hen Thomas Dekker, in his 1609 prose pamphlet The Gull’s Hornbook, describes how gallants should behave in the fashionable aisles w of St. Paul’s Cathedral, he encourages them to pay special attention to the doors: “first observe your doores of entrance, and your Exit; not much unlike the plaiers at the Theaters.” In noting how important doors of entrance and exit are to actors, Dekker is surely drawing on his own experience as a playwright. He may also have a more specific theatrical door in mind. Ben Jonson’s 1599 Every Man Out of His Humour includes a direct precursor to Dekker’s satirical look at behavior inside St. Paul’s, and this extended sequence, taking up the play’s third act, has its characters return again and again to the cathedral’s west door, a notorious site for the posting of advertisements. I propose that the attention lavished on this door is emblematic of Jonson’s dramaturgy. While “the plaiers at the Theaters” always needed to observe their entrances and exits, Jonson exploited the possibilities of the stage doors more consistently and creatively than any other period playwright. The crowded streets of London increasingly appear, in his plays, positioned offstage and out of sight. In turning to indoor settings, Jonson shows how control of doors allows for a larger mastery of urban space. For Jonson as playwright, this mastery extends into the theater itself. Inside the walls of a theater, characters and audience share an enclosed space, and Jonson uses this potentially claustrophobic situation to heighten both the comic energy and the antagonistic tensions that pass through the doors.
1609年，托马斯•德克尔在他的散文性小册子《海鸥手册》中描述了在圣保罗大教堂时髦的过道里，献殷勤者应该如何表现，他鼓励他们特别注意门:“首先观察你的入口和出口;和剧院里的演员没什么不同。”Dekker注意到进出门对演员来说有多重要，他肯定是在借鉴自己作为剧作家的经历。他也可能有一个更具体的剧院之门。本·琼森(Ben Jonson)的《1599年每个人都不幽默》(1599 Every Man Out of His humor)包含了德克尔(Dekker)对圣保罗大教堂内行为的讽刺的直接前身，这个延伸的序列占据了该剧的第三幕，让角色们一次又一次地回到大教堂的西门，一个因张贴广告而臭名昭著的地方。我认为对这扇门的大量关注是约翰逊戏剧创作的象征。虽然“剧院里的演员”总是需要观察他们的出入口，但约翰逊比任何其他时期的剧作家都更持续、更有创造性地利用舞台门的可能性。在他的戏剧中，伦敦拥挤的街道越来越多地出现在舞台后面和视线之外。在转向室内设置时，约翰逊展示了门的控制如何允许对城市空间的更大的掌握。对于身为剧作家的约翰逊来说，这种精通延伸到了戏剧本身。在剧院的墙壁内，角色和观众共享一个封闭的空间，约翰逊利用这种潜在的幽闭恐惧症的情况来提高喜剧能量和通过门的对抗紧张关系。
{"title":"Ben Jonson’s Doors","authors":"Alexander Paulsson Lash","doi":"10.1086/708709","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/708709","url":null,"abstract":"hen Thomas Dekker, in his 1609 prose pamphlet The Gull’s Hornbook, describes how gallants should behave in the fashionable aisles w of St. Paul’s Cathedral, he encourages them to pay special attention to the doors: “first observe your doores of entrance, and your Exit; not much unlike the plaiers at the Theaters.” In noting how important doors of entrance and exit are to actors, Dekker is surely drawing on his own experience as a playwright. He may also have a more specific theatrical door in mind. Ben Jonson’s 1599 Every Man Out of His Humour includes a direct precursor to Dekker’s satirical look at behavior inside St. Paul’s, and this extended sequence, taking up the play’s third act, has its characters return again and again to the cathedral’s west door, a notorious site for the posting of advertisements. I propose that the attention lavished on this door is emblematic of Jonson’s dramaturgy. While “the plaiers at the Theaters” always needed to observe their entrances and exits, Jonson exploited the possibilities of the stage doors more consistently and creatively than any other period playwright. The crowded streets of London increasingly appear, in his plays, positioned offstage and out of sight. In turning to indoor settings, Jonson shows how control of doors allows for a larger mastery of urban space. For Jonson as playwright, this mastery extends into the theater itself. Inside the walls of a theater, characters and audience share an enclosed space, and Jonson uses this potentially claustrophobic situation to heighten both the comic energy and the antagonistic tensions that pass through the doors.","PeriodicalId":53676,"journal":{"name":"Renaissance Drama","volume":"48 1","pages":"31 - 55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/708709","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43217994","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
eprints@whiterose.ac.uk https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item.
