In the following essay, McCandless explores the play's approach to masculinity, particularly Shakespeare's treatment of the Trojan War as a process of emasculation. The critic maintains that the play's dramatic representation of sexual difference is left unresolved.

In the following essay, James explores the Elizabethan attitudes reflected in Shakespeare's treatment of history and legend in Troilus and Cressida, explaining that at the time the play was written the legend of the Trojan War and its warriors and lovers were viewed with mixed emotions by Elizabethans. James additionally relates elements of the play to the Essex rebellion.

In the following essay, Hodgdon refers to several different stage adaptations of Troilus and Cressida to demonstrate how the play was constructed to keep Cressida in particular, and, through her representation, Renaissance women in general, under male control.

In the following essay, Maguire explains Cressida's submission to Diomedes, contending that she is a victim of Diomedes' abuse and manipulation and that “Cressida consequently behaves as do most abused women: she submits.”

In the following essay, Maquerlot compares the style of Troilus and Cressida to the Mannerist mode of painting popular during Shakespeare's time, and contends that Shakespeare was attempting to portray the Trojan War as presented by Homer, as well as the love story of Troilus and Cressida as depicted by Chaucer, in a way that highlighted the modern disillusionment with the ideal of chivalry.

In the following essay, Gil demonstrates that the Greek and Trojan warriors in Troilus and Cressida have grown weary of the establishment of homosocial bonds through the bodies of women. Supporting his contentions with a study of Renaissance thinking on the nature of personal identity and the definition of the self, Gil argues that the warriors want to distinguish personal sexual identity from social relationships and experience.

David Hillman, Tavistock Centre, London Ignorance in physiologicis—that damned 'idealism.'

In the following essay, Hillman contends that Shakespeare wrote and produced Troilus and Cressida with a view to concentrating on the grossly physical aspects of the human body in order to bring life to a tale that had already been frequently told and whose language had thus been rendered abstract through overtelling.

In the following essay, O'Rourke proposes that with Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare gave us universal characters that we can recognize as cynical sexual clichés even as we sympathize with them as romantic lovers.

In the essay below, Donaldson compares Chaucer's Criseyde to Shakespeare 's Cressida, and claims that "though in many ways dissimilar, [they are in some important ways alike; and have equally valid claims on our sympathy. "]

In the excerpt below, Charnes discusses how Shakespeare represents his characters in Troilus and Cressida and examines the distinctions between public and private forms of desire in the play.

In the following essay, Yogev observes that the courtly and chivalric codes found in earlier versions of the story of Troilus and Cressida are intentionally subverted in Shakespeare's play into opportunities for male sexual aggression and exploitation.

In the excerpt below, Mallin suggests that the misogynistic and homoerotic ambiguity and violence in the play reflect England's ambivalence toward the aging, increasingly less powerful and heirless Queen Elizabeth I.

In the essay below, Woods discusses homoerotic and homosexual interpretations of several Shakespearean plays, particularly Troilus and Cressida. He also offers a synopsis of the critical debate about whether Shakespeare's sonnets to the young man delineate homosexual desires, and contends that the sonnets are profoundly concerned with the distinction between male friendship and male sexual love.

In the following excerpt, Cook examines the problematic relationship between desire and the representation of women as objects, which she claims "requires that the woman either betray her lover, revealing her inadequacy in her corruption, or die. "

In the following essay, Greenfield argues that by depicting Troy as decadent and corrupt in Troilus and Cressida, Shakespeare undercut England's efforts to build national pride by connecting its ancestry as a nation to the heroic and ancient city of Troy.

In the essay below, Stein examines Shakespeare's use of dramatic imagination in Troilus and Cressida, and places the play within the genre of tragedy, calling it 'our most helpful definition of the play. "

In the following essay, Mead suggests that the instability of the Renaissance economy is reflected in the metaphors of coinage used in Troilus and Cressida to describe the shifting moral stances and unreliable characters within the play.

In the following essay, Burns suggests that the play's negative portrayal of Cressida is in fact meant to reflect critically on those characters who condemn her and, more generally, to demonstrate the corrosive effects of war upon humanity.

In the following essay, Girard examines the presence of mimetic desire in Troilus and Cressida and states that the purpose of the play is "to show that lechery and war are one. "

In the following excerpt, Bevington presents the debates surrounding the historical context of Troilus and Cressida and discusses whether or not Shakespeare was using the play to mock some of his fellow playwrights; Bevington also takes a close look at the classical subject matter of the play itself and how it has been interpreted in twentieth-century productions.

Below, Bayley contends that in the tragic atmosphere of Troilus and Cressida "the fact of experience and the saving ability to cherish it, change it, build upon it, are kept apart. "

In the following essay, Bielmeier uses the philosophical works of Kierkegaard to demonstrate that Cressida and the bastard Thersites are the most ethical characters in the war-torn world of Troilus and Cressida.

