Mirror for Magistrates in Context Literature, History and Politics in Early Modern England
Produktdetaljer
Om bidragsyterne
Harriet Archer is a Leverhulme Early Career Fellow at Newcastle University, working on a book-length project called New Poets: Writing and Authority in 1570s England, and an edition, with Paul Frazer, of Norton and Sackville's Gorboduc for the Manchester Revels Plays Series. She completed her D.Phil. on A Mirror for Magistrates and textual transmission at Christ Church, Oxford in 2013. Her research interests include sixteenth-century historiography, modes of authorship, and the early modern reception of ancient and medieval culture. Andrew Hadfield is Professor of English at the University of Sussex. He is the author of several studies of early modern literature and culture including Shakespeare and Republicanism (2005) and Edmund Spenser: A Life (2012), both of which were awarded prizes. He is currently writing a study of lying in early modern England, funded by the Leverhulme Trust, and is co-editing the Works of Thomas Nashe, funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. He is vice-chair of the Society for Renaissance Studies and is a regular reviewer for the Times Literary Supplement and the Irish Times.'This volume has the comprehensive quality of a handbook, with wide-ranging and thorough contributions on the Mirror's bibliographic history; its sources, influences, and analogues; on genre, rhetoric, the writing of history, Elizabethan politics and literature. But it's also imaginative, full of new critical approaches, multivocal and pleasingly readable in its concise chapters. Like the Mirror itself - whose authors are represented in conversation as they write - this collection has the feeling of scholars talking productively to one another: interacting with and sometimes disagreeing with one another's views, they are alive to the mercurial qualities of the text, its 'vanishing acts' and temporal twists and turns.' Mary Ann Lund, University of Leicester
'… this collection deserves significant praise. The editors, writing about a team of writers who each play their part in producing the works of Mirror, have themselves assembled a team of expert contributors who illuminate Mirror's significance for and impact on late-Tudor historiography and literature. Fittingly, the contributors often respond to one another's critical position; these debates and disagreements are always cordial and productive. Unlike Lewis's experience with Mirror, a reader can only lay down this collection feeling invigorated by its erudition and insight.' Rory Loughnane, Literature & History