ENGL 521 (3)
TOPICS IN HISTORICAL PERIODS AND MOVEMENTS: GENEROSITY AND EXCHANGE IN THE WORKS OF SHAKESPEARE AND MARLOWE
Instructor: Sean Lawrence
Email: sean.lawrence@ubc.ca
Critical Background
The importance of economics to Elizabethan and Jacobean drama is both recognized and interpreted widely, to embrace the pressures of sixteenth-century economic forces on the stage and the wider society to which it catered, as well as the fictive economies of love, land and power depicted within the plays, and finally the implicitly economic modes of thought which criticism in our own time has brought to bear on dramatic literature. This course will explore the theoretical background and applications of such critical approaches, as well as their limits. We will therefore pay particular attention to materialist and historicist criticisms, but also to their critics, including those inspired by philosophy and the so-called religious turn in Shakespeare criticism.
Marcel Mauss=s understanding of the gift furnishes a practically all‑encompassing theory of exchange, and has enjoyed a great deal of influence in Shakespeare criticism. The characters not only exchange money and flesh in The Merchant of Venice or land and love in King Lear, but also insist upon the ubiquity of exchange. In King Lear and Timon of Athens, the results are tragic, but exchange also undercuts comedies such as The Merchant of Venice, and the society which supports it must be relegated into a distant, Catholic setting. Characters and often critics anxiously reduce gifts to exchanges, whereas the plays offer implicit criticisms and present other possibilities. In Christopher Marlowe=s Edward II, for instance, political struggles betray their origins in affection, but also display a tendency to become self-sustaining and to reduce erotic partnerships, such as that of Mortimer and Isabella, to their expression. Titus Andronicus dramatises the origin of language itself in a generous effort to address the Other. Finally, Dr. Faustus and The Tempest provide contrasting depictions of two magicians, one of whom refuses forgiveness and suffers an eternal isolation identified with damnation, while the other ends his play, and possibly its playwright=s career, asking for forgiveness.
Course format
Seminar meetings will consist of two elements, both led by student seminar presentations: In the first half of the class, we will discuss the work of a critic or group of critics, either a monograph or a collection of essays. While some monographs concern Shakespeare=s or Marlowe=s work in general, in other classes the critical readings will represent a range of responses to a particular work or a range of approaches to a critical issue. In the latter case, discussion will flow naturally into the second half of the class, where we will discuss a play or long poem.
Ordinarily, a member of the class will initiate discussion with a report on a monograph or essay collection. Similarly, a student will initiate the second half of discussion by presenting a reading of a play or poem. The classroom environment should therefore prove largely student-centered.
Course Requirements
While there are no formal prerequisites for the course, it is assumed that students will have studied Shakespeare or his contemporaries at the advanced undergraduate level.
In addition, all students should attend classes having finished the readings, usually consisting of a fairly long play and two or more articles. As the class is heavily focused on student discussion, both attendance and participation are mandatory.
Assignments
Seminar presentations will be oral, but a written copy must be submitted in writing for grading. The major assignment, however, is a term paper, of eighteen to twenty-two pages in length, exploring an important critical issue involving at least two plays and, ideally, suitable for publication.
The grade breakdown is as follows:
Seminar presentation on criticism.................................................................................................. 15%
Seminar presentation on a play or poem........................................................................................ 15%
General participation..................................................................................................................... 10%
Final paper................................................................................................................................... 60%
Statement on Academic Integrity
The academic enterprise is founded on honesty, civility, and integrity. As members of this enterprise, all students are expected to know, understand, and follow the codes of conduct regarding academic integrity. At the most basic level, this means submitting only original work done by you and acknowledging all sources of information or ideas and attributing them to others as required. This also means you should not cheat, copy, or mislead others about what is your work. Violations of academic integrity (i.e., misconduct) lead to the break down of the academic enterprise, and therefore serious consequences arise and harsh sanctions are imposed. For example, incidences of plagiarism or cheating usually result in a failing grade or mark of zero on the assignment or in the course. Careful records are kept in order to monitor and prevent recidivism.
A more detailed description of academic integrity, including the policies and procedures, may be found at
http://okanagan.students.ubc.ca/calendar/index.cfm?tree=3,54,111,0
Course Organization and Readings
Week One
Introduction and assignment of seminar topics.
No seminar presentations, but all students should read the following before class:
Douglas, Mary. ANo Free Gifts.@ In The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. Ed. W. D. Halls. London: Routledge, 1990. vii-xviii.
Greenblatt, Stephen. Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of Social Energy in Renaissance England. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988. (First chapter only).
Jarvis, Simon. AThe Gift in Theory.@ Dionysius 17 (December 1999): 201-22.
Week Two
Play: The Jew of Malta
Smith, Shawn. AA Society of One: Reading The Jew of Malta Through Serres=s Theory of Exchange.@ Exemplaria: A Journal of Theory in Medieval and Renaissance Studies 15.2 (Fall 2003): 419-50.
