» » Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist

Free eBook Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist download

by Lukas Erne

Free eBook Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist download ISBN: 0521822556
Author: Lukas Erne
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (April 21, 2003)
Language: English
Pages: 300
Category: Imaginative Literature
Subcategory: History and Criticism
Size MP3: 1548 mb
Size FLAC: 1135 mb
Rating: 4.4
Format: docx doc txt rtf


Lukas Erne's Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist is a book for the new century.

Lukas Erne's Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist is a book for the new century. Erne shows decisively that Shakespeare and his acting companies produced playtexts for both performance and publication, on stage and on page, for the playhouse and the printing house. Thus, Erne's Shakespeare is precisely a man of the theater who became a literary dramatist, at once concerned with the next perfomance and his own literary reputation

Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist.

Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist. Online ISBN: 9781139342445. Examining the evidence from early published playbooks, Erne argues that Shakespeare wrote many of his plays with a readership in mind and that these 'literary' texts would have been abridged for the stage because they were too long for performance.

Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist book. Lukas Erne argues in this study that Shakespeare, apart from being a playwright who wrote theatrical texts for the stage, was also a literary dramatist who produced reading texts for publication.

In this 2003 study, Lukas Erne argues that Shakespeare, apart from being a playwright who wrote theatrical texts for the stage, was also a literary dramatist who produced reading texts for the page. The usual distinction that has been set up between Ben Jonson on the one hand, carefully preparing his manuscripts for publication, and Shakespeare the man of the theatre, writing for his actors and audience, indifferent to his plays as literature, is questioned in this book.

Examining the evidence from early published playbooks, Erne argues that Shakespeare wrote many of his plays with a readership in mind and that these 'literary' texts would have been abridged for the stage because they were too long for performance.

Lukas ErneShakespeare as a Literary Dramatist Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. William Shakespeare’s The Tempest has proved to be an invaluable source of critical controversy in regard to race, gender, and class inequalities. ISBN: 0-521-82255-6 (hbk). Expanding the common scholarly view that treats these issues in isolation, this essay scrutinises those characters subordinated to a hegemonic power under the unifying concept of the subaltern, as developed by Antonio Gramsci in his Prison Notebooks.

Discover ideas about English Writers. Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist', by Lukas Erne. English Writers World Famous Summer School Tolkien Shakespeare Reading Lists Playlists Book Lists.

Lukas Erne's other publications include this book's sequel Shakespeare and the Book Trade .

Lukas Erne's other publications include this book's sequel Shakespeare and the Book Trade (2013), Shakespeare's Modern Collaborators (2008) and Beyond 'The Spanish Tragedy': A Study of the Works of Thomas Kyd (2001).

Lukas Erne argues in this study that Shakespeare, apart from being a playwright who wrote theatrical texts for the stage, was also a literary dramatist who produced reading texts for publication. Contrary to a long-standing consensus, Shakespeare does not seem to have been opposed, or indifferent, to the publication of his plays, and he pursued a policy of trying to get them published. Accordingly, Shakespeare's long play texts survive in a literary format that would have required shortening before they reached the stage.
User reviews
Freighton
"Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist" is a book for the new millennium...one which just MIGHT forever change the way you think about Shakespeare.

This is an often provocative and always gripping volume which explores the rise of printed play-texts in late Elizabethan and early Jacobean England, and in doing so, invites a much-needed rethinking of many cherished assumptions concerning the literary culture of that era. It deftly explores the long-ignored mutual interests of authors, theater companies, book sellers and the marketplace of potential buyers for play texts...ably illuminating what may be described as Shakespeare's consciously LITERARY ambitions and practices.

I do not think it an overstatement to suggest that this book (together with its sequel "Shakespeare and The Book Trade") forces us to rethink both: a) the late 20th century obsession with (and near sole-focus) on performance-based textual criticism of Shakespeare and b) the theatrical history of the Jacobethan era at large. In exploring the relationship between the acted and the printed word, Erne SHAKES both the theatrical and the academic stages. Now on to some specifics as to his methods:

Lukas Erne's examines the genesis and history of the 20th century's near-exclusive focus on "Performance Criticism". To put in bluntly, he reveals this school of thought to be rooted in biased research, unsupportable conjectures concerning period practices and flat-out academic myth. In chapter after chapter of painstaking research (backed up with extensive footnotes and scholarly citations) he explores academia's recent love affair with the vision of Shakespeare as merely a 'Public Theater Playwright Grinding out Commercial Scripts' (akin to a Hollywood TV writer). Then, via his own meticulous research, combined with that of a handful of other academics who have genuinely STUDIED, DOCUMENTED AND CONTEXTUALIZED the publishing and book trade practices of Shakespeare's era, Erne demolishes (with hard data from the publishing trade) the notion that Shakespeare wrote only for the stage and did not care about the publication or the literary afterlife of his plays.

