Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare (ISBN 1602350027)

Burke on the Bard:
All of Kenneth Burke's writings on Shakespeare have been assembled in one place in this book, and even a compendium of brief mentions of Shakespeare, through the assiduous efforts of Scott Newstok. And what a treasure trove it is. As an undergraduate, I remember working my way diligently through Burke's A Rhetoric of Motives and A Grammar of Motives and being dazzled by the breadth and depth of this man's thinking. I thought I might have to dust off these volumes in order to approach this collection, but I did not find that necessary. The work stands solidly on its own, touching on Burke's dramatistic analytical approach, but not requiring any special knowledge beyond the scope of the essays themselves. Burke is quirky, and though he has a definite critical system, he is not essentially systematic. These essays range widely, both individually and as a collection. For the Shakespeare scholar, each one is a gem worthy of contemplation; for the neophyte or undergrad, this is a fine book to read piecemeal, on a "need-to-know basis." From a scholarly perspective, I am most struck by the prescient sensibility of Burke's thinking. His work seems to percolate up through the current generation of literary critics, largely latent and unacknowledged, but there for the perceptive reader to discern. In places a Marxist perspective emerges, as in brief discussions of the enclosure acts, calling to mind H. R. Coursen's The Leasing Out of England: Shakespeare's Second Henriad. Yet Burke is no doctrinaire Marxist. Elsewhere, insightful psychological approaches both to characters and to the audience's experience of the play emerge. But there is no Procrustean psychological deformation of the works. Most markedly, Burke seems to anticipate many of the new-historical perspectives so prevalent today. In Stephen Greenblatt's Will in the World and James Shapiro's A Year in the Life of Shakespeare: 1599, I hear echoes of Burke. Though best known as a rhetorical analyst, the scope of Burke's critical project is made clear in his work on Shakespeare. For anyone who finds the previous paragraph "inside baseball," do not lose hope. This book is ideal for the beginning and intermediate Shakespeare student as well. Burke's treatment of Julius Caesar, Othello, Hamlet, Macbeth, and King Lear will provide any student of the Bard's tragedies with fresh perspectives and unique insights into Shakepeare's tragic vision. The essay on Caesar is especially illustrative of the uniqueness of the Burkean approach. In the essay, "Antony in Behalf of the Play," Burke gives a meta-dramatic view of the play through the persona of Marc Antony, exploring the motives of the characters, the playwright, the audience within the play (the crowd), and the audience of the play. "Psychology and Form," the essay on Hamlet, ranges far and wide, offering insight into Burke's extensive knowledge and synoptic approach to literature. Here, he develops a theory of the development and resolution of psychological expectations in an audience and compares this to the listener's expectation of resolution in music (the condition to which all art aspires, as Walter Pater memorably put it). Burke is a great thinker and a gifted writer. This book does an invaluable service by assembling all of his writing on the greatest writer in English in one place. This is a book that will be treasured by the expert and can teach the student to treasure Shakespeare's work. It is highly recommended.

Valuable for students of Burke's scholarship:
This work gathers together all of Kenneth Burke's writing on Shakespeare, thirteen major essays and a host of notes and remarks scattered throughout his writings. It contains an introduction by its editor,Scott L. Newstok which explains his own work on the volume, and Burke's general approach to Shakespeare criticism. The book also contains on its back cover laudatory words from among others Harold Bloom and Stephan Greenblat, that is from among the most distinguished literary critics working today. Burke is an original in his approach to Shakespeare. He focuses often on the opening of the play, and is very concerned with the effect of the play on the audience. He again and again shows how Shakespeare is master playwright creating the effect he wants the work to have on the audience. For Burke whose basic view of drama derives from Aristotle 'action' plays the central role.'Character' is if not subordinated then not given the central place in his analysis as it has in the work of arguably the greatest Shakespearean critic of all A.C. Bradley. While understanding Burke's brilliance and originality I have never been a strong fan of his writing. I have always found it somewhat difficult and academic. His learning is vast and he makes sudden shifts in his discourse which I find hard to follow. I too find often that the kinds of dramatic questions, the questions relating to how the dramatist achieved the effects he did, are not those which primarily concern me. However the volume as scholarly collection and edition of Burke's work is comprehensive and carefully referenced. It is a real contribution to Burke scholarship and should be made good use of by all those who take interest in his scholarship.

