Othello is a test case for assessing the relative abilities of critical race study and traditional literary scholarship to explain Othello’s jealousy. Race critics prefer ‘politically engaged scholarship’ to the traditional standards of ‘sound scholarship’. Its explanation of Othello’s jealousy in terms of his race and Venetian racism suff…[Read more]

This essay attempts a reconceptualized relationship between Jesus the Jewish man and Christ the Christian messiah, with the twin purposes of mitigating the anti-Semitism of the Synoptic Gospels and reclaiming Jesus for Jews. I critique the quest for the historical Jesus, assess the Gospel accounts of Jesus, and situate Jesus in Christianity,…[Read more]

Describes and analyzes two episodes of article rejections based on political correctness and several published instances of politically correct inverse racism. Shows that political correctness in judging scholarship on race uses a double standard which enables reverse racism and an unsavory rhetoric. Discusses political correctness as the…[Read more]

Describes and analyzes two episodes of article rejections based on political correctness and several published instances of politically correct inverse racism. Shows that political correctness in judging scholarship on race uses a double standard which enables reverse racism and an unsavory rhetoric. Discusses political correctness as the…[Read more]

Describes and analyzes two episodes of article rejections based on political correctness and several published instances of politically correct inverse racism. Shows that political correctness in judging scholarship on race uses a double standard which enables reverse racism and an unsavory rhetoric. Discusses political correctness as the…[Read more]

Reviews the Shakespeare Quarterly special issue (spring 2016), a collection of articles on different aspects of modern race study in Shakespeare. Addresses the problems confronting race study, the rhetoric of race “conversation,” and difficulties in race scholarship. Focuses on Ian Smith’s “Who Speaks for Othello” as representative of race study…[Read more]

Reviews the Shakespeare Quarterly special issue (spring 2016), a collection of articles on different aspects of modern race study in Shakespeare. Addresses the problems confronting race study, the rhetoric of race “conversation,” and difficulties in race scholarship. Focuses on Ian Smith’s “Who Speaks for Othello” as representative of race study…[Read more]

Provides a personal perspective on, and analysis of, developments in the English profession. Emphasizes the proliferation of PhDs, the industrialization of scholarship and its effects on research and promotion, and the diminished influence and status of English studies. Makes suggestions for addressing present difficulties and reviving the study…[Read more]

Provides a personal perspective on, and analysis of, developments in the English profession. Emphasizes the proliferation of PhDs, the industrialization of scholarship and its effects on research and promotion, and the diminished influence and status of English studies. Makes suggestions for addressing present difficulties and reviving the study…[Read more]

Explores issues of professionalization and politicalization of humanistic studies. Sketches an up-dated return to the basics of humanistic research and teaching.

Explores issues of professionalization and politicalization of humanistic studies. Sketches an up-dated return to the basics of humanistic research and teaching.

Critiques current status of relationship between scholarly research and academic teaching. Uses three examples–one each from Macbeth, Othello, and King Lear–to illustrate connections between both efforts.

Critiques current status of relationship between scholarly research and academic teaching. Uses three examples–one each from Macbeth, Othello, and King Lear–to illustrate connections between both efforts.

Describes the dynamics of the attribution argument between Stratfordians and anti-Stratfordians, with particular attention to the asymmetries of the debate. Revisits the evidence of Greene’s “A Groatsworth of Wit.” Sketches and critiques two anti-Stratfordian arguments on that evidence.