Although not much is known about the three Stuart plays in this edition, which was first published in 1987, we can ascribe them to one of the English universities, and each is indicative of a distinctly different influence on the Renaissance academic drama. Heteroclitanomalonomia is part of a minor subgenre referred to as the academic play. It demonstrates the predominance of language or rhetoric studies in the period and its very subject is of purely academic interest. Gigantomachia displays the continuing interest of the Renaissance in classical mythology. And A Christmas Messe follows a more homely tradition, a farcical personification of the mundane. This title will be of interest to students of English Literature, Drama and Performance.

Although not much is known about the three Stuart plays in this edition, which was first published in 1987, we can ascribe them to one of the English universities, and each is indicative of a distinctly different influence on the Renaissance academic drama. Heteroclitanomalonomia is part of a minor subgenre referred to as the academic play. It demonstrates the predominance of language or rhetoric studies in the period and its very subject is of purely academic interest. Gigantomachia displays the continuing interest of the Renaissance in classical mythology. And A Christmas Messe follows a more homely tradition, a farcical personification of the mundane. This title will be of interest to students of English Literature, Drama and Performance.

Literary and cultural changes reflecting new commercial and imperial interests of Restoration Britain.

The author describes the skill and physical stamina of the shadow puppeteers in Kerala state in South India as they perform the Tamil version of the Ramayana epic all night for as many as ten weeks during the festival season. The fact that these performances often take place without an audience forms the starting point for Blackburn's discussion which also explores the broader theoretical issues of text, interpretation, and audience.

Publisher description

“[An] excellent sequel to Stuart’s Cape . . . Precocious readers looking for clever and unusual situations will not be disappointed. Hilarious.” —Kirkus Reviews (starred review) Our favorite worrier is back, and Stuart is about to start third grade. As he makes his way to the first day of school, wearing the worst outfit ever, what could a first-rate worrier do but worry? Stuart worries about getting stuck in the boys’ bathroom, about not having anything to show for show-and-tell, but most of all, about not making any friends. With his cape, though, Stuart is bound to have a day full of wacky adventures. “This humorous fantasy perfectly captures the child’s-eye view of elementary-school life . . . Young readers are sure to identify with Stuart’s persistent quest to find his place in the classroom society.” —School Library Journal “[A] wryly funny mix of the real and the magical, enhanced by Matje’s quirky line art.” —Publishers Weekly

Twenty-two leading experts on early modern drama collaborate in this volume to explore three closely interconnected research questions. To what extent did playwrights represent dramatis personae in their entertainments as forming, or failing to form, communal groupings? How far were theatrical productions likely to weld, or separate, different communal groupings within their target audiences? And how might such bondings or oppositions among spectators have tallied with the community-making or -breaking on stage? Chapters in Part One respond to one or more of these questions by reassessing general period trends in censorship, theatre attendance, forms of patronage, playwrights’ professional and linguistic networks, their use of music, and their handling of ethical controversies. In Part Two, responses arise from detailed re-examinations of particular plays by Shakespeare, Chapman, Jonson, Beaumont and Fletcher, Cary, Webster, Middleton, Massinger, Ford, and Shirley. Both Parts cover a full range of early-Stuart theatre settings, from the public and popular to the more private circumstances of hall playhouses, court masques, women’s drama, country-house theatricals, and school plays. And one overall finding is that, although playwrights frequently staged or alluded to communal conflict, they seldom exacerbated such divisiveness within their audience. Rather, they tended toward more tactful modes of address (sometimes even acknowledging their own ideological uncertainties) so that, at least for the duration of a play, their audiences could be a community within which internal rifts were openly brought into dialogue.