in His Context. St. Martin's Press, 1996.

McDonald, Russ. The Bedford Companion to Shakespeare: An

 

Thomson, Peter. Shakespeare's Professional Career. Cambridge University Press, 1992.


Brief Critical Commentaries


Harbage, Alfred. William Shakespeare: A Reader's Guide. Farrar Strauss, 1963.

Charney, Maurice. How to Read Shakespeare. McGraw-Hill, 1971.

Zesmer, David M. Guide to Shakespeare. Barnes & Noble, 1976.


Anthologies: Historical Background


Andrews, John F. William Shakespeare: His World, His Work, His Influence. Three volumes. Scribners, 1985.

 

Granville-Barker. Harley and G.B. Harrison, editors. A Companion to Shakespeare Studies. Cambridge University Press, 1934.

 

Muir, Kenneth and Samuel Schoenbaum, editors. A New Companion to Shakespeare Studies. Cambridge University Press, 1971. (Chapters on similar topics as those listed above.)

Wells, Stanley, editor. The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare Studies. Cambridge University Press, 1986. (More recent essays on topics similar to those listed above.)


Anthologies of Criticism


Calderwood, James L. and Harold E. Tolliver, eds. Essays in Shakespearean Criticism.

Dean, Leonard F., ed. Shakespeare: Modern Essays in Criticism.

Kernan, Alvin B., ed. Modern Shakespearean Criticsm.


Schmitz, Alexander. Shakespeare Lexicon. Third edition. Revised by George Sazzazin. 1901. Reprint, Blom, 1968.

 

Materials on Individual Plays

 

Back to Home Page