Abstract

Abstract:

Roughly two decades ago, critics reoriented the central position of Christopher Marlowe's Edward the Second in discussions of sixteenth-century eroticism by clarifying important differences between sexuality and gender, dismissing transvestism as a sincere marker of homoerotic desire in the period's drama. Critics have continued to rehearse this dismissal under the curious assumption that if cross-dressing does not necessarily signify homoeroticism, then it simply does not signify it at all. This article returns to the anchor text for this thesis, asking whether certain cases of early modern theatrical playing show gender and sexuality consubstantiating in more complicated ways than previously thought.

pdf

Additional Information

ISSN
1522-9270
Print ISSN
0039-3657
Pages
pp. 285-305
Launched on MUSE
2018-06-07
Open Access
No
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.