Seeff considers the linguistic complexities associated with Shakespeare’s presence in South Africa from 1801 to early twentieth-first century televisual updatings of Shakespeare’s texts. Seeff emphasizes the way in which Shakespeare’s texts were put to political purposes, as well as the way language ideologies have shaped identity in a heteroglossic, multiethnic site. Performances offer windows into the particularities associated with global incursions into local environments; linguistic practice is one of these local forces. Seeff engages with Shakespeare both as the means of promoting a linguistic program in English nationalist/imperialist contexts and as a means of resisting the legacy of this program through acts of translation, transposition, and appropriation.
- de Kock, Leon. “South Africa in the Global Imaginary: An Introduction.” Poetics Today 22, no. 2 (Summer 2001): 278.Google Scholar
- Gilbert, Helen. “Black and White and Re(a)d All Over Again: Indigenous Minstrelsy in Contemporary Canadian and Australian Theatre.” Theatre Journal 55, no. 4 (2003): 679–98.Google Scholar
- Horton, Wilmot, cited in James Sturgis. “Anglicisation at the Cape of Good Hope in the Early Nineteenth Century.” The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 11, no. 1 (1982): 5–32.Google Scholar
- Lehmann, Courtney. Shakespeare Remains: Theater to Film, Early Modern to Postmodern. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
- McCormick, Kay. Language in Cape Town’s District Six. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
- Young, Sandra. “Race and the Global South in Early Modern Studies.” Shakespeare Quarterly 67, no. 1 (2016): 125–35.Google Scholar