Advertisement

Introduction

On Rewriting
  • Chantal Zabus

Abstract

Each century has its own interpellative dream-text: The Tempest for the seventeenth century; Robinson Crusoe for the eighteenth century; Jane Eyre for the nineteenth century; Heart of Darkness for the turn of the twentieth century. Such texts serve as pre-texts to others and underwrite them. Yet, in its nearly four centuries of existence, The Tempest has most endured of any text and, through its rewritings, has helped shape three contemporaneous movements—postcoloniality postfeminism or postpatriarchy, and postmodernism—from the 1960s to the present.

Keywords

Original Text Lesbian Woman Original Inscription Historical Fiction Porary Artist 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Reprinted from William Shakespeare: The Tempest edited by Stephen Orgel (Oxford World’s Classics, 1998) by permission of Oxford University Press. All references are to this edition © Oxford University Press 1987.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    See, for instance, Peter Holland, English Shakespeares: Shakespeare on the English Stage in the 1990s (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997); andGoogle Scholar
  3. Charles Marowitz, Recycling Shakespeare (London: Macmillan, 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 3.
    See Alan Sinfield, “Introduction: Reproductions, Interventions,” in Political Shakespeare: Essays in Cultural Materialism (1985), eds. Jonathan Dollimore & Alan Sinfield (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1994), p. 154. See also his “Making Space: Appropriation and Confrontation in Renaissance British Plays,” in Graham Holderness, ed. & pref., The Shakespeare Myth (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1988), pp. 128–144.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    I have, in several articles, outlined a methodology to make sense of all these Tempest-rewrites beyond a postcolonial reading and encouraged criss-crossings over linguistic boundaries (francophone studies being neatly separated from Anglophone studies) and over genre boundaries to consider literature and film. Since I wrote the first article on Canadian, Québécois, and Caribbean Tempests in 1985, a few articles were published but they invariably addressed issues in isolated fashion, i.e., dealing exclusively with either postcoloniality (Jolly 1986; Brydon 1989) or postmodernism (Donaldson 1988; Skura 1992); with a particular country (Canada: Laframboise 1991) or countries (the Caribbean: Wynter 1990). More recently, books have approached a character and provided its “historiography” (the Vaughans’ Shakespeare’s Caliban, 1991; Harold Bloom’s Caliban, 1992;Google Scholar
  6. Theo D’Haen & Nadia Lie, eds., Constellation Caliban, 1997) or the history of the play’s production (Christine Dymkowski, The Tempest: Shakespeare in Production, 2000) or within the “Shakespeare Studies” paradigm (The Tempest and Its Travels, eds. Peter Hulme and Bill Sherman, 2000). Book chapters have also been devoted to The Tempest from, for example, a queer (Google Scholar
  7. Kate Chedgzoy, Shakespeare’s Queer Children, 1995), “performative” (Google Scholar
  8. Susan Bennett, Performing Nostalgia, 1996), or a women’s perspective (Google Scholar
  9. Julie Sanders, Novel Shakespeares, 2002).Google Scholar
  10. 5.
    Edward W. Said, “On Originality,” in The World, the Text, and the Critic (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1983), p. 135. My italics.Google Scholar
  11. 7.
    See, for instance, Kenneth Muir’s The Sources of Shakespeare’s Plays (London: Methuen, 1977); andGoogle Scholar
  12. Geoffrey Bullough’s Narrative and Dramatic Sources to Shakespeare, vol. 8 (London & New York: Columbia University Press, 1975). The scholarly tracing of sources is also an ideological enterprise. To wit, Peter Hulme and Francis Barker’s questioning of Frank Kermode’s use of sources in the Arden edition such as the Bermuda Pamphlets, which he deemed not fundamental to the play’s structure of ideas, when in fact such sources connect the play’s characters to the colonists aboard the Sea-Adventure off the coast of Bermuda in 1609. For a discussion of the Bermuda pamphlets and the influence of the New World on The Tempest, see The Arden Shakespeare: The Tempest, ed. Frank Kermode (London: Routledge, 1954), pp. xxv-xxxiv; andGoogle Scholar
  13. Francis Barker & Peter Hulme, “Nymphs and Reapers Heavily Vanish: the Discursive Con-texts of The Tempest,” in Alternative Shakespeares, ed. John Drakakis (London & New York: Routledge, 1985), p. 199.Google Scholar
  14. 11.
    Fredric Jameson, The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act (London: Methuen 1981), p. 16; andGoogle Scholar
  15. André Lefevere, “‘Beyond Interpretation’, Or the Business of (Re)Writing,” Comparative Literature Studies 24:1 (1987), 19.Google Scholar
  16. 13.
    Qtd in George D. Painter, Proust: The Late Years (Boston, Mass.: Little, Brown, 1965), p. 100.Google Scholar
  17. 14.
    Harold Bloom, The Anxiety of Influence (New York: Oxford University Press, 1973), p. 5 & p. 11. See alsoGoogle Scholar
  18. Paul de Man, Blindness and Insight (New York: Methuen, 1983), pp. 182–83;Google Scholar
