The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 22.0093 Wednesday, 25 May 2011
From: Pete McCluskey <
Date: May 25, 2011 7:49:44 AM EDT
Subject: Re: SHK 22.0085 Arden3 Sir Thomas More
John Briggs strongly registers his complaint that Jowett's edition of STM "is supporting 165 *lines* at most (at most!) which might be by Shakespeare." The works in the following bibliography reveal that Mr. Brigg's reservations are rather old news, and that the critical consensus supports Jowett:
Essential studies of dating and authorship include the critical edition prepared by Vittorio Gabrieli and Giorgio Melchiori (1990); Scott McMillin, The Elizabethan Theatre and The Booke of Sir Thomas More (1987); T. H. Howard-Hill, ed., Shakespeare and Sir Thomas More: Essays on the Play and Its Shakespearean Interest (1989); and A. W. Pollard, ed., Shakespeare's Hand in the Play of Sir Thomas More (1923). The foremost investigation of aesthetic matters is McMillin's monograph; other important studies include his article "The Book of Sir Thomas More: A Theatrical View," Modern Philology 68 (1970): 10-24; Judith Doolin Spikes, "The Book of Sir Thomas More: Structure and Meaning," Moreana 11 (1974): 25-39; Charles R. Forker and Joseph Candido, "Wit, Wisdom, and Theatricality in The Book of Sir Thomas More," Shakespeare Studies 13 (1980): 85-104; and G. Harold Metz, "The Master of the Revels and The Booke of Sir Thomas Moore," Shakespeare Quarterly 33 (1982): 493-95.
I accept McMillin's well-supported argument for the identification of Shakespeare's revisions to the play and offer further support for it in my essay:
“Sir Edmund Tilney, Sir Thomas More, and the Dutch,” in Shakespeare and the Low Countries, Douglas A. Brooks and A.J. Hoenselaars, Editors, Shakespeare Yearbook 15 (2005): 49-64.
Middle Tennessee State University
SHAKSPER: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook,
The SHAKSPER Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the editor assumes no responsibility for them.