For my last post I would like to offer a secondary source on the subject of Renaissance friendship (particularly as it relates to Shakespeare and his works): Sovereign Amity: Figures of Friendship in Shakespearian Contexts, by Laurie Shannon.
In this book, Shannon explores the idea of the friend as a "another self" within early modern friendships, where friends were likened to one soul split between two bodies. She explores this idea of friendship--along with the corresponding ideas of the second self and the shared soul--in regard to societal, historical, and literary contexts. Her argument throughout the book is that friendship was a model for political discourse, and writers of the early modern period explored the idea of sovereignty through their construction of friendship.
This books offers information at a variety of levels. First, Shannon does provide background information on Renaissance society and culture, as well (of course) as on ideas of friendship during the period. This gives a solid base of information from which to build one's topic/argument further. Second, Shannon ties together the culture of the early modern period with literature of the period, exploring (as mentioned above) how writers tinkered with the idea of friendship and love as a way of exploring political discourse and societal ideals. This, then, provides a good resource for those looking at how early modern English society and literature interacted, particular with regard to such love and friendship. Third, Shannon provides analyses of a variety of early modern English texts (mostly Shakespeare's), focusing on the importance and function of friendship within those works. This is a wonderful resource, then, for scholarship on this topic as it specifically relates to and is employed in specific Renaissance works.
Now, as far as I'm aware, Arden of Faversham is not treated in Shannon's book. However, much of what Shannon writes (with the exception of her readings of specific texts that are not Arden of Faversham) is applicable to many pieces of Renaissance literature, and thus I recommend it for anyone interested in the connection between Renaissance friendship and Renaissance literature.
Also, there several other books with a more narrow (but perhaps also more thorough) focus on the connection between friendship and culture in the early modern period (in one way or another). It may be worth looking at: Against Reproduction: Where Renaissance Texts Come From, by the wonderful Stephen Guy-Bray; Textual Intercourse: Collaboration, Authorship, and Sexualities in Renaissance Drama, by Jeffrey Masten, and The Renaissance of Lesbianism in Early Modern England, by Valerie Traub.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Resource Post 10
Alright, I want to get one more quick post off before I head to class. One or two more will be posted after. This post will focus on "Alice Arden’s Freedom and the Suspended Moment of Arden of Faversham," written by Julie Schutzman and published in Studies in English Literature issue 36.2.
In this essay, Schutzman argues that Alice Arden displays a female autonomy within Arden of Faversham in that she manipulates the traditional social structures of both the domestic space of her marriage and the social space of the town in which the play takes place. This manipulation, she contends, presents a threat to the patriarchal order of these societal structures, and in this way she is able to achieve such autonomy. Of particular interest to my posted research topic is Schutzman’s discussion of Alice’s manipulation of Arden, wherein the states that “Arden chooses to remove his gaze from the scene of his wife’s adultery” (304). Schutzman argues that this shift makes Arden the surveyed rather than the surveyor in his marriage (a reversal of the traditional structure), but I plan to use this point to note that Arden’s decision to ignore his wife’s adultery and instead spend his time with Franklin allows, as Schutzman argues, the reversal of the social order which leads to his end.
This is a great article for those of you with feminist interests, as Schutzman pays close attention to the female agency that Alice achieves by challenging the patriarchy. This article is thus also good for those of you looking for articles relating to the treatment of women and the construction of the patriarchy in early modern England, since this essay explores Alice's interaction and engagement with these aspects of Renaissance English society. While the usefulness of this article is hit or miss for my topic, I feel that it would be incredibly useful for those of you who are looking for sources dealing with any of the issues that I have mentioned above.
In this essay, Schutzman argues that Alice Arden displays a female autonomy within Arden of Faversham in that she manipulates the traditional social structures of both the domestic space of her marriage and the social space of the town in which the play takes place. This manipulation, she contends, presents a threat to the patriarchal order of these societal structures, and in this way she is able to achieve such autonomy. Of particular interest to my posted research topic is Schutzman’s discussion of Alice’s manipulation of Arden, wherein the states that “Arden chooses to remove his gaze from the scene of his wife’s adultery” (304). Schutzman argues that this shift makes Arden the surveyed rather than the surveyor in his marriage (a reversal of the traditional structure), but I plan to use this point to note that Arden’s decision to ignore his wife’s adultery and instead spend his time with Franklin allows, as Schutzman argues, the reversal of the social order which leads to his end.
