Mark Fortier
Impact in
-
- Renaissance Literature and Culture
-
- Theatre and Performance Studies
- Arts and Performance Studies
Papers in
-
- Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism 10
- Literary Theory and Cultural Hermeneutics 2
- Poetry Analysis and Criticism 1
- Classics 6
- Renaissance Literature and Culture 6
- Co-authors
- Christopher McCullough (1 shared paper)Daniel T. Fischlin (1 shared paper)Martha C. Nussbaum (1 shared paper)Richard Strier (1 shared paper)
- Journals
- Canadian Theatre Review (2 papers)Renaissance Quarterly (1 paper)The Modern Language Review (1 paper)Modern Language Quarterly (1 paper)Renaissance and Reformation (3 papers)
- Partner nations
- Canada
In The Last Decade
Mark Fortier
16 papers receiving 65 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 29
- Classics 24
- Visual Arts and Performing Arts 40
- Literature and Literary Theory 39
- Anthropology 14
- Law 11
Countries citing papers authored by Mark Fortier
This map shows the geographic impact of Mark Fortier's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Mark Fortier with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Mark Fortier more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Mark Fortier
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Mark Fortier. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Mark Fortier. The network helps show where Mark Fortier may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 4 scholars most cited alongside Mark Fortier, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.
All Works
Showing the 20 most-cited of 28 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2002 | 47 | |
| 2 | 2001 | 19 | |
| 3 | Royal subjects : essays on the writings of James VI and I | 2002 | 10 |
| 4 | 2016 | 8 | |
| 5 | 2016 | 8 | |
| 6 | L'économie sociale : l'avenir d'une illusion | 1998 | 5 |
| 7 | 2013 | 5 | |
| 8 | Shakespeare as "Minor Theater": Deleuze and Guattari and the Aims of Adaptation | 1996 | 4 |
| 9 | 1996 | 3 | |
| 10 | 1998 | 3 | |
| 11 | 2014 | 3 | |
| 12 | 2016 | 3 | |
| 13 | 2011 | 2 | |
| 14 | 2019 | 2 | |
| 15 | 2002 | 1 | |
| 16 | 2005 | 1 | |
| 17 | 2017 | 1 | |
| 18 | 2019 | 1 | |
| 19 | 2019 | 1 | |
| 20 | 1988 | 0 |
About Mark Fortier
Mark Fortier is a scholar working on Literature and Literary Theory, Classics, Visual Arts and Performing Arts, Law and Philosophy, having authored 28 papers that have together received 127 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism (10 papers), Renaissance Literature and Culture (6 papers), Theatre and Performance Studies (5 papers), Law in Society and Culture (4 papers), Medieval and Early Modern Justice (4 papers), Seventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought (3 papers), Literary Theory and Cultural Hermeneutics (2 papers) and Poetry Analysis and Criticism (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Classics (24 citations), Visual Arts and Performing Arts (40 citations), Literature and Literary Theory (39 citations), Anthropology (14 citations) and Law (11 citations). Mark Fortier has collaborated with scholars based in Canada. Frequent co-authors include Christopher McCullough, Daniel T. Fischlin, Martha C. Nussbaum and Richard Strier. Their work appears in journals such as Canadian Theatre Review, Renaissance Quarterly, The Modern Language Review, Modern Language Quarterly and Renaissance and Reformation.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.