詹姆斯国王无聊的再思考:表演与前现代史

IF 0.4 2区 历史学 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN STUDIES Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI:10.1215/10829636-9295030
D. Hopkins
{"title":"詹姆斯国王无聊的再思考:表演与前现代史","authors":"D. Hopkins","doi":"10.1215/10829636-9295030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The royal entry of King James I into London in 1604 serves as an opportunity to reconsider the relationship between public, urban performance and the primary sources that ostensibly document it. The author revisits his own past study of this occasion, revising and expanding previous conclusions about early modern English performance in light of new research and theory. The article deploys new thinking about performance historiography, arguing that such perspectives unsettle the easy placement of an event in historical chronology, disrupt archival logic, and insist on a degree of historiographical ambiguity. The legacy of new historicism is considered in tandem with current theories of performance history, and a hybridization of new historicism and performance theory is considered in relation to historiographic practice.","PeriodicalId":51901,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN STUDIES","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reconsidering the Boredom of King James: Performance and Premodern Histories\",\"authors\":\"D. Hopkins\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/10829636-9295030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The royal entry of King James I into London in 1604 serves as an opportunity to reconsider the relationship between public, urban performance and the primary sources that ostensibly document it. The author revisits his own past study of this occasion, revising and expanding previous conclusions about early modern English performance in light of new research and theory. The article deploys new thinking about performance historiography, arguing that such perspectives unsettle the easy placement of an event in historical chronology, disrupt archival logic, and insist on a degree of historiographical ambiguity. The legacy of new historicism is considered in tandem with current theories of performance history, and a hybridization of new historicism and performance theory is considered in relation to historiographic practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN STUDIES\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN STUDIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/10829636-9295030\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/10829636-9295030","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

1604年,英国国王詹姆斯一世(King James I)正式进入伦敦,这为我们提供了一个重新思考公共、城市表演与表面上记录它的主要来源之间关系的机会。作者回顾了自己过去对这一场合的研究,并根据新的研究和理论对先前关于早期现代英语表演的结论进行了修订和扩展。文章对表演史学进行了新的思考,认为这种观点扰乱了事件在历史年表中的容易位置,扰乱了档案逻辑,并坚持一定程度的历史模糊性。新历史主义的遗产与当前的表演史理论相结合,新历史主义和表演理论的混合与历史实践相结合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Reconsidering the Boredom of King James: Performance and Premodern Histories
The royal entry of King James I into London in 1604 serves as an opportunity to reconsider the relationship between public, urban performance and the primary sources that ostensibly document it. The author revisits his own past study of this occasion, revising and expanding previous conclusions about early modern English performance in light of new research and theory. The article deploys new thinking about performance historiography, arguing that such perspectives unsettle the easy placement of an event in historical chronology, disrupt archival logic, and insist on a degree of historiographical ambiguity. The legacy of new historicism is considered in tandem with current theories of performance history, and a hybridization of new historicism and performance theory is considered in relation to historiographic practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN STUDIES
JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN STUDIES MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES-
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: The Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies publishes articles informed by historical inquiry and alert to issues raised by contemporary theoretical debate. The journal fosters rigorous investigation of historiographical representations of European and western Asian cultural forms from late antiquity to the seventeenth century. Its topics include art, literature, theater, music, philosophy, theology, and history, and it embraces material objects as well as texts; women as well as men; merchants, workers, and audiences as well as patrons; Jews and Muslims as well as Christians.
期刊最新文献
Intention and Interpretation, Now and Then Who Has Intention? Chaucer Studies and the Search for Meaning Making or Declaring Law? Legislative Intent and Privileged Speech in Anglo-Saxon England The Audacity of Judging Mind in Medieval England Scholastic Literary Theory: Intentionalism and the Desire for Stable Sense
×
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