Page 945 - Shakespeare - Vol. 3
P. 945

James I  and  the  Politics  of  Culture,  Baltimore,  MD,  1983;  J.  Westlund,  in
          Shakespeare’s  Reparative  Comedies:  A  Psychoanalytic  View  of  the  Middle
          Plays,  Chicago  1984;  M.  Novy,  in Love’s  Argument:  Gender  Relations  in
          Shakespeare, Chapel Hill, NC, 1984; L.C. Tennenhouse, in Power in Display:

          The  Politics  of  Shakespeare’s  Genres,  Manchester  1884;  J.  Dollimore,  in
          Political  Shakespeare:  New  Essays  in  Cultural  Materialism,  a  cura  di  J.
          Dollimore  e  A.  Sinfield,  ivi  1985;  K.  McLuskie,  ivi;  C.Th.  Neely,  in Broken
          Nuptials  in  Shakespeare’s  Plays,  New  Haven,  CT,  1985;  Ph.C.  McGuire,  in

          Speechless  Dialect:  Shakespeare’s  Open  Silences,  Berkeley,  CA,  1985;  J.
          Rose,  in Alternative Shakespeare  (a  cura  di  J.  Drakakis),  London  1985;  K.
          Newman,  in Shakespeare’s  Rhetoric  of  Comic  Characters,  ivi  1985;  St.
          Mullaney, in The Place of the Stage: Play and Power in Renaissance England,

          Chicago  1988;  J.D.  Cox, Shakespeare  and  the  Dramaturgy  of  Power,
          Princeton, NJ, 1989.
          Saggi (oltre a quelli nei succitati volumi): M.C. Bradbrook, Authority, Truth,
          and Justice in «Measure for Measure», in «RES», XVII, 1941; L.C. Knights, The

          Ambiguity of «Measure for Measure», in «Scrutiny», X, 1942; F.R. Leavis, The
          Greatness  of  «Measure  for  Measure»,  in  «Scrutiny», X,  1942;  D.  Traversy,
          Measure for Measure,  in  «Scrutiny», XI,  1942;  R.W.  Battenhouse, «Measure
          for  Measure»  and  Christian  Doctrine  of  Atonement,  in  «PMLA», LXI,  1946;

          W.M.T.  Dodds,  The  Character  of  Angelo  in  «Measure  for  Measure»,  in
          «Modern  Language  Review», XLI,  1946;  E.M.  Pope, The  Renaissance
          Background  of  «Measure  for  Measure»,  in  «Shakespeare  Survey», II,  1949;
          D.P. Harding,  Elizabethan Betrothals and «Measure for Measure», in «JEGP»,

          XLIX,  1950;  C.  Leech, The  ‘Meaning’  of  «Measure  for  Measure»,  in
          «Shakespeare  Survey», III,  1950;  W.  Sypher,  Shakespeare  as  Casuist:
          «Measure  for  Measure»,  in  «Sewanee  Review», LXVI,  1950;  R.M.  Smith,
          Interpretations  of  «Measure  for  Measure»,  in  «Shakespeare  Quarterly», I,

          1950;  H.S.  Wilson, Action and Symbol in «Measure for Measure» and «The
          Tempest»,  in  «Shakespeare  Quarterly», IV,  1953;  N.  Coghill, Comic Form in
          «Measure for Measure», in «Shakespeare Survey», VIII, 1955; N. Nathan, The
          Marriage  of  Duke  Vincentio  and  Isabella,  in  «Shakespeare  Quarterly», VII,

          1956;  W.W.  Lawrence,  «Measure for Measure» and Lucio,  in  «Shakespeare
          Quarterly», IX,  1958;  D.L.  Stevenson, The  Role  of  James I  in  «Measure  for
          Measure»,  in  «ELH», XXVI,  1959;  E.  Schanzer, The  Marriage-Contracts  in
          «Measure  for  Measure»,  in  «Shakespeare  Survey», XIII,  1960;  J.  Wasson,

          «Measure  for  Measure»:  A  Play  of  Incontinence,  in  «ELH» , XXVII,  1960;  R.
          Southall, «Measure  for  Measure»  and  the  Protestant  Ethic,  in  «Essays  in
   940   941   942   943   944   945   946   947   948   949   950