Difference between revisions of "Derek Dunne"

Line 4: Line 4:
 
"Rogues’ Licence: The Counterfeiting of Authority in Early Modern Literature" (Philip A. Knachel Fellowship, [[Folger Institute 2016-2017 long-term fellows|2016-2017]])
 
"Rogues’ Licence: The Counterfeiting of Authority in Early Modern Literature" (Philip A. Knachel Fellowship, [[Folger Institute 2016-2017 long-term fellows|2016-2017]])
  
The book identifies three broad themes that distinguish interpretations of local cultures and Shakespeare in modern Japan, Korea, China, Taiwan, and Singapore from their counterparts in other parts of the world: they are leading to a more equitable globalization in artistic terms, they serve as a forum where artists and audiences can grapple with contemporary issues, and through international tour activities they are reshaping debates about the relationships between the East and the West. Asian interpretations of Shakespeare matter to Western readers because of their impact on American and European performance cultures, as exemplified by the worldwide recognition of the works of Ong Keng Sen, Akira Kurosawa, and their peers. The history of East Asian Shakespeares as a body of works—as opposed to random stories about cross-cultural encounter—allows us to better understand the processes of localizing artistic ideas through transnational collaboration.
+
This project re-assesses the impact that licencing has had on the composition of early modern literature. Without a licence from a noble patron, players were subject to the Act for the Punishment of Rogues, Vagabonds and Sturdy Beggars. Yet this document is also open to forgery and counterfeiting, as detailed in the so-called cony-catching pamphlets; for example the ‘freshwater mariner’ is famed for ‘run[ning] about the country with a counterfeit licence, feigning either shipwreck or spoil by pirates’ (Greene, The Groundwork of Cony-Catching). Therefore the document designed to control an itinerant population actually becomes the means of criminality, due to the potential duplicity of hand-written documents. Despite the turn towards cultural materialism in early modern studies, the material traces of licencing have yet to be studied in depth. This becomes even more surprising due to the metaphorical richness of ‘licence’ which early modern authors frequently made use of, as when Sir Toby Belch calls on Sir Andrew Aguecheek to ‘taunt him with the licence of ink’ (Twelfth Night, 3.2.42). Therefore this study examines how authors worked through the layers of anxiety and ambivalence created by a document with which they would have been intimately familiar. Forged documents of authority are a staple in the plots of early modern drama, from Hamlet to Bartholomew Fair, drawing attention to the period’s dual understanding of the ‘counterfeit’. In excavating the realities of counterfeit licences alongside their literary manifestations, I reveal the power of the licence for counterfeiters of all stripes, Shakespeare included.
 +
 
 
===Short-term fellowship===
 
===Short-term fellowship===
 
“Vindictive Justice‚ Participatory Revenge” ([[Folger Institute 2014–2015 short-term fellows|2014–2015]])
 
“Vindictive Justice‚ Participatory Revenge” ([[Folger Institute 2014–2015 short-term fellows|2014–2015]])

Revision as of 10:20, 29 April 2016

This page reflects a scholar's association with the Folger Institute.

Long-term fellowship

"Rogues’ Licence: The Counterfeiting of Authority in Early Modern Literature" (Philip A. Knachel Fellowship, 2016-2017)

This project re-assesses the impact that licencing has had on the composition of early modern literature. Without a licence from a noble patron, players were subject to the Act for the Punishment of Rogues, Vagabonds and Sturdy Beggars. Yet this document is also open to forgery and counterfeiting, as detailed in the so-called cony-catching pamphlets; for example the ‘freshwater mariner’ is famed for ‘run[ning] about the country with a counterfeit licence, feigning either shipwreck or spoil by pirates’ (Greene, The Groundwork of Cony-Catching). Therefore the document designed to control an itinerant population actually becomes the means of criminality, due to the potential duplicity of hand-written documents. Despite the turn towards cultural materialism in early modern studies, the material traces of licencing have yet to be studied in depth. This becomes even more surprising due to the metaphorical richness of ‘licence’ which early modern authors frequently made use of, as when Sir Toby Belch calls on Sir Andrew Aguecheek to ‘taunt him with the licence of ink’ (Twelfth Night, 3.2.42). Therefore this study examines how authors worked through the layers of anxiety and ambivalence created by a document with which they would have been intimately familiar. Forged documents of authority are a staple in the plots of early modern drama, from Hamlet to Bartholomew Fair, drawing attention to the period’s dual understanding of the ‘counterfeit’. In excavating the realities of counterfeit licences alongside their literary manifestations, I reveal the power of the licence for counterfeiters of all stripes, Shakespeare included.

Short-term fellowship

“Vindictive Justice‚ Participatory Revenge” (2014–2015)