1990

Addressing Messages for SHAKSPER (30)

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 1, No. 44. Friday, 31 Aug 1990.
 
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 90 17:53:10 EDT
From:         Ken Steele <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Subject:      A Note on Addressing Messages to SHAKSPER
 
 
A number of ambiguously public/private messages have arrived in my
mail lately, so I would like to reiterate my request that any messages
intended for redistribution on the SHAKSPER conference, and particularly
any messages which might appear to be private mail but aren't, be
directed to <SHAKSPER@utoronto> rather than <KSTEELE@utorepas>.
Ultimately, all the messages end up in the same mailbox, but their
original destination is clearly recorded.  If messages sent to my private
address seem private, they may not be redistributed.  Your assistance
in this matter will also ease one of my headaches.
 
                                  Yours,
 
                                  Ken Steele
                                  Editor, SHAKSPER
                                  University of Toronto
 
                                  <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
                                   or <KSTEELE@utorepas>

The Bed's Still Second-Best (41)

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 1, No. 43. Friday, 31 Aug 1990.
 
 
(1)   Date:   Thu, 30 Aug 90 17:40:09 EDT                    (10 lines)
      From:   Ray Wheeler <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Subject:      Re: SHK 1.0036  The Second-Best Bed
 
(2)   Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 90 17:39:23 EDT              (13 lines)
      From:         Ken Steele <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Subject:      English Common Law and Shakespeare's Widow
 
(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:   Thu, 30 Aug 90 17:40:09 EDT
From:   Ray Wheeler <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Subject: 1.0036  The Second-Best Bed  (84)
Comment:      Re: SHK 1.0036  The Second-Best Bed  (84)
 
Ken,
  I can't help but say thanks to you for the little treatise on the
second-best bed. The story may be old hat to others, but it was new
to me and most entertaining. It's probably a dumb question, but under
Common Law and in the absence of a will, who or what would have
determined which third the surviving spouse would receive? RW
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------17----
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 90 17:39:23 EDT
From:         Ken Steele <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Subject:      English Common Law and Shakespeare's Widow
 
 
Well, sorry, but I'm no expert on English Common Law.  I don't think
it mattered "which third" the widow would receive -- she received the
use of the family home and one-third of the wealth, I assume, or
income of the husband's estate.  Does anyone else have any suggestions,
or perhaps good sources for this matter?
 
                                         Ken Steele
                                         University of Toronto

Etexts on SHAKSPER (52)

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 1, No. 41. Friday, 31 Aug 1990.
 
 
(1)   Date:   Thu, 30 Aug 90 17:51:28 EDT                     (9 lines)
      From:   Tom Horton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Subject: SHK 1.0040  Ideas for SHAKSPER's Future
 
(2)   Date: Thu, 30 Aug 90 22:56 CDT                          (7 lines)
      From: Michael Hancher <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Subject: SHAKSPER agenda: ASCII transcripts?
 
(3)   Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 90 17:42:06 EDT              (13 lines)
      From:         Ken Steele <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Subject:      SHAKSPER as an Etext Resource
 
(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:   Thu, 30 Aug 90 17:51:28 EDT
From:   Tom Horton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Subject: Ideas for SHAKSPER's Future  (62)
Comment: SHK 1.0040  Ideas for SHAKSPER's Future  (62)
 
This is not really an idea (so don't get excited).  But I do have a electronic
version of the Folio text of Henry VIII which I am willing to make available if
people are interested in this sort of thing.  It has COCOA-style references.
 
Tom
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------14----
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 90 22:56 CDT
From: Michael Hancher <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Subject: SHAKSPER agenda: ASCII transcripts?
 
I like your suggestion of posting ASCII versions of the plays.  First
it would be useful to compile a handlist of any such versions already
in the public domain, to avoid redundant keyboarding.
(3) --------------------------------------------------------------17----
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 90 17:42:06 EDT
From:         Ken Steele <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Subject:      SHAKSPER as an Etext Resource
 
 
My thanks to Tom Horton for his generous offer.  I have edited etexts of
the quarto and folio tragedies myself -- but I will have to negotiate their
use on SHAKSPER.  I know of at least five copyrighted electronic corpuses
(corpii?) but of no public domain texts.  Does anyone else have texts,
or an opinion on this suggestion?
 
                                             Ken Steele
                                             University of Toronto

Non-Hierarchical Tagging of Etexts (73)

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 1, No. 42. Friday, 31 Aug 1990.
 
