FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2081008289> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2081008289 endingPage "75" @default.
• W2081008289 startingPage "41" @default.
• W2081008289 abstract "Before the Bard: “Shakespeare” in Early Eighteenth-Century London Robert D. Hume Why did the London audience of 1703 tolerate William Burnaby’s abominable perversion of Twelfth Night? I heard this question asked at a recent thesis defense at the University of Toronto, and its implications have continued to haunt me. The simplest answer is to impugn the taste of the audience—but pondering the matter, I am inclined to think that few (if any) members of the audience could have realized that Love Betray’d (Lincoln’s Inn Fields, late January? 1703) had any connection to Shakespeare’s play or that they would have been disturbed by the fact if they had been aware of it. Our view of Shakespeare and theirs are radically incommensurable, and the difference demands some consideration—unless we are prepared simply to regard them as benighted and ignorant fools. We need to ask an embarassingly large and treacherous question: what did the London audience know about Shakespeare before Bardolatry, and how did it know? An obvious point should be acknowledged at the outset: the audience changes, and even at a single date the London audience is anything but homogeneous. We cannot pretend to talk about a single audience, but must discriminate a minimum of three semi-distinct groups. One comprises a handful of serious literary people—playwright adapters like Dryden, scholars like Gerard Langbaine. From Shakespeare allusions in playtexts we can be certain that at least a small cadre of people had actually read plays not known to be in the repertory. A second group is regular playgoers, some of whom no doubt bought printed plays at times or even bought them systematically. Pepys is a good example. The third group, no doubt much the largest, consists of more casual or occasional theatergoers, relatively few of whom are likely to have bought many play scripts. Recorded views of Shakespeare naturally come almost entirely from the first group, but the tastes and preferences of the third group must have had a powerful effect on the theaters’ repertory. We need, therefore, to attend not only to what the most knowledgeable literary people in [End Page 41] London knew but what ordinary playgoers could have known and are likely to have known. The methodological problems are daunting. Indeed, they are even more formidable than the usual difficulties inherent in historicist attempts to recreate outlooks now remote from us. Scholars have spent the last 200 years scrounging for every scrap of evidence and every passing allusion to a national monument. The results are useful but inevitably distortive: a large heap of “evidence” about reputation has been accumulated, but a balanced picture of historical actuality demands attention to blanks, absences, ignorance, and silent indifference. The rise of Bardolatry signalled in the 1769 Jubilee has been charted and recharted, its excesses deplored even as its detractors marvel (for example) at the failure of Pepys to appreciate plays whose greatness most later commentators accept as a matter of faith or even fact. Our knowledge of the story (rustic simpleton is gradually recognized as universal genius) and our deeply ingrained prejudices about the valuation of Shakespeare make sympathetic attention to seventeenth- and eighteenth-century viewpoints close to impossible. A great deal has been written about Shakespeare in the eighteenth century, some of it extremely helpful. In the last few years the work of Gary Taylor and Michael Dobson in particular has substantially altered and improved our understanding of the subject, and I am indebted to both of them. Dobson asks, centrally, how and why “this extraordinary change in Shakespeare’s status came about,” and answers his question in cultural-ideological terms. 1 Taylor offers a refreshingly realistic account of changing views of Shakespeare, trying to reconstruct a pre-Bardolatrous perspective for the pre-1750 period. 2 Both naturally work from the considerable mass of (mostly familiar) evidence of what people said about Shakespeare and the adaptations made from his plays. My own concerns are narrower and more particular. Resisting the temptation to read the evidence in light of later developments, I want to argue that the major shift toward Bardolatry happened only after 1730. And instead of dwelling yet again on familiar..." @default.
• W2081008289 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2081008289 creator A5050623193 @default.
• W2081008289 date "1997-01-01" @default.
• W2081008289 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2081008289 title "Before the Bard: &quot;Shakespeare&quot; in Early Eighteenth-Century London" @default.
• W2081008289 cites W1534791183 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W1602338361 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W1968540625 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W1987840671 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W1994819683 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2009588118 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2016304794 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2087666979 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2088787327 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2110607109 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2115216804 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2154261566 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2157326131 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2318643992 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2329848920 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2332876584 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2332928819 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W2568967441 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W431155593 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W603878931 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W607357825 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W631117365 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W640777283 @default.
• W2081008289 cites W657928949 @default.
• W2081008289 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.1997.0004" @default.
• W2081008289 hasPublicationYear "1997" @default.
• W2081008289 type Work @default.
• W2081008289 sameAs 2081008289 @default.
• W2081008289 citedByCount "59" @default.
• W2081008289 countsByYear W20810082892012 @default.
• W2081008289 countsByYear W20810082892013 @default.
• W2081008289 countsByYear W20810082892014 @default.
• W2081008289 countsByYear W20810082892016 @default.
• W2081008289 countsByYear W20810082892017 @default.
• W2081008289 countsByYear W20810082892018 @default.
• W2081008289 countsByYear W20810082892019 @default.
• W2081008289 countsByYear W20810082892020 @default.
• W2081008289 countsByYear W20810082892021 @default.
• W2081008289 countsByYear W20810082892022 @default.
• W2081008289 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2081008289 hasAuthorship W2081008289A5050623193 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C11171543 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C136815107 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C182306322 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C2779802421 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C66882249 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C8868529 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConcept C97355855 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C10138342 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C111472728 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C11171543 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C121332964 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C124952713 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C136815107 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C138885662 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C142362112 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C15744967 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C162324750 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C169760540 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C182306322 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C2779802421 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C66882249 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C8868529 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C95457728 @default.
• W2081008289 hasConceptScore W2081008289C97355855 @default.
• W2081008289 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2081008289 hasLocation W20810082891 @default.
• W2081008289 hasOpenAccess W2081008289 @default.
• W2081008289 hasPrimaryLocation W20810082891 @default.
• W2081008289 hasRelatedWork W160145377 @default.
• W2081008289 hasRelatedWork W2076305140 @default.
• W2081008289 hasRelatedWork W2133267947 @default.
• W2081008289 hasRelatedWork W2321756657 @default.
• W2081008289 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2081008289 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2081008289 hasRelatedWork W2993159568 @default.
• W2081008289 hasRelatedWork W3167152720 @default.
• W2081008289 hasRelatedWork W4235455028 @default.
• W2081008289 hasRelatedWork W4320494227 @default.
• W2081008289 hasVolume "64" @default.
• W2081008289 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2081008289 isRetracted "false" @default.

• next