A cutting-edge and comprehensive reassessment of the theories, practices and archival evidence that shape editorial approaches to Shakespeare's texts.

In this beautifully illustrated book, one of the foremost Shakespeareans of our time explores the ways in which Shakespeare has been imagined from his time to ours. In a penetrating series of interpretations, Stephen Orgel explores the ironies and paradoxes that have characterized the reconstruction of Shakespeare's texts, his image, the staging and illustration of his plays over the past four centuries, as he is perennially reinvented for new cultural ends. Drawing on performance history, textual history, and the visual arts (including a fascinating chapter on portraiture), Imagining Shakespeare displays throughout the cultural versatility, elegance, lucidity, and wit which have become the hallmarks of Orgel's style.

Using case studies of Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet and Titus Andronicus, this book examines what constitutes a 'Shakespearean text'.

An account of Shakespeare's plays as they were transformed from scripts into books.

The year 2008 marks the four hundredth anniversary of the first publication of King Lear, and for four centuries the play has remained a consummate bibliographical mystery. Winner of the 2007 Jay L. Halio prize for best manuscript in Shakespeare studies, Shakespeare in Shorthand demonstrates that many textual anomalies derive from the play's transcription in Elizabethan shorthand. The shorthand system of John Willis, Stenographie (1602), shows a high correlation with the unusual textual features found in the first quarto of Lear (1608). The patterns of variants in the quarto conform to Willis' rules regarding the reduction of diphthongs and digraphs and the omission of aspirated, doubled, or unsounded letters. In the past two decades the textual interrelation of quarto and folio (1623) Lear has proven one of the most contested issues in Shakespearean studies, and an examination of Stenographie reveals that some of these textual differences result not from authorial revision, but from transmission in abbreviated writing. Bibliographical evidence also indicates that some textual omissions from the folio version are neither authorial nor theatrical, but derive from the printing house.