ENGL 622/Seminar in Early Modern Lit – Spring 2020

ENGL 622
3 credits
Term: Spring 2020
Time: 5:00-7:30 p.m. M
Room: Bliss Hall 114
Prerequisites: ENGL 505		 Prof. G. Steinberg
Office: Bliss Hall 216
Office Phone: 771-2106
E-mail: gsteinbe@tcnj.edu

TEXTBOOKS:

    • Plautus, The Menaechmus Twins and Two Other Plays (Norton, 1971), ISBN 9780393006025,
    • Ovid, Metamorphoses (Indiana University Press, 2018), ISBN 9780253033598,
    • Plutarch, The Makers of Rome (Penguin, 1965), ISBN 9780140441581,
    • Seneca, Four Tragedies and Octavia (Penguin, 1966), ISBN 9780140441741,
    • Christopher Marlowe, The Complete Plays (Penguin, 2003), ISBN 9780140436334, and
    • Arthur F. Kinney, ed., Renaissance Drama (Wiley, 2004), ISBN 9781405119672.

COURSE DESCRIPTION and PURPOSE. An examination of literature of the early modern period in its historical and cultural contexts. Topics may include gender politics, the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, poetics, and exploration and colonization (e.g., Ireland, the Bermudas).

The topic this semester is the reconstruction of the literary “horizon of expectations” for Shakespeare’s comedies and tragedies at the time of their first performance.  The course is not a course in Shakespeare per se but rather a course in the literary and dramatic texts that shaped the literary expectations, perceptions, and tastes of Shakespeare and his audience.  We reconstruct what an Elizabethan audience might have expected when it went to the theater to see a play – reconstructing Elizabethan expectations “from a pre-understanding of the genre, from the form and themes of already familiar works, and from the opposition between poetic and practical language” (Hans Robert Jauss, Toward an Aesthetic of Reception, p. 22).  Reconstructing this “horizon of expectations” allows us to read Shakespeare – any Shakespeare – better and more easily, because we understand the context from which it came, to which it refers, and through which it makes meaning.  We read both precursors and contemporaries of Shakespeare (from Ovid to John Webster), both the (in)famous and the virtually unknown (from Christopher Marlowe to John Lyly), and both the ridiculous and the sublime (from Ralph Roister Doister to Ben Jonson).  Students take what they learn about Elizabethan expectations in class and write about one or more Shakespeare plays.

I am assuming that you have seen, watched, or read five Shakespeare plays – Romeo and Juliet, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Hamlet, Merchant of Venice, and Julius Caesar.  If you have never read or seen these plays, I strongly recommend that you read, see, or watch them in the early stages of this class.

GOALS. In terms of my goals for this course, I want you to

    1. gain greater familiarity with a significant body of texts within – and on the margins of – a variety of literary traditions (i.e., the dramatic traditions of classical Rome, medieval England, and Elizabethan England);
    2. read, analyze, and synthesize literary texts and traditions from a critical, theoretical, and interdisciplinary perspective;
    3. engage in the practice of comparative literary analysis by writing about literary texts and traditions from within a comparative framework and drawing conclusions about the significance of literary and cultural intersections and divergences/differences;
    4. pursue a sustained investigation of the idea of literature itself by examining what literature is and how it is culturally, politically, philosophically and/or sociologically defined and influenced, and by exploring, from a cross-cultural and interdisciplinary perspective, how and why literary texts are categorized (in terms of traditions, periods, genres and movements);
    5. develop your sensitivity to the concrete historicity and cultural specificity of texts and to the development of literary traditions, cultural values, modes of thought, and uses of language over time and across national boundaries;
    6. develop as a young literary scholar in terms of your facility with critical practices in research and writing in the field of English (at an appropriate level for an M.A. student), and
    7. develop an enhanced instructional repertoire for secondary English teaching and/or an enhanced familiarity with foundational literary texts as preparation for further study in a Ph.D. program.

