Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1999 :: November ::
Re: Cardenio (Revenger's Tragedy)
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.1933  Wednesday, 10 November 1999.

[1]     From:   Robin Hamilton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 9 Nov 1999 13:44:31 -0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.1911 Re: Cardenio (Revenger's Tragedy)

[2]     From:   Jonathan Hope <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wed, 10 Nov 1999 12:00:07 +0000 (GMT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.1911 Re: Cardenio


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Robin Hamilton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 9 Nov 1999 13:44:31 -0000
Subject: 10.1911 Re: Cardenio (Revenger's Tragedy)
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.1911 Re: Cardenio (Revenger's Tragedy)

Jack Heller writes:

>>Second, there is a major gap in Middleton's writing from
>>1608-1613.  The playwright prior to this gap wrote only bawdy comedies.
>
>This is inaccurate on two counts. The Revenger's Tragedy and A Yorkshire
>Tragedy are notable extant tragedies in Middleton's canon dating before
>1608.

Is there any evidence other than stylistic for Middleton's authorship of
+The Revenger's Tragedy+?  I've yet to see anything which challenges the
(once) traditional attribution of "anon" as the author of RT.

Robin Hamilton

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jonathan Hope <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wed, 10 Nov 1999 12:00:07 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: 10.1911 Re: Cardenio
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.1911 Re: Cardenio

Yes, Double Falshood is available in a Cornmarket facsimile of (I think)
the first printed edition - with a foreword by (again, I think) Kenneth
Muir.  Remaindered copies of this were floating around London last year
for a pound.

Some list members have expressed doubt that Theobald would have adapted
what he believed to be a Shakespearean MS - it might seem strange that
he did not publish the MS if he had one, but he was an able adaptor of
Shakespeare, as his version of Richard II shows.

In his recent retirement lecture on Shakespeare's canon, Richard
Proudfoot, who is editing *Double Falshood*, suggested that Theobald's
failure to publish his MS might have been due to his growing realisation
that what he originally claimed as a purely Shakespeare MS, was more
likely a Shakespeare-Fletcher collaboration, possibly in a form adapted
by Davenant (I may be mistaken in the dramatist here).

Like Professor Proudfoot, I feel that the evidence is in favour of
Double Falshood being an adaptation of a Shakespeare-Fletcher
collaboration - ie. Cardenio.  The detailed evidence for this is in my
book, The Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays (CUP 1994).

Jonathan Hope
Middlesex University
 

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.