Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.
Chargement... Pseudonymous Shakespeare: Rioting Language in the Sidney Circlepar Penny Mccarthy
Aucun Chargement...
Inscrivez-vous à LibraryThing pour découvrir si vous aimerez ce livre Actuellement, il n'y a pas de discussions au sujet de ce livre. aucune critique | ajouter une critique
An investigation into modes of early modern English literary 'indirection,' this study could also be considered a detective work on a pseudonym attached to some late sixteenth-century works. In the course of unmasking 'R.L.', McCarthy scrutinizes devices employed by writers in the Sidney coterie: punning, often across languages; repetitio-insistence on a sound, or hiding two persons 'under one hood'; disingenuous juxtaposition; evocation of original context; differential spelling (intended and significant). Among McCarthy's stunning-but solidly underpinned-conclusions are: Shakespeare used the pseudonym 'R.L.' among other pseudonyms; one, 'William Smith', was also his 'alias' in life; Shakespeare was at the heart of the Sidney circle, whose literary programme was hostile to Elizabeth I; and his work, composed mainly from the late 1570s to the early 90s, occasionally 'embedded' in the work of others, was covertly alluded to more often than has been recognized. Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque |
Discussion en coursAucun
Google Books — Chargement... GenresClassification décimale de Melvil (CDD)820.9Literature English English literature in more than one form History, description, critical appraisal of works in more than one formClassification de la Bibliothèque du CongrèsÉvaluationMoyenne:
Est-ce vous ?Devenez un(e) auteur LibraryThing. |
For any good grasp of the real siginificance behind a good deal of some of the most important literature of Tudor and Jacobean and Commonwealth England, one must somehow gain a good grasp of the social and political life, times and struggles of the dynastic families the Dudleys, Herberts, Sidneys, Cecils, Veres and others. This work raises numerous interesting questions and offers some very interesting suggestions for how to see and anwser other questions.
Indispensable.
Why wasn't this work a bomb-shell upon its publication and a lasting sensation in Shakespearean scholarship?
Suppose for a moment that Philip Sidney, wounded while fighting with English forces (allied to the forces of the United Provinces of the Netherlands) against Spanish forces at the one-day battle of Zutphen (22 September 1586) died not from his battle-wounds but rather was murdered by his own uncle, Robert Dudley, First Earl of Leicester, one of Elizabeth, the queen's, most favored and beloved courtiers?
McCarthy points out that such was the general consensus view among many in the English nobility of the time: that Philip had been murdered—poisoned—by his uncle Robert Dudley. Philip Sidney was the brother of Mary Sidney as well as the son-in-law of the queen's trusted counsellor and spy-master, Sir Francis Walsingham. He married Walsingham's daughter, Frances, after an earlier attempt to arrange a marriage with Anne Cecil, daughter of William Cecil, Elizabeth's principal secretary of state, fell through. Instead, Anne Cecil wed Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford.
Mary Sidney became the wife of Henry Herbert, the second Earl of Pembroke. Her sons, William and Philip, successors to the title of Earl of Pembroke, became, like their mother, key figures in the literary world which saw the production of Edward Oxford's writings under various pen-names, most notably, "Robert Greene" and "William Shakespere."
The circumstances of Philip Sidney's murder by poisoning, if true, put many important events and people—not least the real author behind the literary work attributed to the pen-name "William Shakespeare"—in a fascinating, revelatory, new light.
_____________________________________
_______________________
* (My note): To her credit, the independent scholar and editor of the blog “PoliticWorm” (http://www.politicworm.com), Stephanie Hopkins Hughes, has well understood this factor and used it to mainly good account.
________________________
_______________________
______________________________________
As supplement to the foregoing, some excerpts from
( )