Book contents
- Frontmatter
- The Power of Magic: From Endimion to The Tempest
- Reading The Tempest
- The Latter End of Prospero’s Commonwealth
- Henry VIII and the Deconstruction of History
- The Politics of Conscience in All is True (or Henry VIII)
- Shakespeare’s Romantic Innocents and the Misappropriation of the Romance Past: The Case of The Two Noble Kinsmen
- The Hand of John Fletcher in Double Falsehood
- ‘The Duke my Father’s Wrack’: The Innocence of the Restoration Tempest
- ‘Remember/First to Possess his Books’: The Appropriation of The Tempest 1700-1800
- The Tempest and After
- Poetry’s Sea-Changes: T. S. Eliot and The Tempest
- The New Function of Language in Shakespeare’s Pericles: Oath versus ‘Holy Word’
- The Discovery of The Rose Theatre: Some Implications
- The Origins of the Roxana and Messallina Illustrations
- Recycling the Early Histories: ‘The Wars of the Roses’ and ‘The Plantagenets’
- Shakespeare Production in England in 1989
- Professional Shakespeare Productions in the British Isles, January-December 1988
- The Year's Contributions to Shakespeare Studies: 1 Critical Studies
- 2 Shakespeare’s Life, Times, and Stage
- 3 Editions and Textual Studies
- Books Received
- Index
Shakespeare’s Romantic Innocents and the Misappropriation of the Romance Past: The Case of The Two Noble Kinsmen
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2007
- Frontmatter
- The Power of Magic: From Endimion to The Tempest
- Reading The Tempest
- The Latter End of Prospero’s Commonwealth
- Henry VIII and the Deconstruction of History
- The Politics of Conscience in All is True (or Henry VIII)
- Shakespeare’s Romantic Innocents and the Misappropriation of the Romance Past: The Case of The Two Noble Kinsmen
- The Hand of John Fletcher in Double Falsehood
- ‘The Duke my Father’s Wrack’: The Innocence of the Restoration Tempest
- ‘Remember/First to Possess his Books’: The Appropriation of The Tempest 1700-1800
- The Tempest and After
- Poetry’s Sea-Changes: T. S. Eliot and The Tempest
- The New Function of Language in Shakespeare’s Pericles: Oath versus ‘Holy Word’
- The Discovery of The Rose Theatre: Some Implications
- The Origins of the Roxana and Messallina Illustrations
- Recycling the Early Histories: ‘The Wars of the Roses’ and ‘The Plantagenets’
- Shakespeare Production in England in 1989
- Professional Shakespeare Productions in the British Isles, January-December 1988
- The Year's Contributions to Shakespeare Studies: 1 Critical Studies
- 2 Shakespeare’s Life, Times, and Stage
- 3 Editions and Textual Studies
- Books Received
- Index
Summary
In what is probably the most influential discussion to date of the relation between The Knight’s Tale and The Two Noble Kinsmen, Philip Edwards leans heavily on ‘a Chaucerian view of the frailty of our determinations’ in making his case for a fundamental continuity of vision. Shakespeare and Fletcher, apparently, are far from misappropriating the romance, even if they skew its rueful irony regarding human subjection to chance, coincidence, and above all Venus, to match the intensely personal bitterness of a Shakespeare ‘looking dim-eyed at innocence and seeing salvation disappear with puberty’ (p. 104). It is as if the world-weary bard, having just recently bid farewell to the imperfect magic of his art in The Tempest, returns for a curtain call in the role of Theseus, presiding sagely over the fading of another insubstantial pageant:
O you heavenly charmers,
What things you make of us! For what we lack
We laugh, for what we have are sorry; still
Are children in some kind. Let us be thankful
For that which is, and with you leave dispute
That are above our question. Let’s go off
And bear us like the time.
(5.4.131–7)Indeed, Theseus' magisterial resignation might appear to take us beyond the threat of 'despair' that troubles Prospero's 'ending' (The Tempest Epi.15) to something like the pallid stoicism of King Lear's concluding lines (either Edgar's or Albany's, depending on the text preferred): The weight of this sad time we must obey, / Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say' (Learf 5.3.299-300).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Shakespeare Survey , pp. 69 - 80Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1991