1993

Sonnet 20: Hews = Jews?

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 129.  Thursday, 4 March 1993.
 
From:           Nate Johnson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 04 Mar 93 16:08:00 EST
Subject: 4.0115  Re: Shakespeare, Jews, and Anti-Semitism
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0115  Re: Shakespeare, Jews, and Anti-Semitism
 
Although, as Jay Halio points out, there are no explicit references to
Jews in the sonnets, I wonder about line 7 of sonnet 20:
 
"A man in hew all *Hews* in his controlling" ["Hews" is italicized]
 
Even without the (random?) italicization, it strikes me that there might
be a pun here, especially given the prevalence of "use" and usury as
themes in the sonnets.  Booth suggests several possible meanings of
'hue' and a pun on "you."  Give the typography of "Iew" in MOV, and at
least one use--"Marke Iew, O learned judge" (Hinman facs)--which suggests
a similar pun, it's tempting to speculate about visual or auditory puns on
you/Iew/ewe/hew or Iews/Hews/use/ewes in the sonnets.
 
The italicization is also interesting, although perhaps even more dangerous
as grounds for speculation.  Authorial intent, of course, isn't the issue,
but I'm also unwilling to believe that italicization and capitalization are
utterly irrelevant at least as clues to some kind of perceived emphasis.
 
The most frequent use of italicization in the sonnets (based on a very rapid
scan) seems to be to highlight proper nouns, esp. from classical sources.
In the "will" sonnets, the most concentrated use of italics, although not
consistent, highlights a word which is both a proper noun and a fertile pun.
 
Having said this, I'm prepared to be jumped on and will have little to say
in my defense unless others have supporting ideas or evidence.
 
--Nate Johnson

Rs: "the naked new-born babe"

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 128.  Thursday, 4 March 1993.
 
(1)     From:   Daniel Pigg <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 04 Mar 93 14:25:53 CST
        Subj:   SHK 4.0126 Q: "a naked new-born babe"
 
(2)     From:   Bernice W. Kliman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 4 Mar 1993 15:48 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 4.0126  Q: "a naked new-born babe"
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Daniel Pigg <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 04 Mar 93 14:25:53 CST
Subject: Q: "a naked new-born babe"
Comment:        SHK 4.0126 Q: "a naked new-born babe"
 
I'm not sure the new critical reading of Brooks is the best, especially
given his obvious ahistoricism.
 
Dan Pigg
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Bernice W. Kliman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 4 Mar 1993 15:48 EDT
Subject: 4.0126  Q: "a naked new-born babe"
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0126  Q: "a naked new-born babe"
 
I can't help jumping in also.  I discusss the passage in my recent book
*Macbeth* in the Manchester UP series on Shakespeare in Performance, p. 6. I
agree that Brooks is interesting and suggestive, but this is what I wrote:
"What can listeners make of the language of Macbeth's hesitancy about murdering
Duncan?  Readers have difficulty untangling the metaphoric layers to understand
Macbeth's state of mind. Sensitive to and appreciative of metaphor as
Shakespeares's audience may have been, it is hard to believe that, even were
the speech spoken with studied deliberateness, they would get more than flashes
of images and the emotive intent, conveyed largely through intonation, gesture,
and expression." I see this obscure language as a element of Shakespeare's
characterization of Macbeth and contrast his language with Lady Macbeth's much
clearer language.
 
Cheers,

Q: "a naked new-born babe"

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 126.  Thursday, 4 March 1993.
 
From:           Ronald Dwelle <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 04 Mar 93 09:26:52 EST
Subject:        [Q: "naked new-born babe"
 
I'm teaching Macbeth (for the first time in years) and stumbling a bit
on some of the language. For example:
 
          I,vii, 16-25.
 
Macbeth is in soliloqy, describing Duncan's meekness and other virtues,
which will "plead against his taking off...."
 
Then the lines:
 
          And pity, like a naked new-born babe
          Striding the blast, or heaven's cherubin horsed
          Upon the sightless couriers of the air,
          Shall blow the horrid deed in every eye
          That tears shall drown the wind.
 
