No abstract

This paper is part of a Literature Compass panel cluster arising from the The Texas A&M John Donne Collection: A Symposium and Exhibition. Comprising an introduction by Gary Stringer and three of the papers presented at the symposium, this cluster seeks to examine the current state of Donne Studies and aims to provide a snapshot of the field. The symposium was held April 6–7, 2006. The cluster is made up of the following articles: “Introduction: Three Papers from The Texas A&M John Donne Collection: A Symposium and Exhibition,” Gary A. Stringer, Literature Compass 4 (2007), 10.1111/j.1741‐4113.2007.00420.x. “Donne and Disbelief: The Early Prose,” Ernest W. Sullivan, Literature Compass 4 (2007), 10.1111/j.1741‐4113.2007.00421.x. “The Cultural Significance of Donne's Sermons,” Jeanne Shami, Literature Compass 4 (2007), 10.1111/j.1741‐4113.2007.00422.x. “T. R. O’Flahertie's Copy of Donne's Letters,” Donald R. Dickson, Literature Compass 4 (2007), 10.1111/j.1741‐4113.2007.00423.x. Unlike his ancester, Sir Thomas More, who attempted to control audience response to his printed Utopia by encoding paradoxical and ambiguous elements into his text, John Donne attempted to control his audience and its response to his Paradoxes and Problems as well as his Biathanatos by restricting their manuscript circulation and by using “metacommentary” in the form of letters to his readers calling attention to the paradoxical qualities of these works. When the Paradoxes and Problems as well as Biathanatos were printed after Donne's death, however, his now unrestricted audience no longer had access to his personal letters of metacommentary, resulting in substantial confusion and ambiguity regarding Donne's intended messages.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract