Imitação ou colaboração? Marlowe e o cânone shakespeareano inicial

Auteurs-es

  • Gary Taylor Florida State University
  • John V. Nance Florida State University

DOI :

https://doi.org/10.5902/2176148564672

Mots-clés :

Christopher Marlowe, Imitação, Autoria, Henrique VI Parte I

Résumé

Este artigo emprega estudos de atribuição de autoria para propor que é possível
distinguir um dramaturgo trabalhando conjuntamente com outro (em colaboração) de um que emprega recursos linguísticos reconhecíveis de outro poeta (imitação). Partindo do pressuposto de que a identidade é celular e sistêmica enquanto a imitação é seletiva e semiótica, verifica-se três trechos de Henrique VI Parte I, na qual William Shakespeare e Christopher Marlowe trabalharam colaborativamente.

Téléchargements

Les données relatives au téléchargement ne sont pas encore disponibles.

Biographie de l'auteur-e

Gary Taylor, Florida State University

GARY TAYLOR, Department Chair, Dahl and Lottie Pryor Professor in Shakespearean Literature, Ph.D., Cambridge, is General Editor of the New Oxford Shakespeare, including Complete Works: Modern Critical Edition (2016), Complete Works: Critical Reference Edition (2017), and Authorship Companion (2017). He was also general editor of the Collected Works of "our other Shakespeare," Thomas Middleton (Oxford, 2008), which won the Modern Language Association's biennial prize for a Distinguished Scholarly edition and the Emily Dietz award for outstanding publication in early modern studies; he also co-edited The Oxford Handbook of Thomas Middleton (2012), the largest collection of new critical essays on Middleton ever published. The "Middleton Trilogy" is now available in paperback. He general-edited two series published by Palgrave, "Signs of Race" and "History of Text Technologies". He founded the interdisciplinary History of Text Technologies program at FSU, and has written about the practice and theory of editing in various periods and genres; in 2006 he gave the McKenzie lectures at Oxford University on Edward Blount, the chief publisher of the 1623 Shakespeare folio. Taylor's Moment by Moment by Shakespeare (MacMillan, 1985) was the winner of a Choice Award for "Outstanding Academic Book." His other books include a history of Shakespeare's reputation (Reinventing Shakespeare, 1989: "the most ambitious book on Shakespeare ever written", according to a review in Shakespeare Quarterly), a theory of artistic reputations generally (Cultural Selection, 1996: "brilliant insights and beautifully reasoned prose… an original and striking analysis of culture", according to the New York Times Book Review), and "an abbreviated history of Western manhood" (Castration, 2000: "terrific reading," according to Salon.com). He co-edited the first collection of essays on Shakespeare and Fletcher's partially-lost play The History of Cardenio (Oxford, 2012), and the same year his "creative reconstruction" of Cardenio was performed in Indianapolis, where it was also the subject of an international scholarly colloquium, a PBS documentary, and another collection of scholarly essays (Palgrave, 2013). His play has most recently been performed by the Richmond Shakespeare Society (2017). Taylor has also worked to communicate contemporary literary theory and criticism to a mass audience (newspapers, radio, TV, museums and theatres in North America and UK, including three Platforms at the Royal National Theatre, London). He was widely interviewed in 2016 in connection with the New Oxford Shakespeare's identification of Christopher Marlowe as Shakespeare's collaborator on the three Henry VI plays.

Références

ABUTALEBI, Jubin and GREEN, David. ‘Bilingual language produc-tion: the neurocognition of language representation and control’, Journal of Neurolinguistics, vol. 20, 242–75, May 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2006.10.003

AUBREY, John. Brief Lives. Ed. John Buchanan-Brown. New York: Penguin, 2000.

BATE, Jonathan (Ed.); SHAKESPEARE, William. Titus Andronicus. New Arden Shakespeare Third Series. London: Bloomsbury, 1995.

BATE, Jonathan and RASMUSSEN, Eric (Eds.), The RSC Shakespeare: The Complete Works. London: Macmillan,2007.

BOURDIEU, Pierre. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, trans. Richard Nice. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1984.

BOURDIEU, Pierre. The field of Cultural Production.New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.

BRADBROOK, M. C. ‘Shakespeare’s recollections of Marlowe’, in Shakespeare’s Styles, In EDWARDS, Philip et al. Shakespeare’s Styles: essays in Honour of Kenneth Muir. Cambridge: CUP, 1980.

BROOKE, Nicholas. ‘Marlowe as Provocative Agent in Shakespeare’s Early Plays’, Shakespeare Survey, vol.14, p. 34-44, 1961. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521064279.004

BURROWS, J. F. and CRAIG, D. H. ‘Lyrical Drama and the Turgid Mountebanks: Styles of Dialog in Romantic and Renaissance Tragedy’, Computers and the Humanities, vol. 28, p. 63-86, 1994. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01830688

BURROWS, John ‘Who Wrote Shamela? Verifying the Authorship of a Pa-rodic Text’, Literary and Linguistic Computing, vol. 20, p. 437-50, 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqi049

BURROWS, John. ‘A Second Opinion on “Shakespeare and Authorship Studies in the Twenty-First Century”’. Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 63 , p. 355–92, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/shq.2012.0038

CHARNEY, Maurice. ‘The Voice of Marlowe’s Tamburlaine in Early Shakespeare’, Comparative Drama, vol. 31, 1997. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/cdr.1997.0047

CHERNAIK, Warren ‘Shakespeare as Co-Author: The Case of 1 Henry VI’, Medieval and Renaissance Drama in england, vol. 27, p. 192–220, 2014.

CLARE, Janet. Shakespeare’s Stage Traffic: Imitation, Borrowing and Competition in Renaissance Theatre. Cambridge, CUP, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139626934

CLEMEN, W. C. english Tragedy Before Shakespeare: The Develo-pment of Dramatic Speech, trans. T. S. Dorsch. London, 1961.

COLDIRON, A. E. B. ‘Cultural Amphibians’. Yearbook of Comparative and General Literature, vol. 51, p. 45-58, 2003–4.

COLDIRON, A. E. B. Printers without Borders: Translation and Textuality in the Renaissance. Cambridge: CUP, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139681056

CRAIG, Hugh and KINNEY, Arthur F., Shakespeare, Computers, and the Mystery of Authorship.Cambridge: CUP, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511605437

CRAIG, Hugh, ‘Authorial Attribution and Computation Stylistics: If You Can Tell Authors Apart, Have You Learned Anything about Them?’, Literary and Linguistic Computing, 14 p. 103-13, 1999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/14.1.103

CRAIG, Hugh. ‘Authorship’. In KINNEY, Arthur F. (Ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Shakespeare. Oxford: OUP, p. 23-3, 2012.

DICKSON, Vernon Guy. emulation on the Shakespearean Stage. Farnham: Ashgate, 2013.

EGAN, Gabriel. ‘Shakespeare: Editions and Textual Studies’, The Year’s Work in english Studies, 91, p. 328–410, 2012). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ywes/mas019

ES, Bart van. Shakespeare in Company. Oxford: OUP, 2013.FROW, John. Character and Person. Oxford: OUP, 2014.

GREENE, Thomas The Light in Troy: Imitation and Discovery in Renaissance Poetry. New Haven: Yale UP, 1982.

HATTAWAY, Michael (Ed.), The first Part of King Henry VI. New Cambridge Shakespeare. Cambridge: CUP, 1990.

HOPE, Jonathan. ‘Middletonian Stylistics’, in TAYLOR, Gary and HENLEY, Trish Thomas. The Oxford Handbook of Thomas Midd-leton. Oxford: OUP, 2012, p. 443-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199559886.013.0016

HOPE, Jonathan. Shakespeare and Language: Reason, Eloquence and Artifice in the Renaissance.London: Bloomsbury, 2010.

HOPE, Jonathan. The Authorship of Shakespeare’s Plays.Cam-bridge: CUP, 1994. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511518942

JACKSON, MacDonald P. Determining the Shakespeare Canon. Oxford: OUP, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198704416.001.0001

JACKSON, MacDonald. ‘Shakespeare’s Brothers and Peele’s Brethren: Titus Andronicus Again’. Notes and Queries, vol. 242, p. 494-5, 1997. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/notesj/44.4.494

JACKSON, MacDonald. ‘Stage Directions and Speech Headings in Act 1 of Titus Andronicus Q (1594): Shakespeare or Peele?’, Studies in Bibliography, vol. 49, 134-48, 1996.

KENNY, Anthony. The Computation of Style. Oxford: OUP, 1982. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-024281-1.50014-0

KIRSCHBAUM, Leo. ‘Some Light on The Jew of Malta’, Modern Language Quarterly, vol. 7, p. 53–6, 1946. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/00267929-7-1-53

LABOV, William. Principles of Linguistic Change, 2 vols. Oxford, 1994–2001.

LABOV, William. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia, 1972.

LABOV, William. The Social Stratification of english in NewYork City. Washington, DC, 1966.

LAKE, David. ‘Three Seventeenth-Century Revisions: Thomas of Woodstock, The Jew of Malta, and Faustus B’. Notes and Queries, vol. 228, p. 133–43, 1983. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/nq/30.2.133

LOGAN, Robert A. Shakespeare’s Marlowe: The Influence of Chris-topher Marlowe on Shakespeare’s Artistry. Aldershot, 2007.

MARLOWE, Christopher The Jew of Malta. Ed. N. W. Bawcutt, Revels Plays. Manchester, 1978.

MARLOWE, Christopher. Dido, Queen of Carthage and The Mas-sacre at Paris, ed. H. J. Oliver, Revels Plays. London, 1968.

MERRIAM, Thomas. ‘Faustian Joan’, Notes and Queries, vol. 245, p. 218-20, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/nq/49.2.218

MILLER, Daniel J. et al. ‘Prolonged Myelination in Human Neocortical Evolution’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 109, p. 16480-5, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1117943109

NANCE, John V. ‘Shakespeare, Theobald, and the Prose Problem in Double Falsehood’. In TAYLOR, Gary et BOURUS, Terri. Creation and Re-Creation, New York: Palgrave, 2012, p. 109-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137344229_9

PEELE, George. Chronicle of King edward the first.London, 1593.

PEELE, George. The Battle of Alcazar, ed. W. W. Greg, Malone Society. London, 1907.

PEELE, George. The Device of the Pageant. London, 1585.

RAMACHANDRAN, V. S. et al., Phantoms in the Brain: Probing the Mysteries of the Human Mind. New York, 1998.

SAUSSURE Ferdinand de. Course in General Linguistics, trans. Roy Harris. La Salle: Open Court, 1983.

SHAPIRO, James. Rival Playwrights: Marlowe, Jonson, Shakes-peare.New York: Columbia University Press, 1991.

SHAW, Christopher and MCEACHERN, Jill (Eds.). Toward a Theory of Neuroplasticity. London: Psychology Press, 2001.

SISSON, Charles. ‘Keep the Widow Waking: A Lost Play by Thomas Dekker’, Library, vol. 4, 1927. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/library/s4-VIII.2.233

STERN, Tiffany. Documents of Performance in early Modern england.Cambridge: CUP, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511635625

TARLINSKAJA, Marina. Shakespeare and the Versification of english Drama, 1561–1642. Farnham: Ashgate, 2014.

TARLINSKAYA, Marina. Shakespeare and the Versification of english Drama, 1561-1642. London: Ashgate, 2014.

TARLINSKAYA, Marina. Shakespeare’s Verse: Iambic Pentameter and the Poet’s Idiosyncrasies.New York, 1987.

