RSCP. 83100 – Remembering & Repressing: Early Modern Cultural Appropriation and Historical Trauma  3 or 4 four credits, M, 6:30-8:30pm, Elsky, Martin Cross listed with ENGL 81100 One of the consequences of the mounting critique of historicism has been the rise of memory studies. This course will explore the various ways anachronic memory seeks to replace history in early modern literature and culture. We will begin with an introduction to cultural memory studies, with special emphasis on the construction of a coherent personal and social identity by projecting the past into the present as overlapping temporalities. We will look at the various ways the arts made the past part of everyday life, but we will place special emphasis on works in which the most startling effects are produced by resistance to integration. Throughout the course we will explore the role of memory at a time of uncertain, ambivalent, and conflicted national and religious boundaries. We will look at the period’s most ambitious memory project, the retrieval of classical antiquity. We will attempt to redefine the concept of imitation as anxious and conflicted memory, especially in Petrarch, and then move to classical imitation in England as repressed memory of Roman tyranny in Britain filtered through a variety of ethnic pasts—Celtic, Gothic, and Norman, leading to the manipulation of overlapping pasts to establish national identity, as in Shakespeare. The second half of the course will turn to the period’s other major memory project, religious memory, specifically representations of traumatic memory during England’s Catholic and Protestant reigns. We will consider how Catholics and Protestants remembered their own pasts and expropriated each other’s during times of persecution. We will end this half of the course by considering the memorial re-mapping of the scriptural and medieval Jewish past, including the discovery of Jewish remains in London. The course will conclude with a refreshing reminder look at the period’s iconic meditation on the futility of memory, Thomas Browne’s Urn Burial. In addition to Petrarch, Shakespeare and Browne, readings will include Jonson, Herbert, and Stow, as well as excerpts from Early Modern historiography, both Catholic and Protestant, and art historical materials. Assignments include oral report and longer term project.
THE FOLLOWING COURSES WILL FULFILL PROGRAM REQUIRMENTS:
CL 88300 Machiavelli & the Problem of Evil  M, 6:30-8:30pm, Oppenheimer, Paul Niccolò di Machiavelli (1469-1527) is not only recognized as the first modern political scientist, distinguished by his empirical approach to political and historical questions, but as the first and possibly foremost investigator of the role of treachery in politics as well as the problem of evil. This course examines along these lines his ideas about politics, history, Fortuna, destiny and chance, together with his influence on the history of drama (through his Mandragola), considering especially his The Prince, The Discourses, and assorted selections from other works. Machiavelli’s influence on philosophy, fiction, drama, and film will be taken up in terms of Shakespeare’s Richard III, Nietzsche, Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, Pirandello’s Six Characters in Search of an Author, Riefenstahl’s film Triumph of the Will, and Orwell’s Animal Farm. The instructor’s biography, Machiavelli: A Life Beyond Ideology, is recommended but not required, as is his Evil and the Demonic: A New Theory of Monstrous Behavior. — One research paper, plus a brief in-class presentation.
CLAS 70200 Latin Rhetoric and Stylistics  R, 6:30-8:30pm, McGowan, Matthew This course offers an introduction to composition in Latin and a survey of prose styles from Cato the Elder to the Vulgate. Each week we will tackle a different genus scribendi and review individual points of syntax and stylistics via practice exercises and free composition. It is hoped that by the end of the course students will have gained a deeper knowledge of Latin sentence structure and idiom and a greater appreciation for a broad range of prose styles in Latin. There will be weekly assignments (pensa) that will include sentences for translation and free composition. There will also be weekly reading assignments from E.C. Woodcock’s A New Latin Syntax and from other scholars analyzing a particular author’s style. The scholarly essays will provide the background for the brief report (= breviarium, c.15 mins.) that every student will be asked to do at least once over the course of the semester. In addition, each week we will read select passages from D.A. Russell’sAnthology of Latin Prose (Oxford). Required Texts (all available on Amazon):D.A. Russell, Anthology of Latin Prose (Oxford). E.C. Woodcock, A New Latin Syntax. Gildersleeve’s Latin Grammar by B. Gildersleeve and G. Lodge. Course meets at Fordham, LC Lowenstein, Room 404 PERMISSION OF EO REQUIRED
HIST 75000 Colonial Americas, 1492-1776  R, 2:00-4:00pm, Waldstreicher, David If “colonial America” is not — or not merely — the prehistory of the United States, then what is it? In recent decades there has been a turn away from approaching North American and Caribbean colonies as a series of emergent and distinct communities or societies, and toward seeing them, first as “contacts,” “contests” or “conquests,” then an “Atlantic world”-in-formation. Most recently, these approaches seem to meld and, interestingly, return in part to perhaps the oldest of approaches to early American history: a notion of the period as shaped fundamentally by the creation, entanglements, and clashes of Spanish, British, Dutch, French, and Amerindian empires. Our readings will focus on attempts to use “empire” to understand both the big picture and the local lived realities, including work that takes a neo-imperial approach to the coming of the American Revolution. Among the key questions that will occupy us: does “empire” offer something analytically valuable that “atlantic” or “global” approaches do not? Do neo-imperial histories have a bias toward certain subjects, interpretations? Do they bring Africans and Native Americans into something like the prominence they actually had? Have correctives that emphasize transatlantic or imperial economies, politics, and wars come at the cost of the advances social historians made in delineating the making (and unmaking) of communities or the local experiences of natives, of settlers, of slaves? Where does “empire” leave seemingly separate subjects like religion and gender? In a historiographical moment in which cultural history seems to have triumphed, does a culturalist sensibility enable, or set appropriate limits to, a revised imperial approach?
MALS 70500 Renaissance Culture  R, 6:30-8:30pm, Marianetti, Marie
SPAN 82200 Seminar: Spanish Literature of the Baroque  M, 4:15-6:15pm, Schwartz, Lia
SPAN 87200 El Quijote  R, 2:00-4:00pm, Alvar, Carlos Pires de