Titlebook: Apes and Monkeys on the Early Modern Stage, 1603–1659; Teresa Grant Book 2024 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclu

GRUEL

Conclusion: A Productive Distortionnson did not use an ape because, unlike other antimasquers, it refuses to be contained or converted by the power of kingly majesty. The chapter moves on to Shirley’s absent-present jokes in his . (1634), and his troupe of monkeys in . (1653). The intrinsic metatheatricality of apes meant that Shirle

災(zāi)難

Habermas and Ricoeur’s Depth HermeneuticsBut, as the last chapter demonstrated, monkeys were not useful just to the Parliamentarian cause, as the works of Sir William Davenant?also confirm. This chapter explores . (1638) and . (1658), to show how Davenant used his monkeys, what they might have meant to their audiences, and how changing pol

Popcorn

The Philosophy of Psychoanalysis After ,e political. It makes connections across chapters to show that humans can be seen essentially as civilised monkeys, and that the metaphorical monkey interrogates the nature of . and . especially in the systems of organisation which prop up institutions. The nature of theatre—with its close relations

熄滅

Density

Perennial長期的

,‘Somewhat Like A Man’: Apes, Boy Players, Women, and women, ‘lesser’ beings, and monkeys is particularly powerful in plays written for the boys’ companies between 1600 and 1613. These associations play out in . (pr. 1605) and . (pr. 1606)—both written for the Children of the Chapel/Queen’s Revels—and in . (pr. 1611), according to its title page g

perpetual

受辱