In the following essay, Savage suggests possible allegorical correlations between characters in Troilus and Cressida and individuals in Queen Elizabeth's court, including the Earl of Essex. Savage indicates that the play reflects Shakespeare's views regarding the factionalism within Elizabeth's court and the inevitability of Essex's fate.

In the following essay, Faber remarks that while Troilus and Cressida has been regarded by many critics as a “problem comedy,” it is better described as a problem tragedy for which Shakespeare could not or chose not to provide a satisfactory conclusion.

In the following essay, Glasser studies those formal effects of Troilus and Cressida that bear a resemblance to the visual effects common in paintings contemporary with the play, contending that both types of effects suggest a collapse of sixteenth-century thought concerning the relationship between time and space, and between subject and object.

In the following essay, Spear examines the themes of masculinity and effeminacy in Troilus and Cressida in order to explore “the cultural fictions of male power.”

In the following essay, Barfoot examines the human relationships in Troilus and Cressida in relation to the “mercantile metaphor” that runs throughout the play. This metaphor, the critic contends, “suggests that we are all traders in our relationships, and, as victims and perpetrators, susceptible to the inevitable treachery that trade brings in its wake.”

In the following essay, Dusinberre maintains that Shakespeare's concept of beauty resides not in the bodies of such women as Helen or Cressida, but instead in the power of language to represent beauty truthfully—something which is impossible to accomplish in the corrupt world of Troilus and Cressida.

In the following essay, Thomson studies the expressive rhetoric used in Troilus and Cressida.

In the essay below, Fly centers on the discontinuity of Troilus and Cressida, observing that "our expectations of formal stability, symmetry, and coherent sequence are repeatedly being frustrated, and we experience as we follow the play unfolding a growing sense of radical disorientation—an apprehension which we gradually come to realize is complementing the informing vision of the play."

In the following essay, first read to senior members of the Oxford English Faculty in 1972, Everett explores the fragmented narrative of Troilus and Cressida, characterizing the drama as "a sequence of brilliantly-achieved moments that are incomparable in their power to startle, to needle and to entertain. "

In the essay that follows, Greene argues that Cressida, by basing her identity on male desires and definitions, becomes "the sum total of 'opinions' of men whose opinions are in themselves societally determined, and she is thus only a representative of her world. "

In the following essay, Helms compares earlier versions of the fall of Troy including the Iliad, the Trojan Women, and Chaucer's Troilus and Criseyde to Shakespeare 's Troilus and Cressida and examines the eroticization of violence and the militarization of Cressida's sexuality in Shakespeare's play.

In the following essay, Hyland contends that the bastard, Thersites—though not always fair in his assessment of what is occurring around him—is nevertheless an important antidote to authoritarianism in the play by virtue of his apparent insignificance.

In the following essay, Adams examines Cressida's inner struggle between being in love and protecting her own identity, contending that "both poles remain simultaneously a part of her personality, intensifying the tension."

In the following essay, Domenichelli alleges that in his cynical portrayal of the duel between Hector and Achilles in Troilus and Cressida, Shakespeare documented the end of the chivalric code in Renaissance England. In addition, Domenichelli states that by transforming the heroic Hector's death into a pointless and ignoble one, Shakespeare also overturned the traditional rules of tragedy.

In the following essay, Okerlund analyzes the reassessments of Troilus, Cressida, Ulysses, and Pandarus that have occurred continuously since Troilus and Cressida was first produced, and concludes that our final judgment of these characters should be that none is evil or good in his or her own right, but that all are embodiments of human nature.

In the excerpt below, Foakes examines the presence of satire in Troilus and Cressida and analyzes the "three strands which interweave to create the pattern and tonality of the play": war, love, and humor.

In the following essay, Nass describes Troilus and Cressida as a play which focuses on the search for authentic, individual identity as well as for loyalty and love within the chaos of war.

In the following essay, Flannery remarks that in Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare demonstrated his understanding of the politically subversive nature of poetry when he portrayed Achilles' insubordinate use of language.

In the following essay, Loggins asserts that the complex, conflicting structure of Troilus and Cressida is related to the fulfillment of personal needs and interests through open, state-sanctioned violence.

In the following essay, Oates studies the conflict between tragic and anti-tragic elements in Troilus and Cressida, contending that the play is best understood as a tragedy that has been purposefully undermined by brutal comic insight.

In the following essay, Tiffany asserts that Cressida has been misread by most critics as either reprehensible or victimized, when in fact she is the product of a patriarchal culture still present today that misunderstands women who do not communicate forcefully.

In the essay that follows, Roy provides a psychoanalytical assessment of Troilus and Cressida, presenting Troy as "fraternal and feminized" and Greece as "patriarchal" and "masculine."

In the following essay, first presented at the annual meeting of the Shakespeare Association of America in 1982, Arnold compares the structure and characters in Troilus and Cressida with those found in several of Euripides' plays.

