LEADER 03631oam 2200589M 450 001 9910135954703321 005 20210409103244.0 010 $a1-317-16329-X 010 $a1-315-57301-6 010 $a1-317-16330-3 024 7 $a10.4324/9781315573014 035 $a(CKB)3710000000912505 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC4717859 035 $a(OCoLC)962412747 035 $a(OCoLC)1100676004 035 $a(OCoLC-P)1100676004 035 $a(FlBoTFG)9781315573014 035 $a(PPN)240821068 035 $a(EXLCZ)993710000000912505 100 $a20161018d2016 fy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur||||||||||| 181 $2rdacontent 182 $2rdamedia 183 $2rdacarrier 200 00$aCommunity-making in early Stuart theatres $estage and audience /$fedited by Roger D. Sell, Anthony W. Johnson, Helen Wilcox 210 1$aLondon :$cRoutledge,$d2016. 215 $a1 online resource (450 pages) $cillustrations 311 $a1-4094-2701-3 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $apt. 1. Period trends -- pt. 2. Individual playwrights. 330 $aTwenty-two leading experts on early modern drama collaborate in this volume to explore three closely interconnected research questions. To what extent did playwrights represent dramatis personae in their entertainments as forming, or failing to form, communal groupings? How far were theatrical productions likely to weld, or separate, different communal groupings within their target audiences? And how might such bondings or oppositions among spectators have tallied with the community-making or -breaking on stage? Chapters in Part One respond to one or more of these questions by reassessing general period trends in censorship, theatre attendance, forms of patronage, playwrights' professional and linguistic networks, their use of music, and their handling of ethical controversies. In Part Two, responses arise from detailed re-examinations of particular plays by Shakespeare, Chapman, Jonson, Beaumont and Fletcher, Cary, Webster, Middleton, Massinger, Ford, and Shirley. Both Parts cover a full range of early-Stuart theatre settings, from the public and popular to the more private circumstances of hall playhouses, court masques, women's drama, country-house theatricals, and school plays. And one overall finding is that, although playwrights frequently staged or alluded to communal conflict, they seldom exacerbated such divisiveness within their audience. Rather, they tended toward more tactful modes of address (sometimes even acknowledging their own ideological uncertainties) so that, at least for the duration of a play, their audiences could be a community within which internal rifts were openly brought into dialogue. 606 $aTheater audiences$zEngland$xHistory$y17th century 606 $aTheater and society$zEngland$xHistory$y17th century 606 $aTheater$zEngland$xHistory$y17th century 606 $aTheater$xPolitical aspects$zEngland$xHistory$y17th century 606 $aEnglish drama$y17th century$xHistory and criticism 615 0$aTheater audiences$xHistory 615 0$aTheater and society$xHistory 615 0$aTheater$xHistory 615 0$aTheater$xPolitical aspects$xHistory 615 0$aEnglish drama$xHistory and criticism. 676 $a792.0942/09032 702 $aJohnson$b Anthony W. 702 $aSell$b Roger D. 702 $aWilcox$b Helen 801 0$bOCoLC-P 801 1$bOCoLC-P 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910135954703321 996 $aCommunity-making in early Stuart theatres$92877763 997 $aUNINA