In this study of A Midsummer Night's Dream, The Merchant of Venice, and Measure for Measure I argue that the surface plots of these comedies point us to a philosophic understanding seldom discussed in either contemporary public discourse or in Shakespearean scholarship. The comedies usually involve questions arising from the conflict between the enforcement of law (whether just or not) and the private longings (whether noble or base) of citizens whose yearnings for happiness tend to be sub- or even supra-political. No regime, it appears, is able to respond to the whole variety of circumstances that it may be called upon to judge. Even the best written laws meet with occasional exceptions and these ulterior instances must be judged by something other than a legal code. When these extra-legal instances do arise, political communities become aware of their reliance on a kind of political judgment that is usually unnoticed in the day-to-day affairs of public life. Further, it is evident that the characters who are able to exercise this political judgment, are the very characters whose presence averts a potentially tragic situation and makes a comedy possible. By presenting examples of how moral and political problems are dealt with by the prudent use of wisdom, Shakespeare is pointing the reader to a standard of judgment that transcends any particular (or actual) political arrangement. Once we see the importance of the prudent use of such a standard, we are in a position to judge what this philosophic wisdom consists of and where it is to be acquired. It is just such an education with which Shakespeare intends to aid his readers.

Examines the functions of messengers in six plays by Shakespeare.

The thesis explores the development of Shakespeare’s political ideas, in particular his exploration of authority, and the legitimacy of resistance towards it, in the two English history tetralogies (as well as the self-contained history, King John), and examines the ways in which this protracted engagement with the question of kingship – and governance more generally – informs his turn to tragedy towards the end of the 1590s. The thesis argues that criticism has tended to downplay the importance of the first tetralogy in the Shakespeare canon (particularly the Henry VI plays), and as a corollary it has overlooked the important continuities that can be traced from Shakespeare’s earliest engagement with politics to his treatment of power in Julius Caesar and Hamlet. The thesis sees the history plays as essentially paradoxical and ambivalent. Shakespeare presents the past as both a shining example to which each succeeding generation must aspire, but also as a legacy which they are powerless to fulfil, while he treats the dynastic conflicts of the Houses of York and Lancaster as essentially intractable, with each new pretender to the throne – however legitimate his claim – undermined by a host of legal, moral, and pragmatic considerations. It is a central contention of the thesis that it was Shakespeare’s failure satisfactorily to resolve the intractable political conflicts of the first tetralogy which prompted him to confront a similar set of questions in King John, before returning to them yet again in the more highly acclaimed second tetralogy. The thesis concludes by arguing that far from representing a breach with his history plays, the tragedies are continuous with them. So rather than identifying the ‘origins’ of Hamlet either in Shakespeare’s reaction to the fall of Essex or the death of his son, Hammet, in 1596, it is more persuasive to see the play as arising from the debates and problems which were initially addressed in the first tetralogy.

This thesis explores the intersection between the study of Shakespearean drama and the theory and practice of early modern dramatic genres. It reassesses the significance of tragedy and the idea of the tragic within three separate yet related generic frames: tragedy, history, and tragicomedy. Behind this research lies the fundamental question of how newly emerging dramatic genres allow Shakespeare to explore tragedy within different aesthetic and dramatic contexts, and of how they allow his writing to move beyond tragedy. The thesis begins by looking at Shakespeare’s deployment of the complex trope of “nothing”. “Nothing” as a rhetorical trope and metaphysical idea appears across many of the tragedies, often becoming a focal point for the dramatic representation of scepticism, loss and nihilism. The trope is often associated with the space of the theatre, and sometimes with the dramaturgy of tragedy itself. However, it is also deployed within the histories and tragicomedies at certain moments which might equally be called tragic. “Nothing” therefore provides a starting-point for thinking about how the genres of history and tragicomedy engage with tragedy. Part I focuses on tragedy, including extended readings of Timon of Athens and King Lear. It explores Shakespearean drama as a response to the pressures of the early modern cultural preoccupation with, and anxiety about, scepticism. Stanley Cavell and other critics of early modern dramatic scepticism have tended to locate this engagement with scepticism within tragedy. However, this section shows that the same sceptical problematic is addressed across Shakespearean dramatic genres, with very different results. It then explores why scepticism should display a particular affinity for tragedy as a dramatic genre. Part II focuses on history, with particular reference to Richard II and Henry V. The trope of “nothing” is used as a starting-point to explore the intersection between Shakespearean history and tragedy. Engaging with Walter Benjamin’s theory of baroque tragedy as Trauerspiel (mourning-plays) rooted in history, it argues that Trauerspiel provides a useful generic framework against which to consider the mournful aesthetic of Shakespeare’s histories. Part III focuses on early modern tragicomedy and The Winter’s Tale, asking how Shakespeare achieves the transition from tragedy to tragicomedy in his later writing. It explores tragicomedy’s background on the early modern stage in theory and practice, paying particular attention to Guarini’s theory that pastoral tragicomedy frees its hearers from melancholy, and to the legacy of medieval religious drama and its engagement with faith and belief. Returning to the trope of “nothing”, this section shows that The Winter’s Tale addresses the same sceptical problematic as the earlier tragedies. Arguing that scepticism opens up a space for tragedy and nihilism in the first half of The Winter’s Tale, it demonstrates that Shakespeare finds in the genre of tragicomedy an aesthetic and dramatic form which allows him to move through, and beyond, the claims of tragedy.