 
(1)   Date:   Fri, 31 Aug 90 12:33:23 EDT                     (7 lines)
      From:   "Michael S. Hart" <HART@UIUCVMD>
      Subject:      Re: SHK 1.0033  WordCruncher Riverside Shakespeare  (156)
 
(2)   Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 90 17:20:48 EDT              (48 lines)
      From:         Ken Steele <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Subject:      The Value of Non-Hierarchical Coding
 
(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:   Fri, 31 Aug 90 12:33:23 EDT
From:   "Michael S. Hart" <HART@UIUCVMD>
Subject: 1.0033  WordCruncher Riverside Shakespeare  (156)
Comment:      Re: SHK 1.0033  WordCruncher Riverside Shakespeare  (156)
 
As for collecting all references to Juliet's lines, why not creat a macro
to search for Juliet as speaker, then export her portions to a file.  The
file could then be searched for "love" as I recall the example was.  mh
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------52----
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 90 17:20:48 EDT
From:         Ken Steele <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Subject:      The Value of Non-Hierarchical Coding
 
 
As Michael Hart suggests, there are makeshift solutions to any individual
problem.  If my desire was to detect all occurrences of "love" in the
dialogue of Juliet, I could indeed create a database input text which
consisted solely of her lines, index it (with TACT or WordCruncher), and
then perform whatever operations upon it I wished.
 
However, if I wished to compare Juliet's use of "love" with Romeo's
use of it, or Juliet's use with all other characters' use, this solution
would be extremely trying -- rather than a single distribution screen,
one would be faced with multiple databases and very unhelpful results.
 
Furthermore, this presumes that all I wish to do with the texts is
explore this issue of Juliet's dialogue.  The remarkable power of
computer-assisted research comes from its spontaneity -- the researcher
quite simply need not know what s/he is looking for until a pattern
emerges from the evidence.  It might not be the speeches of Juliet at
all, but the spelling preferences of a single compositor; it might be
that the word "love" does not appear at all in a particular gathering;
it might be that love is always discussed in verse... (you get the
idea).
 
Using TACT, for instance, it is possible to evaluate the evidence in
a single textbase according to any number of variables, because it is
not limited to three rigidly hierarchical levels of codes.  The user
can type in a word, list of words, or presaved category of words, such
as, for example, the language of Petrarchan love.  One could then view
the results of this search in a given scene, play, or genre in a one-line
index screen, Keyword in Context screen, or (my favourite) a histogram.
TACT's graph (called the Distribution Display) could depict the occurrences
of the Petrarchan language according to Act, Scene, and Line.  With a
few keystrokes, the display would shift to a graph of occurrences by
speaker, or by prose/verse, or by signature, compositor, gathering,
and so on.
 
Just like WordCruncher, TACT allows the researcher to
*discover* new patterns, not simply to demonstrate anticipated ones --
but TACT (and apparently the eventual upgrade of WordCruncher) will
allow the use of multiple, non-hierarchical tags, which greatly increases
the utility and user-friendliness of the software, and advances by an
order of magnitude the possibility for original discovery in research.
 
                                  Ken Steele
                                  University of Toronto

Ideas for SHAKSPER's Future (62)

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 1, No. 40. Thursday, 30 Aug 1990.
 
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 90 17:32:12 EDT
From:         Ken Steele <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Subject:      Ideas for SHAKSPER
 
 
A number of suggestions have been made about possible new features
of the Shakespeare Electronic Conference, and I would like to throw
them out for comments and discussion from SHAKSPEReans as a whole.
 
The electronic medium, the nature of the network, and the abilities of
the Fileserver all conspire to make it particularly feasible to post
cumulative data files for member contribution and retrieval.  I have in
mind the sort of file exemplified by the RIVERSID ERRORS SHAKSPER
file, one which is of general interest and/or utility, and which
SHAKSPEReans working together can make a more complete and up-to-
date resource than is available elsewhere.  Member suggestions so far
have included a list of Shakespeare videotape and film resources, a
core bibliography of criticism, and a list of current Shakespeare
dissertations or works in progress.
 
Some suggestions in the SHAKSPER GUIDE which have yet to be
realized include the possibility of posting ASCII Shakespeare texts on
the SHAKSPER Fileserver for retrieval by members.  Members could
use whatever text retrieval software they prefer to index and utilize
these files.  Obviously the files would have to be non-copyright texts,
and for the textual scholars amongst us, the original quarto and folio
texts would probably be preferable.  Perhaps we could divide the work
of scanning, proofing, editing, and tagging our own texts, or perhaps
someone knows of texts which could be made available.  Does anyone
feel strongly whether this would or would not be worthwhile?
 
It also seems to me that reviews of critical books or articles would be
particularly appropriate on SHAKSPER.  These would not necessarily be
formal reviews, requiring much time or effort -- members could simply
write brief paragraphs on something they had read of interest that
week or month, and send it to the list.  New trendy articles or classic
tomes of criticism would be equally interesting to most of us, I suspect.
We could rotate daily responsibility among a group of volunteers, or
simply hope that the contributions would flow in regularly on their own.
Any opinions or suggestions?
 
Do any of you have any other suggestions for services or features
which SHAKSPER could offer its members, or which its members could
offer SHAKSPER?  Any features of other electronic discussion groups
which seem suggestive?  Any needs which go unfilled by more
traditional media?  I look forward to seeing your responses.
 
                                  Yours,
 
                                  Ken Steele
                                  Editor, SHAKSPER
                                  University of Toronto
 
                                  <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
                                   or <KSTEELE@utorepas>

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.