The Countess of Pembroke's Arcadia: The Old Arcadia

by Philip Sidney, Albert Feuillerat, Albert 1874-1953 Feuillerat

Book Overview

Philip Sidney was in his early twenties when he wrote his 'Old' Arcadia for the amusement of his younger sister, the Countess of Pembroke. The book, which he called 'a trifle, and that triflingly handled', reflects their youthful vitality. The 'Old' Arcadia tells a romantic story in a manner comparable to that of Shakespeare's early comedies. It is divided into five 'Acts', and abounds in lively speeches, dialogues, and quasi-dramatic tableaux. Two...

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 019283956X
• ISBN13: 9780192839565
• Release Date: June 1999
• Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA
• Length: 399 Pages
• Weight: 0.65 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.7" x 5.3" x 7.7"

Customer Reviews

This is the one you want

RESOLVED: The "New" Arcadia is better than the old--much better. And this is the edition of it you ought to read.

A monument of dullness?

T.S. Eliot labelled Sidney's Arcadia as a "monument of dullness," and about 100 pages into the book, I felt inclined to agree with his assessment. Sidney was a poet first and foremost, and even he admitted to his sister, the Countess of Pembroke, that this particular work was but "a trifle."Yet, surprisingly, I found myself getting captivated by the plot of two princes disguised as shepherds to win the girls of their dreams (in the process, of course, they also win girls -- and guys -- of their nightmares). The somewhat stilted (even by Renaissance standards) language makes it difficult to plod through at times, but the plot is interesting and keeps your attention -- and that's ultimately what counts.Re: this edition, it is one of the few good editions of the original "Old" Arcadia around. Sidney revised the work during his lifetime and his friend and biographer, Fulke Greville, later published a bizarre composite of the old and revised versions that for centuries stood as the definitive "Arcadia". K. Duncan-Jones provides a clean text with useful scholarly apparatus. One caveat: in my edition, pp. 297-306 were *missing*, mistakenly replaced by a double-printed pp. 307-316. This is an annoyance for someone who is reading the book as a scholar, which I believe represents the majority readership of the book, as I can't imagine casual readers picking it up for bedstand reading! All in all, a fun work and better than the first act leads one to believe!