In Religion and Revelry in Shakespeare's Festive World, Phebe Jensen reexamines the link between traditional festivity and devotional ritual in Shakespeare's plays, providing a new approach to the study of the secularization of early modern England. On the whole, this book is an exemplary attempt at offering an alternative to the dominant narrative of secularization. Jensen's study consists of an examination of the political and social meanings surrounding early modern festivity, such as how contemporary politics factored into the decline of traditional pastimes. Jensen adds nuance to this conventional argument through a detailed discussion of Catholicism's vital role in early modern English culture and its subsequent influence on the religious mores of the country. Working within this social festivity model, she suggests that “Shakespeare [. . .] was a festive traditionalist” (22).

Jensen, whose focus is on the intersection of Protestant and Catholic culture in the celebratory world of early modern England, is a perceptive narrator. In Part I of the book, “Religion and Revelry,” she provides a dense historiography of festivity. Jensen begins Chapter 1, “‘The Reliques and Ragges of Popish Superstition,’” by citing the earlier work of C. L. Barber, as well as that of prominent scholars David Cressy, Christopher Haigh, and Eamon Duffy. These scholars focus their discussions of festivity on the Reformation's role in attacking traditional pastimes, building their arguments on the notion that ideological efforts to rid the church of pagan rituals were dominated and ultimately resolved by English Reformation politics. Jensen, however, explains how the fundamental struggle between religion and revelry in early modern England intersected with discussions about the purpose of religious festivity; she argues that religion and festivity are “inextricably connected, and participating in the ritual year [. . .] could be a way of expressing and experiencing devotion” (26). In Chapter 2, “‘A Calendar! A Calendar!’: Festive Nostalgia and Calendrical Reform,” Jensen analyzes the reform of the liturgical calendar, taking into account the vague attempts at reform during the Elizabethan period, as well as Spenser's attempt to impose reform with his The Shepheardes Calendar. In this chapter, Jensen compares Thomas Dekker's The Shoemaker's Holiday (in which the Protestant calendar is reformed through the creation of a day to celebrate apprentices) to Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream (in which joyful rites have religious connotations). Jensen considers how Shakespeare successfully applied the use of such religious ceremony in the play for maximum theatrical effect.

In Part II, “Shakespeare's Festive World,” Jensen explores the association between festivity and Catholicism in Shakespeare's As You Like It, Twelfth Night, and The Winter's Tale. Shakespeare's descriptions of popular festive customs in each play are carefully taken apart and analyzed. In Chapter 3, “Pastimes and Pastoral: As You Like It,” Jensen takes into account how the play's festive world is revised in view of Reformist efforts to separate festivity from the church. She provides theatrical commentary via a careful textual analysis of Twelfth Night in Chapter 4, “Falstaff in Illyria: The Second Henriad and Twelfth Night.” In this chapter, Jensen delves principally into the relationship between the play's festivity and its religion within the framework of the Oldcastle controversy, which she claims—thanks to its espousal of devotional ties between festivity and religion, as embodied by the “fool and jester”—is still haunted by Falstaff.

Using the rich examples of traditional devotional material in these plays, Jensen makes her case that various festive customs associated with Catholic belief must still have been part of public awareness in Shakespeare's time, and that Shakespeare used this awareness freely to enhance his work. In Chapter 5, “Singing Psalms to Hornpipes: Festivity, Iconoclasm and Catholicism in The Winter's Tale,” Jensen analyzes the representation of Catholic imagery and idolatry throughout that late play. Jensen maintains that Shakespeare's widespread use of such imagery was an endorsement of Catholic devotional aesthetics, but was not, however, an endorsement of Catholic belief.

Jensen gives us a comprehensive portrayal of the mode in which the religious struggles of the Elizabethan and Jacobean eras shaped early modern literature. The one drawback of this volume, however, is its intricate narrative: it can overwhelm the reader and, no matter how original the research, one can't help but get lost in Jensen's informative details. This work is not for the generalist who wants be introduced to the scholarly debate surrounding traditional festivity, since it presents a very select investigation that best serves scholars with advanced knowledge of Jensen's topic. Nevertheless, this is indeed a worthy contribution to Shakespearean literary criticism, offering scholars important new ways to think about how we perceive the meaning of festivity in early modern literature generally, and in Shakespeare's theatrical works specifically.