This volume originates as a continuation of the previous volume in the CEMP series (1.1) and aims at furthering scholarly interest in the nature and function of theatrical paradox in early modern plays, considering how classical paradoxical culture was received in Renaissance England. The book is articulated into three sections: the first, “Paradoxical Culture and Drama”, is devoted to an investigation of classical definitions of paradox and the dramatic uses of paradox in ancient Greek drama; the second, “Paradoxes in/of Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama” looks at the functions and uses of paradox in the play-texts of Shakespeare and his contemporaries; finally, the essays in “Paradoxes in Drama and the Digital” examine how the Digital Humanities can enrich our knowledge of paradoxes in classical and early modern drama.

This volume aims at providing a comprehensive view of the performative as well as heuristic potentialities of the theatrical paradox in early modern plays. We are interested in discussing the functions and uses of paradoxes in early modern English drama by investigating how classical paradoxes were received and mediated in the Renaissance and by considering authors’ and playing companies’ purposes in choosing to explore the questions broached by such paradoxes. The book is articulated into three sections: the first, “Paradoxes of the Real”, is devoted to a theoretical investigation of the dramatic uses of paradoxes; the second, “Staging Mock Encomia” looks at the multiple dramatic functions of mock encomia and at the specific situations in which paradoxical praises were inserted in early modern plays; finally, the essays in “Paradoxical Dialogues” examine the connections between a number of early modern mock encomia and ancient or contemporary models.

Exploring Shakespeare's intellectual interest in placing both characters and audiences in a state of uncertainty, mystery, and doubt, this book interrogates the use of paradox in Shakespeare's plays and in performance. By adopting this discourse-one in which opposites can co-exist and perspectives can be altered, and one that asks accepted opinions, beliefs, and truths to be reconsidered-Shakespeare used paradox to question love, gender, knowledge, and truth from multiple perspectives. Committed to situating literature within the larger culture, Peter Platt begins by examining the Renaissance culture of paradox in both the classical and Christian traditions. He then looks at selected plays in terms of paradox, including the geographical site of Venice in Othello and The Merchant of Venice, and equity law in The Comedy of Errors, Merchant, and Measure for Measure. Platt also considers the paradoxes of theater and live performance that were central to Shakespearean drama, such as the duality of the player, the boy-actor and gender, and the play/audience relationship in the Henriad, Hamlet, As You Like It, Twelfth Night, Antony and Cleopatra, The Winter's Tale, and The Tempest. In showing that Shakespeare's plays create and are created by a culture of paradox, Platt offers an exciting and innovative investigation of Shakespeare's cognitive and affective power over his audience.

Since publication in 1979 Isabel Rivers' sourcebook has established itself as the essential guide to English Renaissance poetry. It: provides an account of the main classical and Christian ideas, outlining their meaning, their origins and their transmission to the Renaissance; illustrates the ways in which Renaissance poetry drew on classical and Christian ideas; contains extracts from key classical and Christian texts and relates these to the extracts of the English poems which draw on them; includes suggestions for further reading, and an invaluable bibliographical appendix.

A major study of ideas of truth and falsehood in early modern England from the advent of the Reformation to the aftermath of the failed Gunpowder Plot.

The poem offers a complicated mixture of self-assertion and deference, of shrewdness and wisdom, of self-respect and selfless love. Essays placing the "Memorandum" in its historical, literary, and theoretical contexts follow the text of the poem itself.