Apocryphal Thinking, or, Deuterocanonical Shakespeare. (2nd October 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Purkis, James
• Is Part Of: Shakespeare. Volume 13:Number 4(2017)
• Page Start: 292
• Page End: 308
• Publication Date: 2017-10-02
• Subjects: editing -- canon -- attribution -- authorship -- apocrypha; Periodicals; 822.33
• DOI: 10.1080/17450918.2017.1402814
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1745-0918

Abstract

ABSTRACT: This article takes the contested relationship between the Christian canon and the Apocrypha in early modern England as a model for understanding three recent editions of Shakespeare's works. A Shakespeare Apocrypha found its first formal instantiation in C. F. Tucker Brooke's collection in 1908. Brooke's belief that there may be fragments of Shakespeare's writing among the apocryphal drama, but that such instances are neither "Shakespearian" nor warrant inclusion among Shakespeare's works, poses a question for recent work by attributionists that have identified Shakespeare's hand beyond the bounds of the traditional canon. Over the past 30 years, series and editions of Shakespeare's drama have introduced more plays, changing the canon. Three recent Complete Works, the Royal Shakespeare Company edition, the third edition of the Norton Shakespeare and the New Oxford Shakespeare each reproduce Shakespeare's works in two different forms or editions, with a complete works supplemented by another body of texts. The relationships between the constituent editions echo many of the uncertainties between canon and Apocrypha contested in Shakespeare's time. Analysing the tensions between the proto- and deuterocanonical collections of Shakespeare reveals the contingent nature of the canon and should occasion a rethinking of what we mean by Shakespeare's works.