Lukas Erne is Professor in the English Department at the University of Geneva.

Review of the hardback: 'Readers who finished Shakespeare as a Literary Dramatist with the question 'now what?', puzzling what to do with a book whose fascinating implications would seem to return us to an older, author-centered mode of literary criticism, will be singularly impressed at how much Erne's Q1 Romeo and Juliet achieves toward seeing an old play with new eyes. … I take up Erne's edition of Romeo and Juliet as an exemplary attempt to move Shakespearean editorial theory beyond the problematising and iconoclazm that dominated the past two decades' repudiation of the New Bibliography. Erne leads us to reconsider the coherence of Q1 Romeo and Juliet as a play distinct from the one traditionally presented in modern editions.' Archiv

• Preface; Abbreviations and conventions; Introduction: 1. Textual provenance: a century of 'bad quartos'; Past thinking about Q1 Romeo and Juliet; The early draft / revision theory; Memorial reporters?; Stage abridgement, not memorial reconstruction?; Evidence of memorial agency; Alternatives to the traditional narrative; A version for the provinces?; Theatrical abridgement; Textual provenance: conclusion; 2. Dramatic specificities: Pace and action; Stage directions; The betrothal scene; Characterization; Inconsistent time references; 3. Publication and printing: The First Quarto in 1597; The First Quarto after 1597; Note on the text; List of characters; THE PLAY; Textual notes; Appendix A. Scene division; Appendix B. Casting and doubling; Appendix C. Bel-védere (1600); Appendix D. Q1 in eighteenth-century editions of Romeo and Juliet; Bibliography.

Lukas Erne is Professor in the English Department at the University of Geneva.

Review of the hardback: 'Readers who finished Shakespeare as a Literary Dramatist with the question 'now what?', puzzling what to do with a book whose fascinating implications would seem to return us to an older, author-centered mode of literary criticism, will be singularly impressed at how much Erne's Q1 Romeo and Juliet achieves toward seeing an old play with new eyes. … I take up Erne's edition of Romeo and Juliet as an exemplary attempt to move Shakespearean editorial theory beyond the problematising and iconoclazm that dominated the past two decades' repudiation of the New Bibliography. Erne leads us to reconsider the coherence of Q1 Romeo and Juliet as a play distinct from the one traditionally presented in modern editions.' Archiv

• Preface; Abbreviations and conventions; Introduction: 1. Textual provenance: a century of 'bad quartos'; Past thinking about Q1 Romeo and Juliet; The early draft / revision theory; Memorial reporters?; Stage abridgement, not memorial reconstruction?; Evidence of memorial agency; Alternatives to the traditional narrative; A version for the provinces?; Theatrical abridgement; Textual provenance: conclusion; 2. Dramatic specificities: Pace and action; Stage directions; The betrothal scene; Characterization; Inconsistent time references; 3. Publication and printing: The First Quarto in 1597; The First Quarto after 1597; Note on the text; List of characters; THE PLAY; Textual notes; Appendix A. Scene division; Appendix B. Casting and doubling; Appendix C. Bel-védere (1600); Appendix D. Q1 in eighteenth-century editions of Romeo and Juliet; Bibliography.

Lukas Erne is Professor in the English Department at the University of Geneva.

Review of the hardback: 'Readers who finished Shakespeare as a Literary Dramatist with the question 'now what?', puzzling what to do with a book whose fascinating implications would seem to return us to an older, author-centered mode of literary criticism, will be singularly impressed at how much Erne's Q1 Romeo and Juliet achieves toward seeing an old play with new eyes. … I take up Erne's edition of Romeo and Juliet as an exemplary attempt to move Shakespearean editorial theory beyond the problematising and iconoclazm that dominated the past two decades' repudiation of the New Bibliography. Erne leads us to reconsider the coherence of Q1 Romeo and Juliet as a play distinct from the one traditionally presented in modern editions.' Archiv

• Preface; Abbreviations and conventions; Introduction: 1. Textual provenance: a century of 'bad quartos'; Past thinking about Q1 Romeo and Juliet; The early draft / revision theory; Memorial reporters?; Stage abridgement, not memorial reconstruction?; Evidence of memorial agency; Alternatives to the traditional narrative; A version for the provinces?; Theatrical abridgement; Textual provenance: conclusion; 2. Dramatic specificities: Pace and action; Stage directions; The betrothal scene; Characterization; Inconsistent time references; 3. Publication and printing: The First Quarto in 1597; The First Quarto after 1597; Note on the text; List of characters; THE PLAY; Textual notes; Appendix A. Scene division; Appendix B. Casting and doubling; Appendix C. Bel-védere (1600); Appendix D. Q1 in eighteenth-century editions of Romeo and Juliet; Bibliography.