Catalogue


The struggle for Shakespeare's text : twentieth-century editorial theory and practice /
Gabriel Egan.
imprint
Cambridge, UK ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 2010.
description
xii, 319 p. ; 24 cm.
ISBN
0521889170 (hardback), 9780521889179 (hardback)
format(s)
Book
Holdings
More Details
imprint
Cambridge, UK ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 2010.
isbn
0521889170 (hardback)
9780521889179 (hardback)
abstract
"We know Shakespeare's writings only from imperfectly-made early editions, from which editors struggle to remove errors. The New Bibliography of the early twentieth century, refined with technological enhancements in the 1950s and 1960s, taught generations of editors how to make sense of the early editions of Shakespeare and use them to make modern editions. This book is the first complete history of the ideas that gave this movement its intellectual authority, and of the challenges to that authority that emerged in the 1980s and 1990s. Working chronologically, Egan traces the struggle to wring from the early editions evidence of precisely what Shakespeare wrote. The story of another struggle, between competing interpretations of the evidence from early editions, is told in detail and the consequences for editorial practice are comprehensively surveyed, allowing readers to discover just what is at stake when scholars argue about how to edit Shakespeare"--
catalogue key
7399674
 
Includes bibliographical references (p. 272-308) and index.
A Look Inside
Reviews
Review Quotes
'An eminently readable guide to all the key concepts and tools in engaging with Shakespeare's text.' Around the Globe
To find out how to look for other reviews, please see our guides to finding book reviews in the Sciences or Social Sciences and Humanities.
Summaries
Description for Bookstore
We know Shakespeare's writings only from imperfectly-made early editions, from which editors struggle to remove errors. This book analyses the controversies provoked by this struggle across the twentieth century, showing the reader why Shakespeare's texts are not settled, and why modern editors cannot agree on how they should present them.
Main Description
We know Shakespeare's writings only from imperfectly-made early editions, from which editors struggle to remove errors. The New Bibliography of the early twentieth century, refined with technological enhancements in the 1950s and 1960s, taught generations of editors how to make sense of the early editions of Shakespeare and use them to make modern editions. This book is the first complete history of the ideas that gave this movement its intellectual authority, and of the challenges to that authority that emerged in the 1980s and 1990s. Working chronologically, Egan traces the struggle to wring from the early editions evidence of precisely what Shakespeare wrote. The story of another struggle, between competing interpretations of the evidence from early editions, is told in detail and the consequences for editorial practice are comprehensively surveyed, allowing readers to discover just what is at stake when scholars argue about how to edit Shakespeare.
Table of Contents
Prefacep. vii
Acknowledgementsp. viii
A note on references, quotations, names and pronounsp. xi
Introductionp. 1
The fall of pessimism and the rise of New Bibliography, 1902-1942p. 12
New techniques and the Virginian School: New Bibliography 1939-1968p. 38
New Bibliography 1969-1979p. 81
Intermezzo: the rise and fall of the theory of memorial reconstructionp. 100
New Bibliography critiqued and revised, 1980-1990p. 129
The 'new' New Bibliography: the Oxford Complete Works, 1978-1989p. 167
Materialism, unediting and version-editing, 1990-1999p. 190
Conclusion: the twenty-first centuryp. 207
How early modern books were made: a brief guidep. 231
Table of Shakespeare editions up to 1623p. 237
Editorial principles of the major twentieth-century Shakespeare editionsp. 240
Works citedp. 272
Indexp. 309
Table of Contents provided by Ingram. All Rights Reserved.

This information is provided by a service that aggregates data from review sources and other sources that are often consulted by libraries, and readers. The University does not edit this information and merely includes it as a convenience for users. It does not warrant that reviews are accurate. As with any review users should approach reviews critically and where deemed necessary should consult multiple review sources. Any concerns or questions about particular reviews should be directed to the reviewer and/or publisher.

  link to old catalogue

Report a problem