![]() ![]() Authorial attribution should match the current scholarly consensus as best it can.John Drakakis’s Arden3 Merchant of Venice, for example, pushes its viewpoint incessantly. ![]() The editor should not have an ideological axe to grind or slant the apparatus to the exclusion of other points of view.Frank Kermode’s Arden2 edition of The Tempest is superb and was incredibly influential, but it is from 1955. More recent editions are preferable, to take into account newer scholarship.I’ve made these choices based on a number of factors: Cambirdge was for a time pitched at a student audience and so its editions tended to be less comprehensive than the others, but again, not consistently so. Oxford editions in particular sometimes fall prey to the evanescent trends of their time, which is a problem given that most date from the 80s and 90s. By and large, there are three or four options for those who want heavy-duty apparatus with their Shakespeare: I don’t claim to be an expert, just an informed amateur with an interest in the Renaissance background of the plays and the history of the English language. Almost all of the plays have enough references and ambiguities that it’s worth having a knowledgeable guide to consult with and to agree and disagree with. This page contains my recommendations for critical, annotated editions of Shakespeare’s plays, followed by a selection of my favorite criticism. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |