Historicists - Early Modern

[Dr. Old Bill]

I've started my Ph.D. program research in earnest, and have assembled a healthy list of POIs and programs that would seem to "fit" quite well with my interests...but since it has been so quiet here lately, I figure I might as well crowdsource a little bit to get a sense of people / programs I might have overlooked. I have two or three more specific interests, but all of them would seem to fit under the more general umbrella of historicism (or, dare I say New Historicism) in early modern drama. UPenn has shot to the top of my list because of people like Peter Stallybrass and Ania Loomba (who is not as much of a historicist, but has written extensively on the context of race in Shakespeare), while Yale, Berkeley, OSU, Rutgers, and UNC-Chapel Hill are all on my shortlist as well. Still, I'm sure there are many others out there that I haven't thought about or haven't been able to research as yet...so if any of you happen to know of professors who are still doing New Historicism (whether they use that slightly outmoded term or not), I would love to hear about them!

[Warelin]

Stephen Greenblatt (Harvard?) Isn't he considered a founder or something of New Historicism?
Jean E. Howard (Columbia)
Joe Loewenstein (WashU)
Marjorie Levinson (Michigan- She published in 2012 on New Historicism)
Alan Liu (Was originally from Yale, but moved to teach at UCSB)

[Ramus]

For what it's worth, my sense is that the majority of early modernists would identify themselves as historicist, or at least as working on something involving some historical component. Even those people/programs that lean toward the more theoretical, "trendy" topics can be strongly skewed toward historicism (UMich, for example).

What are the two or three more specific topics you're interested in? I might be able to throw out a couple of names if I knew that.

I'm glad to hear you're shooting for Penn -- I have it on good authority that they have a real death of EM graduate students currently and are trying to correct that this cycle. 

And if you have any questions about OSU, feel free to PM me! 

 

[Dr. Old Bill]

58 minutes ago, Ramus said:

For what it's worth, my sense is that the majority of early modernists would identify themselves as historicist, or at least as working on something involving some historical component. Even those people/programs that lean toward the more theoretical, "trendy" topics can be strongly skewed toward historicism (UMich, for example).

What are the two or three more specific topics you're interested in? I might be able to throw out a couple of names if I knew that.

I'm glad to hear you're shooting for Penn -- I have it on good authority that they have a real death of EM graduate students currently and are trying to correct that this cycle. 

And if you have any questions about OSU, feel free to PM me! 

 

Thanks Ramus! Yeah, so far UPenn looks like the closest fit for me. My eventual WS significantly engages with two of Loomba's writings, and one of my LOR writers (the professor whose course I wrote my WS paper for) turned me on to Stallybrass, who is clearly right up my alley as well. I don't know as much about Rebecca Bushnell and Rita Coleman, but it seems that they would be complementary, at least.

One of my main specializations is historicist race theory (hence the Loomba connection), and slightly more broadly, geohumoral theory and the body etc. Michael Schoenfeldt is one of the leading figures in that sub-field, though I'll have to give UMich some more thought / research before I go down that road. Some of the most interesting recent scholarship in that field comes from professors at SLACs etc. though (like Kim F. Hall at Barnard College).

I'm also developing a strong interest in the history of the book, and material culture more generally. Theresa Coletti stoked that interest, and I'll be taking a course with Kellie Robertston in the fall on the effect of the Gutenberg Press on print culture...and I find I'm more excited about that course than any other so far. OSU has Sarah Neville, Alan B. Farmer, and Richard Dutton...all of whom dabble quite extensively in that area.

A third, slightly unrelated interest of mine is in Shakespeare's treatment of the fickle masses...particularly in his ancient Greece and Rome plays (with Coriolanus and Julius Caesar my favorite examples...though Timon of Athens and others deal with the topic directly as well). Still, that's probably more of a long-term project for me than something I need to think about engaging with at this stage.

 

P.S. Thanks for those names, @Warelin. Greenblatt is indeed one of the "rock stars" of the New Historicism, as is Stephen Orgel, though they're probably too far beyond the approach of graduate students at this point. I also won't be applying to Harvard for personal reasons. Stanford, on the other hand...

