Joyce Carol Oates’s Carthage as a Modern Troilus and Cressida Story

Both Geoffrey Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde and Joyce Carol Oates’s Carthage are set in times of war, the Trojan War and the Iraq War, respectively, and both are associated with love on the one hand, and loss on the other. In fact, Carthage contains many echoes of the past, with the main characters of the novel, Juliet and Cressida Mayfield, bringing connotations with Chaucer’s and Shakespeare’s works, their father compared to an old Roman general, and Corporal Brett Kincaid likened to the hero of chivalric romances. The aim of this article is to argue that Oates’s Carthage may be seen as a modern Troilus and Cressida story in that it presents aspects of medieval reality in a modern guise, with the most poignant and recurrent association being that between the “war on terror” and medieval crusades and the emotion dominating the characters’ reactions being rage, an emotion which occurs in relation to the fires of passion and war in Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde, Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida, and Joyce Carol Oates’s Carthage.

“Were not that a botchy core?”: the Function of Disease in 2 Henry IV, King Lear, Troilus and Cressida, and Twelfth Night

<p>The social currency of disease has developed and changed dramatically over the centuries, and this thesis focuses on how Shakespeare used the currency of early modern disease in his plays. Shakespeare’s use of disease and disease metaphors is discussed within the context of four plays: Henry IV Part Two, Twelfth Night, King Lear, and Troilus and Cressida. The first chapter (of three) finds that the purpose of disease within the body politic metaphors is, inevitably, complication. In order to counter and resolve the disease of the state, advisors become physicians, extending the potential of the analogy further until it permeates the social structure of the plays and our perception of the characters. Disease is employed to imply division, instability, and disorder within the imagined body of the state. The second chapter shows how the idea of infection is used to highlight interpersonal concerns within the plays. The chapter uses references to early modern sources and beliefs about the four humours to illustrate how Shakespeare connects social disorder, disease, morality, and status. The discussion focuses on Galen’s “nonnaturals” which were believed to affect humoral balance, highlighting the significance of early modern conceptions of diet, exercise, miasma, sleep, and stress which serve to create a pervading sense of disease in the social worlds of the plays. The personal and often horrifying experiences of mental disease we are presented with in King Lear and Twelfth Night are the focus of the third and final chapter. The display of suffering is found to primarily serve to emphasise the commonality of man. In both plays (though at different levels of seriousness) insanity causes a loss of social status for the sufferer and, through this loss of status, their humanity is stressed. The dramatic potential of madness allows the theatre of the courtroom to be parodied to draw questions about injustice into the plays, though without offering any definitive conclusions to them. The literary nature of madness within these plays, furthermore, allows for the clear presentation of issues of class and justice. Generally Shakespeare abandons absolute realism in favour of using disease and disease metaphors as a disrupting influence on social and political order so as to emphasise a wide range of themes and ideas.</p>

“Were not that a botchy core?”: the Function of Disease in 2 Henry IV, King Lear, Troilus and Cressida, and Twelfth Night

<p>The social currency of disease has developed and changed dramatically over the centuries, and this thesis focuses on how Shakespeare used the currency of early modern disease in his plays. Shakespeare’s use of disease and disease metaphors is discussed within the context of four plays: Henry IV Part Two, Twelfth Night, King Lear, and Troilus and Cressida. The first chapter (of three) finds that the purpose of disease within the body politic metaphors is, inevitably, complication. In order to counter and resolve the disease of the state, advisors become physicians, extending the potential of the analogy further until it permeates the social structure of the plays and our perception of the characters. Disease is employed to imply division, instability, and disorder within the imagined body of the state. The second chapter shows how the idea of infection is used to highlight interpersonal concerns within the plays. The chapter uses references to early modern sources and beliefs about the four humours to illustrate how Shakespeare connects social disorder, disease, morality, and status. The discussion focuses on Galen’s “nonnaturals” which were believed to affect humoral balance, highlighting the significance of early modern conceptions of diet, exercise, miasma, sleep, and stress which serve to create a pervading sense of disease in the social worlds of the plays. The personal and often horrifying experiences of mental disease we are presented with in King Lear and Twelfth Night are the focus of the third and final chapter. The display of suffering is found to primarily serve to emphasise the commonality of man. In both plays (though at different levels of seriousness) insanity causes a loss of social status for the sufferer and, through this loss of status, their humanity is stressed. The dramatic potential of madness allows the theatre of the courtroom to be parodied to draw questions about injustice into the plays, though without offering any definitive conclusions to them. The literary nature of madness within these plays, furthermore, allows for the clear presentation of issues of class and justice. Generally Shakespeare abandons absolute realism in favour of using disease and disease metaphors as a disrupting influence on social and political order so as to emphasise a wide range of themes and ideas.</p>

Troilus and Cressida's Folio Prologue in the Poets’ War: Shakespeare, Jonson, Marston

Although many scholars have denigrated Troilus and Cressida, the Folio version of the play—with a prologue—offers a more tractable, even winsome play than does the quarto version. As a buffer between the real world of an audience and the imagined world of a play, the prologue adjusts the expectations of an audience, highlighting at once its own potency and the interpretive potential of this textual difference between quarto and Folio. This Prologue conveys an appeal neither obsequious nor arrogant—as do its respective models in John Marston's Antonio and Mellida and Ben Jonson's Poetaster—but rhetorically sinuous and eminently tactful, at once calming the war of the theaters and previewing the subtle tonal shifts in the play that follows it. In Poetaster, Jonson presents “An armed Prologue,” which has often been mentioned as a precursor to Shakespeare's Troilus Prologue, but I argue that its surface similarities only highlight its differences in goals, methods, and most importantly tone. And by contrast with the epilogue in Antonio and Mellida, the Troilus Prologue presents a more subtly nuanced attempt to win the favor of an audience not wholly by self-effacement but by complex honesty and mimetic rhetoric, counterbalanced to anticipate the perplexing world of Shakespeare's play.