BibTex RIS Cite

Complex Fusion of Virtues and Faults: Shakespeare’s Antony as a ‘Manliest’ Man

Year 2015, Volume: 3 Issue: 4, 17 - 29, 11.07.2016

Fehmi Turgut Öznur Yemez

Abstract

Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra presents a rigorous challenge in terms of character analysis since the central characters of the play, Antony and Cleopatra, are not unified figures acting in accordance with a recognizable personality. The characters’ complexity is enhanced by their limited action and reliable words. The words in the play are hardly trustworthy and the characters are too sophisticated to conceive as such making the interpretation of the characters more difficult. Thus, arguing that Mark Antony who can be praised or attacked remains questionable, this paper deals with the conflict between what Antony thinks about himself, what he does, and what the others think about him in order to demonstrate the multiplicity and complexity in his character.

Keywords

Antony and Cleopatra multiplicity of character manliness

References

  • Berek, Peter. “Doing and Undoing: The Value of Action in Antony and Cleopatra.” Shakespeare Quarterly, 32.3 (1982): 295-304.
  • Brown. John Russell. A. C. Bradley on Shakespeare’s Tragedies. New York: Palgrave
  • Macmillan, 2007, Print.
  • Clark, S., ed. The New Century Shakespeare Handbook. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc. (1974).
  • Dollimore J. “Antony and Cleopatra: Virtus under Erasure.” The Roman Plays. Ed. G. Holderness. London: Longman, (1996).
  • Harrier, Richard C. “Cleopatra’s End.” Shakespeare Quarterly, 13.1 (1962): 63-65.
  • Jones, Emrys., ed. Introduction. “Antony and Cleopatra.” William Shakespeare. London: Penguin, 1988.
  • Kaula, David. “The Time Sense of Antony and Cleopatra.” Shakespeare Quarterly, 15.3 (1964): 211-223.
  • Knight, Charles., ed. The Comedies, Histories, Tragedies and Poems of William Shakespeare (1852).
  • Lymann, Dean B. “The Sewanee Review.” University of the South: (2007).
  • Michael, Payne. “Erotic Irony and Polarity in Antony and Cleopatra.” Shakespeare Quarterly, 24.3 (1973): 265-279.
  • Schwartz, Elias. “The Shackling of Accidents: Antony and Cleopatra.” College English, 23. 7 (1962): 550-558.
  • Shakespeare, William. Antony and Cleopatra. The Complete Works of William Shakespeare. London: DKY Editions, 1990.
  • Spevack, M., ed. A New Variorum Edition of William Shakespeare, Antony and Cleopatra. New York: The Modern Language Association, 1990.
  • Wolf, William D. “New Heaven, New Earth”: The Escape from Mutability in Antony and Cleopatra.” Shakespeare Quarterly, 33.3 (1982): 328-335.

Year 2015, Volume: 3 Issue: 4, 17 - 29, 11.07.2016

Fehmi Turgut Öznur Yemez

Abstract

References

  • Berek, Peter. “Doing and Undoing: The Value of Action in Antony and Cleopatra.” Shakespeare Quarterly, 32.3 (1982): 295-304.
  • Brown. John Russell. A. C. Bradley on Shakespeare’s Tragedies. New York: Palgrave
  • Macmillan, 2007, Print.
  • Clark, S., ed. The New Century Shakespeare Handbook. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc. (1974).
  • Dollimore J. “Antony and Cleopatra: Virtus under Erasure.” The Roman Plays. Ed. G. Holderness. London: Longman, (1996).
  • Harrier, Richard C. “Cleopatra’s End.” Shakespeare Quarterly, 13.1 (1962): 63-65.
  • Jones, Emrys., ed. Introduction. “Antony and Cleopatra.” William Shakespeare. London: Penguin, 1988.
  • Kaula, David. “The Time Sense of Antony and Cleopatra.” Shakespeare Quarterly, 15.3 (1964): 211-223.
  • Knight, Charles., ed. The Comedies, Histories, Tragedies and Poems of William Shakespeare (1852).
  • Lymann, Dean B. “The Sewanee Review.” University of the South: (2007).
  • Michael, Payne. “Erotic Irony and Polarity in Antony and Cleopatra.” Shakespeare Quarterly, 24.3 (1973): 265-279.
  • Schwartz, Elias. “The Shackling of Accidents: Antony and Cleopatra.” College English, 23. 7 (1962): 550-558.
  • Shakespeare, William. Antony and Cleopatra. The Complete Works of William Shakespeare. London: DKY Editions, 1990.
  • Spevack, M., ed. A New Variorum Edition of William Shakespeare, Antony and Cleopatra. New York: The Modern Language Association, 1990.
  • Wolf, William D. “New Heaven, New Earth”: The Escape from Mutability in Antony and Cleopatra.” Shakespeare Quarterly, 33.3 (1982): 328-335.
There are 15 citations in total.

Details

Other ID JA48VJ22PG
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Fehmi Turgut This is me

Öznur Yemez

Publication Date July 11, 2016
Published in Issue Year 2015 Volume: 3 Issue: 4

Cite

APA Turgut, F., & Yemez, Ö. (2016). Complex Fusion of Virtues and Faults: Shakespeare’s Antony as a ‘Manliest’ Man. Narrative And Language Studies, 3(4), 17-29.
AMA Turgut F, Yemez Ö. Complex Fusion of Virtues and Faults: Shakespeare’s Antony as a ‘Manliest’ Man. nalans. July 2016;3(4):17-29.
Chicago Turgut, Fehmi, and Öznur Yemez. “Complex Fusion of Virtues and Faults: Shakespeare’s Antony As a ‘Manliest’ Man”. Narrative And Language Studies 3, no. 4 (July 2016): 17-29.
EndNote Turgut F, Yemez Ö (July 1, 2016) Complex Fusion of Virtues and Faults: Shakespeare’s Antony as a ‘Manliest’ Man. Narrative And Language Studies 3 4 17–29.
IEEE F. Turgut and Ö. Yemez, “Complex Fusion of Virtues and Faults: Shakespeare’s Antony as a ‘Manliest’ Man”, nalans, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 17–29, 2016.
ISNAD Turgut, Fehmi - Yemez, Öznur. “Complex Fusion of Virtues and Faults: Shakespeare’s Antony As a ‘Manliest’ Man”. Narrative And Language Studies 3/4 (July 2016), 17-29.
JAMA Turgut F, Yemez Ö. Complex Fusion of Virtues and Faults: Shakespeare’s Antony as a ‘Manliest’ Man. nalans. 2016;3:17–29.
MLA Turgut, Fehmi and Öznur Yemez. “Complex Fusion of Virtues and Faults: Shakespeare’s Antony As a ‘Manliest’ Man”. Narrative And Language Studies, vol. 3, no. 4, 2016, pp. 17-29.
Vancouver Turgut F, Yemez Ö. Complex Fusion of Virtues and Faults: Shakespeare’s Antony as a ‘Manliest’ Man. nalans. 2016;3(4):17-29.