Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPerng, Ching-Hsi
dc.contributor.authorChing-Hsi, Perng
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-23T15:16:16Z
dc.date.available2020-09-23T15:16:16Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifierONIX_20200923_9780472901326_28
dc.identifier.urihttps://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/41832
dc.description.abstractTraditionally, criticism of plays from the Yüan Dynasty (1260–1368) has been dominated by the so-called poetic and socialist schools. Double Jeopardy instead rigorously evaluates a group of plays by aesthetic criteria generated from within the works themselves. It examines seven courtroom plays with special attention to language and the manipulation of dramatic characters—undoubtedly the most reliable indicators of the playwright’s strength and craftsmanship in such a stylized art form as Yüan tsa-chü drama. The analytical method adopted in Double Jeopardy is textual explication of the conventions of genre and the individual characteristics of each play. The innovation and creative vitality of each playwright emerges through close scrutiny of selected conventional aspects of courtroom dramas: the functions and placement patterns of lyric, verse, and prose as well as the custom of a single singing role and its implication for the presentation of dramatis personae. Because Yüan drama is driven by conventions, Perng demonstrates a method that can be applied not just to judgment reversal plays but to Yüan dramatic criticism as a whole. In pursuing a method of textual explication, Perng provides a basis on which a larger framework of criticism of Yüan drama may be built.
dc.languageEnglish
dc.relation.ispartofseriesMichigan Monographs In Chinese Studies
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::A The Arts::AG The Arts: treatments and subjects::AGA History of arten_US
dc.subject.otherHistory of art
dc.titleDouble Jeopardy
dc.title.alternativeA Critique of Seven Yüan Courtroom Dramas
dc.typebook
oapen.identifier.doi10.3998/mpub.19158
oapen.relation.isPublishedBye07ce9b5-7a46-4096-8f0c-bc1920e3d889
oapen.relation.isFundedBy0314e571-4102-4526-b014-3ed8f2d6750a
oapen.relation.isFundedBy0cdc3d7c-5c59-49ed-9dba-ad641acd8fd1
oapen.imprintU OF M CENTER FOR CHINESE STUDIES
oapen.series.number35
oapen.pages195
oapen.place.publicationAnn Arbor
oapen.grant.number[grantnumber unknown]
oapen.grant.number[grantnumber unknown]
peerreview.anonymityDouble-anonymised
peerreview.idd98bf225-990a-4ac4-acf4-fd7bf0dfb00c
peerreview.open.reviewNo
peerreview.publish.responsibilityScientific or Editorial Board
peerreview.review.decisionYes
peerreview.review.stagePre-publication
peerreview.review.typeFull text
peerreview.reviewer.typeExternal peer reviewer
oapen.review.commentsThe proposal was selected by the acquisitions editor who invited a full manuscript. The full manuscript was reviewed by two external readers using a double-blind process. Based on the acquisitions editor recommendation, the external reviews, and their own analysis, the Executive Committee (Editorial Board) of U-M Press approved the project for publication.


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record