M W 3:00-4:15
Robinson B 122
Office Hours: MW 9:30-10:15, and by appointment
Office: Buchanan Hall (formerly Mason Hall) D201E
Office Ph. #: 993-8720
home page: http://mason.gmu.edu/~rmatz
I have heard of your paintings, too, well enough. God hath given you one face, and you make yourselves another. –Hamlet
For Renaissance moralists, applying make-up (“painting”) was a sin against God’s natural order; for many of these same moralists so were plays, since in playing a part one altered one’s very being. No wonder anti-cosmetic rants so often appear in Renaissance drama, as in this quotation from Hamlet. In this course, we will consider how the remarkably brilliant and self-conscious Renaissance theater was energized by and played out anxieties about changes in a supposedly “natural” order, not only in the content of the plays (frequently satiric, dark and/or spectacularly violent) but also in their very form as “made-up” works of human art. Further, we’ll consider the theater itself as a place apart from regular order, a place of fun, holiday, riot or license, of “play” rather than rule.
In our approach to these plays, we’ll become familiar with some of the historicist, feminist and poststructuralist impulses that have shaped the reinterpretation of the Renaissance stage and Renaissance culture over the past forty years. We’ll also learn about textual criticism and what goes into the creation of a modern edition of a Renaissance literary text, by making one as a class for a never-before-edited Renaissance play.
Course assignments: Class participation, blog posts, quizzes, a trip to the Folger (or equivalent activity), one three-page paper, one five-page paper, editions project, a final
Note: Schedule subject to change (I will give warning, however).
|Date||Assignments and Events
|M Aug. 28||Course Introduction|
|W Aug. 30||from Steven Mullaney, The Place of the Stage, 26-31, 45-59 (in Blackboard)|
|M Set. 4||Labor Day – No Class|
|W Sept. 6||Jonson, Volpone, act 1
|M Sept. 11||Jonson, Volpone, acts 2 and 3|
|W Sept. 13||Jonson, Volpone, acts 4 and 5|
|M Sept. 18||Dekker, Shoemaker’s Holiday, scenes 1 and 2
|W Sept. 20||Dekker, Shoemaker’s Holiday, prefatory texts on pp. 489-91 (if not already read), and scenes 3 – 11
||Paper 1 assigned|
|M Sept. 25||Dekker, Shoemaker’s Holiday, scenes 12 – 21|
|W Sept. 27||Dekker and Middleton, The Roaring Girl, act 1||Paper 1 exchanged|
|M Oct. 2||Dekker and Middleton, The Roaring Girl, acts 2 and 3|
|W Oct. 4||Dekker and Middleton, The Roaring Girl, acts 4 and 5||Paper 1 due|
|T Oct. 10||Beaumont and Fletcher, Love’s Cure; or, the Martial Maid, acts 1-3 ;
No class (credit for trip to Folger and extra time to read Love’s Cure)
|Editorial Queries on Love’s Cure|
|W Oct. 11||Beaumont and Fletcher, Love’s Cure; or, the Martial Maid, acts 4-5;
Edition Planning I – What kind of edition?
|Editorial Queries on Love’s Cure|
|M Oct. 16||Kyd, The Spanish Tragedy, acts 1 and 2
|W Oct. 18||Kyd, The Spanish Tragedy, act 3|
|M Oct. 23||Kyd, The Spanish Tragedy, act 4|
|W Oct. 25||Edition planning II – Organizing groups and scoping roles and project plans|
|M Oct. 30||Marlowe, Edward II, acts 1 and 2||Paper 2 assigned|
|W Nov. 1||Marlowe, Edward II, act 3|
|M Nov. 6||Marlowe, Edward II, acts 4 and 5|
|W Nov. 8||Edition planning III||Editorial Project Plans due|
|M Nov. 13||Middleton, Women Beware Women, act 1||Paper 2 exchanged|
|W Nov. 15||Middleton, Women Beware Women, acts 2 and 3|
|M Nov. 20||Middleton, Women Beware Women, acts 4 and 5||Paper 2 due|
|W Nov. 22||No class: Thanksgiving Break|
|M Nov. 27||Edition work|
|W Nov. 29||Edition work|
|M. Dec. 4||Edition work|
|W Dec. 6||Edition work|
|M Dec. 11||No class||Edition work due|
|M Dec. 18||Final Exam: 1:30 pm – 4:15 pm|
Participation and Attendance:
Comments: Each student is responsible for 10 responses to the above. You must provide at least five responses by Monday October 16 @ 9:00 am. Responses can be to the original posting or to other responses about it. If you post after we’ve had a class on the particular text, you can also bring in class lecture or discussion, but make sure you are responding to the online dialogue, not to class alone. Discussions will close one week after they start (hence the last date for all responses is one week after the last post). Responses should be around 50 words–you don’t need an extended argument, but “you’re wrong” or “great point” will not qualify. Please treat fellow posters with the same respect and seriousness online as you would in class.
Evaluation: I will evaluate postings–both originating threads and responses–based on your consistent and rich participation in the online dialogue. I will not grade individual postings, however. Here is the scale I will use, based on 100 points total.
For an originating thread missed: -20 points
For example, someone who missed no originating threads and 3 responses would score 88 or 88%, a B+. I reserve the right to adjust grades up or down based on the quality of what’s posted.
The Edition Project
There are a lot of details about the project (and visit, or alternatives) that we’ll discuss in class. The important thing to know in advance is that we’ll work on this edition in teams of four or five students, and you’ll receive both a team grade and an individual one. I’ll also provide you with details on how I calculate these.
Also note that uncited sources will constitute plagiarism even if they ended up in your work without your conscious knowledge (e.g. you forgot you read the material; you confused your own notes with notes on a source), since part of the scholarly responsibility that comes with using secondary sources is keeping track of which words or ideas were yours and which came from a source. If you do not wish to take on this responsibility then you should not consult secondary sources.
I will take all suspected cases of plagiarism to the Honor Committee.
Students with Disabilities
GRADE CRITERIA FOR ESSAYS
A Specific, complex and/or striking thesis, thesis developed without digression through the course of the paper, consistently precise, sensitive and/or striking interpretations of the text, crafted prose, no major mechanical problems
B Specific thesis, thesis generally developed through the course of the paper, consistently good interpretation of text, competent prose, minor mechanical problems
C Has a thesis, but one that needs greater specificity or complexity, thesis developed with some digression or repetition, some good interpretation, some mechanical problems
D Very general thesis, thesis development digressive or repetitive, plot summary or thoughts/speculations not based on textual evidence, major mechanical problems
F No thesis or thesis development