Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1997 :: May ::
Re: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the Subject
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 8.0513.  Thursday, 1 May 1997.

[1]     From:   Peter C. Herman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 30 Apr 1997 07:52:10 -0700 (PDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 8.0510  Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Subject

[2]     From:   A.E.B. Coldiron <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 30 Apr 1997 11:05:05 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 8.0510 Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Subject

[3]     From:   Taiwon Kim <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 30 Apr 1997 15:25:42 EST
        Subj:   RE: SHK 8.0510  Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Subject

[4]     From:   Chris Stroffolino <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 30 Apr 1997 23:57:49 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 8.0510 Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Subject


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Peter C. Herman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 30 Apr 1997 07:52:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: 8.0510  Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Comment:        Re: SHK 8.0510  Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Subject

>Has anyone any suggestions for relevant books or material on the
>importance of the soliloquy to the construction of the subject in
>Renaissance drama? Thanks.

James Hirsch has a terrific article on Hamlet's "To Be or Not To Be"
speech in a recent issue of Modern Language Quarterly (I think). He's
the man to contact and/or read.

Peter C. Herman

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           A.E.B. Coldiron <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 30 Apr 1997 11:05:05 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 8.0510 Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Comment:        Re: SHK 8.0510 Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Subject

Katharine Maus, _Inwardness and Theatre_, is a good place to start, and
follow her bibliography.  Regards, A.

[3]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Taiwon Kim <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 30 Apr 1997 15:25:42 EST
Subject: 8.0510  Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Comment:        RE: SHK 8.0510  Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Subject

Hi,

I think you may want to look at Raymond Williams' essay, "On Dramatic
dialogue and monologue" in <Writing in Society> (Verson, 1984). The same
issue was dealt with in his book <Culture> (Fontana, 1984), pp.139-147.
Katherine Belsey is also taking up the issue in her book <The Subject of
Tragedy> (methuen, ?) which I don't have now, so that I cannot provide
the page numbers.

Taiwon Kim
University of Florida

[4]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Chris Stroffolino <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 30 Apr 1997 23:57:49 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 8.0510 Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Comment:        Re: SHK 8.0510 Q: The Soliloquy and the Construction of the
Subject

Dear Diane Hughes-Off the top of the cuff, I can not think of any
particular
references about soliloquies (but I'm sure some will come), but I am
very interested in this issue, and also the issue of how soliloquies
came to be privileged (in post Coleridgean/Bradleyan) as not only more
"authentic" but also more "poetic" than other discursive forms in
Shakespeare (witty stichomythias, for instance), and what the
implications of this "misreading" have been (for instance, the idea some
still cling to that soliloquies are somehow beyond rhetoric, and are NOT
performative).  I think the relationship of soliloquies to lyric poetry
(the kind that adheres to the convention of a singular lyric "speaker")
might be worth exploring in this connection, and am currently working on
comparing (and contrasting) Shakespeare's Sonnet 8 to RICHARD II's
POMFRET SOLILOQUY to explore their formal dialogic (and
self-referential/meta-poetic) aspects. In the process, I am reading JOEL
FINEMAN'S excellent "Shakespeare's Perjured Eye" (should be underlined,
not in quotes), which argues that in the sonnets Shakespeare was largely
responsible for constructing modern subjectivity.  Although I disagree
with the historical ramifications of his argument, that prefers to see
Shakespeare representing a clean break from earlier subjectivities (and
much prefer the argument of someone like Rosalie Colie in Shakespeare's
Living Art, who argues more for the historical continuity), and although
Fineman's emphasis is primarily on the SONNETS and not SOLILOQUIES
within the plays (he died, alas, before moving to that aspect of his
project), much of what he says about the kind of subjectivity he detects
in the sonnets can apply VERY well to the soliloquies as well,
especially if one tends to see the soliloquies as "lyric" poems, which
I'd argue is a valuable endeavor, even if at a certain point, they must
be seen within the context of the "surrounding" play, whose meaning they
are determined by, but also may determine (more than quite a few
critics/readers allow themselves to admit). I hope this has at least
SOME relevance to your inquiry. Thanks, Chris Stroffolino
 

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.