Tiffany Stern

Good, succict, to-the-point introduction to the practical ins and outs of publishing in Shakespeare's time and their relation to the instability of his texts.

Between a playwright and his play in print, we are told, stood [to name but a few factors] manuscripts, promptbooks, parts (actors were never given the whole text, only their lines and cues), alterations (in response to the needs of production or the requirements of censorship, for example), press compositors prone because of their show more working conditions to errors or omissions, etc.

Pros: Invaluable for anyone wanting a clear overview of the facts behind Shakespeare's variant texts; suitable for anyone, layman or student of literature, as the language is approacheable and not impossibly technical.

Cons: Does not properly justify its claim that textual instability counters the idea of Shakespeare as an individual author, possessed of intention; watch out for unfortunate typos. show less