Picture of author.

Stephen Greenblatt

Autor(a) de The Swerve: How the World Became Modern

70+ Works 15,576 Membros 239 Reviews 12 Favorited

About the Author

Stephen Greenblatt is a literary critic, theorist and scholar. He is the author of Three Modern Satirists: Waugh, Orwell, and Huxley (1965); Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare (1980); Learning to Curse: Essays in Early Modern Culture (1990); Redrawing the Boundaries: The mostrar mais Transformation of English and American Literary Studies (1992); The Norton Shakespeare (1997); Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare (2004); Shakespeare's Freedom (2010); and The Swerve: How the World Became Modern (2011). (Bowker Author Biography) mostrar menos
Image credit: Bachrach

Obras de Stephen Greenblatt

Hamlet in Purgatory (2001) 258 cópias
The Norton Shakespeare: Tragedies (1997) — Editor — 186 cópias
The Norton Shakespeare: Comedies (1997) — Editor — 164 cópias
The Norton Shakespeare: Romances and Poems (1997) — Editor — 133 cópias
The Norton Shakespeare: Histories (1997) — Editor — 127 cópias
The Norton Shakespeare Vol. 2: Later Plays (2008) — Editor — 94 cópias
New world encounters (1986) 37 cópias
Allegory and Representation (1981) 37 cópias
The Greenblatt Reader (2005) 24 cópias
The Norton Shakespeare: Two Volume Set (2015) — Editor — 5 cópias
The Uncoupling 1 exemplar(es)

Associated Works

The Complete Works of William Shakespeare (1589) — Editor, algumas edições31,576 cópias
Religio Medici and Urne-Buriall (New York Review Books Classics) (2002) — Editor, algumas edições233 cópias
Criticism: Major Statements (1964) — Contribuinte — 220 cópias
Staging the Renaissance (1991) — Contribuinte — 75 cópias
Reynard the Fox: A New Translation (2015) — Prefácio, algumas edições72 cópias
A New History of Early English Drama (1997) — Prefácio, algumas edições56 cópias

Etiquetado

16th century (374) 17th century (344) anthology (980) biography (625) British (377) British literature (484) classic (825) classic literature (167) classics (1,047) collection (274) comedy (215) criticism (129) drama (2,668) early modern (147) ebook (122) Elizabethan (200) England (315) English (378) English literature (852) fiction (1,742) hardcover (238) history (1,089) literary criticism (367) literature (1,890) non-fiction (902) own (191) philosophy (235) play (474) plays (1,878) poetry (2,248) read (184) reference (267) Renaissance (537) sonnets (161) textbook (184) theatre (972) to-read (1,097) tragedy (206) unread (159) William Shakespeare (3,618)

Conhecimento Comum

Nome padrão
Greenblatt, Stephen
Nome de batismo
Greenblatt, Stephen Jay
Data de nascimento
1943-11-07
Sexo
male
Nacionalidade
USA
Local de nascimento
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Locais de residência
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
Berkeley, California, USA
Educação
Yale University (B.A.|1964|Ph.D|1969)
Pembroke College, Cambridge (M.Phil.|1966)
Ocupação
professor
literary critic
scholar
Relacionamentos
Targoff, Ramie (wife)
Organizações
University of California, Berkeley
Harvard University
Modern Language Association of America
Premiações
American Academy of Arts and Sciences (1987)
American Philosophical Society (2007)
American Academy of Arts and Letters (2008)
James Russell Lowell Prize (1989 and 2011)
Erasmus Institute Prize (2002)
Mellon Distinguished Humanist Award (2002) (mostrar todas 12)
William Shakespeare Award for Classical Theater (2005)
Wilbur Cross Medal (2010)
National Book Award for Nonfiction (2011)
Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction (2012)
Holberg Prize (2016)
Accademia degli Arcadi
Agente
Jill Kneerim
Pequena biografia
Stephen Greenblatt is the John Cogan University Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University as well as a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award for Nonfiction. He is the General Editor of The Norton Shakespeare and the General Editor of The Norton Anthology of English Literature. He divided his time between Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Vermont. [from The Swerve (2011)

Membros

Resenhas

Going into this book, I suspected that I would not find the author's conclusion (that Lucretius' poetic explication of Epicurean philosophy, On the Nature of Things was a keystone of modern materialistic thought) compelling. And that suspicion was correct. But the book was enjoyable, nonetheless.
[Audiobook Note: The reader, Edoardo Ballerini, was great. He deftly handled all the Latin, Italian, German and French text. (Although I do have one quibble. Like most English-speakers, he put the emphasis on Epicurus' name on the 3rd syllable, instead of the 2nd where it belongs.)]… (mais)
1 vote
Marcado
Treebeard_404 | outras 140 resenhas | Jan 23, 2024 |
This was a very interesting read. Through several plays - from Richard III to Caesar and Coriolanus - author guides us through the political views Shakespeare had on his contemporaries (people and aristocracy) and way he saw parallels with his time and historical examples of murderous villains that found their way to the top in order to rule their lands.

Is it surprising that Shakespeare hid/presented all his views in form of plays? To be honest no. Plays were form of entertainment (not unlike today's dramas and thrillers) but much more honest to their public because average citizen knew much better what is going on around him (when compared to modern equivalents). Everybody definitely knew what the story was about and what was alluded at but everybody kept quiet (including the censors) unless concrete actions were taken. They were aware that people need breathing space and be able to comment and critique the rulers (remember jesters? Their role was sort of mement-mori, to remind rulers that they are not almighty. Can you imagine jesters to be able to show bad sides of current rule anywhere? They would be lynched the moment they would say something masses do not agree with).