This is a great article for those of you with feminist interests, as Schutzman pays close attention to the female agency that Alice achieves by challenging the patriarchy. This article is thus also good for those of you looking for articles relating to the treatment of women and the construction of the patriarchy in early modern England, since this essay explores Alice's interaction and engagement with these aspects of Renaissance English society. While the usefulness of this article is hit or miss for my topic, I feel that it would be incredibly useful for those of you who are looking for sources dealing with any of the issues that I have mentioned above.
Resource Post 9
At this point, I have already listed the best secondary sources (that I could find) for my chosen research topic. In the 3-4 posts to follow, I will be giving slightly shorter analyses of the remaining secondary sources that I would like to talk about, since they become much less involved with the focus of this portion of my blog. However, this does not mean that those of you looking for resources on domestic violence/homosociality (especially in Arden of Faversham) should pay these next few sources no mind; you may find some of these sources more relevant to your own interests than they are to mine, and so I encourage you to at least look at them in more detail. Anyhow, today's post focuses on Alexander's Leggatt's essay, "Arden of Faversham" (creative and informative title, I know), published in Shakespeare Survey: An Annual Survey of Shakespearian Study and Production, volume 36.
Now I know what you're thinking: "Shakespeare Survey? I thought your topic deals with Arden of Faversham..." This is true. But Arden of Faversham was written by an anonymous author, and there are some who argue that Arden of Faversham was written by Shakespeare and that his authorship of the play was either lost or never made known. And besides, it doesn't make a difference to my topic whether Shakespeare wrote the play or not. So I thought I would take a look at Leggatt's article to see what it had to offer (since it's generic title made me think that it would be applicable to my subject matter. Anyhow, here's my analysis of the article:
In this essay, Leggatt examines the style in which the anonymous author of Arden of Faversham wrote the play. He compares the style of writing and writing conventions employed in the text to other, popular early modern English plays, such as Tambourline and Hamlet. Leggatt argues that, in writing Arden of Faversham, the author has allowed a greater degree of realism into the early modern theater than other plays of the time allowed.
There's more to it than this, I know, but I feel that I have summarized the gist of the article quite well. Of particular interest to my topic, Leggatt does examine the character Franklin on several occasions throughout the course of his essay, and in one instance he notes how Franklin tends to pull Arden away from the domestic problems that Arden faces throughout the play. He also notes how Arden and Mosby seem to have an intuitive, friendship-like connection with one another, as seen through their several interactions. More specifically, I plan to use Leggatt's observations as part of the foundation for my claim that it is Franklin and his connection to Arden that allow for Alice’s adultery and, later, Arden’s murder.
This article may admittedly not be ideal for all topics relating to Arden of Faversham. I know that I am taking several small pieces from the article for my own argument, but that's one thing I like about the essay. There is a lot of information in the article, and thus there is a lot that can be used for a variety of different topics. So do check it out, and I hope it'll be equally (if not more) useful for you.
Now I know what you're thinking: "Shakespeare Survey? I thought your topic deals with Arden of Faversham..." This is true. But Arden of Faversham was written by an anonymous author, and there are some who argue that Arden of Faversham was written by Shakespeare and that his authorship of the play was either lost or never made known. And besides, it doesn't make a difference to my topic whether Shakespeare wrote the play or not. So I thought I would take a look at Leggatt's article to see what it had to offer (since it's generic title made me think that it would be applicable to my subject matter. Anyhow, here's my analysis of the article:
In this essay, Leggatt examines the style in which the anonymous author of Arden of Faversham wrote the play. He compares the style of writing and writing conventions employed in the text to other, popular early modern English plays, such as Tambourline and Hamlet. Leggatt argues that, in writing Arden of Faversham, the author has allowed a greater degree of realism into the early modern theater than other plays of the time allowed.
There's more to it than this, I know, but I feel that I have summarized the gist of the article quite well. Of particular interest to my topic, Leggatt does examine the character Franklin on several occasions throughout the course of his essay, and in one instance he notes how Franklin tends to pull Arden away from the domestic problems that Arden faces throughout the play. He also notes how Arden and Mosby seem to have an intuitive, friendship-like connection with one another, as seen through their several interactions. More specifically, I plan to use Leggatt's observations as part of the foundation for my claim that it is Franklin and his connection to Arden that allow for Alice’s adultery and, later, Arden’s murder.
This article may admittedly not be ideal for all topics relating to Arden of Faversham. I know that I am taking several small pieces from the article for my own argument, but that's one thing I like about the essay. There is a lot of information in the article, and thus there is a lot that can be used for a variety of different topics. So do check it out, and I hope it'll be equally (if not more) useful for you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)