As a result, this course addresses the following outcomes for the School of Humanities and Social Sciences:

#1 Written Communication
#5 Critical Analysis and Reasoning: Ability to critique the arguments of others in the discipline and the construction of one’s own arguments in the discipline, using data/evidence are a focus of instruction and/or the ability to analyze linguistic and cultural patterns
#6 Information Literacy: Evaluating the validity and/or reliability of a source
#7 Interpret Language and Symbol

REQUIREMENTS. This course has the following graded assignments:

    1. participation in a writing group outside of class (worth 5% of your final grade),
    2. eight two-page response papers (altogether worth 20% of your final grade), and
    3. two conference-length papers of 8-10 pages each (not including notes and bibliography), each on a topic of the student’s choice, okayed by the instructor, with appropriate research (the first worth 35% and the second worth 40% of your final grade).  If you wish, for the experience, you may substitute a single seminar paper of 15-20 pages for these two conference papers.  Please talk to me about this option if you’d like to choose it.

Your final grade will be based on the following scale: A = 93%-100%, A- = 90%-92%, B+ = 87%-89%, B = 83%-86%, B- = 80%-82%, C+ = 77%-79%, C = 73%-76%, C- = 70%-72%, D+ = 67%-69%, D = 60%-66%, and F = below 60%.

Your two conference-length papers are an opportunity for you to show me what you’ve learned in class, applying what you’ve learned in a new context.  In your conference paper, you need to argue a clear, specific, original thesis, and you need to do so with professionalism appropriate to a young scholar in the discipline of English.  I expect you to enter into the critical conversation going on in scholarly articles and books on your topic, saying something worth saying while responding to what others have said before you.  Needless to say, professionalism in terms of standard punctuation, spelling, and grammar is also a must.  The topic of the paper is up to you, but I recommend that you choose one text that we’ve studied in class and one Shakespeare play, arguing a thesis about how the text from class provides a context for audience expectations with respect to the Shakespeare play.  I encourage you to discuss your paper topic with me as you begin writing the paper (over email or in person).

I will assign you to writing groups, which should form and begin meeting by the second or third week of class.  The groups will brainstorm ideas for your paper topics, and later, your group’s members will serve as peer reviewers of your paper drafts.  The groups should meet (in person or, if that’s not always possible, electronically) at least five times during the semester (although I encourage groups to meet even more often than that).  At least five times, each group should submit a brief report (via email to me) of what the group has been doing and who has attended its meetings.  If a group would like me to come to one (or more) of its meetings to assist and give feedback on your work, I will graciously accept any invitations proffered.

In the course of the term, you are required to write 8 short, informal response papers (about 2 pages each) on the critical readings – the scholarly articles – assigned for class.  You may choose on which days you want to submit a response paper, as long as by the end of the term you have submitted a total of 8.  You may not submit a response paper on a day for which there is no critical reading assigned.  I ask you to type your response papers (so that they are easier for me to read), but they need not be a perfect, polished product.  Rather, response papers should be just what their name says – a response.  You are to summarize the main point of the scholarly article assigned for the day in a single paragraph and then respond to that main point in a critical but reflective fashion.  Don’t worry about typos or comma splices or organization.  Be as specific and focused as you can, getting down as much as you can, as quickly as you can.  Treat response papers more like a journal entry than like a formal paper.  I want an exploration – as detailed and focused as possible – of the scholarly essay assigned for the day.  You may not submit more than one response paper on a single day, nor may you submit a response paper for a day that you are absent from class.  I recommend that you use your response papers as a safe place to try out potential ideas for your conference paper.  Response papers will be graded pass/fail.  You may submit more than 8 response papers in the course of the term (to make up for any response papers that do not receive a grade of “Pass”), but no matter how many extra response papers you submit, you will receive credit for no more than 8.  Normally, as long as you submit a response paper of suitable length, focus, detail, and thoughtfulness (and as long as you submit it in person in class on the assigned day), you will receive all the credit that the response paper is worth (i.e., 100% or A++).

OFFICE HOURS. My office is Bliss Hall 216, and my office hours this term are 2:00-3:30pm on Tuesdays and Fridays. If you cannot see me during these hours, feel free as needed to call my office (771-2106) or talk to me before or after class to arrange an appointment at another time. You may also contact me by email (gsteinbe@tcnj.edu), or you may leave a message for me in my box at the English department offices in Bliss 124. Email is generally the fastest way to contact me.

ATTENDANCE. Regular attendance is a virtual necessity for successful completion of this class. Class activities constitute important, useful preparation for your graded work. If you miss a class, you will essentially lose out on that day’s contribution to your preparation, since it is never really possible to reproduce or recapture the dynamics and flow of a missed class meeting (even if you get notes from someone). If, however, you positively must miss a class, I expect you to find out what you missed and to come fully prepared – without excuses – to the next class meeting. If you must miss an exam or other in-class graded work due to a religious holiday, let me know ahead of time, and we will arrange a way for you to make up the work. For information on the College’s attendance policy, please go to https://policies.tcnj.edu/?p=77.

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY. Academic dishonesty is any attempt by a student to gain academic advantage through dishonest means, to submit, as his or her own, work which has not been done by him/her or to give improper aid to another student in the completion of an assignment. Such dishonesty would include, but is not limited to, submitting as his/her own a project, paper, report, test, or speech copied from, partially copied, or paraphrased from the work of another (whether the source is printed, under copyright, or in manuscript form). Credit must be given for words quoted or paraphrased. The rules apply to any academic dishonesty, whether the work is graded or ungraded, group or individual, written or oral. TCNJ’s academic integrity policy is available on the web at https://policies.tcnj.edu/?p=130.

ACCOMMODATIONS. The College of New Jersey prohibits discrimination against any student on the basis of physical or mental disability or perceived disability. The College will also provide reasonable and appropriate accommodations to enable students with disabilities to participate in the life of the campus community. If you require special accommodations, I will make every reasonable effort to accommodate your needs and to create an environment where your special abilities are respected. For more information, please go to https://policies.tcnj.edu/?p=145 and https://arc.tcnj.edu/.

DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION. We are all enriched by greater diversity, and we all bring different perspectives to this classroom. I want to create a learning environment that supports diversity and honors your identities and perspectives (including your race, gender, class, sexuality, religion, mental and physical health, differing abilities, politics, etc.). If you go by a name and/or set of pronouns that differ from those that appear in your official records, please let me know. If you feel that your performance in class is being impacted by experiences related to your identity outside of class, please don’t hesitate to come and talk to me. If something is said in class (by anyone, including me) that makes you feel uncomfortable, targeted, misunderstood, or disparaged as a person, please talk to me about it. I will expect our whole class (including me) to strive always to honor every form of diversity in our classroom. To see TCNJ’s official diversity statement, please go to https://diversity.tcnj.edu/campus-diversity-statement/.

COURSE SCHEDULE. This schedule is subject to change at the discretion of the professor. Changes in the schedule made after the start of the semester will be in red.