Shakespeare’s last plays, because of their apparent similarity in thematic concern, dramatic arrangements and stylistic features, are often considered by modern scholarship to form a unique group in his canon. Their departure from the preceding great tragedies and their status as an artist’s last works have long aroused scholarly interest in Shakespeare’s lateness—the study, essentially, of the relationship between his advancing years and his last-period dramatic output, encompassing questions such as ‘Why did Shakespeare write the last plays?’, ‘What influenced his writing?’, and ‘What is the significance of these plays?’. Answers to the questions are varied and often contradictory, partly because the subject is the elusive Shakespeare, and partly because the concept of lateness as an artistic phenomenon is itself unstable and problematic. This dissertation reconsiders Shakespeare’s lateness by reading the last plays in the light of, but not bound by current theories of late style and writing. The analysis incorporates traditional literary, stylistic and biographic approach in various combinations. The exploration of the works (Pericles, Cymbeline, The Winter’s Tale, The Tempest, Henry VIII and The Two Noble Kinsmen), while underlined by an interest in their shared concern with the effect, power and the possibilities of art and language, also places an emphasis on each play’s special, distinct features and contexts. A pattern of steady artistic development is revealed, bespeaking Shakespeare’s continued professional energy and ongoing self-challenge, which are, in fact, at the centre of his working methods throughout his career. The dissertation therefore proposes that Shakespeare’s ‘lateness’ is in fact a continuation of his sustained dramatic development instead of, in terms of working attitude and methods, a brand new, sharply different phase, and that his last plays are the result of his, as it were, ‘working as usual’. It also suggests that occasionally ‘ungrouping’ the plays, which frees the critic from perspectives preconditioned by classifying them under labels such as ‘romances’ and ‘tragicomedies’, might yield fruitful insight into late Shakespeare.

Over a period of sixty years, between 1936 and 1996, there were numerous filmed versions of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, but four in particular were made for and obtained a worldwide commercial release. George Cukor’s lavish production of 1936 with Norma Shearer as Juliet was the first feature length, big budget, ‘talkie’ of Shakespeare’s play to be made by a major studio and aimed at the cinema going public. Shearer remains, to this day, the only actress of the modern age who was a major film star when cast in the role of Juliet. In direct contrast to this, Renato Castellani’s Anglo Italian neo-realist, retrospective 1954 adaptation featured an unknown Susan Shentall, who had never acted before filming and, on completion of the film, retired and never acted again. Franco Zeffirrelli’s sweeping 1968 production with Olivia Hussey as Juliet was a worldwide commercial success and is still revered by many as being the authoritative film experience of the play. Baz Luhrmann’s1996 version, with Claire Danes playing opposite Leonardo DiCaprio, was initially decried as an affront to Shakespeare’s masterpiece and the director was accused of sacrificing the text for a highly stylised and bombastic shallow content. It is only recently that this film has been viewed by critics and academics alike in a more sympathetic and positive manner. These films, taken individually, present to us a particular performance of the ‘Juliet’ of Shakespeare’s text; but in addition to this they allow us a comparative study of the portrayal of Juliet as a celluloid reflection of the idealised woman shaped by the progressive demands of the contemporary phallocentric society in the western world. Patricia White examined this reflection theory in Feminism and Film and, in turn, referred to the studies of Molly Haskell and Marjorie Rosen in the early 1970s, and quoted them on the basis that film ‘reflects social reality, that depictions of women in film mirror how society treats women, that these depictions are distortions of how women ‘“really are” and what they “really want” ’(White 118). The theory explores the supposition that women are repeatedly and systematically portrayed in a catalogue of images that compels the viewer to see and accept them in a typology of roles which, according to White, reinforces the phallocentric ideology of women as an array of ‘virgins, vamps, victims, suffering mothers, child women and sex kittens’(White 118). A question that therefore arises and which is central to this thesis is how, specifically, has Juliet been portrayed in film? Has the Juliet of the screen been nothing more than an object of visual stimulation, an object of the scopophilic gaze and male sexual fantasy? If this is the case, how does this vary in each of the filmed versions listed? We must also consider how Juliet exists in relation to other characters in the play beyond her direct involvement with Romeo. Juliet’s role is pivotal within the play even though she does not have the most lines. She has a direct influence on Mercutio and his relationship to Romeo, even though Juliet and Mercutio fail to exchange a single line of dialogue in the entire play. Juliet’s relationship with Romeo is altered dramatically in the aftermath of Mercutio’s death. Juliet’s life is also influenced by her relationships with others such as the Nurse and Friar Laurence, each of whom will abandon her at some point in the play. How are these relationships played and interpreted in each of the films in question? One cannot write extensively of Juliet if one limits oneself to writing exclusively of her. Each of these characters and how they are portrayed needs also to be examined. So too must the directors, all male, be examined in some detail. How much do they alter the Juliet of Shakespeare’s text and for what purpose?

