David Bevington points out in his performance history of Shakespeare that in both Measure for Measure and The Tempest , the villainous characters are those that attempt to elude the all-seeing surveillance of the Duke and Prospero. Villains are particularly villainous when they think they can do . . . . Continue Reading »
I want to try to bridge the gap between medieval and Renaissance obsession with gift and gratitude and the Enlightenment where these are either privatized or reduced or ignored altogether. Let me begin with some additional thoughts on Timon of Athens, following the argument of an insightful 1947 . . . . Continue Reading »
Wallace again on Timon of Athens . Wallace argues that Shakespeare has written a play to explore Seneca’s society of benefits and gratitude, and shows that the classical model of social order is impossible: “the cast would appear to have been designed to test the Senecan hypothesis . . . . Continue Reading »
In a 1986 article in Modern Philology , John Wallace argues that Timon of Athens is “Shakespeare’s Senecan Study,” reflecting on the issues raised by Seneca’s de Beneficiis : “Shakespeare must have been thinking of Seneca, but a safer argument could have been . . . . Continue Reading »
Paul Cantor describes three of Shakespeare’s Roman plays as a trilogy, moving from the Republic ( Coriolanus ) to the early empire ( Julius Caesar ) to the decadence of Octavian ( Antony and Cleopatra ). Together they form “a kind of historical trilogy, dramatizing the rise and fall of . . . . Continue Reading »
At 16, Hugo Grotius published a well-regarded edition of the notoriously difficult Marriage of Philology and Mercury by Martianus Capella. . . . . Continue Reading »
In 1921, Frank Harris argued that Shakespeare’s art reveals the man: “As it is the object of a general to win battles, so it is the life-work of the artist to show himself to us, and the completeness with which he reveals his own individuality is perhaps the best measure of his own . . . . Continue Reading »
Edward Said helped launch post-colonial criticism of Austen, arguing that Sir Thomas Bertram’s expedition to Antigua, apparently accepted so casually by Austen and her characters, shows that she was an imperialist at heart. Simply by virtue of his standing in English society, Said argued, Sir . . . . Continue Reading »
Critics say that Austen’s work is too restricted. But, as Julia Prewitt Brown says, if this is true, it’s hardly something that Austen would have been unaware of: “we must assume that Jane Austen was highly attuned to the unheroic implications of her subject from the beginning of . . . . Continue Reading »
In “What’s Wrong With the World,” Chesterton commented on the differences between eighteenth and nineteenth century fiction. Essentially, the eighteenth century was from Mars, the nineteenth from Venus. Austen developed her tastes and sensibilities in the eighteenth century, . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