A welcome and enthusiastically recommended addition:
An iconoclastic American intellectual, the late Kenneth Burke (1897-1993) was an exceptional and prolific literary critic whose writings and commentaries were respected -- even by those who occasionally disagreed with either his assumptions and conclusions. In the pages of "Kenneth Burke On Shakespeare", academician Scott L. Newstok (Assistant Professor of English, Gustavus Adolphus College, and Andrew W. Mellon Post-Doctoral Fellow at Yale University) has gathered together under one cover all of Burke's Shakespeare literary criticism (including previously unpublished notes and lectures) that had such wide-spread influence on his contemporaries. Drawn from a profusion of sources, including literary magazines, academic journals, Newstok has accomplished a truly impressive task of research and recovery. The result is a compendium of analytical commentaries on Shakespearean dramas and comedies. Enhanced with the inclusion of an appendix (Additional References to Shakespeare in Burke's Writings), extensive notes, and 'Index of Works by Shakespeare', and a general index, "Kenneth Burke On Shakespeare" is a welcome and enthusiastically recommended addition to academic library Shakespearean Studies reference collections and supplemental reading lists.

A Valuable Collection of Shakespeare Criticism:
The most valuable aspect of Scott L. Newstok's recent "Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare" is his inclusion of a talk, delivered by Burke, entitled "Introduction: Shakespeare Was What?," which serves as a useful primer to Burke's system of reading Shakespeare. As the lecture establishes, Burke is ultimately concerned with what literature does (i.e. how it functions). Accordingly, Shakespeare is, in Burke's mind, an artist who "spontaneously knew how to translate some typical tension or conflict of his society into terms of variously interrelated personalities." As Burke explains, Shakespeare's ability "was to let that whole complexity act itself out, by endowing each personality with the appropriate ideas, attitudes, actions, situations, relationships, and fatality" (18). Shakespeare, above all other dramatists, constructs plays in which his characters' engagements with each other constitute the play's movement while dictating meaning to its audience. And Burke, perhaps above all other critics, articulates the anatomy of these engagements for us. Without a doubt, Burke scholars will find Newstok's compilation of additional references to Shakespeare invaluable. While the sections that Newstok provides can't possibly offer full context, the well-versed Burkean will certainly have the texts in question (A Grammar of Motives, Attitudes Toward History, and so on) at hand. An impressive piece of scholarship, Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare will prove to be an essential work for a variety of audiences, including Shakespearians and Burkeans.

At last Burke's Shakespeare criticism in one place--and edited!:
Kenneth Burke was a restless thinker ever-alert to what makes Shakespeare's plays work. Scott L. Newstok, with admirable bravura in a profession that tends to undervalue the editing of collections, recognized the importance of committing himself to the painstaking project of recovering Burke's writings on Shakespeare. The result is a treasure-trove both of some landmark essays in his career (most notably the 1951 Hudson Review piece on Othello), and also of the bric-a-brac of intellectual history scattered throughout Burke's work from the 1920s through the 1980s. Newstok unearths and reproduces sections that Burke crossed out from a lecture, thus offering windows onto his compositional process. Among other works never fully revised for publication, he edits and annotates the typescript of Burke's response to a graduate student's paper on Troilus and Cressida. As importantly, Newstok gathers what appears to be every excerpt from Burke's lifetime of writing that mentions Shakespeare. The process of obtaining permissions alone is staggering, but it is a further tribute to Newstok' s professional integrity and passion for the project that he gained full cooperation from the Burke estate and the endorsement of surviving family members. The volume begins with a cogent survey of the key issues and terms (including a glance at Aristotle, "Burke's classical mentor") that played a generative role in Burke's Shakespeare criticism. He ends with suitably terse yet remarkably helpful notes; for example, indicting where precisely in Coleridge's Biographia Literaria we can find the reference to which Burke alludes in passing. Newstok gives sufficient identifying tags of dramatists, writers, philosophers, and artists whom Burke assumed his audience knew, and covers in detail the original settings of the works discussed and, when applicable, where they were printed previously. This much having been said, the larger question still looms: Do we need so much--indeed all--of Burke's Shakespeare criticism gathered in one place? The answer this volume convincingly urges is: yes. The Editor's Introduction establishes the impressive influence Burke has had on a number of critics and dramatists, as well as on important movements in literary scholarship and dramatic criticism. The claim of kinship to Burke's work is wide and diverse, ranging from Edward Said to Angus Fletcher. In a long note Newstok gives an initial roll call of upward of fifty Renaissance literary scholars who have profitably engaged Burke's work. He goes on to point out that Northrop Frye annexed Burke as one of his antecedents in "the archetypal approach," and Harold Bloom called Burke "my heroic precursor." And yet it is often through indirection that debts to Burke's ideas are acknowledged. Buried in a footnote, for example, Stephen Greenblatt tellingly relates: "As so often happens, I discovered that Burke's brilliant sketch had anticipated the shape of much of my argument." In part this reluctance to give Burke pride of place in one's own scholarly work is the result of the unmistakably Burkean tone and trajectory of thought to be found in his often idiosyncratic approach. Unlike literary critics who develop systems that others dutifully can follow, Burke does not leave a coherent methodology, notwithstanding his "Pentadic analysis" and his, at times, deeply moving readings of Shakespearean scenes. Rather readers receive insights--the kinds that he left for a general audience rather than a coterie of the initiated. Although he "appreciated the favorable attention from academia," finally he was more concerned with inspiring "others to join his ecstatic readings of Shakespeare, and gain contact with the energy at the heart of Shakespeare's plays." One example illustrates just how useful having access to these essays can be, especially in a properly edited edition. Recently when teaching Timon of Athens to undergraduates, I turned to Burke's typical mode of beginning an investigation as presented in Newstok's book. It supplied just the heuristic jump-start required: "First, let's force ourselves to decide exactly what Timon of Athens is about." Written originally as the introduction to an edition of Timon, Burke intelligently recounted the main strokes of the play, act by act. He then treated the main characters in turn and examined their function in the drama: "Apemantus serves to keep the play from falling simply into contrasted halves." He also considered relations among the sexes, showing how women in this play function "only in a supernumerary capacity." That there are only courtesans and no mothers, sisters, or wives, fits well with Burke's judgment on Timon as "an almost brutally end-of-the-line character, his life coming to a close in rabid talk of total human rot." The one moment of pity, supplied by the faithful retainer Flavius, is a touch that Burke sees as "quite Shakespearean, at least in the sense that a Shakespearean tragedy has a scene that softens the audience with tears of pity just before the final outbreak of victimage." He compares Flavius speech instructively to Desdemona's willow song, a connection discussed at greater length in Chapter Six, Burke's landmark essay on Othello (another reason why it is good to have all of these essays collected in one volume). When all is said and done, Burke is a reliable and subtle expositor of Shakespeare's plays. The second part of this essay turns to consider the nature of Timon as a dramaturgic invention. With all of the rigor shown in his Rhetoric of Religion (1961), Burke explores "invective," "lamentation," and "praise" seen as "the three freedoms." Fortunately Newstok restores paragraphs apparently excised by Burke's editor, Francis Ferguson. These are instructive paragraphs indeed, as they make clear why these three are linked and how they help explain the ineluctable humane movement charted out in Timon of Athens. Granting the disputation of authorship, Burke makes a solid case for Timon's "radicalism"--in its usual, literal, and etymological senses--and concludes that, although it "is not pretty," it is "extremely thorough." Likewise Burke is thorough and radical in his approach to the plays as a whole. He covers all of the chief topical issues and he seeks to dig to the root of things that often remain undetected by virtue of alluring speeches and the fast-paced sweep of a drama's action. Consequently this is a book that should be placed next to The Riverside Shakespeare on one's bookshelf. As a teacher I anticipate returning to it often, especially when sorting out what should go into an introductory lecture on a given play. And it is for this same reason that people outside the academy will want to have ready access to Burke as well: he gets to the bottom of things.