Love’s Labor’s Lost, and: Titus Andronicus, and: King Lear (review)

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 325-334
Author(s):  
Gavin Hollis
Linguaculture ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-22
Author(s):  
Michael Hattaway

Abstract Performance studies must enjoy parity of esteem with critical studies because they remind us of the plurality of “readings” that are generated by a Shakespearean text. Shakespeare seems to have apprehended this when, in Othello, he used a nonce-word, “denotement”, which applies to Othello’s reading of his wife in his mind’s eye. I examine other sequences in which we watch a character “reading” on-stage or imagined action, in Hamlet, Titus Andronicus, Cymbeline, Richard II, and Troilus and Cressida. In Hamlet this involves re-reading as well as generic displacement, which, I argue, is a way of rendering inwardness. As I test case, I analyse a production of King Lear by Shakespeare’s Globe, on a fairground stage, in which the king reshaped himself, became a folkloric figure, like a figure in Nashe’s Summer’s Last Will and Testament. The play itself was thus, indecorously, reshaped as “The Tale of King Lear”. “Dramatic truth”, therefore, in no way depends upon theatrical “realism”.


Author(s):  
Neema Parvini

This chapter assesses the extent to which harm is caused in Shakespeare’s plays when the moral order breaks down by focusing on plays in which the dramatis personae revert to the Hobbesian state of nature and unspeakable cruelty: Titus Andronicus, 3 Henry VI, Richard III, and King Lear. In such moments Shakespeare seems to invoke the image of the tiger, which he only uses fifteen times in all his works. In the constrained or tragic vison (Thomas Sowell), when there are no institutions with which to reinforce the morals that bind people together (authority, loyalty, fairness, sanctity), the worst aspects of humanity – as embodied in the tiger – are granted their fullest expression. However, in Shakespeare’s version of this vision, human nature provides the seeds of its own rebirth.


Author(s):  
Charlotte Scott

Developing Chapter 2’s interest in forms of obligation and authority, Chapter 3 extends its focus to the tragedies and the spaces that children occupy in relation to their parents. Providing new readings of Romeo and Juliet, Titus Andronicus, and King Lear, Chapter 3 explores the status of the child, not as a necessarily young subject, although many of Shakespeare’s children are, but in relation to early modern forms of obligation. Looking at contemporary parenting manuals, pedagogic texts, and household manuals, this chapter puts some of Shakespeare’s tragic children within the contexts of authority and supplication. Understanding the term ‘child’ as descriptive of the human’s relation to God, Chapter 3 explores the different forms that subjection takes in the tragic imagination. Attending to free will in Romeo and Juliet, infantilism in Titus, and supplication in Lear, this chapter shows the significance of the ties that bind one human to another.


1996 ◽  
Vol 12 (47) ◽  
pp. 229-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Warner

Deborah Warner is one of the most exciting of the generation of directors who emerged during the 'eighties – incidentally claiming for women a natural entrance into a profession previously dominated by men. In 1980 she formed the Kick Theatre Company, with whom over the following, formative years of her career she directed The Good Person of Szechwan, The Tempest, Measure for Measure, King Lear, Coriolanus, and Woyzeck. In 1988, following a production for the RSC of Titus Andronicus in the previous year, she became one of the company's resident directors, staging King John and Electra before moving in 1990 as an associate director to the National, where her first two productions were of The Good Person with Fiona Shaw and King Lear with Brian Cox. During the 'nineties, she has extended both the nature and the range of her work, directing Shaw in Hedda Gabler in Dublin, Coriolanus in German at the Salzburg Festival, Don Giovanni at Glyndbourne – and, in 1994–95, the season she discusses below, a revival of Beckett's Footfalls at the Garrick, controversially banned by the Beckett Estate, a dramatization of Eliot's seminal inter-war poem The Waste Land, premiered in Brussels, Richard II at the Cottesloe, with a woman, Fiona Shaw, in the title-role, and a project for the London International Festival of Theatre site-specific to the old railway hotel at St. Pancras. In September 1995 she discussed her recent and future work with Geraldine Cousin, who teaches Theatre Studies in the University of Warwick, where she has just completed a study of contemporary plays by women entitled Women in Dramatic Place and Time.


2021 ◽  
pp. 107-112
Author(s):  
Arseniy Kuzmichev ◽  

The main subject of the book written by S. Sachon is the perception of objects both visible to the audience and imaginative in five Shakespearian plays: Titus Andronicus, Henry V, Hamlet, Macbeth and King Lear. Her approach is a synthesis of phenomenology, historicism, close reading, theatrical studies and modern cognitive studies. Her aim is to analyze both audience's conscious and subconscious response to the language and images of Shakespearian plays.


Author(s):  
Eric Langley

Part II of my study introduces sympathy’s attendant oppositional force, antipathy, and consequently Chapters 3 and 4 are both informed by early-modern scientific conceptions of pharmaceutical medicine, wherein the same bittersweet drug can have both medicinal and poisonous (or sympathetic and antipathetic) capacity; this pharmaceutical metaphor is shown to widely inform Shakespeare’s drama, both at the level of genre, plot, and character, and, more significantly for my study, at the level of word, where language itself is repeatedly described as operating with the force of the Platonic pharmakon. Communication is shown to have the capacity both to cure and to kill, leaving the Shakespearean subject caught up among indeterminable influences, beset by malign attendants, infectious carriers, sickly sympathizers, and ill communicators. Chapter 3 explores a number of plays—including The Winter’s Tale, Titus Andronicus, Coriolanus, King Lear, and All’s Well That Ends Well.


Religions ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cyndia Clegg

The multiple uses of religion in Shakespeare’s plays seem to counter each other at every turn. In one respect, though, I have found a surprising consistency. Moments when Shakespeare’s drama imagines the afterlife are moments that lend significant insights into the play’s action or characterization, even though the image of one undiscovered country may differ drastically from another. Across the canon, the afterlife may appear as a place of religious judgment, as in Othello, Hamlet, Merchant of Venice; as a classical Elysium or Hades where the spirit or shadow removes elsewhere (Antony and Cleopatra, Titus Andronicus); as Abraham’s Bosom—a place of rest between death and the Last Judgment (Henry V, Richard III, Hamlet); or an unidentifiable life to come (Macbeth, King Lear).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document