The final stages of getting a paper into shape for submission relies on checking its English presentation (or getting help in doing this). The main author revises the paper to reach a final draft. The role of the co-authors is discussed, including the sequence of their names. Conflicts of interest must be considered here. Setting out the paper in clear sections and subsections is stressed as it makes the paper easier for editor and reviewers to follow. The need for a letter of submission is considered.

Discussion of Stravinsky’s so-called ghostwriters usually focuses on Chroniques de ma vie (1935) and Poétique musicale (1939) – two books, originally written and published in French, which the composer produced during the interwar period.1 This is because Stravinsky is presented as the sole author of both volumes even though, strictly speaking, he wrote neither. ‘Ghostwriter’ has become a commonplace to describe those who collaborated with Stravinsky, but the term’s connotations of imposture make it unsuited for describing the composer’s complex relationship with the act of writing, his routine for preparing texts and the workings of what might be called his ‘idea mill’. Stravinsky himself only rarely, and somewhat reluctantly, admitted the important role played by the many co-authors involved in drafting his writings. In turn, his collaborators seem to have accepted the arrangement without hesitation, often as a form of devotion to the composer.

Included among Igor Stravinsky’s collaborators were prominent artists of all genres, including choreographers such as Mikhail Fokine (1880–1942) and George Balanchine (1904–83), and the painters Mikhail Larionov (1881–1964) and Pablo Picasso (1881–1973). Perhaps the largest collection of collaborators consisted of notable literary figures: Charles-Ferdinand Ramuz (1878–1947), Jean Cocteau (1889–1963), André Gide (1869–1951), Wystan Hugh Auden (1907–73) and Chester Kallman (1921–75).

This chapter examines the role played by various sources – Shakespeare’s ‘inheritances’ – in shaping the dramatist’s treatments of grief, sorrow and a longing for emotional recognition. I argue that warring characters’ competitive displays of feeling, which are central to the drama of affect in Richard III and 3 Henry VI, derive from but intensify comparable scenes in Senecan drama. However, whilst such competitive emoting is affirmed in these early Shakespearean plays, in Richard II, The Merchant of Venice and elsewhere the same phenomenon – now linked to implicit imitations of Christ’s Passion inspired by the medieval mystery plays – instead provokes scepticism. Having explored this, the chapter then turns to a more contemporary source. I consider, specifically, how early modern ways of conceiving credit relations guided Shakespeare and his co-author, Thomas Middleton, in imagining the emotions in Timon of Athens. Timon too, I contend, affirms himself by parading what he conceives as a kind of love – his credit-funded gestures of charity – in a tacitly competitive fashion. Like earlier Shakespearean characters, though, he is led by this into transmuted reworkings of Christ’s Passion and the latter again expose the compromised, inauthentic nature of emotional display.