Printed Drama and Political Instability in Mid-Seventeenth-Century Britain: The Literary Politics of Resistance and Distraction in Plays and Entertainments, 1649–1658 describes the function of printed drama in 1650s Britain. After the regicide of 1649, printed plays could be interpreted by royalist readers as texts of resistance to the republic and protectoral governments respectively. However, there were often discrepancies between the aspirational content of these plays and the realities facing a royalist party who had been defeated in the Civil Wars. Similarly, plays with a classically republican Roman setting failed to offer a successful model for the new republic. Consequently, writers who supported the new republic and, eventually, Cromwell’s protectoral government, proposed entertainments, based around the concept of the sublime, whose purpose was to create political amnesia in the audience, thereby nullifying any political dissatisfaction with a non-monarchical form of government. This volume will appeal to students and scholars of seventeenth-century literature, and of the political history of 1640s and 1650s Britain.

"Printed Drama and Political Instability in Mid-Seventeenth Century Britain: The Literary Politics of Resistance and Distraction in Plays and Entertainments from 1649-1658 describes the function of printed drama in 1650s Britain. After the regicide of 1649, printed plays could be interpreted by Royalist readers as texts of resistance to the republic and protectoral governments respectively. However, there were often discrepancies between the aspirational content of these plays and the realities facing a Royalist party who had been defeated in the civil wars. Similarly, plays with a classically republican Roman setting failed to offer a successful model for the new republic. Consequently, writers who supported the new republic and, eventually, Cromwell's protectoral government, proposed entertainments, based around the concept of the sublime, whose purpose was affect: that is, creating political amnesia in the audience, thereby nullifying any political dissatisfaction with a non-monarchical form of government. This volume will appeal to students and scholars of seventeenth century literature, and of the political history of 1640s and 1650s Britain"--

Printed Drama and Political Instability in Mid-Seventeenth-Century Britain: The Literary Politics of Resistance and Distraction in Plays and Entertainments, 1649-1658 describes the function of printed drama in 1650s Britain. After the regicide of 1649, printed plays could be interpreted by royalist readers as texts of resistance to the republic and protectoral governments respectively. However, there were often discrepancies between the aspirational content of these plays and the realities facing a royalist party who had been defeated in the Civil Wars. Similarly, plays with a classically republican Roman setting failed to offer a successful model for the new republic. Consequently, writers who supported the new republic and, eventually, Cromwell's protectoral government, proposed entertainments, based around the concept of the sublime, whose purpose was to create political amnesia in the audience, thereby nullifying any political dissatisfaction with a non-monarchical form of government. This volume will appeal to students and scholars of seventeenth-century literature, and of the political history of 1640s and 1650s Britain.

Seeks to reassess the dramatic output of the Commonwealth, Protectorate and early Restoration; a period that has often been marginalised by specialists of both Renaissance and Restoration drama.

Paradise Lost and the Making of English Literary Criticism identifies the early reception of Paradise Lost as a site of contest over the place of literature in political and religious controversy. Milton’s earliest readers and critics (Dryden, Addison, Dennis, Hume, and Bentley) confronted a poem and author at odds with prevailing culture and the revanchist conservatism of the restored monarchy. Grappling with the epic required navigating Milton’s reputation as a “fanatick” who had called in print for Charles I’s execution, inveighed openly against monarchy on the eve of Charles II’s return, and held heretical views on the trinity, baptism, and divorce. Harper argues that foundational figures in English literary criticism rose to this challenge by innovating new ways of reading: producing creative (and subversive) rewritings of Paradise Lost, articulating new theories of the sublime, explaining the poem in the first substantial body of annotations for an English vernacular text, and by pioneering early forms of textual criticism and editing.

Human Insufficiency argues that early modern writers depict the human political subject as physically vulnerable in order to naturalize slavery. Representations of Man as a weak creature—“poor” and “bare” in King Lear’s words—strategically portrayed English bodies as needing care from people who were imagined to be less fragile. Drawing on Aristotle’s depictions of the natural master and the natural slave in the Politics, English writers distinguished the fully human political subject from the sub-human Slave who would care for his feeble body. This justification of a nascent slaving economy reinvents the violence of enslaving Afro-diasporic peoples as a natural system of care. Human Insufficiency’s most important contribution to early modern critical race studies is expanding the scope of the human as a racialized category by demonstrating how depictions of Man as a vulnerable species were part of a discourse racializing slavery.

Tropes and the Literary-Scientific Revolution: Forms of Proof argues that the rise of mechanical science in the seventeenth century had a profound impact on both language and literature. To the extent that new ideas about things were accompanied by new attitudes toward words, what we commonly regard as the “scientific revolution” inevitably bore literary dimensions as well. Literary tropes and forms underwent tremendous reassessment in the seventeenth century, and early modern science was shaped just as powerfully by contest over the place of literary figures, from personification and metaphor to anamorphosis and allegory. In their rejection of teleological explanations of natural motion, for instance, early modern philosophers often disputed the value of personification, a figural projection of interiority onto what was becoming increasingly a mechanical world. And allegory—a dominant mode of literature from the late Middle Ages until well into the Renaissance—became “the vice of those times,” as Thomas Rymer described it in 1674. This book shows that its acute devaluation was possible only in conjunction with a distinctively modern physics. Analyzing writings by Sidney, Shakespeare, Bacon, Jonson, Brahe, Kepler, Galileo, Hobbes, Descartes, and more, it asserts that the scientific revolution was a literary phenomenon, just as the literary revolution was also a scientific one.