{"title":"“To Strike the Ear of Time”: Ben Jonson’s Poetaster and the Temporality of Art","authors":"J. Rickard","doi":"10.1086/708711","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/708711","url":null,"abstract":"eprints@whiterose.ac.uk https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item.","PeriodicalId":53676,"journal":{"name":"Renaissance Drama","volume":"48 1","pages":"57 - 81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/708711","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48532807","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
fter wielding the power to command storm and shipwreck throughout The Tempest, Prospero speaks an Epilogue in which he acknowledges a how his manipulation of the sea has always been subject to the indulgence of the audience. In comparing the audience’s compliance to favorable sea winds, Prospero’s speech plays upon a familiar association between theatrical performance and seafaring in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. The Prologue to ThomasMiddleton’sNoWit, NoHelp Like aWoman’s (1611) wonders “How is’t possible to please / Opinion tos’d in such wilde Seas?” given the sheer numbers of people who attend the theater and the diversity of their tastes. As Douglas Bruster has argued, The Tempest’s opening shipwreck can itself be read as an allegory for playhouse labor, since theatrical productions, like seafaring, required hard work and cooperation. Unwilling audiences interfered with this labor by disrupting the performance or its representational fictions, rather than helping to keep the ship afloat. Theater and seafaring also shared a precarious status as risky enterprises undergoing new forms of commercialization in early modern England. For early modern playwrights, the risks, dangers, and
{"title":"Performing the Sea: Fortune, Risk, and Audience Engagement in Pericles","authors":"Jane Hwang Degenhardt","doi":"10.1086/708967","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/708967","url":null,"abstract":"fter wielding the power to command storm and shipwreck throughout The Tempest, Prospero speaks an Epilogue in which he acknowledges a how his manipulation of the sea has always been subject to the indulgence of the audience. In comparing the audience’s compliance to favorable sea winds, Prospero’s speech plays upon a familiar association between theatrical performance and seafaring in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. The Prologue to ThomasMiddleton’sNoWit, NoHelp Like aWoman’s (1611) wonders “How is’t possible to please / Opinion tos’d in such wilde Seas?” given the sheer numbers of people who attend the theater and the diversity of their tastes. As Douglas Bruster has argued, The Tempest’s opening shipwreck can itself be read as an allegory for playhouse labor, since theatrical productions, like seafaring, required hard work and cooperation. Unwilling audiences interfered with this labor by disrupting the performance or its representational fictions, rather than helping to keep the ship afloat. Theater and seafaring also shared a precarious status as risky enterprises undergoing new forms of commercialization in early modern England. For early modern playwrights, the risks, dangers, and","PeriodicalId":53676,"journal":{"name":"Renaissance Drama","volume":"48 1","pages":"103 - 129"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/708967","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49007186","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
f the play is a book, it’s not a play.” Stephen Orgel’s claim has reverberated through the past two decades of scholarship in thefield of earlymodern drama, wending its way ever further from its original context in a discussion of how modern editors might or should render printed plays. One of the places it has resurfaced is in discussions of the historical perceptions of printed dramaheld by the earliest readers of Shakespeare and his contemporaries. Despite numerous claims for the “literariness” of early modern playbooks, Orgel’s statement has often been invoked in order to then be rejected or modified as part of a claim for printed drama’s theatricality.Richard Preiss, for instance, asserts that it “does not bear on the mentality of those earlymodern playgoers whowere being invited to attend performances and then to buy texts of them as modules of a single cultural activity.” Lucy Munro complicates the play/book dichotomy, arguing that it was mutable, and inhered not in the object but in the mode of reading: for early readers of John Marston’s The Fleer, “the playbook was sometimes a play, sometimes a book.” More recently, early modern readers have been tasked with the ability to read with “parted eye,” asHermia puts it inAMidsummer Night’s Dream, whereby they read