[Ramus]

25 minutes ago, Wyatt's Terps said:

Thanks Ramus! Yeah, so far UPenn looks like the closest fit for me. My eventual WS significantly engages with two of Loomba's writings, and one of my LOR writers (the professor whose course I wrote my WS paper for) turned me on to Stallybrass, who is clearly right up my alley as well. I don't know as much about Rebecca Bushnell and Rita Coleman, but it seems that they would be complementary, at least.

I've heard Stallybrass is a great mentor for graduate students. I know a couple of people that took his dissertation seminar at the Folger a couple of years ago, and they've only had the best things to say about him. I don't know about Coleman, but I really like Bushnell's work on humanism from the late 90s. Not sure what she's doing now, though. 

28 minutes ago, Wyatt's Terps said:

One of my main specializations is historicist race theory (hence the Loomba connection), and slightly more broadly, geohumoral theory and the body etc. Michael Schoenfeldt is one of the leading figures in that sub-field, though I'll have to give UMich some more thought / research before I go down that road. Some of the most interesting recent scholarship in that field comes from professors at SLACs etc. though (like Kim F. Hall at Barnard College).

They have a lot of great people working on race/bodies at UMich, Mike being only one of them (he's an alarmingly nice guy to boot). I know, for one, that several of their graduate students focus on the topic, so you wouldn't feel too alone there. I'm sure she's already on your list, but Mary Floyd-Wilson wrote the definitive work on geohumoral race stuff about a decade ago, so UNC might be ideal.  You also might look into people working on historical affect. That might be a bit outside your wheelhouse, but the turn toward emotion and affect has attracted a number of people who focused on humoral theory and the body in 00s. The contributors to the recent edited collection Historical Affects and the Early Modern Theater (Routledge, 2015) might be of some interest.

47 minutes ago, Wyatt's Terps said:

I'm also developing a strong interest in the history of the book, and material culture more generally. Theresa Coletti stoked that interest, and I'll be taking a course with Kellie Robertston in the fall on the effect of the Gutenberg Press on print culture...and I find I'm more excited about that course than any other so far. OSU has Sarah Neville, Alan B. Farmer, and Richard Dutton...all of whom dabble quite extensively in that area.

OSU is a really great place to attend if you're interested in book history. Sarah and Alan are both wonderful (Richard retired this past semester, unfortunately). We also have David Brewer here -- he's an 18th-centuryist, but he does a fair amount with book history and trades off teaching the book history class with Alan. Our library has a pretty decent early book and manuscript collection, and a fair number of us regularly work with those materials. For non-OSU book history people, you might check into these folks: David Kastan (Yale), Zach Lesser (Penn -- I can't believe how deep their early modern bench is), Bill Sherman (York), Heidi Brayman Hackel (UCR), Randall McLeod (Toronto), Peter Blayney (also Toronto), and Gary Taylor (Florida State), to name a few. In general, UVA has a strong reputation in book history and textual criticism, though I can't remember if they have any early modern book historians on payroll.

1 hour ago, Wyatt's Terps said:

A third, slightly unrelated interest of mine is in Shakespeare's treatment of the fickle masses...particularly in his ancient Greece and Rome plays (with Coriolanus and Julius Caesar my favorite examples...though Timon of Athens and others deal with the topic directly as well). Still, that's probably more of a long-term project for me than something I need to think about engaging with at this stage.

I can't really offer much input on this interest, though I'm pleased to know there's another Coriolanus fan out there in the world! Easily the most underrated of Shakespeare's plays. Its class dynamics are absolutely fascinating, and Aufidius' rumination on Coriolanus at the end of Act 4 is Shakespeare at his best. 

[Dr. Old Bill]

8 hours ago, Ramus said:

I've heard Stallybrass is a great mentor for graduate students. I know a couple of people that took his dissertation seminar at the Folger a couple of years ago, and they've only had the best things to say about him. I don't know about Coleman, but I really like Bushnell's work on humanism from the late 90s. Not sure what she's doing now, though.

That's good to know. I checked out a copy of his Renaissance Clothing and the Materials of Memory a couple of months ago, but it was recalled before I had a chance to read it. Still, that's definitely the sort of scholarship that intrigues me.

