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

Reviews399 For the most part they note editions of the plays, though in some cases a critical work is indicated. The choice of edition sometimes seems quite odd. For many of the more obscure plays, of course, there is only one edition to cite, but for Youth and Hick Scorner, where I would expect a reference to Ian Lancashire's 1980 edition in the Revels series (which is listed in the main bibliography as item 49), Berger perversely cites A. L. Gowan's eclectic edition of 1922 for Youth, while for Hick Scorner he gives only W. W. Greg's article "Notes on Some Early Plays." Both of these are cited in Lancashire's edition, so a direction there would have turned them up for the student in any case. Similarly, for Skelton's Magnyfycence, Berger cites Scattergood's edition in the Penguin Complete English Poems, a popular edition without apparatus, ignoring Paula Neuss' excellent critical edition of 1978 (again in the Revels series, and listed in the main bibliography as item 67). Reference to Gammer Gurion's Needle in a popular edition of 1903 (C. M. Gayley's Representative English Comedies) is unlikely to provide much of a "starting point for scholarship." Finally, a third brief appendix lists projected volumes and their editors in the Records of Early English Drama project. For such an extensive work I have found relatively few errors, and those on the whole minor. R. M. Lumiansky is listed as Lumianski in items 55 and 1016, and in one case the spelling of an author's name has led Berger to list his work twice, with slightly differing information and quite different, though not inconsistent, annotations. This is R. T. Davies' 1972 edition of The Corpus Christi Play of the English Middle Ages (item 28), which is listed separately under Davis (item 32). Author's names are often unnecessarily repeated, especially if one publication includes a middle name (items 114, 142-43, 569a-70, 670-71 68081 , 788-91, 828, 1257a-58, 1330-31, 1357-58, 1439-40, 1650, 1695). The edition of Nice Wanton by David Parry and Kathy Pearl listed as "forthcoming " (item 69b) was in fact published in 1978. There seems to be some uncertainty whether "Middle Ages" should be printed with initial capitals or not. It is a truism that all bibliographies are obsolete by the time they are published, and this is even more true of any bibliography which aims at some degree of exhaustiveness. Such a truism should not blind us to Berger's very considerable achievement, or to its very great usefulness to scholars and students of English drama. Its virtues are great—clear organization, useful annotations, and a fine index; its flaws are minor. We will be thanking Berger for a long time to come. DAVID N. KLAUSNER University of Toronto F. J. Lamport. German Classical Drama: Theatre, Humanity and Nation 1750-1870. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Pp. xiii + 241. $49.50. This book is conceived as a general introduction to the classical age of German drama. Treating chronologically the plays of Lessing, Goethe, Schiller, Kleist, Grillparzer, and Hebbel, the author elucidates how 400Comparative Drama Lessing's efforts to introduce contemporary realism to the German stage gradually gave way—due in good part to Lessing's own artistic growth— to a more overtly poetic and symbolic drama which its practitioners would employ to promote their program of cosmopolitan humanitarianism . This evolution would of course culminate in Weimar classisicm, and for Lamport Schiller's Wallenstein trilogy marks the finest moment, for it "combines Shakespearian with Greek or neo-classical formal features, and it combines realism of content—in its unsparing analysis of the realities of politics and history, and of the ambiguities and moral shortcomings of human motivation—with a high degree of artistic stylization" (p. 115). After Wallenstein things begin to wane, and Lamport ascribes the decline partly to a reactionary Goethe: "The tendency to a stylized, poetic or even operatic, rather than a realistic manner of presentation was, however, becoming more and more characteristic of Weimar classicism , as it confronted the new and ever more threateningly unpoetic world of the nineteenth century. It was ... a...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 399-401
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.