Search results

Steve Sohmer

.1.147–58) In this speech Lily B. Campbell detects ‘the voice of Elizabeth’ speaking through John; 22 her inference misses the mark. It is not Elizabeth speaking but her father, Henry VIII. A careful reading of Shakespeare’s words reveals a precise epitome of Henry’s attacks on the power of the papacy in England. To begin, ‘interrogatories’ are legal

in Reading Shakespeare’s mind
Steve Sohmer

memory in Shakespeare’s time. But why was the seventh anniversary of a death considered particularly significant? The perfection and power of seven No number – not three nor thirteen – has been so laden with mystical significance in so many cultures and religions over so many centuries as seven. Annemarie Schimmel

in Reading Shakespeare’s mind
Steve Sohmer

), and his own hope for an Elysian reunion – all served up in a text peppered with anagrams, wordplay and snatches of Scripture – and bubbling with topicality. To top this off, Shakespeare gave his play a title which recognized (and celebrated) a decisive Queen and the power of her will. It is a dazzling coup de théâtre. In the final chapter I will

in Reading Shakespeare’s mind
Steve Sohmer

’ Illyria What did ‘Illyria’ signify for Shakespeare’s Elizabethan auditors? And what impression of Illyria did his auditors carry with them into the playhouse? For one thing, Elizabethans knew Paul brought the Gospel to Illyria. He says so in Romans: ‘Through mighty signs and wonders [miracles], by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem

in Reading Shakespeare’s mind
Steve Sohmer

the Geneva Bible. 27 It is difficult for scholars in a free society to grasp how a violent censorious regime raises the consciousness of citizens who read books and attend performances. Though authorities have the power to repress free expression, their efforts have a double effect: readers and auditors learn to attend more closely to what authors and performers say. They come

in Reading Shakespeare’s mind
Steve Sohmer

certainly beyond dispute, and its title is more than appropriate – at least the Twelfth Night part. But what about that dependent phrase? What did Shakespeare intend to convey when he wrote ‘ or What You Will ’? And, not incidentally, who is You ? Is You us, the audience? Or just some general You ? Or can You be a certain someone who had the power to will

in Reading Shakespeare’s mind
Open Access (free)
Rachel E. Hile

general in this time period is confused and incomplete, in part no doubt because of the sense that it was safer not to speak too clearly about the ways that poets could and did criticize those in power. We can see this emphasis on discretion in Thomas Nashe’s abuse of Gabriel Harvey for criticizing Spenser’s malcontented- MUP_Hile_SpenserSatire_Printer.indd 174 14/10/2016 15:36 Conclusion 175 ness in Mother Hubberds Tale: “If any man were vndeseruedly toucht in it, thou hast reuiued his disgrace that was so toucht in it, by renaming it, when it was worn out of al

in Spenserian satire
Open Access (free)
Rachel E. Hile

seems a better fit with John Marston than with Spenser—as do Robert C. Elliott’s idea of satire as stemming from magic rituals of exclusion and Fredric Bogel’s more recent and comprehensive view of satire as a broadly social ritual of exclusion (Elliott, Power of Satire; Bogel, Difference Satire Makes)—then the very definition will make Spenser seem less important as a satirist, and thus those interested in Spenser will privilege his other works and those interested in satire will examine other writers, and never the twain shall meet. Broad theories of satire that aim

in Spenserian satire
The ends of incompletion
Chloe Porter

of the commonwealth’. 38 Given the ‘privileged visibility’ of power in this period, the visual representation of the monarch is a highly regulated area, subject to extensive state ‘scrutiny’. 39 In such a context the state theoretically dictates what constitutes the deific ‘perfection’ of the monarch, whilst also defining the aesthetic appearance of a ‘complete’ visual representation

in Making and unmaking in early modern English drama
Rachel E. Hile

Ayesha Ramachandran argues that “By associating the Elizabethan court with the romance garden rather than the epic battlefield, Spenser reveals and redefines the power relations that are at stake: romance is the world of Circe’s bed, of Acrasia’s garden and Aragnoll’s web, a world where the artfulness of women, the duplicity and dissimulation associated with female power, prevails over single-minded epic might” (Ramachandran, “Clarion,” 81). With one exception, even the Old Historicists, however, generally hesitated to identify Venus allegorically, despite their often

in Spenserian satire