  19. Frank Lentricchia, After the New Criticism (1980) (New York: Methuen, 1983), p. 283; andGoogle Scholar
  20. Thomas Docherty, After Theory: Post Modernism/Post Marxism (London: Routledge, 1990), p. 127.Google Scholar
  21. 15.
    The term is borrowed from Judie Newman, The Ballistic Bard: Postcolonial Fictions (London: Arnold, 1995), p. 21.Google Scholar
  22. 16.
    Pierre Macherey, Pour une théorie de la production littéraire (Paris: François Maspero, 1970), p. 267. The combined concepts of Lyotard’s métarécit or grand-narrative, of Genette’s “hypertextuality,” and of Bloom’s grand precursor come close to Macherey’s notion. SeeGoogle Scholar
  23. Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984), p. xxiii. Originally, La condition post-moderne (Paris: Ed. De Minuit, 1979); andGoogle Scholar
  24. Gérard Genette, Palimpsestes (Paris: Seuil, 1982), pp. 235–236.Google Scholar
  25. 17.
    Diana Brydon and Helen Tiffin, “‘The Thematic Ancestor’: Conrad, White and Atwood,” in Decolonizing Fictions (Sydney, Mundelstrup, West Yorkshire: Dangaroo Press, 1993), p. 89. See alsoGoogle Scholar
  26. Diana Brydon, “The White Inuit Speaks: Contamination as Literary Strategy,” Past the Last Post: Theorising Post-Colonialism and Post-Modernism, eds. Ian Adam & Helen Tiffin (Calgary: Calgary University Press, 1990), pp. 191–203.Google Scholar
  27. 18.
    Linda Hutcheon, A Theory of Parody: The Teaching of Twentieth-Century Art Forms (New York & London: Methuen; 1985), p. 32.Google Scholar
  28. 19.
    Mikhail Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination, trans. C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Austin & London: University of Texas Press, 1981), p. 76.Google Scholar
  29. 20.
    John Fowles, The Ebony Tower (Boston, Mass.: Little, Brown, 1974), p. 18.Google Scholar
  30. 21.
    Hutcheon, Theory of Parody, p. 35 & pp. 69–83. On satire versus parody, see pp. 78–79. On pastiche, see, for instance, Linda Hutcheon, “The Politics of Parody,” in The Politics of Postmodernism (London & New York: Routledge, 1989), pp. 93–117, esp. pp. 94–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 22.
    Jacques Derrida, Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning, and the New International trans. Peggy Kamuf; with an introduction by Bernd Magnus & Stephen Cullenberg (New York and London: Routledge, 1944), p. 4 & p. 10. Originally Spectres de Marx (Paris: Galilée, 1993).Google Scholar
  32. 24.
    Hélène Cixous and Catherine Clément, “Sorties,” in The Newly Born Woman, trans. Betty Wing, intro. Sandra Gilbert (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1986), p. 65. Originally published as La Jeune Née (Paris: Union générale d’éditions, 1975).Google Scholar
  33. 25.
    Adrienne Rich, “When We Dead Awaken: Writing as Re-vision” (1971), College Englishj 35:1 (October 1972), 18–25; rpt in Adrienne Rich’s Poetry, ed. Barbara Charlesworth Gelpi & Albert Gelpi (New York: W W Norton, 1975), pp. 90–98; and in Rich’s On Lies, Secrets, and Silence: Selected Prose 1966–1978 (London & New York: W W Norton, 1979), pp. 33–49. Rich’s poem “When We Dead Awaken,” was published in Diving into the Wreck: Poems 1971–1972 (New York & London: WW Norton, 1973), pp. 5–6. The title is lifted from Henrik Ibsen’s play When We Dead Awaken (Naar Vidde Vaagner) (1899).Google Scholar
  34. 26.
    Marianne Hirsch, The Mother/Daughter Plot: Narrative, Psychoanalysis, Feminism (Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1989), p. 160. See alsoGoogle Scholar
  35. Rachel Blau du Plessis, Writing Beyond the Ending: Narrative Strategies of Twentieth-Century Women Writers (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985), p.4.Google Scholar
  36. 27.
    Liz Yorke, Impertinent Voices: Subversive Strategies in Contemporary Women’s Poetry (London & New York: Routledge, 1991), p. 1 & p. 15. My italics. See also Liedeke Plate’s Ph.D. dissertation, Visions and Re-Visions: Female Authorship and the Act of Rewriting (Indiana University 1995). DAIN: DA9614560.Google Scholar
  37. 28.
    See Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths, Helen Tiffin, The Empire Writes Back (London: Routledge, 1989), p. 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 29.
    Jack J. Jorgens, Shakespeare on Film (Bloomington & London: Indiana University Press, 1977), pp. 12–14. See also, e.g., Brian McFarlane, Novel to Film. An Introduction to the Theory of Adaptation (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), p. 7;Google Scholar
  39. Geoffrey Wagner, The Novel and the Cinema (Rutherford, N.J.: Farleigh Dickinson University Press, 1975), pp. 222–231;Google Scholar
  40. William Luhr, Peter Lehman, Authorship and Narrative in the Cinema (New York: Putman, 1977), p. 192;Google Scholar
  41. Andrew J. Dudley, Concepts in Film Theory (New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984), pp. 98–104; andGoogle Scholar
  42. Eric Rentschler, German Film and Literature (London: Methuen, 1986), p. 3.Google Scholar
  43. 30.
    Frank Kermode, The Sense of an Ending: Studies in the Theory of Fiction (New York: Oxford University Press, 1967), p. 8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chantal Zabus 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chantal Zabus

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations