1982
DOI: 10.2307/450341
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

"Stir" and Work in Shakespeare's Last Plays

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Discussions of Shakespeare’s theater as a space of labor almost invariably turn to The Tempest as a key text, although readings of the play as a representation of London – and the London theaters more specifically – are often at odds with readings that emphasize the enforced labor of Caliban and Ariel in a global context. Although traditional analyses of the play in terms of labor tend to posit Caliban’s enslavement in moralistic terms or read the play in general as a Christian allegory for labor as ‘spiritual cultivation’ (Rockett 84; Bond; Hunt, ‘ “Stir” and Work’), scholars have more recently queried the play’s embeddedness within London’s bourgeoning theatrical market. Andrew Gurr, for instance, posits Prospero as a ‘London citizen‐employer’ rather than a colonialist (202), whereas Douglas Bruster aims to revise post‐colonialist readings of the play by focusing on the parallels between its dramatic elements (the ship in the opening scene; Miranda as an auditor and spectator) and the material practices of Shakespeare’s theater (‘Local Tempest ’).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Discussions of Shakespeare’s theater as a space of labor almost invariably turn to The Tempest as a key text, although readings of the play as a representation of London – and the London theaters more specifically – are often at odds with readings that emphasize the enforced labor of Caliban and Ariel in a global context. Although traditional analyses of the play in terms of labor tend to posit Caliban’s enslavement in moralistic terms or read the play in general as a Christian allegory for labor as ‘spiritual cultivation’ (Rockett 84; Bond; Hunt, ‘ “Stir” and Work’), scholars have more recently queried the play’s embeddedness within London’s bourgeoning theatrical market. Andrew Gurr, for instance, posits Prospero as a ‘London citizen‐employer’ rather than a colonialist (202), whereas Douglas Bruster aims to revise post‐colonialist readings of the play by focusing on the parallels between its dramatic elements (the ship in the opening scene; Miranda as an auditor and spectator) and the material practices of Shakespeare’s theater (‘Local Tempest ’).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%