Clorys and Orgasto: Difference between revisions
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
==Critical Commentary== | ==Critical Commentary== | ||
< | '''[[Works Cited:Manley and MacLean]]''' note that this play is one of several "[e]specially vexing" in that the title is "difficult to match to extant sources or stories" (127). | ||
<br><br> | |||
'''[[Works Cited:Wiggins]]]''', #878, includes this play in his general assessment of Strange's men's repertory items (now lost) that show up only in Henslowe's diary, 1592-3. Noting that the play is not marked "ne" and that it has just one performance, he considers it the most likely play in the company's repertory at this time to have been in production for some time already and thus by February 1592 to be at "the fag end" of a possibly successful run. Even so, he allows that it might be one of those which were experiencing "the last gasp of an ignominiously brief stage life." | |||
==For What It's Worth== | ==For What It's Worth== | ||
Revision as of 12:02, 1 November 2018
Playwright's Name ([[>1592]])
Historical Records
28 february 1591/2, xviijs
Theatrical Provenance
The sole record of this play is its appearance in the playlists of Lord Strange's men at the Rose playhouse during the first run of theirs recorded at that venue. Philip Henslowe began to list the plays performed at his playhouse (the Rose) on 19 February 1592, heading that list with the name of the company in residence: Strange's men. "Cloris and Ergasto" (the title as modernized by Wiggins #878) is entered for 28 February and not entered again.
Probable Genre(s)
<List possible genres of the play: if noted by a critic, cite them, e.g. "Comedy (Harbage)". If an original speculation, simply list the genre.>
Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues
<Enter any information about possible or known sources. Summarise these sources where practical/possible, or provide an excerpt from another scholar's discussion of the subject if available.>
References to the Play
<List any known or conjectured references to the lost play here.>
Critical Commentary
Works Cited:Manley and MacLean note that this play is one of several "[e]specially vexing" in that the title is "difficult to match to extant sources or stories" (127).
Works Cited:Wiggins], #878, includes this play in his general assessment of Strange's men's repertory items (now lost) that show up only in Henslowe's diary, 1592-3. Noting that the play is not marked "ne" and that it has just one performance, he considers it the most likely play in the company's repertory at this time to have been in production for some time already and thus by February 1592 to be at "the fag end" of a possibly successful run. Even so, he allows that it might be one of those which were experiencing "the last gasp of an ignominiously brief stage life."
For What It's Worth
<Enter any miscellaneous points that may be relevant, but don't fit into the above categories. This is the best place for highly conjectural thoughts.>
Works Cited
<List all texts cited throughout the entry, except those staple texts whose full bibliographical details have been provided in the masterlist of Works Cited found on the sidebar menu. Use the coding below to format the list>
<If you haven't done so already, also add here any key words that will help categorise this play. Follow the examples below to make category tags.>
Site created and maintained by your name, affiliation; updated DD Month YYYY.