8 hours ago, Ramus said:

They have a lot of great people working on race/bodies at UMich, Mike being only one of them (he's an alarmingly nice guy to boot). I know, for one, that several of their graduate students focus on the topic, so you wouldn't feel too alone there. I'm sure she's already on your list, but Mary Floyd-Wilson wrote the definitive work on geohumoral race stuff about a decade ago, so UNC might be ideal.  You also might look into people working on historical affect. That might be a bit outside your wheelhouse, but the turn toward emotion and affect has attracted a number of people who focused on humoral theory and the body in 00s. The contributors to the recent edited collection Historical Affects and the Early Modern Theater (Routledge, 2015) might be of some interest.

Alright. I'll definitely dig more into UMich. I applied there in my last cycle a couple of years ago, and though my interests were quite a bit different then, I remember they had a wealth of scholars that appealed to me. As for Mary Floyd-Wilson...definitely! She's one of the main reasons I'll be applying to UNC-Chapel Hill. I've read most of English Ethnicity and Race in Early Modern England, and her work is definitely key to my interests. I will be sure to check out Historical Affects... soon as well.

8 hours ago, Ramus said:

OSU is a really great place to attend if you're interested in book history. Sarah and Alan are both wonderful (Richard retired this past semester, unfortunately). We also have David Brewer here -- he's an 18th-centuryist, but he does a fair amount with book history and trades off teaching the book history class with Alan. Our library has a pretty decent early book and manuscript collection, and a fair number of us regularly work with those materials. For non-OSU book history people, you might check into these folks: David Kastan (Yale), Zach Lesser (Penn -- I can't believe how deep their early modern bench is), Bill Sherman (York), Heidi Brayman Hackel (UCR), Randall McLeod (Toronto), Peter Blayney (also Toronto), and Gary Taylor (Florida State), to name a few. In general, UVA has a strong reputation in book history and textual criticism, though I can't remember if they have any early modern book historians on payroll.

Good to know about OSU! Kastan is definitely one of the key POIs at Yale, and I've come across Hackel's name a bit. I'm just not sure if UCR has a large enough early modern department to make applying worthwhile, but we'll see. I spent a month in Riverside, and lived in nearby Rancho Cucamonga for several months back in 2001, so I know and like the area, at least. As for UVA...something has always put me off about their program. I can't put my finger on what, but I've never got a good vibe. Perhaps that's a stupid reason to neglect a seemingly great fit of a program, but when combined with my reluctance to move back to Virginia (for a bevy of reasons), I'm probably going to pass on UVA once again. I don't think I would apply to Canadian programs, since the funding (rather, the tuition remission) situation isn't great. Then again, being Canadian myself, it would seem to make a lot of sense, since I wouldn't need to worry about visas etc. We'll see.

8 hours ago, Ramus said:

I can't really offer much input on this interest, though I'm pleased to know there's another Coriolanus fan out there in the world! Easily the most underrated of Shakespeare's plays. Its class dynamics are absolutely fascinating, and Aufidius' rumination on Coriolanus at the end of Act 4 is Shakespeare at his best. 

Ah! Yes, I truly love Coriolanus, and agree that it is woefully underrated. While it is often difficult (and slightly juvenile) to bandy about the term "favorite" when it comes to works in one's field, I have no issue with saying that Coriolanus is my favorite Shakespeare play. Its themes speak to me more than any other. I find it interesting that the first two acts of Timon of Athens almost achieve an inversion of those same themes, though the utter lack of development in acts three through five undermine its effectiveness as a play. I had an independent study lined up with Amanda Bailey, who is also very interested in Coriolanus and the political sphere in Shakespeare...but she had to back out when it became clear that she would be named Chair of the department. So I'm still looking for someone to explore Coriolanus at length with, but may have to just accept that any project on the play will have to be self-guided.

[poliscar]

Have you thought about Northwestern at all? Laurie Shannon is stellar, and Kasey Evans' work would go nicely with your interest in Race & Ethnicity. Northwestern English is also one of the best places for Critical Race Theory in general, so you'd have a broader context there for your work. 

[Dr. Old Bill]

1 hour ago, poliscar said:

Have you thought about Northwestern at all? Laurie Shannon is stellar, and Kasey Evans' work would go nicely with your interest in Race & Ethnicity. Northwestern English is also one of the best places for Critical Race Theory in general, so you'd have a broader context there for your work. 

Yep! Northwestern is on my shortlist, with Shannon and Evans my two main POIs. Thanks for chiming in!