Wong Ka-ki, Katrine Wong. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 123-132). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Acknowledgements --- p.vi / Chapter Chapter One --- Introduction --- p.2 / Chapter Chapter Two --- Medical Aspects in Shakespearean Drama --- p.11 / Chapter Chapter Three --- """If music be the food of love ´ؤ´ح：： Music as an Indicator of a Person's Attitude toward and Position in Love" --- p.47 / Chapter Chapter Four --- "Music: ""The patroness of heavenly harmony´ح" --- p.81 / Chapter Chapter Five --- Conclusion --- p.112 / Works Cited --- p.123

Typescript (photocopy). / Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries

The present research deals with the application of Julia Kristeva s psychoanalytic theories of the mind to a selection of William Shakespeare s plays. Kristeva s key psychoanalytic terms the symbolic, the semiotic and the abject are first elaborated in detail and are then applied to different situations and characters in the plays. The plays discussed in this thesis are A Midsummer Night s Dream, As You Like It and The Taming of the Shrew for the comedy section, Richard II, 1 & 2 Henry IV and Coriolanus for the English and Roman History section, and Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth and King Lear for the Tragedy section. The reason for choosing the above plays is that I believe there is a gap of knowledge in this regard and no thorough research on this scale has been conducted up to this time. The intention is to discuss and explicate the moments in which the dramatic heroes undergo some unconscious-driven experiences that can be best explained by Kristeva s post-Freudian psychoanalytic approach. In short, what I am going to show in the present study is the psychoanalytic assumption that Shakespearean characters, forced by internal or external elements, leave the symbolic and take refuge in the semiotic. In such moments, the characters inevitably face the abject which is an archaic memory comprising the elements of enchantment and horror. The abject can be best described as the archaic memories of a distant past when the self had no border and was associated with the semiotic, a subject s harmonious beginning. In its early childhood, to become a subject, an individual breaks its semiotic ties and, by so doing, enters the realm of the symbolic which is associated with grammar and law. The symbolic awards a subject a distinct identity and helps it stay on the route to signification. Kristeva s understanding of the process of individuation is explained by her subject in process , a journey in which a subject always oscillates between the symbolic and the semiotic. The key point in Kristeva s psychoanalytic thought is that the semiotic does not fade away and hovers around a subject s border of identity and remains a constant threat for its symbolic identity. To remain immune from the annihilating forces of the semiotic, a subject has to remain vigilant and protect its borders of identity. My main goal in this thesis is to show that, in some particular situations in the plays, Shakespearean characters fail to remain vigilant and, inevitably, their subjects are exposed to the abject. In other words, in moments of ambition, anger, love or fear, they surrender or take refuge in the semiotic and face the abject. Although Shakespearean plays have previously been approached by Sigmund Freud s (and some other major practitioners ) theories, the application of Kristeva s psychoanalytic theories of the mind gives the opportunity to approach the plays from a new perspective that would otherwise have remained unknown. Thus, the originality of this research lies in its extensive application of Kristeva s theories to the selected Shakespearean plays, theories that, although they derive from those of Freud, have the potential to shed light on those psychoanalytic aspects of the plays that Freud either neglected or left unfinished.

No description available.