I can find no gloss and can make little sense of the simile.
 
Can someone interpret (or direct me)?
 
Thanks
 
[I cannot resist this one: start with Cleanth Brooks's "The Naked Babe and
the Cloak of Manliness," the second chapter in *The Well Wrought Urn*. --hmc]

Rs: Tree's 1899 *King John*

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 127.  Thursday, 4 March 1993.
 
(1)     From:   Georgianna Ziegler <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 04 Mar 1993 11:55:07 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 4.0125  Q: Tree's 1899 *King John*
 
(2)     From:   Bernice W. Kliman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 4 Mar 1993 15:32 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 4.0125  Q: Tree's 1899 *King John*
 
(3)     From:   John C. Mucci <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 4 Mar 93 19:01:00 UT
        Subj:   RE: SHK 4.0125  Q: Tree's 1899 *King John*
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Georgianna Ziegler <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 04 Mar 1993 11:55:07 -0500
Subject: 4.0125  Q: Tree's 1899 *King John*
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0125  Q: Tree's 1899 *King John*
 
The New York Public Library has a microform of *Shakespeare's historical drama
King John produced at Her Majesty's Theatre by Herbert Beerbohm Tree on
the 20th of September, MDCCCXCIX.* [London]: British Mutoscope and
Biograph Co., 1899.
 
The Folger Library has a photogravure of Tree as K. John done by Charles
A. Buchel, and an ink and opaque drawing of K. John I.v. showing
McLeay as Hubert, Mr. Tree as K. John, Miss Bateman as Constance, and
Master Lefton as Arthur.  We also have a number of letters to and from
(24) Tree, though I'm not sure that any of these will deal with that
production.
 
Georgianna
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Bernice W. Kliman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 4 Mar 1993 15:32 EDT
Subject: 4.0125  Q: Tree's 1899 *King John*
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0125  Q: Tree's 1899 *King John*
 
The next issue of the *Shakespeare Bulletin* has information about this
production.  You should have this issue soon if you are a subscriber.  Also,
an essay appeared fairly recently in *Theatre Survey* by B. A. Kachur, with
excellent illustrations. *The Shakespeare on Film Newsletter*, which has
now merged with the *Shakespeare Bulletin*, carried an announcement of the
Kachur essay in vol. 16.2, p. 7.
 
To subscribe to the *Bulletin* send $15 for one year and $30 for two to Profs.
James LUSARDI and June SCHLUETER, at Lafayette College, Easton, PA 18042.  The
Bulletin, a performance journal, is issued quarterly and has about 50 pages per
issue--full of good things.
 
Good luck with your research.
 
Bernice W. Kliman
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           John C. Mucci <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 4 Mar 93 19:01:00 UT
Subject: 4.0125  Q: Tree's 1899 *King John*
Comment:        RE: SHK 4.0125  Q: Tree's 1899 *King John*
 
There is a very interesting account of the 1899 production of _King
John_ in the book SHAKESPEARE AND SILENT FILM, as that particular
production was the basis of the world's first cinematographical
representation of Shakespeare. There are a few stills from the film
--and I believe one of the stage production, but the actual film
itself is apparently lost.

Q: Tree's 1899 *King John*

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 125.  Thursday, 4 March 1993.
 
From:           John Aney <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 3 Mar 93 23:01:55 EST
Subject:        H.B. Tree's 1899 _King John_
 
Fellow SHAKSPER-eans:
 
I am currently doing some research on H. Beerbohm Tree's 1899 production of
_King John_, and would be very interested to hear if anyone out there has some
ideas of sources I might check on.  I realize this specific question may not
yield any answers, but then again, you never know.
 
Also, any one have any good resources for trying to determine how the ORIGINAL
production of _KJ_ might have been staged (we have no record of it being
performed pre-Restoration...)
 
I am using you all as a resource, not as a substitute for my own research,
which continues daily (and nightly!!!)
 
Thanks!
 
John
 
"It is useless to claim people are born free if you deny
people are born good." - George Bernard Shaw
 
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.