The English novel in the time of Shakespeare

The rise of the English novel needs rethinking after it has been confined to the "formal realism" of Defoe, Richardson, and Fielding (Watt, 1957), to "antecedents, forerunners" (Schlauch, 1968; Klein, 1970) or to mere "prose fiction" (McKillop, 1951; Davis, Richetti, 1969; Fish, 1971; Salzman, 1985; Kroll, 1998). My paper updates a book by Jusserand under the same title (1890) by proving that the social and moral history of the long prose genre admits no strict separation of "novel" and "romance", as both concepts are intertwined in most fiction (Cuddon, Preston, 1999; Mayer, 2000). The rise of the novel, seen in its European context, mainly in France and Spain (Kirsch, 1986), and equally in England, was due to the melting of the nobility and high bourgeoisie into a "meritocracy", or to its failure, to become the new bearer of the national culture, around 1600. (Brink, 1998). My paper will concentrate on Euphues (1578), a negative romance, Euphues and His England (1580), a novel of manners, both by Lyly; Arcadia (1590-93) by Sidney, a political roman à clef in the disguise of a Greek pastoral romance; The Unfortunate Traveller (1594) by Nashe, the first English picaresque novel, and on Jack of Newbury (1596-97) by Deloney, the first English bourgeois novel. My analysis of the central values in these novels will prove a transition from the aristocratic cardinal virtues of WISDOM, JUSTICE, COURAGE, and HONOUR to the bourgeois values of CLEVERNESS, FAIR PLAY, INDUSTRY, and VIRGINITY. A similar change took place from the Christian virtues of LOVE, FAITH, HOPE to business values like SERVICE, TRUST, and OPTIMISM. Thus, the legacy of history proves that the main concepts of the novel of manners, of political romance, of picaresque and middle-class fiction were all developed in the time of Shakespeare.

Social Inequality and Social Policy outside the OECD

Almost all Latin American countries are still marked by extreme forms of social inequality – and to an extent, this seems to be the case regardless of national differences in the economic development model or the strength of democracy and the welfare state. Recent research highlights the fact that the heterogeneous labour markets in the region are a key source of inequality. At the same time, there is a strengthening of ‘exclusive’ social policy, which is located at the fault lines of the labour market and is constantly (re-)producing market-mediated disparities. In the last three decades, this type of social policy has even enjoyed democratic legitimacy. These dynamics challenge many of the assumptions guiding social policy and democratic theory, which often attempt to account for the specificities of the region by highlighting the purported flaws of certain policies. We suggest taking a different perspective: social policy in Latin American should not be grasped as a deficient or flawed type of social policy, but as a very successful relation of political domination. ‘Relational social analysis’ locates social policy in the ‘tension zone’ constituted by the requirements of economic reproduction, demands for democratic legitimacy and the relative autonomy of the state. From this vantage point, we will make the relation of domination in question accessible for empirical research. It seems particularly useful for this purpose to examine the recent shifts in the Latin American labour markets, which have undergone numerous reforms. We will examine which mechanisms, institutions and constellations of actors block or activate the potentials of redistribution inherent in such processes of political reform. This will enable us to explore the socio-political field of forces that has been perpetuating the social inequalities in Latin America for generations.