3.8 Article

Not on his Picture, but his Booke': Shakespeare's First Folio and Practices of Collection

Journal

SHAKESPEARE
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17450918.2023.2244463

Keywords

First Folio; play collection; paratext; authorship; Samuel Daniel; William Alexander

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article compares Shakespeare's First Folio with other play collections from the same period, highlighting the influence of the strategies of selection and presentation on how we engage with the texts. It identifies four practices - categorising, fixing, authorising, and fetishizing - and explores how each strategy is employed in different collections. The article concludes that while Shakespeare's Folio has had a significant impact on our understanding of his plays, it cannot be considered as a benchmark for play collections.
Every play collection represents an interpretative act that evaluates the materials it contains. In this quatercentenary year since the publication of Shakespeare's First Folio, this article positions the volume alongside other play collections from the period to show how they construct, through their strategies of selection and presentation, influential narratives that affect how we engage with the texts they contain. It identifies four practices that clarify a collection's strategies - categorising, fixing, authorising, and fetishizing - and takes each of these in turn, casting a spotlight on the First Folio's interest in 'Histories', its professed fixity, its valuation of Shakespeare as sole author, and its imperative to fetishize the book. Other collections, including Alexander's Monarchic Tragedies (1604, 1607), Daniel's Whole Works (1623), and Lyly's Six Court Comedies (1632), advertise different strategies: some prioritise cross-genre readings; some construct networks of authorisers (including stationers and dedicatees) who inform reading practices; and some embrace a lack of fixity, denying final authority to the material book. This article demonstrates that Shakespeare's Folio cannot be taken as a touchstone for plays in collection. The volume has, nevertheless, had an outsized influence on how we understand Shakespeare and his plays, and the work of other early modern writers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available