In the following essay, Slights examines the distinctive structure of Troilus and Cressida, and concludes that through the effects of the play's paralleling of scenes and the love and war plots, Shakespeare created what may be called a tragic satire.

Below, Novy suggests that the apparently comedic, love-centered world of Troilus and Cressida is in fact lust-centered, and that it ultimately resembles a tragedy in its violent focus on war and the male characters' brutal rejection of "womanish" ways.

In the following essay, Jago contends that Troilus and Cressida is unique because it stands outside “the popular traditions Shakespeare normally followed”; Jago demonstrates this point by contrasting the play with Romeo and Juliet.

In the excerpt below, Novy studies the gender distinctions in Troilus and Cressida, observing that "in the external world, masculinity is identified with violence and femininity with weakness."

In the following essay, Cole examines Shakespeare's subversive treatment of mythic figures in Troilus and Cressida, asserting that "Shakespeare exposes the tendency of men to idealize their errors of judgment and their self-serving passions under the guise of heroic or chivalric myth."

In the following excerpt, Colie argues that in Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare attacks literature at its very source by turning upside down Homeric values and by "stripping Troilus, Cressida, and Pandarus of their recognizable, rich, highly complex humanity with which Chaucer had endowed them. "

In the following essay, Voth and Evans challenge critics who dismiss Cressida as a calculating prostitute, contending that a close study of her character reveals the difficulty of her decisions and the motivation behind her actions.

In the following excerpt, Marsh focuses on a single passage from Troilus and Cressida (I.ii.249-86) which, he contends, shows Cressida to be both a tease and a sincere lover. Marsh explains that this apparent contradiction in fact reveals, on one hand, the stereotypical male view of women as temptresses, and on the other, Cressida's genuine feelings for Troilus.

In the following essay, Lynch argues that the so-called idealism of Troilus is not as pure as some commentators have suggested, but is instead as self-absorbed and corrupt as the world Troilus himself inhabits.

In the following essay, Eldridge examines the characters of Hector, Cressida, and Troilus, asserting that their common heritage as Trojans has more to do with their behavior than do the play's themes of love and war.

In the following essay, Asp contends that Cressida's self-worth originates from the observations of others, emphasizing that her "identity and value are defined by the varying perceptions by which she is judged."

In the following essay, Charney assesses the indeterminate character of Troilus and Cressida, stating that "the play is irritating and unsatisfying, and this may be its modern attraction when other plays seem to yield up a more rational and more coherent response."

In the following excerpt, Ornstein discusses the significance of honor and chivalry in Troilus and Cressida.

In the following excerpt, Kimbrough focuses on the pursuit of honor by Hector and Troilus.

In the following review, McQueen-Thomson contends that Michael Bogdanov's 2000 Bell Shakespeare Company production of Troilus + Cressida successfully combined “audacious, challenging production with intelligent, coherent interpretation, proving the strengths of theatre as a political medium.”

In the following review, Wolf praises Trevor Nunn's 1999 National Theatre staging of Troilus and Cressida, contending that Nunn “yanks us … right inside this play's singularly hellish heart.”

In the following review, Dumas discusses the Colorado Shakespeare Festival production of Troilus and Cressida, directed by Tom Markus. Although he finds the cast “functional,” Dumas is not impressed by the director's change of the play's setting from the Trojan War to the American Civil War.

In the following review of the Royal Shakespeare Company's Troilus and Cressida, directed by Ian Judge, Taylor comments on the production's more powerful sequences and praises a few individual performances, including Victoria Hamilton's Cressida, Louis Hilyer's Hector, and Phillip Voss's Ulysses.

In the following review of Troilus and Cressida directed by Tom Markus for the Colorado Shakespeare Festival, Brooks-Dillard praises the strength of the production as a whole and also comments on the excellence of the players' performances.

In the following review of Troilus and Cressida directed by Sir Peter Hall at the American Place Theatre in New York, Sommers finds the production “ambivalent” and praises only a few individual performances.

In the following review, Murray assesses the Royal Shakespeare Company's production of Troilus and Cressida, directed by Ian Judge. Murray's review is mixed as he finds fault with Joseph Fiennes's whining Troilus and with Victoria Hamilton's shallow Cressida, but praises several of the other male roles and states that as a whole the production offered a “defensible” take on the play.

In the following review, Winn critiques the staging of Troilus and Cressida directed by Kenneth Albers for the Oregon Shakespeare Festival, maintaining that despite the production's “missed opportunities,” it was the best of the outdoor shows at the festival.

In the following review of Andrew Hilton's 2003 stage production of Troilus and Cressida, Gardner remarks on the relevancy of the play for the twenty-first century but notes that while Hilton's play was expertly performed, his uncut version was too long to be completely appealing to modern audiences.

In the following review, Kohn asserts that Richard Monette's 2003 Stratford Festival production of Troilus and Cressida effectively demonstrated the madness of war. Kohn also praises Bernard Hopkins's bawdy, bisexual performance as Pandarus as vital to this rendition of the play.