Garber, Marjorie. Shakespeare and Modern Culture. New York: Random House, 2008.
Grady, Hugh, ed. Shakespeare and Modernity: Early Modern to Mellinnium. New York: Routledge, 2000.
Singh, Jyotsna. “Different Shakespeares: The Bard in Colonial/Postcolonial India.” Theatre Journal 41.4 (1989): 445-458.
Trivedi, Poonam. “Shakespeare in India: An Introduction.” MIT Global Shakespeares, 20 Mar. 2000. Web. 10 Jan. 2013. <http://globalshakespeares.mit.edu/blog/2010/03/20/india>.
, Peter A. and Giuseppe Sciortino. “The Diversities of Europe: From European Modernity to the Making of the European Union.” Ethnicities 14.4 (2014): 485-497.
Lambert, Ladina Bezzola and Balz Engler. Shifting the Scene: Shakespeare in European Culture . Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2004.
Laroque, François. “Shakespeare’s Imaginary Geography.” Shakespeare and Renaissance Europe . Eds. Andrew Hadfield and Paul Hammond. London: Bloomsbury, 2004. 193-219.
Less, Timothy. “The Great Schism that Could Pull the EU Apart.” New Statesman 17
The essay examines a Bengali adaptation of Macbeth, namely Rudrapal Natak (published 1874) by Haralal Ray, juxtaposing it with differently accented commentaries on the play arising from the English-educated elites of 19th Bengal, and relating the play to the complex phenomenon of Hindu nationalism. This play remarkably translocates the mythos and ethos of Shakespeare’s original onto a Hindu field of signifiers, reformulating Shakespeare’s Witches as bhairavis (female hermits of a Tantric cult) who indulge unchallenged in ghastly rituals. It also tries to associate the gratuitous violence of the play with the fanciful yearning for a martial ideal of nation-building that formed a strand of the Hindu revivalist imaginary. If the depiction of the Witch-figures in Rudrapal undercuts the evocation of a monolithic and urbane Hindu sensibility that would be consistent with colonial modernity, the celebration of their violence may be read as an effort to emphasize the inclusivity (as well as autonomy) of the Hindu tradition and to defy the homogenizing expectations of Western enlightenment
W orks C ited
Bray, Alan. The Friend . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.
Bristol, Michael and Kathleen McLuskie, eds. Shakespeare and Modern Theater: The Performance of Modernity . London and New York: Routledge, 2001.
Dollimore, Jonathan and Alan Sinfield, eds. Political Shakespeare: Essays in Cultural Materialism . 2nd ed. Cornell University Press, 1985.
Heath, Joseph and Andrew Potter. Nation of Rebels: Why Counterculture Became Consumer Culture . New York: Harper Collins, 2004.
Holderness, Graham. Cultural
Spectator and the Spectacle: Audiences in Modernity and Postmodernity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
McLuskie, Kate and Kate Rumbold. Cultural Value in Twenty-first Century England: the Case of Shakespeare . Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2014.
Rancière, Jacques. Le Spectateur Emancipé. Paris: La Fabrique, 2008.
Rodrigues, Tiago. By Heart e Outras Peças Curtas . Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, 2016.
Shakespeare’s Sonnets. Ed. Stanley Wells. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
. “Patriarchal Territories: The Body Enclosed”. Rewriting the Renaissance: The Discourses of Sexual Difference in Early Modern Europe. Eds. M. Ferguson, M. Quilligan et al. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1986. 123-146.
Sinfield, A. “Cultural Materialism, Othello and the Politics of Plausibility”. Literary Theory: An Anthology . Eds. J. Rivkin and M. Ryan. Oxford: Blackwell, 1998. 804-826.
Russo, M. The Female Grotesque: Risk, Excess and Modernity , New York and London: Routledge, 1995.
no Yuminsha. Tokyo: Kawadeshobo Shinsha, 1993.
Heinrich, Patrick. The Making of Monolingual Japan: Language Ideology and Japanese Modernity. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 2012.
Minami, Ryuta. “Shakespeare Reinvented on the Contemporary Japanese Stage” in Performing Shakespeare in Japan. Eds. Ian Curruthers, John Gillies and Minami Ryuta. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001: 146-158.
Miyagi, Satoshi. Press conference, 5 April 2011 at the Institut Français, Tokyo. Trans. Mika Eglinton.
Shakespeare, William. Trans. Ádám Nádasdy. Hamlet, Dánia hercege: Tragédia két részben . Pécsi Nemzeti Színház [promptbook of the 2003 Pécs production; courtesy of Pécsi Nemzeti Színház], .
Zábrádi, Mariann. “A gonoszság napfényre jön, leplezze bár egy ország (...?).” Echo (May/2), 2003. 26-27.
Vardac, Alexander Nicholas. Stage to Screen: Theatrical Method from Garrick to Griffiths . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U.P., 1949.
Worthen, W. B. “Shakespearean Performativity.” Shakespeare and Modern Theatre: The Performance of Modernity . Ed. Michael
. “John Akomfrah: The Nine Muses .” The Wire . February 2012. 18 October 2016. < http://www.thewire.co.uk/about/artists/john-akomfrah/john-akomfrah_the-nine-muses >.
Burt, Richard and Julian Yates. What’s the Worst Thing You Can Do to Shakespeare? . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.
Calbi, Maurizio. Spectral Shakespeares. Media Adaptations in the Twenty-First Century . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.
Chambers, Iain. Mediterranean Crossings. The Politics of an Interrupted Modernity . Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2008
and Fetish in the Mission Encounter . Berkeley: U of California Press. 2007.
Keane, Webb. “Sincerity, “Modernity,” and the Protestants,” Cultural Anthropology 17.1 (2002): 65-92.
Knapp, Jeffrey. Shakespeare’s Tribe: Church, Nation, and Theater in Renaissance England . Chicago: U of Chicago Press, 1992.
Lippi-Green, Rosina. “Standard Language Ideology, and Discriminatory Pretext in the Courts,” Language in Society 23.2 (1994): 163-98.
Myers, Aaron M. Representation and Misrepresentation of the Puritan in Elizabethan Drama. Folcroft