{"title":"<scp>Jonathan Goldberg</scp>. <i>Being of Two Minds: Modernist Literary Criticism and Early Modern Texts</i>","authors":"Esther Osorio Whewell","doi":"10.1093/res/hgad006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgad006","url":null,"abstract":"Jonathan Goldberg, who died shortly after the publication of this book, was chiefly known for creating critical dialogues between early modernity and post-modernism. The simplest premise for a book like Being of Two Minds is reception study; Goldberg’s book is not quite that, although it might be a kind of reception study squared or folded back on itself—an account, by an early modernist, of how three modernist critics (Eliot, Woolf, and Empson) wrote about using early modern literature to think with. Being of Two Minds is more of a how than a why kind of book, and more in the end about modernist than early modern writing, although Goldberg brings to bear a welcome familiarity with the poets who are his main subjects’ subjects (existing studies with overlapping interests, he notes, have been by modernism specialists, and primarily consisted in allusion-hunting). Perhaps its closest kin, mentioned several times in a book otherwise not over-entangled with recent criticism, is Helen Thaventhiran’s 2015 Radical Empiricists: Five Modernist Close Readers.","PeriodicalId":255318,"journal":{"name":"The Review of English Studies","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135489624","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"John Marston’s Stationers, 1607–1633","authors":"Charles Cathcart","doi":"10.1093/res/hgac098","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgac098","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This essay revisits the publication of John Marston’s writings following his withdrawal from theatrical activity. It directs attention away from Marston’s presumed interventions and examines the choices and activities of five stationers: Thomas Thorpe, Thomas Archer, Richard Hawkins, Hugh Perry, and William Sheares. Their release of Marston’s writing offers a sharp insight into their various strategies and practices. Thorpe’s handling of What You Will and Histrio-mastix is best understood in relation to his choice to publish the plays of Marston, Jonson, and Chapman—and those of no other dramatist. Archer’s release of The Insatiate Countesse makes most sense in relation to the Overbury scandal. Hawkins—unlike his peers—progressively accentuated authorial agency in the successive editions of The Metamorphosis of Pigmalions Image within his series of Alcilia-led compilations. Perry and Sheares seem to have been running a joint enterprise at the time of The Workes of Mr John Marston of 1633. By turning towards the choices made by these stationers and placing less emphasis on the hypothesis of Marston’s reluctance to be associated with his writings, a new history of reception, dissemination, and publishing enterprise emerges.","PeriodicalId":255318,"journal":{"name":"The Review of English Studies","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136117232","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Porscha Fermanis. Romantic Pasts: History, Fiction and Feeling in Britain, 1790-1850","authors":"M. Goode","doi":"10.1093/res/hgad003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgad003","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":255318,"journal":{"name":"The Review of English Studies","volume":"119 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116611095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"<scp>Nicholas Cronk, Nick Treuherz, Nicolas Fréry, Ruggero Sciuto, Antony McKenna</scp>, and <scp>Gianluca Mori</scp> (eds). <i>Lettres sur les Anglais</i>","authors":"Thomas Keymer","doi":"10.1093/res/hgad002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgad002","url":null,"abstract":"Journal Article Nicholas Cronk, Nick Treuherz, Nicolas Fréry, Ruggero Sciuto, Antony McKenna, and Gianluca Mori (eds). Lettres sur les Anglais Get access Nicholas Cronk, Nick Treuherz, Nicolas Fréry, Ruggero Sciuto, Antony McKenna, and Gianluca Mori (eds). Lettres sur les Anglais. By voltaire. Vol. 6A (I & II), Pp. xxii+704; Vol. 6B, Pp. xxxvi+611; Vol. 6C, Pp. xvi+328 (Les Œuvres complètes de Voltaire). Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 2020–22. Hardback, £350. Thomas Keymer Thomas Keymer University of Toronto, Canada Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of English Studies, Volume 74, Issue 313, February 2023, Pages 179–181, https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgad002 Published: 13 January 2023 Article history Received: 08 December 2022 Editorial decision: 02 January 2023 Accepted: 03 January 2023 Corrected and typeset: 13 January 2023 Published: 13 January 2023","PeriodicalId":255318,"journal":{"name":"The Review of English Studies","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135898226","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Body Language: Making Love in Lyric in <i>Romeo and Juliet</i>","authors":"Hester Lees-Jeffries","doi":"10.1093/res/hgac097","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgac097","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract With a particular focus on an intensive close reading of the scenes between the lovers and their portrayal of desire and intimacy, this essay discusses how Shakespeare transforms lyric poetry, especially its formal features, not simply into dramatic poetry but into theatre, demonstrating how Shakespeare creates the lovers’ world and the passionate intimacy of their relationship through the embodiment of lyric forms, especially the sonnet, the epithalamium, and the aubade. Explicitly thinking about bodies (and bodies on stage) rather than ‘the body’, it draws on a number of Shakespeare’s sources, especially Sidney’s Astrophil and Stella and Marlowe’s Hero and Leander, as well as Arthur Brooke’s