The Tongue and Its Office in The Revenger's Tragedy

PMLA ◽  
1977 ◽  
Vol 92 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. L. Simmons

Lussurioso’s valedictory in The Revenger’s Tragedy—”My tongue is out of office”—isolates a dominant image that Cyril Tourneur adapted from the Kydian revenge play, particularly Titus Andronieus where the mutilation of Lavinia represents the gothic assault on the definitively human ability to speak and the cancellation of the eloquent bond that creates a just society. Whereas Shakespeare finally affirms this classical idealization of rhetoric, Tourneur accentuates the opposing tradition of rhetoric as the ability to flatter, seduce, and speak unjustly. He employs the biblical concept of the fiery tongue as a quasi-independent organ with psychic and ethical potency. In Tourneur’s world of “nimble and desperate tongues,” the linguistic glory of man becomes a phallic and self-destructive act that justifies Vindice’s moral degeneration and tragic end. With other images that ironically evoke lost ideals of Renaissance humanism, imagery of the tongue helps to illuminate the grotesque Jacobean darkness of the play.

1950 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 332-332
Author(s):  
No authorship indicated
Keyword(s):  

1971 ◽  
Vol 10 (02) ◽  
pp. 96-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. HALLEN ◽  
P. HALL ◽  
H. SELANDER

Administrative and medical information about the patient forms, in each case, a pattern, the complexity of which increases as the number of data grows. Even when the data are 4—5 in number, the human ability to recognize and distinguish between different patterns begins to fail, A mathematical method (linear discriminatory analysis) has been worked out. This system of analysis appears to provide opportunities of placing patients with the same or similar patterns in classes which are diagnostically, prognostically or therapeutically homogeneous.


1969 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 281-283
Author(s):  
Charles Trinkaus (book author) ◽  
John D’Amico (review author)
Keyword(s):  

Moreana ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 39 (Number 149) (1) ◽  
pp. 17-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.D. Cousins

William J. Bouwsma influentially argued, in 1975, that “[t]he two ideological poles between which Renaissance humanism oscillated may be roughly labelled ‘Stoicism’ and ‘Augustinianism.’” He suggested that white individual humanists might, at different times, favour some version of one over some version of the other, their intellectual allegiances were nonetheless fundamentally divided between the two. An unacknowledged possibility in Bouwsma’s essay is that humanist texts might interplay the two—knowingly or unselfconsciously. Stoical elements and Augustinianism can be seen to co-exist in Boethius’ The Consolation of Philosophy, a notable precedent, perhaps. Further, they can be seen to co-exist in More’s Fortune Verses, which are at once a sophisticated contribution to the literature of Fortune and an example (most likely a self-conscious one) of Stoicism’s literary cohabitation with Augustinianism.


2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-248
Author(s):  
Julien Weber

This article is about the grotesque in Baudelaire. While Baudelaire's famous essay on laughter plays an important role in contemporary theories of grotesque aesthetics, his own poetic production is often left aside. In this article, I discuss how the grotesque manifests itself in works by Baudelaire that seem a priori irrelevant because of their ostensible use of ‘comique significatif’, a sort of antithesis of the grotesque. Through a discussion of Pauvre Belgique! And ‘Le Chien et le Flacon’, I argue that the baudelairian grotesque most powerfully intervenes in the mode of a distortion of the intended meaning, which leads me to distinguish its reading from a properly ‘aesthetic’ experience.


Author(s):  
Gerald Gaus

This book lays out a vision for how we should theorize about justice in a diverse society. It shows how free and equal people, faced with intractable struggles and irreconcilable conflicts, might share a common moral life shaped by a just framework. The book argues that if we are to take diversity seriously and if moral inquiry is sincere about shaping the world, then the pursuit of idealized and perfect theories of justice—essentially, the entire production of theories of justice that has dominated political philosophy for the past forty years—needs to change. Drawing on recent work in social science and philosophy, the book points to an important paradox: only those in a heterogeneous society—with its various religious, moral, and political perspectives—have a reasonable hope of understanding what an ideally just society would be like. However, due to its very nature, this world could never be collectively devoted to any single ideal. The book defends the moral constitution of this pluralistic, open society, where the very clash and disagreement of ideals spurs all to better understand what their personal ideals of justice happen to be. Presenting an original framework for how we should think about morality, this book rigorously analyzes a theory of ideal justice more suitable for contemporary times.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document