Ambiguity as a rhetorical principle in Shakespeare - Much Adoabout Nothing (c. 1598) and Othello (c. 1604): case studies

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5902/2176148556900

Keywords:

Shakespeare, Ambiguity, Rhetoric, Spain

Abstract

The ambiguity ascribed to Shakespeare was a recent subject of academic scrutiny. This article investigates the history of modern political thought scholarship for that phenomenon. According to this proposition, polyphony would derive from the use of the rhetorical technique known as in utramque partem, an approach of two opposite sides of the same topic, in order to stage delicate political questions. Using a pair of plays written in the context of intense discussions about war and peace in London as case studies, I seek to explore how Shakespeare represented the Anglo-Spanish conflict through antagonistic perspectives.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Ricardo Cardoso, Universidade de São Paulo

Doutorando em História Social pela FFLCH-USP e pesquisador visitante no Shakespeare Institute (UK)

References

ALTMAN, Joel B. The Tudor Play of Mind. Rhetorical Inquiry and the Development of Elizabethan Drama. Berkeley; Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1978.

ALTMAN, Joel B. The improbability of Othello. Rhetorical anthropology and Shakespearean selfhood. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2010.

ARISTÓTELES. Obras Completas de Aristóteles. Retórica. António Pedro Mesquita (coordenação). Prefácio e introdução de Manuel Alexandre Júnior. Tradução e notas de Manuel Alexandre Júnior, Paulo Farmhouse Alberto e Abel do Nascimento Pena. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2012.

ARMITAGE, David (ed). British Political Thought in History, Literature and Theory. 1500-1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

______. Shakespeare’s properties. In.: ARMITAGE, David; CONDREN, Conal; FITZMAURICE, Fitzmaurice (ed’s). Shakespeare and Early Modern Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, p. 25-45.

______; CONDREN, Conal; FITZMAURICE, Fitzmaurice (ed’s). Shakespeare and Early Modern Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.

BANDELLO, Matteo. La Prima Parte de Le Novelle Del Bandello. Lucca: Il Busdrago, 1554.

CARDOSO, Ricardo. Guerra Anglo-Espanhola (1588-1604) na Obra Dramática de Shakespeare: o palco entre tempestade. In.: CLOSEL, Régis Augustus Bars; MARIN, Ronaldo (Orgs.). Shakespeare. 450 Anos. BMA Edições. São Paulo, Instituto Shakespeare Brasil – Cena IV Shakespeare Cia, 2014, p. 107-127.

CARDOSO. A Invencível Armada na Pena de Shakespeare: diplomacia e dramaturgia na transição do século XVI para o XVII. 216f. Dissertação (Mestrado em História Social). Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas, Universidade de São Paulo. São Paulo-SP, 2016. Disponível em: <http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/8/8138/tde-09122016-141257/pt-br.php>, Acesso em: 16 de junho de 2019.

CONDREN, Conal. Unfolding the ‘properties of government’: the case of Measure for Measure and the history of political thought. In.: ARMITAGE, David; CONDREN, Conal; FITZMAURICE, Fitzmaurice (ed’s). Shakespeare and Early Modern Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, p. 157-175.

CURTIS, Cathy. The active and contemplative lives in Shakespeare’s plays. In.: ARMITAGE, David; CONDREN, Conal; FITZMAURICE, Fitzmaurice (ed’s). Shakespeare and Early Modern Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, p. 44-63.

DONAHOE, Emily Pitts. In Utramque Partem: Arguing Both Sides of the Question in Othello. In.: English Literary Renaissance, Chicago, volume 48, n. 3, Autumn 2018, p. 314-338.

EVERETT, Barbara. Spanish Othello: the making of Shakespeare’s moor. In.: Shakespeare Survey, Cambridge, nº 35, p. 101-112, 1982.

FRASER, Antonia. A Conspiração da Pólvora. Terror e fé na Revolução Inglesa. Tradução de Alda Porto. Rio de Janeiro: Record, 2000.

GAJDA, Alexandra. Debating War and Peace in Late Elizabethan England. In.: The Historical Journal, Cambridge, Volume 52, Issue 04, p. 851–878, December 2009.

GARNET, Henry. Treatise of Equivocation. Edited by David Jardine. London: Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans, 1851.