Romeus and Juliet, exploring in precise detail how Shakespeare works with them, the particularity of his transformations, and their effects.1","PeriodicalId":255318,"journal":{"name":"The Review of English Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136039618","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Afterlife of Daniel Defoe’s Captain Singleton in the Seven Years’ War","authors":"Nicholas Seager","doi":"10.1093/res/hgac082","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgac082","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Daniel Defoe’s pirate novel Captain Singleton (1720) was republished in 1757, during the political and military crises of the early stages of the Seven Years’ War. The fact that Singleton at this time was extensively rewritten has gone entirely unnoticed by scholars. The present article explains how this version of Defoe’s maritime picaresque fiction responded to national anxieties about naval performance, aristocratic leadership, and martial masculinity following the loss of Minorca, seeking to galvanize its readers during the privateering rush of this period and the more general appetite for a ‘blue-water’, colonial war strategy. In 1757, Bob Singleton is transformed from the stateless sea rover of Defoe’s original into a patriotic privateer who serves the British nation in an unofficial capacity, both as an African explorer in the first half and a maritime adventurer in the second. The 1757 novel shows the ways in which the rising taste for sentimental fiction, moving away from individualistic adventure stories, coalesced with imperialist and nationalist agendas in the mid-eighteenth century. This example of literary appropriation rewards the investigation of the afterlives of eighteenth-century fiction, aiding recognition of how novels endured and were revived, often in revised or remediated states, to reach different readerships and speak to new sociocultural contexts.","PeriodicalId":255318,"journal":{"name":"The Review of English Studies","volume":"220 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115323742","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"On Looking into Chapman’s Austen: 100 Years On","authors":"K. Sutherland","doi":"10.1093/res/hgac083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgac083","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":255318,"journal":{"name":"The Review of English Studies","volume":"31 3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125630273","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Eleventh-Century ‘N’ Psalter from England: New Pieces of the Puzzle","authors":"Monika Opalińska, Paulina Pludra-Żuk, E. Chlebuś","doi":"10.1093/res/hgac081","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgac081","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper presents an analysis of two recently found fragments of a Latin psalter with a continuous Old English gloss. The fragments were used as endleaf guards in an early modern book from the collection of Samuel Meienreis, currently held at the C. Norwid Library in Elbląg. We argue that the newly found parchment pieces match four other membra disiecta from the same eleventh-century codex produced in England. Since the formerly identified fragments were removed from the bindings of unknown books, their provenance and the origin of the manuscript from which they were removed have not been established, so far. The new findings partially fill this gap. In this paper we explore palaeographical and linguistic evidence, and the historical context of the manuscript waste found in Elbląg in an attempt to reconstruct the history of the so-called N Psalter to which all the extant pieces once belonged.","PeriodicalId":255318,"journal":{"name":"The Review of English Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129478723","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Dearth of the Author: Philip Massinger and the Beaumont and Fletcher Folio","authors":"Eoin Price","doi":"10.1093/res/hgac079","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgac079","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In 1647, Humphrey Moseley and Humphrey Robinson published a folio collection of unpublished works which they attributed to Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher, two writers famous for their collaborations from 1606 to 1613. But in affording Beaumont a place on the title page, the publishers misattributed the volume. Scholars now accept that Beaumont had very little direct input in the collection whereas Philip Massinger, who began collaborating with Fletcher soon after Beaumont’s retirement, had a very significant, unacknowledged role in the collected plays. This essay offers the first extended discussion of why it was that Massinger was written out of this canon-defining volume. I argue first that Massinger was by many accounts a popular and vendible dramatist, whose omission from the folio had little to do with him having a poor reputation. Instead, I suggest that the reputation of the names Beaumont and Fletcher, established in the preceding decades, proved irresistible to the publishers. Furthermore, I argue that Massinger’s reputation as a distinctive solo playwright also counted against him, making it harder to apprehend him as a prolific collaborator. Next, I demonstrate how the 1647 folio participated in a process of canonization which elided Massinger’s significant collaborative contribution and discuss the distorting effect this has had on our understanding of Beaumont, Fletcher, Massinger, and playwrighting practice more broadly. I end by pointing towards some ways of rectifying the historical elision of Massinger’s collaboration with Fletcher.","PeriodicalId":255318,"journal":{"name":"The Review of English Studies","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115788730","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}