FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W189576484> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W189576484 startingPage "115" @default.
• W189576484 abstract "In The Development of English Drama in the Late Seventeenth Century, nearly a quarter of a century old but the most frequently cited source in this collection, Robert D. Hume scolds critics of Restoration drama content to ignore all but a tiny minority of the relevant (13). Such myopia by-and-large defined the field, Hume pointed out. Etherege, Congreve, and Wycherley received plenty of attention; Vanbrugh, Farquhar, Dryden, and Shadwell received some, but not much (14). Hume's indictment was prescient: To claim to characterize a period by analysing to writers selected on the ground that posterity remembers them seems and (14)--a proto-new-historicist credo if there ever was one. Hume had no reason to say so, but eighteenth-century drama post-Farquhar wasn't doing much better. A lack of interest in Fielding's drama and in plays by farce-writers, sentimentalists, topical tragedians, and female dramatists of any sort created the sense that nothing much had happened between Farquhar and Goldsmith save the enriching of Gay, the gaying of Rich, and the licensing of the stage. Critics did not find these phenomena inviting. Then as now, The Beggar's Opera (1727) resists our critical gimmickry; and a generation unembarrassed by aesthetic criteria might be forgiven for having regarded the Stage Licensing Act (1737) as separating dreary blank-verse tragedies of imprecise political resonance from (among other unpleasantries) dreary blank-verse tragedies of no political resonance. Confronting the torporous heft of, say, Thomson's Edward and Eleonora (1737) on one side of the field and Home's Douglas (1756) on the other, critics punted. Goldsmith and Sheridan did not lack for attention, but the critical methods applied to post-Restoration drama were as arbitrary and as the methods that troubled Hume. No one needs to be told that things have changed, although the impetus has come from a felt need for ideological reprioritizing rather than a commitment to battling unsound methodology. It would be silly to claim this collection as a guidebook to the Current Dispensation (if there is one), but it does seem fair to cite it as evidence of an accelerating rejection of a canon that Hume rightly deemed insufficient. Robert Marldey's reconceptualizing of the old canon of Restoration comedy; the more recent and expansive work of Paula Backscheider, Richard Braverman, and Rose Zimbardo; the rediscovery of Fielding's drama by Hume and Albert J. Rivero; the explosion of interest in female writers generally, female playwrights specifically, and Aphra Behn more specifically still; the mainstreaming of gothicism and sentimentalism--these and other factors have moved us further from restrictive models of canonicity, particularly with respect to the earlier part of the long eighteenth century.(1) Recent collections have done their part. Abetted by the surge of interest in Behn, Mary Anne Schofield and Cecelia Macheski's Curtain Calls: British and American Women and the Theater, 1660-1820 (1991) helped correct an old canon hostile to female playwrights. J. Douglas Canfield and Deborah C. Payne's Cultural Readings of Restoration and Eighteenth-Century English Theater (1995) offered an assortment of rereadings and exhumations, nicely balanced in terms of gender. For better or for worse, the present collection goes a step further by disregarding the old canon, even as a point of resistance. Hume's three to seven canonical playwrights of the Restoration (14) are absent in any substantive sense. Goldsmith and Sheridan are absent altogether; so is Gay. Behn, whose full dramatic corpus has only recently appeared in print, merits barely a mention. (Indeed, Jean I. Marsden suggests that the kerfuffle about Behn has kept us from appreciating Behn's contemporary, Mary Pix.) And when Fielding does appear, he appears as a writer whose fiction owes much to his drama, not as a dramatist per se. …" @default.
• W189576484 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W189576484 creator A5040373931 @default.
• W189576484 date "1999-09-22" @default.
• W189576484 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W189576484 title "Promises and Perils of the Anticanon" @default.
• W189576484 hasPublicationYear "1999" @default.
• W189576484 type Work @default.
• W189576484 sameAs 189576484 @default.
• W189576484 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W189576484 countsByYear W1895764842017 @default.
• W189576484 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W189576484 hasAuthorship W189576484A5040373931 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C136815107 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C164913051 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C2779148373 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C523419034 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C7991579 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W189576484 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C111472728 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C124952713 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C136815107 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C138885662 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C142362112 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C164913051 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C17744445 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C199539241 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C2779148373 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C523419034 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C7991579 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C94625758 @default.
• W189576484 hasConceptScore W189576484C95457728 @default.
• W189576484 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W189576484 hasLocation W1895764841 @default.
• W189576484 hasOpenAccess W189576484 @default.
• W189576484 hasPrimaryLocation W1895764841 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W1487806985 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W1506106061 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W1582984126 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W1987061583 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W1997744918 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W2085754833 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W2331710546 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W2480068551 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W2487767121 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W280092544 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W296522086 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W2992227638 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W321442594 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W334341783 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W60878387 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W74895642 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W2573703639 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W2602618578 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W2761331454 @default.
• W189576484 hasRelatedWork W347040054 @default.
• W189576484 hasVolume "32" @default.
• W189576484 isParatext "false" @default.
• W189576484 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W189576484 magId "189576484" @default.
• W189576484 workType "article" @default.