This is the first sustained study of how Shakespeare has been mobilized during conflicts spanning the eighteenth to the twenty-first century. It draws on interdisciplinary research to develop an innovative critical methodology that reveals the creativity and diversity of wartime theatre production and its variable impacts.

The first material history of how Shakespeare has been 'recruited' in wartime.

Shakespeare’s works occupy a prismatic and complex position in world culture: they straddle both the high and the low, the national and the foreign, literature and theatre. The Second World War presents a fascinating case study of this phenomenon: most, if not all, of its combatants have laid claim to Shakespeare and have called upon his work to convey their society’s self-image. In wartime, such claims frequently brought to the fore a crisis of cultural identity and of competing ownership of this ‘universal’ author. Despite this, the role of Shakespeare during the Second World War has not yet been examined or documented in any depth. Shakespeare and the Second World War provides the first sustained international, collaborative incursion into this terrain. The essays demonstrate how the wide variety of ways in which Shakespeare has been recycled, reviewed, and reinterpreted from 1939–1945 are both illuminated by and continue to illuminate the War today.

A lively collection of essays from scholars from across Europe, North America and Australia. The book ranges from Shakespeare's use of manuals on war written for the sixteenth-century English public by an English mercenary, to reflections on the ways in which Shakespeare has been represented in Nazi Germany, wartime Denmark, or cold war Romania.

British Theatre and the Great War examines how theatre in its various forms adapted itself to the new conditions of 1914-1918. Contributors discuss the roles played by the theatre industry. They draw on a range of source materials to show the different kinds of theatrical provision and performance cultures in operation not only in London but across parts of Britain and also in Australia and at the Front. As well as recovering lost works and highlighting new areas for investigation (regional theatre, prison camp theatre, troop entertainment, the threat from film, suburban theatre) the book offers revisionist analysis of how the conflict and its challenges were represented on stage at the time and the controversies it provoked. The volume offers new models for exploring the topic in an accessible, jargon-free way, and it shows how theatrical entertainment of the time can be seen as the `missing link’ in the study of First World War writing.

When Nicholas Shakespeare stumbled across a box of documents belonging to his late aunt, Priscilla, he was completely unaware of where this discovery would take him and what he would learn about her hidden past. The glamorous, mysterious figure he remembered from his childhood was very different from the morally ambiguous young woman who emerged from the trove of love letters, photographs, and journals, surrounded by suitors and living the dangerous existence of a British woman in a country controlled by the enemy. He had heard rumors that Priscilla had fought in the Resistance, but the truth turned out to be far more complicated. As he investigated his aunt's life, dark secrets emerged, and Nicholas discovered the answers to the questions over which he'd been puzzling: What caused the breakdown of Priscilla's marriage to a French aristocrat? Why had she been interned in a prisoner-of-war camp, and how had she escaped? And who was the "Otto" with whom she was having a relationship as Paris was liberated? Piecing together fragments of one woman's remarkable and tragic life, Priscilla is at once a stunning story of detection, a loving portrait of a flawed woman trying to survive in terrible times, and a spellbinding slice of history.

