Literature

Joanne Altieri, Ph.D. is a Professor of Literature at Cambridge University.  The stance Altieri takes with this essay is that there is a distinct absence of romantic representation  in Henry V, unlike many of Shakespeares other plays.  It analyzes the impact this fact had on its Elizabethan audiences.  It also develops the idea that the play offers two distinct impressions of Henry V, as generous benefactor and cruel tyrant.  It further goes on to discuss the constraint of romantic idealization.  The essay relies almost exclusively on the text, though it does interpret the historical figures  such as Alexander the Great  and their significance to the plot.  The weakness of this essay is the fact that it jumps around from subject to subject in a disjointed way.  While the argument is well grounded, it is not entirely persuasive due to the way it is presented.
Fergusson, Francis.  Introduction to Macbeth.  Shakespeares Tragedy of Monarchy.  New York Harper  Row, Inc., 1962.
Francis Fergusson was a University Professor of Comparative Literature at Rutgers University and has written numerous books about various authors.  Fergusson takes the position that Macbeth focuses on placing the monarchy in jeopardy and concludes that the story does not end until the monarchy is firmly established again.  Macbeth is about evil itself and the way men feel when under its spell.  Macbeth himself is a victim and perpetrator of evil as well as the character who sees the most deeply into what is going on.  It is this quality that made him susceptible to the pull of evil.  The Introduction to Macbeth walks the reader carefully through the play, beginning with its history.  The text is analytical without over complication.  The strength of the introduction is its emphasis on the text itself, using quotes from the play to emphasize its points.  As such, the points are well made and persuasive.
Gay, Penny.  The Taming of the Shrew Avoiding the Feminist Threat.  As She Likes It Shakespeares Unruly Women.  New York Routledge, 1994.  86-119.
Penny Gay is a Professor of English at the University of Sydney.  She has written several books analyzing Shakespeares plays as well as John Milton.  Gay claims that The Taming of the Shrew reinforces deeply held beliefs in audiences since it was first performed and that is what maintains its popularity.  The patriarchal system was in effect in Shakespeares day and still remains in place today.  It has changed subtly but still holds power over society.  As a comedy, it reveals the threat and failure of a womens revolt in a manner lighthearted enough to enjoy but effectively reinforcing the message.  This book chapter analyzes whether or not this play would be as popular as it is today if it had not been penned by Shakespeare.  This question is based on the fact that the plays title and central theme is grounded more in Elizabethan thinking that modern philosophy.  As a comedy, this play is laughed at and enjoyed, but it in fact abusive toward women and the final taming reveals that women must always be put in their place.  Gay writes very clearly and effectively.  She bases her argument on both historical background and the text of the play.  She reveals that in order to appease more modern audiences  particularly since the late-twentieth century  the play has been subtly edited to soften the feminist movement.
Horwich, Richard.  Riddle and Dilemma in The Merchant of Venice.  Studies in English Literature Spring 1977.  Vol. 17 Issue 2.  191-200.
Richard Horwich, Ph.D.  is an Adjunct Professor at New York University.  He has written several essays and literary criticisms of Shakespeare.  This essay concerns itself with the choices the characters are presented with in the play.  Due to the fact that the play shifts back and forth between Venice and Belmont, Horwich argues that the location itself is a choice.  The choices themselves drive the story forward, creating the dramatic tension and ultimately, resolution within the text.  It includes background information on Venice and the importance of this city as the location.  Horwichs argument is clearly defined in the beginning, but it seems to get off track shortly thereafter.  It relies heavily on the text in its interpretation, which strengthens the argument. 
Leggat, Alexander.  Twaynes New Critical Introductions to Shakespeare King Lear.  Boston G. K. Hall  Co., 1988.
Alexander Leggatt is a Professor of English at University College, University of Toronto.  In addition to this book, he has written two other works analyzing Shakespeares plays.  Leggatts argument stems from the ending of the play and the shock of Cordelias death.  He claims that the play prohibits repeat readings or productions due to the unpleasant surprise as to the ending.  Due to the fact that audiences have always wanted Cordelia to survive and receive her due, her demise has inevitably hurt the plays reception and production.  Leggatt analyzes the reception of King Lear as much as the text.  He reveals that the ending prevented playhouses from producing the play for more than 150 years.  He then walks through the play, revealing that there is no indication or foreshadowing of the ending within the text, concluding that her death comes as a complete shock and is therefore an inappropriate ending.
McDonald, Russ.  Introduction.  The Tragedy of Othello, the Merchant of Venice.  New York Penguin Books, 2001. 

Russ McDonald is a Professor of English Literature at Stanford University and works with a team of critical authors in analyzing Shakespeare and other authors.  The main argument of McDonald is that Shakespeare takes great pains to paint Othello as an outsider. He is separate from other characters within the play and different from the typical heroic figure.  In addition, unlike the other tragedies, it is not about power or control it is about love, its fragility and vulnerability to hate.  As such the battle for power is personal and emotional.  The Introduction effectively illustrates Othellos separateness from those around him. McDonald emphasizes that this difference is largely based on race and the name Othello itself.  It begins by making broad statements about Othellos character and how it relates to the story being told.  It then expands into textual analysis.  The arguments are well presented and establish a solid basis with which to analyze the work. 

Richmond, Hugh M.  Much Ado About Notables.  Shakespeare Studies.  New York Rosemont Publishing and Printing Corporation, 1979.  49-64.

Hugh Richmond is the Director, Shakespeare Program at the English Department, University of California at Berkeley.  This essay concentrates on Shakespeares larger body of work and claims that his ability as an author was grounded in his capacity to build on the work of other men.  He claims that Shakespeares outlines and composition reveal stories that are more syncretic than entirely original.  As an example, he studies the story of Much Ado About Nothing and its historical context.  He claims that Shakespeare uses the characterizations in the play to symbolize characteristics already in literature and popular in Elizabethan times.  The broad scope of his analysis makes Richmonds essay a little unfocused.  Lacking textual documentation, it is difficult to be completely persuaded by this essay.  It does, however, provide illuminating commentary on the historical context and implications of the play.

Waith, Eugene M.  Angel with Horns the Unity of Richard III.  Shakespeare the Histories.
Eugene Waith is a Professor of English at Yale University and has written and edited numerous books about Shakespeares tragedies and histories as well as the tragic hero.  Waiths argument is that Richard III is a predictable story based on the standard rotation of history.  He believes that someone who has observed history is able to accurately predict what follows.  As a history, it is presumed that the events are based on actual events, yet Waith claims that this claim is loosely accurate and the play is more fictional than historical.  The weakness of the analysis is that it does not rely or usually refer to the text but on outside documentation.  While this information is thorough and at time, effective, it creates a separation between the essay and the play itself.

Wilson, John Dover, C. H.  What Happens in Hamlet.  London University of Cambridge Press, 1959.
John Wilson originally released this analytical book in 1935 and it has been reprinted eight times since then.  Wilson was a Professor of English at Cambridge University.  The book offers several chapters about various aspects of the play Hamlet.  His main argument is that in order to fully understand Hamlet, or any play of the Shakespearian era, the reader must first understand the Elizabethan mind and how society lived and thought.  It is only by doing this can the various themes and subplots can be fully appreciated.  For the original audience, much of the plays story and background was based on their knowledge of the state of Denmark and this knowledge added meaning to the play.  Overall, the argument Wilson presents is thorough and thoughtful, written in clear, direct language.  Yet, it falls short of persuasion, as it does not account for the larger themes within the play that appeal even to modern audiences.  It also relies almost solely on outside resources rather than the text of the play itself.