I enjoyed the analysis, it was very detailed, especially parts on Richard III and Lear. And of course as it usually goes nowadays, author could not resist but bring on the He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Made-From-2016.
Hahahahahahahahaha, truly funny. You see, there seems to be a complete misconception between what populist and tyrant is. If these terms were equal then every politician since 1960's could be marked as a tyrant because they are all populists. And why do I say 1960's? Because up to that point it was expected that politician = statesman. Unfortunately when you just take a look at series of politicians from last 30 years, you wont see statesmen but rather poor group of populists who just happened to be at the top - one who every so often launched missiles because of his adultery, you will see second one that started multiple wars because economy was off so he started 20-years-and-ongoing campaigns in far countries and darn the consequences (remember the reasons like small things never confirmed (WMDs....)), third one that was talking about ending wars of the previous one but just continued them, fourth that was vulgar and loud mouth (and for this people did not like him) and said what was on the mind of many and finally fifth that reverted on almost everything he said in his campaign year.

Was anyone of these people statesman? No, they are professional politicians (apart from 2016-person since he was media person, celebrity you might say, bombast and vulgar but again no better than others).

This is where author fails in my opinion when it comes to parallels to Shakespearean tyrants. Tyrants from Shakespeare's plays were strong but very flawed individuals - to be ultimate ruler of life and death it takes strong person to remain sane. And these are not strong persons in that [mental] sense. Take Lear for example, from very wise person he became a fool. Whatever we might think about Caesar he was pushed to the limits because he was too successful (and success especially in those days was a danger to Senat bureaucrats). Coriolanus story shows how just Senate is - not at all. Maybe this play is closest to our own society because it shows what populist political body is capable of.

In modern society we do not have to be scared of tyrant (single person ruling everyone) because it wont happen. We need to be scared of tyranny of bureaucrats, grey people in the background. Just look at all the petty officials that seized control over cities, counties and parts of country, none is ready to relive themselves of those powers, some say they need to stay in force for years to come. These are true tyrants that we need to be afraid of today. But unfortunately they are amorphous mass, you cannot point to no-one exactly, only persons we see are high-level politicians and these are in and out, they are not constant. People in the back are.

What author skips over is that ever present emotional factor in political arena. Richard III craves it, Jack Cade is perfect example of emotional manipulator who drives people to do horrendous things, Caesar is killed because emotional response of population towards him is seen as crime by Brutus and his group who see themselves "more catholic than Pope" because it is only them who know what is good for Rome. Coriolanus is automaton that enrages the masses due to his bluntness and insensitivity and this finally brings his doom.

As long as people cannot control their emotions and resist calls to be first-and-foremost activists and not rational persons schemers in the government will always use that.

Can one imagine Shakespeare working in modern times? I am sure he would adapt to new technologies but I also have a feeling that he would be cancelled, his books burned, called this and that if his work does not flow with the main stream. I wonder what would he think about people that have everything but are so ready to destroy others because of differences of ideas. What would he think of millions of Richard's or Corilanus' lurking in the shadows? I think he would be justly terrified. As we all should be.

Very good book. Highly recommended.
… (mais)
 
Marcado
Zare | outras 10 resenhas | Jan 23, 2024 |
Fascinating book. It's the kind of book that made me want to dog-ear pages and underline sentences so I could re-read particular paragraphs, but since it's a library book, I couldn't do that.

I really enjoyed this book even though some parts of it were slow reading for me. Some reviewers have said it's a polemic against the church but I didn't take it that way. If nothing else, I discovered that I'm an Epicurean. Also, it's made me want to read Lucretius' poem "On the Nature of Things." The ideas expressed in Lucretius' poem are that the "universe functions without the aid of gods, that religious fear is damaging to human life, that pleasure and virtue are not opposites but intertwined, and that matter is made up of very small material particles in eternal motion, randomly colliding and swerving in new directions." (from the book jacket)

The Swerve is the story of how the ideas in Lucretius' poem threatened the church and so was almost lost to history until a book hunter, Poggio Bracciolini, found it almost a thousand years later and translated and copied it. The Swerve is filled with wonderful and weird stories e.g. copyists in the scriptoriums had to maintain complete silence so in order to request a new volume, they developed an "elaborate gestural language" which included putting fingers in their mouths as if gagging to indicate they wanted a dangerous pagan book. There's also a section on "the Lie Factory" (the papal court) about which Poggio wrote the Facetiae where he recorded all the gossip and conversation (including the slanderous and obscene) that went on. Lots of interesting stuff here.



… (mais)
 
Marcado
ellink | outras 140 resenhas | Jan 22, 2024 |
I'm at a loss to tell what it was. Definitely not what I expected it to be. Yet I admit some may like it. An utter surprise.
 
Marcado
Den85 | outras 140 resenhas | Jan 3, 2024 |

Listas

Prêmios

You May Also Like

Associated Authors

Estatísticas

Obras
70
Also by
8
Membros
15,576
Popularidade
#1,459
Avaliação
½ 4.4
Resenhas
239
ISBNs
252
Idiomas
18
Favorito
12

Tabelas & Gráficos