Breaking the Mirror Refractions of Kingliness in Shakespeares Second Tetralogy (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Metaphor of the Mirror: Mirroring and Alterity in "Richard III"
The Metaphor of the Mirror: Mirroring and Alterity in Richard III (BA dissertation), 2019
The Elizabethan era was a particular moment of the history of England in which it was witnessed a shifting towards modernity. Especially through History plays we encounter the problem of identity and its representation brought up on stage. I selected "Richard III" because its powerful example of experimentation of theatrical forms and of protagonist's characterisation which play around this incompatibility between form and essence. Richard, indeed, is an "author-actor" aware of this problem and he exploits it as a weapon to fulfill his ambitions.
Shakespeare's Use of Staged and Literary Mirrors in Henry IV, Part One
Through his use of stage compositions, Shakespeare could make visual motifs reverberate with audiences by mirroring these images again within the same play. The playwright's history, "Henry IV, Part One" contains one noteworthy example which occurs in two separate acts, both involving the character of Hotspur.
“My Reformation, Glittering O’er My Fault”: The Evolution Toward Shakespeare’s Ideal Prince
Indiana University South Bend Graduate Research Journal, 2014
Modern interpretations of Shakespeare's Lancastrian Tetralogy are shaded by modern morality and understanding of kingship or leadership. This article places the tetralogy within the historical context of Shakespeare's audience and considers the analogies Shakespeare's kings represent as deviations from their historical counterparts. Contrary to modern opinion, Henry V (Prince Hal) embodies the ideal morals and executions of the duties of kingship contemporary to the writing of the plays and seeks to present the author's ideal concept of kingship.
The Shakespearean object : psychoanalysis, subjectivity and the gaze
2000
Through a close analysis of four plays by Shakespeare this thesis argues that the question of subjectivity ultimately comes to be negotiated around a structural impasse or certain points of opacity in each of the text's signifying practices. Challenging assumptions about the putatively "theatrical" contexts of Richard IlL Richard Il Hamlet and Antony and Cleol2atr , I argue that, to varying degrees, the specular economy of each play is in fact traversed by a radical alterity that constitutiyLly gives rise to a notion of subjectivity commonly referred to as "Shakespearean. " Elaborating upon the work of both Jacques Lacan and Jacques Derrida, I argue that "subjectivity" in the plays is, rather, the articulated confrontation with a non-dialectizable remainder that haunts each text from within. Crucially in this respect I relate each of the texts to Lacan's account of the "gaze" as a species of what he calls the object a: an alien kernel of jouissance exceeding all subjective mediation yet, paradoxically, also that which confers internal consistency both to subjectivity and to the very process of symbolization as such. I am, moreover, also concerned to read the work of Jacques Derrida as providing an illuminating context for how this incursion of alterity that he terms differance (what Lacan calls the Real) may be read as the unacknowledged support of subjectivity. The thesis concludes with a consideration of how this analysis of the Shakespearean object, rather than succumbing to the heady pleasures of an unfettered textuality, opens, ineluctably, onto a rethinking of the very category of the "political" itself.
Skepsi, 2010
The article addresses issues of ‘beyond text’ through a ‘poststructuralist’ reading of Shakespeare’s Richard III and Richard III. Richard III, the eponymous protagonist of the play, worms his way to the top through violence, murder, and dexterity, but, most of all, through what seems to be a skilful and cunning manipulation of event, character as textual construct, circumstance, language, and audience. He has often been noted as possessing certain features in common with the Vice figure in medieval drama, including the privilege of meta-theatrical awareness. I question the notion of Richard’s ‘meta-awareness’ of medium, and posit the meta’s re-circumscription by the text. The article will discuss ‘movements’ in the play and the extent of Richard’s control of events. The textualisation of the character Richard III and the elusiveness of Richard-as-playwright, lead to a consideration of the simultaneously groundless and overdetermined situation of the ‘historical’ Richard, the jostling of the ghostly and the corporeal, and the possibility of the ‘original’.
Shakespeare: Revising and Re-visioning
Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 2012
This article engages with one of the current critical and bibliographical concerns of Shakespeare studies: the collaborative nature of Shakespeare’s work. Bibliographers have identified other hands in the fabric of Shakespeare’s plays. Here the focus is Shakespeare’s collaboration in the plays of others. Three such instances will be examined; The Book of Sir Thomas More, The Spanish Tragedy and The Chronicle History of King Lear. Substantially different as these cases may be, in all of them Shakespeare is working with the materials of others. Shakespeare’s King Lear is an adaptation of the older Leir play performed by the Queen’s Men and in that sense it is a deeply collaborative work. As this essay concludes, without a model there would be nothing to stimulate, or provoke or exceed.