{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030303030303030304, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008912655971479501, 'mean_word_length': 5.552529182879377, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Shakespeare and Social Dialogue: Dramatic Language and Elizabethan Letters (review)

But the finest achievement is where we might not think to find it—in what Cartwright exposes as the growing interiority dramatized by the often-silent Grissell.“Grissell not only commands attention, she infuses other characters and audience members with her displaced feelings, evoking from them the demonstration of her interiority—a theatricality particular to humanist dramaturgy” (153). “The humanist commitment to affective poetics advances the new 1560s spectacle of women as magnetic, transformative objects of knowledge” (156). This holds true too of the romances of the 1570s— the preponderant form of drama for the decade that would so inspire and worry Stephen Gosson and others—as, in the spirit of Petrarch, Platonic or ideal love is merged with the celebration of physicality, reaching its height in the spectacular onstage bloodletting of Fidelia in Love and Fortune, who, opening her veins from beneath her breast, combines the sacrifice of Christ with the nourishment of milk in what may be the century’s most startling and powerful spectacle of power and agency. “Renaissance drama,” Cartwright sums,“expresses the unresolved contest for meaning between two views of humankind, the fragmented being of the medieval moralities and the autonomous, empirical individual” sung in the anthems of Burckhardt. “But that Foucauldian distinction between two epistemes may be overdrawn” (8). Foucault is not alone here. In painstaking historical detail, in close textual observation, in imagined performative spectacle, Cartwright’s view is not only modifying and corrective. It is seminal.