Manipulation of Theatrical Audience Size

IF 0.3 3区 文学 N/A LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM Critical Survey Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.3167/cs.2022.340306
A. Faktorovich
{"title":"Manipulation of Theatrical Audience Size","authors":"A. Faktorovich","doi":"10.3167/cs.2022.340306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Thomas Nashe’s’ satirical ‘ten thousand’ attendees at a London performance exaggeration is similarly absurd to most previous studies of audience size during the British Renaissance. These claims are countered in this article with a realistic calculation of the maximum quantity of people the described dimensions of the licensed London theatres could have accommodated. Claims that a troupe could have seen peak sales when it was forced to close during a plague are also reconsidered. And the failure of the English dramatic genre to reach its neighbouring Welsh market is questioned as indicative of the rarity of this mode of entertainment in comparison with the popularity claimed for it in puffing self-reviews of plays in the first post-origin decades. The ease with which a false belief in popularity could be generated is consistent with the Ghostwriting Workshop’s self-promotion of their published books. This article pulls together pieces of evidence to explain the literary, fiscal and political misdeeds committed by this Workshop in their quest for profit and fame.","PeriodicalId":56154,"journal":{"name":"Critical Survey","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Survey","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3167/cs.2022.340306","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Thomas Nashe’s’ satirical ‘ten thousand’ attendees at a London performance exaggeration is similarly absurd to most previous studies of audience size during the British Renaissance. These claims are countered in this article with a realistic calculation of the maximum quantity of people the described dimensions of the licensed London theatres could have accommodated. Claims that a troupe could have seen peak sales when it was forced to close during a plague are also reconsidered. And the failure of the English dramatic genre to reach its neighbouring Welsh market is questioned as indicative of the rarity of this mode of entertainment in comparison with the popularity claimed for it in puffing self-reviews of plays in the first post-origin decades. The ease with which a false belief in popularity could be generated is consistent with the Ghostwriting Workshop’s self-promotion of their published books. This article pulls together pieces of evidence to explain the literary, fiscal and political misdeeds committed by this Workshop in their quest for profit and fame.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
剧场观众规模的操纵
托马斯·纳舍(Thomas Nashe)在伦敦演出时对一万名观众的“讽刺”夸大,与英国文艺复兴时期大多数以前对观众规模的研究一样荒谬。本文对这些说法进行了反驳,并对伦敦特许剧院所描述的最大容纳人数进行了现实的计算。关于一个剧团在瘟疫期间被迫关闭时可能会出现销售额高峰的说法也被重新考虑。英国戏剧类型未能进入邻近的威尔士市场,这被质疑为表明这种娱乐模式的罕见性,而在后起源的第一个几十年里,这种娱乐模式在对戏剧进行自我评价时很受欢迎。人们很容易产生对受欢迎程度的错误信念,这与Ghostwriting Workshop对其出版书籍的自我宣传是一致的。这篇文章汇集了一些证据来解释这个工作坊在追求利润和名誉方面犯下的文学、财政和政治罪行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Survey
Critical Survey LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
期刊最新文献
(There Is) Nothing Like a Dane Alienating Hamlet Västanå Teater's 1996 Hamlet Elli Tompuri's Female Hamlet, 1913 ‘|Y]oung Hamlet’
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1