CRITICISM

Bruce, Yvonne. “The Pathology of Rhetoric in Coriolanus.” Upstart Crow 20 (2000): 93-115.

Challenges critics who contend that words and their meanings are disjoined in Coriolanus.

Brustein, Robert. Review of Coriolanus. The New Republic 200, no. 1 (2 January 1989): 26-28.

Assesses the “radical” production of Coriolanus directed by Steven Berkoff, which featured Christopher Walken as Coriolanus, and finds that both the production and Walken's performance were turbulent.

Cefalu, Paul. “‘The End of Absolutism’: Shakespeare's Coriolanus and the Consensual Nature of the Early Modern State.” Renaissance Forum 4, no. 2 (2000): 34.

Evaluates what Cefalu describes as misguided transitionalist and capitalist readings of the play, and reexamines Coriolanus within the context of recent historical studies on the Tudor-Stuart state.

Colman, E. A. M. “The End of Coriolanus.” ELH 34, no. 1 (March 1967): 1-20.

Explores the contention that Coriolanus's demise is disappointing because he appears not to have achieved any level of self-realization.

Hutchings, W. “Beast or God: The Coriolanus Controversy.” Critical Quarterly 24, no. 2 (summer 1982): 35-50.

Surveys recent critical commentary on Coriolanus, finding that scholars typically purport that the play is either mainly concerned with politics or with the character of Coriolanus. Hutchings maintains that character and politics are complementary rather than conflicting elements in the play's structure, and that these topics are linked through the play's language.

Ripley, John. Coriolanus on Stage in England and America, 1609-1994. Madison, N.J.: Farleigh Dickinson University Press, 431 p.

Book-length study of Coriolanus's stage history, concluding with an analysis of the modern psychoanalytical and political approaches to the play.

Sicherman, Carol M. “Coriolanus: The Failure of Words.” ELH 39, no. 2 (June 1972): 189-207.

Contends that words and meanings are hopelessly dissociated in Coriolanus and examines in particular the ways in which language fails Coriolanus.

Van Oort, Richard. “The Hero Who Wouldn't Be: Coriolanus and the Scene of Tragic Paradox.” Anthropoetics 4, no. 2 (fall 1998-winter 1999): 10.

Asserts that Coriolanus resents the fact that his heroism is not self-evident and must be publicly acknowledged, and that this explains his refusal to participate in events acclaiming his heroism. Van Oort further demonstrates how Shakespeare transformed Coriolanus's resentment and refusal into the fulfillment of the tragedy.