In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

notes All references to Shakespeare’s plays are to The Norton Shakespeare. introduction. palimpsested time Note to epigraph: Serres with Latour, Conversations on Science, Culture, and Time, 60. 1. For studies of the early modern wonder cabinet, see Mullaney, ‘‘Strange Things, Gross Terms, Curious Customs’’; Impey and Macgregor, The Origins of Museums; Agamben , ‘‘The Cabinet of Wonder,’’ The Man Without Content; and Swann, Curiosities and Texts. 2. As Douglas Bruster notes in an important essay about the new work on Renaissance material culture (‘‘The New Materialism in Early Modern Studies,’’ in Shakespeare and the Question of Culture), the anthology or edited collection has become the favored genre for scholarship in the field. See de Grazia, Quilligan, and Stallybrass (eds.), Subject and Object in Renaissance Culture, which includes essays on a variety of early modern objects, including feathers, textiles, and Communion wafers; Fumerton and Hunt (eds.), Renaissance Culture and the Everyday, whose back-cover blurb boasts an even more extensive catalogue of items such as ‘‘mirrors, books, horses, everyday speech, money, laundry baskets, graffiti, embroidery, and food preparation’’; Orlin (ed.), Material London, ca. , whose essays examine various aspects of material culture in London, including the fashion for brightly colored clothes, Irish mantles, and yellow starch; and Harris and Korda (eds.), Staged Properties in Early Modern English Drama, which examines stage properties ranging from false beards to domestic furnishings. 3. The fascination with ‘‘things’’ is not a phenomenon confined to scholarship on Renaissance material culture. It is apparent in most other periods of literary and cultural studies, as is evidenced by the titles of recent edited collections about material culture from pre- to postmodernity, such as Daston (ed.), Things That Talk, and Brown (ed.), Things. A notable exception to the elision of time in the study of objects is Ahmed, Queer Phenomenology. 4. The term was coined by Patricia Fumerton in her introduction to Fumerton and 196 notes to pages 2–5 Hunt (eds.), Renaissance Culture and the Everyday, 3. I critique it in ‘‘The New New Historicism’s Wunderkammer of Objects.’’ 5. Jameson, The Political Unconscious, 1. 6. The longue durée approach, popularized by the Annales school of French history, is most clearly elaborated in the work of Fernand Braudel: see in particular his essay ‘‘History and the Social Sciences.’’ Recently there has been a trend toward microhistoricization —that is, contextualizing literature within temporal units as small as single year. The best illustration of this approach is Shapiro, . 7. Fumerton, ‘‘Introduction,’’ in Fumerton and Hunt (eds.), Renaissance Culture and the Everyday, 1–17, esp. 6; and Wall, Staging Domesticity, i. 8. Latour, We Have Never Been Modern, 75. 9. For studies of the institutional transmigration of property, after the Reformation, from the monasteries to the commercial playhouses, see Greenblatt, ‘‘Shakespeare and the Exorcists,’’ in Shakespearean Negotiations, esp. 112–13, and Stallybrass, ‘‘Worn Worlds,’’ esp. 312. On the Roman traces inscribed in early modern London’s city walls and gates, especially Ludgate, see Harris, ‘‘Ludgate Time.’’ 10. These conceptions of time are examined in closer detail in my studies of the second Henriad (chapter 2), Macbeth (chapter 4), and Othello (chapter 6). Key work on Shakespearean conceptions of time includes Quinones, The Renaissance Discovery of Time; Waller, The Strong Necessity of Time; Sypher, The Ethic of Time; and Fletcher, Time, Space and Motion in the Age of Shakespeare. 11. Compare Deleuze, The Fold, whose first section is called ‘‘The Pleats of Matter’’ (3–13). 12. Even so-called presentism, a movement currently garnering attention in Shakespeare studies for its challenge to historicist orthodoxy, has tended to reify the present and the past as temporally discrete, if mutually implicated, entities. For the most clear exposition of presentism as a critical method in Shakespeare studies, see Grady and Hawkes (eds.), Presentist Shakespeares. 13. According to the table of Papias, 47 atoms of time ⳱ 1 ounce; 8 ounces of time ⳱ 1 ostent, i.e., 1 minute. See Papias, Grammaticus clarus an. . I discuss George Herbert’s adaptation of this concept of the atom in the last section of Chapter 2. 14. Bruster, Shakespeare and the Question of Culture, 191. For other Marxist-inflected critiques of the ‘‘materialism’’ of studies of early modern material culture, see Sinfield, ‘‘Poetaster, the Author, and the Perils of Cultural Production’’; and Hawkes, ‘‘Materialism and Reification in Renaissance Studies.’’ 15. A notable exception to this trend is the Marxist-inflected work on early modern clothes and textiles by Peter Stallybrass, one of the pioneers...

Share