William Shakespeare's collaborations

Like most playwrights of his period, William Shakespeare did not always write alone. A number of his surviving plays are collaborative, or were revised by others after their original composition, although the exact number is open to debate. Some of the following attributions, such as The Two Noble Kinsmen, have well-attested contemporary documentation; others, such as Titus Andronicus, are dependent on linguistic analysis by modern scholars; recent work on computer analysis of textual style (word use, word and phrase patterns) has given reason to believe that parts of some of the plays ascribed to Shakespeare are actually by other writers.

In some cases the identity of the collaborator is known; in other cases there is a scholarly consensus; in others it is unknown or disputed. These debates are the province of Shakespeare attribution studies. Most collaborations occurred at the very beginning and the very end of Shakespeare's career.

Elizabethan authorship

The Elizabethan theatre was nothing like the modern theatre, but rather more like the modern film industry. Scripts were often written quickly, older scripts were revised, and many were the product of collaboration. The unscrupulous nature of the Elizabethan book printing trade complicates the attribution of plays further; for example, William Jaggard, who published the First Folio, also published The Passionate Pilgrim by W. Shakespeare, which is mostly the work of other writers.

Shakespeare's collaborations

Early works

Collaboration with Wilkins

Collaborations with Middleton

Collaborations with Fletcher

See also

References

  1. W. W. Greg, A List of Masques, Pageants, &c. Supplementary to "A List of English Plays", Appendix II, lxiv (1902)
  2. Malvern, Jack (12 October 2009). "Computer program proves Shakespeare didn't work alone, researchers claim". Times of London.
  3. Taylor, Gary. "Shakespeare and Others: The Authorship of Henry the Sixth, Part One", Medieval and Renaissance Drama, 7 (1995), 145–205.
  4. Vincent (2005: 377–402)
  5. Vickers (2007: 311–352)
  6. George Peele was once thought to be part-author
  7. Bald, R.C., "The Booke of Sir Thomas More and Its Problems." Shakespeare Survey II (1949), pp. 44–65; Evans, G. Blakemore. Introduction to Sir Thomas More. The Riverside Shakespeare. Herschel Baker, Anne Barton, Frank Kermode, Harry Levin, Hallett Smith, and Marie Edel, eds. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1974, 1997, p. 1683; McMillin, Scott. The Elizabethan Theatre and "The Book of Sir Thomas More". Ithaca, N.Y., Cornell University Press, 1987, pp. 82–3, 140–4, etc.
  8. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/arts/further-proof-of-shakespeares-hand-in-the-spanish-tragedy.html?hp&_r=0
  9. Collaborations
  10. Hope, Jonathan. The Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays: A Socio-Linguistic Study (Cambridge, 1994); Jackson, MacDonald P. "The Authorship of Pericles: The Evidence of Infinitives", Note & Queries 238 (2993): pp. 197–200; Jackson 2003
  11. Timon of Athens, with Middleton
  12. ^ a b Maguire, Laurie (19 April 2012). "Many Hands – A New Shakespeare Collaboration?". The Times Literary Supplement. also at Centre for Early Modern Studies, University of Oxford accessed 22 April 2012: "The recent redating of All's Well from 1602–03 to 1606–07 (or later) has gone some way to resolving some of the play's stylistic anomalies" ... "[S]tylistically it is striking how many of the widely acknowledged textual and tonal problems of All's Well can be understood differently when we postulate dual authorship."
  13. Don Quixote portal
  14. Potter, Lois (ed.), Fletcher, John and Shakespeare, William The Two Noble Kinsmen The Arden Shakespeare: Third Series, Thomson Learning 1997, ISBN 1-904271-18-9.
  15. Authorship of Two Noble Kinsmen
  16. Two Noble Kinsmen – Qualifying the authorship
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 12/3/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.