GREENBLATT, Stephen. O Novo Historicismo: ressonância e encantamento. In.: Estudos Históricos, Rio de Janeiro/RJ, v. 4, n. 8, p. 244-261, 1991.

______. Como Shakespeare se tornou Shakespeare. Tradução de Donaldson M. Garshagen; Renata Guerra. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, [2004] 2012.

GRIFFIN, Eric J. English Renaissance Drama and the Specter of Spain. Ethnopoetics and Empire. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009.

HADFIELD, Andrew. Lying in Early Modern English Culture. From the Oath of Supremacy to the Oath of Allegiance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.

HAUSER, Arnold. Maneirismo. A crise da renascença e o surgimento da arte moderna. 2 Tomos. Tradução de J. Guinsburg e Magda França. São Paulo: Perspectiva, [1965] 2007.

HONAN, Park. Shakespeare. Uma vida. Tradução de Sonia Moreira. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2001.

HOWARD, Jean E. Dramatic Traditions and Shakespeare’s Political Thought. In.: ARMITAGE, David (ed). British Political Thought in History, Literature and Theory. 1500-1800. Edited by David Armitage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 128-144.

JAMES VI and I. His Maiesties Lepanto, or Heroicall Song Being Part of His Poeticall Exercises at Vacant Houres. London: Simon Stafford and Henry Hooke, 1603.

JONES, Emrys. ‘Othello’, ‘Lepanto’ and the Cyprus Wars. In.: Shakespeare Survey, Cambridge, nº 21, p. 47-52, 1969.

MAcCAFFREY, Wallace T. Elizabeth I. War and Politics, 1588-1603. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992.

MIRANDA, Marcella. Aspectos Práticos de uma teoria absoluta. A monarquia e as Cortes na Espanha de Felipe II, 1556-1598. Belo Horizonte: Fino Traço, 2016.

RICHMOND, Hugh. M. Much Ado About Notables. In.: Shakespeare Studies, n. XII, p. 49-63, 1979.

SCATOLIN, Adriano. A Invenção no Do Orador de Cícero. Um estudo sob a luz de Ad Familiares I, 9, 23. 308f. Tese (Doutorado em Letras Clássicas). Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas, Universidade de São Paulo. São Paulo-SP, 2009.

SCHWARTZ, Stuart B. Cada Um na Sua Lei. Tolerância religiosa e salvação no mundo atlântico ibérico. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2009.

SHAKESPEARE, William. The New Oxford Shakespeare. The complete works; critical reference edition. General editors Gary Taylor, John Jowett, Terri Bourus, Gabriel Egan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.

SHAKESPEARE, William. Much Ado About Nothing. Edited by Claire McEachern. London: Bloomsbury, 2014.

SHAKESPEARE, William. Othello. Revised Edition. Edited by E. A. J. Honigmann with a new introduction by Ayanna Thompson. London: Bloomsbury Arden Shakespeare, 2016.

SKINNER, Quentin. Shakespeare and the Humanist Culture. In.: Shakespeare and Early Modern Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, p. 271-281.

SKINNER, Quentin. Forensic Shakespeare. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.

TAYLOR, Gary. The Canon and the Chronology of Shakespeare’s plays. In: WELLS, S.; TAYLOR, G.; JOWETT, J.; MONTGMOMERY, W. William Shakespeare. A Textual Companion. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1997, p. 69-144.

SIMPSON, J. A.; WEINER, E. S. C. The Oxford English Dictionary. 20 volumes. Prepared by J. A. Simpson and E. S. C. Weiner. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989

BLANKS, David R.; FRASSETTO, Michael (Ed’s). Western Views of Islam in Medieval and Early Modern Europe. Perception of Other. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999.

WERNHAM, R.B. The Return of the Armadas. The last years of the Elizabethan war against Spain, 1595-1603. Oxford: Clarendon, 1994.

WIGGINS, Martin; RICHARDSON, Catherine. British Drama, 1533-1642. A catalogue. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007-atual.

Published

2021-03-11 — Updated on 2022-08-01

Versions

How to Cite

Cardoso, R. (2022). Ambiguity as a rhetorical principle in Shakespeare - Much Adoabout Nothing (c. 1598) and Othello (c. 1604): case studies. Letras, 93–108. https://doi.org/10.5902/2176148556900 (Original work published March 11, 2021)