Seminar paper from the year 2012 in the subject Didactics for the subject English - Literature, Works, grade: 1,00, Staatliche Berufliche Oberschule Fachoberschule / Berufsoberschule Kaufbeuren, language: English, abstract: “King Henry V” has always been considered as Shakespeare’s most patriotic play, one could even argue his most nationalistic play. “King Henry V” appears to be the story of the ideal English king who is brave, charismatic, honourable and pious or as Shakespeare puts it, he is “the mirror of all Christian kings” who fights for what is righteously his and leads his “band of brothers” to victory against impossible odds. However, to truly understand Shakespeare’s motivations, we have to take a look at the tumultuous time in which the play was written. Under the reign of Elizabeth I., England had either been at war or at the constant threat of one for decades. It was a time of frequent conspiracies to overthrow the queen and bloody rebellions. In this context the play can be seen as an attempt to raise the morale and to rally the English around a common cause. This interpretation becomes plausible given the fact that the play’s popularity increased whenever England was threatened, for example in both world wars and the Napoleonic wars. Nevertheless “King Henry V” is not just simple wartime propaganda, it’s an ambiguous play which can be interpreted both as a glorification of war or alternatively as a subtle critique of the cruelty and futility of war. It lies entirely in the eye of the beholder. Someone with a patriotic point of view might identify himself with the virtuous Henry or admire that - although weakened by plague and famine - the English soldiers and their king defeats a superior French army, whereas a more critical reader might question the legitimacy of waging a war of aggression in the first place. Furthermore particularly modern readers feel disgusted by the killing of the unarmed prisoners at the battle of Agincourt. Nowadays it would be considered a war crime and even back then it was considered inhumane. On the one hand Shakespeare seems to show the ideal monarch and an English nation united in victory, on the other hand he shows the ugly face of war with all his atrocities and inhumanity. In the following essay I will show both, the patriotic and a more critical perspective and the reason why Shakespeare implemented both of them in his play.

Shakespeare gave star billing on his stage to the Elizabethan war milieu. Somogyi (education, Shakespeare' Globe) draws upon a broad range of military literature of the era (newsletters, war treatises, manuals, and maps) to demonstrate just how deeply the menace of war and reality of military service permeated the theater of As You Like It and Henry V. With a particular spotlight on Hamlet, the author assesses the war-related themes of: casualties, military art, theaters of battle, rumors, ghosts, and questions raised. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

This original study explores a vital aspect of early modern cultural history: the way that warfare is represented in the theatre of Shakespeare and his contemporaries. The book contrasts the Tudor and Stuart prose that called for the establishment of a standing army in the name of nation, discipline and subjectivity, and the drama of the period that invited critique of this imperative. Barker examines contemporary dramatic texts both for their radical position on war and, in the case of the later drama, for their subversive commentary on an emerging idealisation of Shakespeare and his work. The book argues that the early modern period saw the establishment of political, social and theological attitudes to war that were to become accepted as natural in succeeding centuries. Barker's reading of the drama of the period reveals the discontinuities in this project as a way of commenting on the use of the past within modern warfare. The book is also a survey and analysis of literary theory over the last twenty-five years in relation to the issue of early modern war - and develops an argument about the study of literature and war in general.Features* Interdisciplinary approach addressing the early-modern period as one of particular importance in the history of warfare* Examines the way that the period helped shape modern attitudes to war* Sets Shakespeare in the context of those dramatists who preceded him, as well as his contemporaries and successors* Surveys the work of the past and considers the future of criticism in relation to warfare

“An excellent, vividly written” (The Washington Post) account of leadership in wartime that explores how four great democratic statesmen—Abraham Lincoln, Georges Clemenceau, Winston Churchill, and David Ben-Gurion—worked with the military leaders who served them during warfare. The relationship between military leaders and political leaders has always been a complicated one, especially in times of war. When the chips are down, who should run the show—the politicians or the generals? In Supreme Command, Eliot A. Cohen expertly argues that great statesmen do not turn their wars over to their generals, and then stay out of their way. Great statesmen make better generals of their generals. They question and drive their military men, and at key times they overrule their advice. The generals may think they know how to win, but the statesmen are the ones who see the big picture. Abraham Lincoln, Georges Clemenceau, Winston Churchill, and David Ben-Gurion led four very different kinds of democracy, under the most difficult circumstances imaginable. They came from four very different backgrounds—backwoods lawyer, dueling French doctor, rogue aristocrat, and impoverished Jewish socialist. Yet they faced similar challenges. Each exhibited mastery of detail and fascination with technology. All four were great learners, who studied war as if it were their own profession, and in many ways mastered it as well as did their generals. All found themselves locked in conflict with military men. All four triumphed. The powerful lessons of this “brilliant” (National Review) book will touch and inspire anyone who faces intense adversity and is the perfect gift for history buffs of all backgrounds.