Architectural Rhetoric in Shakespeare and Spenser by Jennifer C. Vaught

Abstract

Reviewed by: Architectural Rhetoric in Shakespeare and Spenser by Jennifer C. Vaught Goran Stanivukovic Architectural Rhetoric in Shakespeare and Spenser. By Jennifer C. Vaught. (Research in Medieval and Early Modern Culture, 24) Berlin: de Gruyter. 2019. xi+228 pp. €89.95. ISBN 978–1–5015–1793–8. The essence of this book lies in the word 'architectural' and in its different representations in the works of Shakespeare and Spenser. The book offers a thorough [End Page 280] and persuasive, comparative analysis of 'intertextual allusions' (p. 9) in the works of these two writers, evidenced in 'analogous characters, dwellings, and situations they imagine' rhetorically (p. 11). It makes a strong case for a cross-disciplinary approach to the study of textual and visual poetics in literature. The clear sense of architecture, however, contrasts with the fluid and flexible use of rhetoric. Jennifer C. Vaughtʼs approach to rhetoric is not applied to an extensively formulated theory and system, as it was developed and understood in the early modern intellectual sphere, but instead to language and discourse more broadly. There is a sense that rhetoric is used meta-rhetorically, not to explore how form, persuasion, and effective styles shape meaning, embody ideas, and affect the audience. Vaught sets out to 'examine the rhetoric of architecture throughout The Faerie Queene and in Shakespeareʼs history plays [. . .] [in] Troilus and Cressida, the Roman plays Antony and Cleopatra and Coriolanus, the tragedies Macbeth and King Lear, and the romance The Tempest' (p. 1). This is a comprehensive corpus, and Vaught must be praised for engaging with such a large body of major plays within a coherent argument. For a book that puts emphasis on rhetoric, however, the absence of an in-depth analysis of rhetorical texts is glaring. The passing references to Peacham and Sidney only, and to Quintilian, suggest that rhetoric as itself materialist practice is not the thrust of the book. In her focused, tightly argued study, however, Vaught is excellent when she explores mnemonic and cognitive aspects of rhetoric and when she explains how memory produced effect by linking concrete architectural forms to specific ideas. Most of Vaughtʼs book comprises new readings of 'the world of things, from houses to hammers' (p. 9) as expressions of the body, especially of the permeable body. The solidity of architecture and 'things' and, in contrast, the permeability of the body, are brought together in excellent analyses of the mind-body dichotomy expressed in the language of architectural form and design. The book consists of six chapters, starting with a general discussion based on reading the motif of the permeable body in a literary corpus including The Faerie Queene (I and II) and 1–2 Henry 6, which establishes the methodological foundations for the book. The second chapter continues a discussion of the Henriad plays, but focusing on the expressive power of the language of rhetoric to embody political meaning. This chapter offers a thought-provoking analysis of the motif of the ruined castle in Richard II, a motif analogous to the kingʼs state of mind. From an analysis of exterior settings, the book moves to an exploration of interior spaces. The focus is on The Faerie Queene again, and on Britomartʼs embodiment and interiority in relation to the spatial interiority. The subject of Chapter 4 is the cityʼs ruins and walls, with Spenserʼs minor work 'Ruins of Rome' interpreted alongside a selection of Shakespeareʼs sonnets, Troilus and Cressida, and Coriolanus. Especially original is the exploration of linguistic and thematic parallels of Books IV and V from The Faerie Queene alongside Antony and Cleopatra, focusing on 'built environment' imagined as the body and framing psychological and mental states such as grief and anxiety. The final chapter examines depictions of the body and mind 'as analogous to hellish and story surroundings', to decaying and crumbling buildings, [End Page 281] and to an 'entrapping labyrinth' (p. 125). There remains much in Vaughtʼs probing and lucidly argued book that deserves critical attention and that will give her study currency beyond the bounds of literary studies. Goran Stanivukovic Saint Maryʼs University Copyright © 2022 Modern Humanities Research Association