{"title":"Reading Plays as Books: Interpreting Readers’ Marks and Marginalia in Early Modern Play Quartos","authors":"Hannah August","doi":"10.1086/708708","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/708708","url":null,"abstract":"f the play is a book, it’s not a play.” Stephen Orgel’s claim has reverberated through the past two decades of scholarship in thefield of earlymodern drama, wending its way ever further from its original context in a discussion of how modern editors might or should render printed plays. One of the places it has resurfaced is in discussions of the historical perceptions of printed dramaheld by the earliest readers of Shakespeare and his contemporaries. Despite numerous claims for the “literariness” of early modern playbooks, Orgel’s statement has often been invoked in order to then be rejected or modified as part of a claim for printed drama’s theatricality.Richard Preiss, for instance, asserts that it “does not bear on the mentality of those earlymodern playgoers whowere being invited to attend performances and then to buy texts of them as modules of a single cultural activity.” Lucy Munro complicates the play/book dichotomy, arguing that it was mutable, and inhered not in the object but in the mode of reading: for early readers of John Marston’s The Fleer, “the playbook was sometimes a play, sometimes a book.” More recently, early modern readers have been tasked with the ability to read with “parted eye,” asHermia puts it inAMidsummer Night’s Dream, whereby they read","PeriodicalId":53676,"journal":{"name":"Renaissance Drama","volume":"48 1","pages":"1 - 30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/708708","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45456002","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"False Evidence and Deceptive Eyewitnesses: The Theatricality of Uncertainty in The Picture and Cymbeline","authors":"L. Robertson","doi":"10.1086/708713","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/708713","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53676,"journal":{"name":"Renaissance Drama","volume":"48 1","pages":"131 - 154"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/708713","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46314159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
ance 39/ cholarship on Shakespeare’s skepticism has rightly explored what his characters do and, more importantly, say in expressing their conflicting values and points of view, their moral uncertainties, and their limited powers of perception. Shakespeare often uses those moments to register doubt about language itself—about the ability of words to convey precisely what we mean to say or, in some cases, to help us discern what we mean. Building on the rhetorical underpinnings of literary skepticism but offering a new interpretive angle, this essay focuses on the skeptical, specifically Pyrrhonian, dimensions of Shakespeare’s dramatized silences. His Sonnets (1609) provide some clues about his perspective. There, Shakespeare compares himself to a tongue-tied “actor on
{"title":"Jessica’s Silence and the Feminine Pyrrhonic in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice","authors":"Suzanne M. Tartamella","doi":"10.1086/708674","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/708674","url":null,"abstract":"ance 39/ cholarship on Shakespeare’s skepticism has rightly explored what his characters do and, more importantly, say in expressing their conflicting values and points of view, their moral uncertainties, and their limited powers of perception. Shakespeare often uses those moments to register doubt about language itself—about the ability of words to convey precisely what we mean to say or, in some cases, to help us discern what we mean. Building on the rhetorical underpinnings of literary skepticism but offering a new interpretive angle, this essay focuses on the skeptical, specifically Pyrrhonian, dimensions of Shakespeare’s dramatized silences. His Sonnets (1609) provide some clues about his perspective. There, Shakespeare compares himself to a tongue-tied “actor on","PeriodicalId":53676,"journal":{"name":"Renaissance Drama","volume":"48 1","pages":"83 - 101"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/708674","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45875535","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
R. Gaby, Alice Leonard, James D. Mardock, H. Ostovich
Although the popularity of Shakespeare's Falstaff from 1597 to now receives frequent acknowledgement, his straight-woman, Mistress Quickly, has attracted relatively scant attention. She was popular enough, however, for Shakespeare to include her in four plays, within varied social contexts but with a consistently inconsistent voice. This collaboration reviews the role of Mistress Quickly across all four plays — 1&2 Henry IV, Henry V and The Merry Wives of Windsor — drawing on our experience of editing the character electronically for Internet Shakespeare Editions. These papers report on the problems, choices, and insights that e-editing Mistress Quickly has exposed