Thurn, David H. AEconomic and Ideological Exchange in Marlowe=s Jew of Malta.@ Theatre Journal 46.2 (1994): 157-70.
Week Three
Play: The Merchant of Venice
Andrew, Edward. Shylock=s Rights: A Grammar of Lockian Claims. Toronto: University Toronto Press, 1988. (Selections)
Turner, Frederick. Shakespeare=s Twenty-First Century Economics: The Morality of Love and Money. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. (Selections)
Girard, René. A>To Entrap the Wisest=: A Reading of The Merchant of Venice.@ In Literature and Society: Selected Papers From the English Institute, 1978. Ed. Edward W. Said. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980. 100-19.
Week 4
Play: Dr. Faustus
McAlindon, Tom. ADoctor Faustus: The Predestination Theory.@ English Studies: A Journal of English Language and Literature 76.3 (1995): 215-20.
Hamlin, William M. ASkepticism and Solipsism in Doctor Faustus.@ Research Opportunities in Renaissance Drama 36 (1997): 1-22.
[Luther, Martin]. APrologue to Romans.@ In William Tyndale. Tyndale=s New Testament. Ed. David Daniell. New Haven, CT: Yale UP, 1989.
Week 5
Play: Timon of Athens
Secondary texts:
Jackson, Ken. A>One Wish= or the Possibility of the Impossible: Derrida, the Gift and God in Timon of Athens.@ Shakespeare Quarterly 52.1 (2000): 34-66.
Heal, Felicity. AHospitality and Honor in Early Modern England.@ Food and Foodways 1.4 (1987): 321-50.
Week 6
Play: King Lear
Cavell, Stanley. Disowning Knowledge in Six Plays of Shakespeare. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1988. (Selections)
Lawrence, Sean. AThe Difficulty of Dying in King Lear.@ English Studies in Canada. 31.4 (December 2005): 35-52.
Week 7
Play: Coriolanus
Lucking, David. "'The price of one fair word': Negotiating Names in Coriolanus." Early Modern Literary Studies 2.1 (1996): 4.1‑22. <URL: http://purl.oclc.org/emls/02‑1/luckshak.html>
Leithart, Peter J. ACity of In-Gratia: Roman Ingratitude in Shakespeare=s Coriolanus.@ Literature & Theology: An International Journal of Religion, Theory, and Culture 20.4 (2006): 341-60.
Shershow, Scott Cutler. AIdols of the Marketplace: Rethinking the Economic Determination of Renaissance Drama.@ Renaissance Drama 26 (1995): 1-27.
Week 8
Play: Titus Andronicus
Detmer-Goebel, Emily. AThe Need for Lavinia=s Voice: Titus Andronicus and the Telling of Rape.@ Shakespeare Studies 29 (2001): 75-93.
Asp, Carolyn. A>Upon Her Wit Doth Earthly Honor Wait=: Female Agency in Titus Andronicus.@ In ATitus Andronicus@: Critical Essays. Ed. Philip C. Kolin. New York: Garland, 1995. 333-44.
Harris, Bernice. ASexuality As a Signifier for Power Relations: Using Lavinia, of Shakespeare=s Titus Andronicus.@ Criticism: A Quarterly for Literature and the Arts 38.3 (Summer 1996): 383-406.
Week 9
Play: Edward II
Perry, Curtis. AThe Politics of Access and Representations of the Sodomite King in Early Modern England.@ Renaissance Quarterly 53.4 (2000 Winter): 1054-83.
Bray, Alan. AHomosexuality and the Signs of Male Friendship in Elizabethan England.@ History Workshop 29 (1990): 1-19.
Montaigne, Michel Eyquem de. AOn Friendship.@ In The Essayes or Morall, Politike and Millitarie Discourses. Trans. John Florio. London: 1603.
Week 10
Play: Othello
Cavell, Stanley. Disowning Knowledge in Six Plays of Shakespeare. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1988. (Selections)
Berger, Harry. AImpertinent Trifling: Desdemona=s Handkerchief.@ Shakespeare Quarterly 47.3 (1996 Autumn): 235-50.
Stockholder, Katherine S. AEgregiously an Ass: Chance and Accident in Othello.@ Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900 13.2 Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama (Spring 1973): 256-72.
Week 11
Play: The Tempest
Orgel, Stephen. AProspero=s Wife.@ Representations 8 (Fall 1984): 1-13.
Cox, John D. ARecovering Something Christian About The Tempest.@ Christianity and Literature 50.1 (Fall 2000): 31-51.
Ricoeur, Paul. AEpilogue: Difficult Forgiveness.@ Memory, History, Forgetting. Chicago: U Chicago P, 2004.
Week 12
Review and conclusion
Last reviewed 
6/5/2008 2:28:12 PM