TAYLOR, Gary ‘A History of The History of Cardenio’. In TAYLOR, Gary et BOURUS, Terri. Creation and Re-Creation, New York: Palgrave, 2012, p. 11–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199641819.003.0002

TAYLOR, Gary. ‘Shakespeare and Others: The Authorship of Henry the Sixth, Part One’, Medieval and Renaissance Drama in england, vol. 7, p. 145–205, 1995).

TAYLOR, Gary. ‘Sleight of Mind: Cognitive Illusions and Shakespearian Desire’. In TAYLOR, Gary et BOURUS, Terri (Eds.) The Creation and Re-creation of Cardenio: Performing Shakespeare, Transforming Cervantes. New York: Palgrave, 2013, p. 125-68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137344229_10

TAYLOR, Gary. ‘Why Did Shakespeare Collaborate?’. Shakespeare Survey, vol. 67, p. 1-17, 2014.

TAYLOR, Gary. “Empirical Middleton: Macbeth, Adaptation, and Mi-croauthorship”. Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 65, n.3, p. 239-272, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/shq.2014.0030

TAYLOR, Gary. “Why Did Shakespeare Collaborate?”. Shakespeare Survey, vol. 67, p. 1-17, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/SSO9781107775572.001

TURNER, Robert Y. Shakespeare’s Apprenticeship (Chicago, 1974); Clemen, ‘Some aspects of style in the Henry VI plays,’. In EDWARDS, Philip et al. Shakespeare’s Styles: essays in Honour of Kenneth Muir. . Cambridge: CUP, 1980.

VICKERS, Brian. ‘Incomplete Shakespeare; or, Denying Co-Authorship in 1 Henry VI ’. Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 58, p. 311–52, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/shq.2007.0053

VICKERS, Brian. ‘Shakespeare and Authorship Studies in the Twenty--first Century’. Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 62, p. 106-40, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/shq.2011.0004

VICKERS, Brian. Shakespeare Co-Author. Oxford: OUP, 2002.

VINCENT, When ‘harey’ Met Shakespeare: The Genesis of ‘The first Part of Henry the Sixth’. Saarbru ̈cken, 2008.

WEBER, William W. ‘Shakespeare After all? The Authorship of Titus An-dronicus 4.1 Reconsidered’. Shakespeare Survey, vol. 67 p. 69– 84, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/SSO9781107775572.006

WIGGINS, Martin. British Drama, 1558-1642. Oxford: OUP, 10 vols., 2007-.

WILSON, Dover (Ed.), The first Part of King Henry VI. Cambridge Shakespeare. Cambridge: CUP, 1952.

WILSON, John Dover ed., Titus Andronicus. Cambridge Shakespeare. Cambridge: CUP, 1948.

WOOLLETT, Katherine and MAGUIRE, Eleanor A. ‘Acquiring “the Knowledge” of London’s Layout Drives Structural Brain Changes’, Current Biology, vol. 21, 2109-14, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2011.11.018

Téléchargements

Publié-e

2021-03-11 — Mis(e) à jour 2022-08-01

Versions

Comment citer

Taylor, G., & Nance, J. V. (2022). Imitação ou colaboração? Marlowe e o cânone shakespeareano inicial. Letras, 109–140. https://doi.org/10.5902/2176148564672 (Original work published 11 mars 2021)

Numéro

Edição Especial - 2/2020: Teatro Elisabetano e Jacobino: estudos textuais, teatrais e críticos

Rubrique

Artigos

Licence

(c) Tous droits réservés Letras 2021

Licence Creative Commons

Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Partage dans les Mêmes Conditions 4.0 International.

Ficam concedidos a Letras todos os direitos autorais referentes aos trabalhos publicados. Os originais não devem ter sido publicados ou submetidos simultaneamente a outro periódico e não serão devolvidos. Em virtude de aparecerem nesta revista de acesso público, os artigos são de uso gratuito, com atribuições próprias, em aplicações educacionais e não comerciais.