{"title":"To Nell and Back: Revisiting Mistress Quickly","authors":"R. Gaby, Alice Leonard, James D. Mardock, H. Ostovich","doi":"10.1086/705891","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/705891","url":null,"abstract":"Although the popularity of Shakespeare's Falstaff from 1597 to now receives frequent acknowledgement, his straight-woman, Mistress Quickly, has attracted relatively scant attention. She was popular enough, however, for Shakespeare to include her in four plays, within varied social contexts but with a consistently inconsistent voice. \u0000 \u0000This collaboration reviews the role of Mistress Quickly across all four plays — 1&2 Henry IV, Henry V and The Merry Wives of Windsor — drawing on our experience of editing the character electronically for Internet Shakespeare Editions. These papers report on the problems, choices, and insights that e-editing Mistress Quickly has exposed","PeriodicalId":53676,"journal":{"name":"Renaissance Drama","volume":"47 1","pages":"201 - 237"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/705891","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48792667","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
n a list of goods bought for his company, the Lord Admiral’s Men, Philip Henslowe recordsmaking a payment for a rather remarkable garment: “a robe for to goo invisibell.”However, Henslowe himself does not seem particularly impressed by his acquisition. For all its magical promise, this robe of invisibility sits innocuously in the middle of a list of other costumes purchased since April 3, 1598, including such basics as a “payer of long black wollen stockens.” Furthermore, the invisibility robe was not especially expensive. “Bowght” with “a gown for Nembia,” it is jointly priced at £3 and 10s. It is impossible to know howmuch of this sum was spent individually on the robe and how much on the gown, but comparison with other items in the inventory provides a sense of the relative cheapness of the double purchase. According to the same section of the accounts, Henslowe paid more than a pound more for a “black satten dublett” and a “payer of rownd howsse paned of vellevett,” and about twice as much for “a dublett of whitt satten layd thicke with gowld lace, and a payer of rowne pandes hosse of cloth of sylver, the panes laydwith gowld lace.” Invisibility came cheaper than Elizabethan glamour. But although the sumptuous garments are fastidiously
菲利普·亨斯洛（Philip Henslowe）在为他的公司海军上将的手下（Lord Admiral’s Men。尽管这件隐身衣有着神奇的前景，但它无害地位于1598年4月3日以来购买的其他服装清单的中间，其中包括“黑色长羊毛袜的付款人”等基本服装。此外，这件隐形衣并不特别昂贵。“Bowght”和“Nembia的礼服”的联合定价分别为3英镑和10英镑。不可能知道这笔钱中有多少是单独花在长袍上的，也不可能知道有多少是花在长袍身上的，但与库存中的其他物品相比，可以感觉到双重购买的相对便宜。根据账目的同一部分，Henslowe为一件“黑色的satten dublett”和一件“rownd howse paned of vellevett的付款人”多花了一英镑多，为“一件镶有高领花边的whitt satten的dublett，和一件镶着高领花边、rowne pandes hosse of sylver布料的付款人”花了大约两倍的钱。隐形比伊丽莎白时代的魅力更便宜。但是，尽管华丽的服装很讲究
{"title":"Ways of Seeing in Renaissance Theater: Speculating on Invisibility","authors":"G. Woods","doi":"10.1086/705888","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/705888","url":null,"abstract":"n a list of goods bought for his company, the Lord Admiral’s Men, Philip Henslowe recordsmaking a payment for a rather remarkable garment: “a robe for to goo invisibell.”However, Henslowe himself does not seem particularly impressed by his acquisition. For all its magical promise, this robe of invisibility sits innocuously in the middle of a list of other costumes purchased since April 3, 1598, including such basics as a “payer of long black wollen stockens.” Furthermore, the invisibility robe was not especially expensive. “Bowght” with “a gown for Nembia,” it is jointly priced at £3 and 10s. It is impossible to know howmuch of this sum was spent individually on the robe and how much on the gown, but comparison with other items in the inventory provides a sense of the relative cheapness of the double purchase. According to the same section of the accounts, Henslowe paid more than a pound more for a “black satten dublett” and a “payer of rownd howsse paned of vellevett,” and about twice as much for “a dublett of whitt satten layd thicke with gowld lace, and a payer of rowne pandes hosse of cloth of sylver, the panes laydwith gowld lace.” Invisibility came cheaper than Elizabethan glamour. But although the sumptuous garments are fastidiously","PeriodicalId":53676,"journal":{"name":"Renaissance Drama","volume":"47 1","pages":"125 - 151"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/705888","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46010082","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：