Date Assignment
M Jan 27 Introductions
Critical Readings:  Hans Robert Jauss, Toward an Aesthetic of Reception, Chapter 1, pp. 18-45 (available in Canvas), AND Jean Howard, “Shakespeare, Geography, and the Work of Genre on the Early Modern Stage,” Modern Language Quarterly 64.3 (September 2003): 299-322 (available through Project Muse)
M Feb 3 The Murder of Abel, Noah, and The Second Shepherds’ Play (all three in Renaissance Drama)
Critical Reading:  Lisa J. Kiser, “‘Mak’s Heirs’: Sheep and Humans in the Pastoral Ecology of the Towneley First and Second Shepherds’ Plays,” JEGP 108 (2009): 336-359 (available through JSTOR)
M Feb 10 Plautus, The Menaechmus Twins (known everywhere else as The Menaechmi) and Pseudolus
Critical Reading:  Richard F. Hardin, “Encountering Plautus in the Renaissance:  A Humanist Debate on Comedy,” Renaissance Quarterly 60 (2007): 789-818 (available through Project Muse)
M Feb 17 Seneca, Phaedra (also known as Hippolytus) and Thyestes
Critical Reading:  Jessica Winston, “Seneca in Early Elizabethan England,” Renaissance Quarterly, 59 (2006): 29-58 (available through JSTOR)
M Feb 24 Ovid, Metamorphoses, Books I, VI, X, and XV
Critical Reading:  Heather James, “Ovid and the Question of Politics in Early Modern England,” ELH 70 (2003): 343-373 (available through Project Muse)
M Mar 2 Plutarch, “Coriolanus” and “Brutus”
Critical Reading:  Gordon Braden, “Plutarch, Shakespeare, and the Alpha Males,” in Shakespeare and the Classics, ed. Charles Martindale and A. B. Taylor (Cambridge:  Cambridge UP, 2004), pp. 188-205 (available in Canvas)
M Mar 9 Nicholas Udall, Ralph Roister Doister, Prologue; all of Acts I and II; Scenes 4-5 of Act III; Scenes 2-4, 6, and 8 of Act IV; and all of Act V (available here)
Critical Reading:  Elizabeth Hanson, “There’s Meat and Money Too: Rich Widows and Allegories of Wealth in Jacobean City Comedy,” ELH 72:1 (2005): 209-38 (available through JSTOR)
M Mar 16 NO CLASS (SPRING BREAK)
M Mar 23 Thomas Norton and Thomas Sackville, Gorboduc (available here)
Critical Reading:  Kirk Quinsland, “Antitheatricalism and the Interpretation of Tudor Allegorical Performance,” Studies in English Literature 1500-1900 55.2 (Spring 2015): 365-389 (available through Project Muse)
F Mar 27 first conference-length paper DUE in Canvas by midnight
M Mar 30 John Lyly, Endymion (available here), and Robert Greene, Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay (available here)
Critical Reading:  Leah Scragg “The Victim of Fashion?:  Rereading the Biography of John Lyly,” Medieval and Renaissance Drama in England 19 (2006), pp. 210-26 (available through EBSCOhost), OR Mark Dahlquist, “Love and Technological Iconoclasm in Robert Greene’s Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay,” ELH 78 (2011): 51-77 (available through JSTOR)
M Apr 6 Thomas Kyd, The Spanish Tragedy (in Renaissance Drama), and Christopher Marlowe, Tamburlaine the Great, Part I
Critical Reading:  William N. West, “‘But this will be a mere confusion’:  Real and Represented Confusions on the Elizabethan Stage,” Theatre Journal 60 (2008): 217–233, OR Jonathan Burton, “Anglo-Ottoman Relations and the Image of the Turk in Tamburlaine,” Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 30 (2000): 125-156 (both available through Project Muse)
M Apr 13 Arden of Faversham and Thomas Dekker, The Shoemaker’s Holiday (both in Renaissance Drama)
Critical Reading:  Ian McAdam, “Protestant Manliness in Arden of Faversham,” Texas Studies in Literature and Language 45 (2003): 42-72, OR Brian Walsh, “Performing Historicity in Dekker’s The Shoemaker’s Holiday,” SEL 46.2 (Spring 2006): 323-348 (both available through Project Muse)
M Apr 20 Mary Sidney, Countess of Pembroke, The Tragedy of Antony (in Renaissance Drama), and Christopher Marlowe, The Jew of Malta
Critical Reading:  Arata Ide, “The Jew of Malta and the Diabolic Power of Theatrics in the 1580s,” SEL 46.2 (Spring 2006): 257–279 (available through Project Muse)
M Apr 27 John Marston, The Malcontent (in Renaissance Drama), and Elizabeth Cary, The Tragedy of Mariam (in Canvas)
Critical Reading: William M. Hamlin, “Temporizing as Pyrrhonizing in Marston’s The Malcontent,” Comparative Drama 34.3 (Fall 2000): 305-320 (available through Project Muse), OR Kimberly Woosley Poitevin, “‘Counterfeit Colour’:  Making up Race in Elizabeth Cary’s The Tragedy of Mariam,” Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature 24 (2005): 13-34 (available through JSTOR)
M May 4 Francis Beaumont, The Knight of the Burning Pestle, and Ben Jonson, Bartholomew Fair (both in Renaissance Drama)
Critical Reading:  Joshua S. Smith, “Reading between the Acts:  Satire and the Interludes in The Knight of the Burning Pestle,” Studies in Philology 109 (2012): 474-495 (available through Project Muse), OR Alison A. Chapman, “Flaying Bartholomew:  Jonson’s Hagiographic Parody,” Modern Philology 101 (2004): 511-541 (available through JSTOR)
M May 11 John Webster, The Duchess of Malfi (in Renaissance Drama)
Critical Reading:  Albert H. Tricomi, “Historicizing the Imagery of the Demonic in The Duchess of Malfi,” Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 34.2 (Spring 2004): 345-372 (available through Project Muse)
F May 15 second conference-length paper DUE in Canvas by midnight