View source for Lecture BM1, Summer 2009: Round up

[[User:Sabine Gebken|Sabine Gebken]] writes: 

I hope I am not too late to ask some questions for tomorrow’s session. There are four questions that came to my mind while I summed up the lecture.

*The first question concerns the eighth lecture on Drama 1: Shakespeare. On the last slide is said: “Be aware of the problematic aspects in the construction of  the Elizabethan period”. I couldn’t remember to have heard anything of problems like that. So what are these problems like?

*The second question is on the second part of the drama topic. There is a slide that carries the headline “Contextualising the Country Wife”. The first four points repeat the development of theatre and the fifth says that the “Country Wife” responds to that position. For me it was not clear to what point of the development the “Country Wife” responds. And at least I did not really get how this “crazy” comedy responds to the conservative positions.

:*It is a typical "Restoration Comedy" - fitting into the political context of the new court life Charles II established in London after his return in 1660.

*The next question concerns the same lecture and the slide with the title “The Early 18th century audience”. There is one point that says that there sat “Orange Wenches” in the audience. I couldn’t find anywhere what “Orange Wenches” are.

*And my last question is again on the same lecture where is said that the 19th century sensational Naturalism had a tendency towards cinematic realism. This statement really confused me! I couldn’t get the connection between Naturalism. I understand the connection between Naturalism and Realism but what has it to do with cinema?

[[User:Daniel Sip|Daniel Sip]] added the following:

*Could you recapitulate the Approaches of Structuralism and Post Structuralism?
 
* Is Formalism an author-orientated approach or context-orientated?!

* On the "History of Literature" session: Why did [[User:Olaf Simons|Olaf Simons]] show us 18th century 'Literary Journals' - was it just to show that such journals are different today?

*One of the slides read: "The International market of the belles lettres with fiction being part of the production of histories has been deconceptualized" What is meant with that and why did this "fdeconceptualisation" happen?

* What is the difference between the "Belles Lettres", "Fiction" and "Literature"? How can I prove that the a text is part of the "Belles Lettre" or "Literature". What is meant with the statement that there is but one global concept of the "Belles Lettres"?

* On "The early modern novel": The conflict between novels and romances - does it just mean thet the English novel was a reaction on the French romance? The presentation seemed to prove that such a view is problematic...

*How does the publishing history and the reception of ''Robinson Crusoe'' fit in this conflict. ''Robinson Crusoe'' was not the typical English novel of this period, it rather showed aspects of a romance. Was this shown to prove a mistake in the Ian Watt thesis?

*On the "Englisch Novel in the 19th century" session: Could we take another look at the questions given there? 

* What was meant with "Seriousness" and "Popularity" in this lecture? 

*Is there a relationship between the "circulating library" and the "rise of the novel"?