English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Love’s labour is often lost in Shakespeare’s (un)romantic comedy because love is folly and lovers, ridiculous. We know, however, that Shakespeare delights in paradoxes and reversals which alert us to the possibility of finding wisdom in folly and folly in self-professed wisdom. Given the insisted-upon interchangeability of wisdom and folly in Shakespeare’s plays, how can we be confident of being able to tell them apart? If lovers are foolish in Love’s Labour’s Lost then what wisdom might there be in their folly? When Biron puts his mind to proving the value of love he makes various grandiose claims. One is that love ‘adds a precious seeing to the eye’. Should we treat this as a truth or a seeming truth, a nugget of wisdom about the way love can ‘deepen the sensation of being’ (Peter May) or just another depthless, well-turned phrase? This paper explores the question of when and under what conditions love can be taken seriously in Love’s Labour’s Lost.

Love in Love’s Labour’s Lost: Ontological Foundation or Laughing Matter?