To cite just one examined data set: Erne notes the length of each of Shakespeare's plays and points out that historical records show that the "dramatic portion" of Early Modern theater performances on the Public Stage (minus the music prior to performance and the jigs afterward) were typically about 2 to 2.5 hours in duration. Current RSC staging allows for an approximate maximum of 900 spoken lines per hour. Even at putative performance speeds which would substantially exceed these modern standards (as proposed by academics for Early Modern drama) the maximum number of lines that could have be spoken in that 2 to 2,5 hour time frame would have been approximately 2300 to 2700 lines. Yet, no less than 28 out of Shakespeare's 37 First folio plays are over 2700 lines in length...with a number over 3200 lines...and Hamlet and Richard III coming in at nearly 3600 lines !!!

Apparently, most of the 20th century "thought leaders" of Shakespearean textual criticism prefer not to *seriously* ask themselves this simple question: "Why did Shakespeare write such long plays...ones which could not be PRACTICALLY acted on the public stages of his era ??"

(Note: BTW, in a case of truly circular reasoning, the above-mentioned putative "fast-paced" performance speeds envisioned for Early Modern theater companies, were first CONJECTURED by academics due to the very fact that the plays were so long to begin with !!)

Erne convincingly makes the case that the full-length versions of Shakespeare's plays were long because they were written with publication AS LITERATURE firmly in mind, and that these long version plays were routinely condensed for Public Stage performances. His research also establishes a compelling case that the so-called "bad quartos" of Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, and Henry V represent some form of condensed acting versions for the London stage...and that, as such, far from being ignored and rejected (as is the current vogue) they should be of intense scholarly interest aimed at discovering true Original Practices.

While all of the above may sound like common sense to the casual reader (who may be unfamiliar with the questionable approaches taken by certain eminent Shakespeare academics) it goes directly against recent past and current "scholarly wisdom" as preached by many leading lights of the field, including: Stanley Wells, Gary Taylor and a host of other "name" academics.

After reading Erne, one wonders how they could have EVER got it all so wrong.

Per further research by Erne into the exact timing of their publication, the quarto versions of MOST of Shakespeare's plays would have been published with the consent and assistance of the acting company (and in some cases the author himself)...not "stolen" by a conspiracy of paid confederates among the audience scribbling furiously in notebooks, or "memorially reconstructed" by "dishonest actors" to be later released by "thieving publishers" and "pirate printers"...which is the scenario that a host of distinguished academics (including the august names above) have clung-to for nearly a century.

Erne replaces this flawed vision with shorter & crisper plays as acted on the stage and with a Shakespeare who was a self-consciously literary artist...one who was well aware of the long-term value of his plays as scholarly works...an author who intended the majority of his plays both as great literature to be carefully studied on the page, as well as (in condensed version) scripts to be performed before a live audience.

This book is highly recommended for all of those who prefer common sense explanations of Shakespeare as a flesh & blood human being and author versus strained logic of academic elites pushing their own pet agendas.
Fordrekelv
Excellent! hugely recommended.
Tujar
This book has totally changed the way I think about Shakespeare. Erne absolutely demolishes an entire tradition of Shakespeare scholarship: i.e.,that Shakespeare wrote only for the stage and did not care about the publication or literary afterlife of his plays. Erne reminds us that Renaissance stage performances were approximately 2 hours long, 2 ½ at most. And even at performance speeds far exceeding modern standards, the maximum number of lines that could be acted in 2 ½ hours is 2500. Yet no less than 28 out of Shakespeare's 37 plays are over 2700 lines! Why did Shakespeare write such long plays that could not be acted on the stage? Erne argues convincingly that he wrote the long versions for publication and then abridged them for stage performance. The so-called "bad quartos" of Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, and Henry V represent acting versions of the longer folio versions. The quarto versions of the plays were published by Shakespeare and the acting company; they were not stolen by spectators with notebooks, or reconstructed later by actors. Likewise, Erne argues that Shakespeare himself planned the folio text, even though he never lived to see it through to publication. In sum, Shakespeare was self-conscious literary artist, well aware of the literary value of his plays, who wrote his plays both as literature to be read and as scripts to be performed.