1993

Spirits of the Internet (Two Possibly Missed Digests)

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 712. Wednesday, 3 November 1993.
 
From:           Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, November 3, 1993
Subject:        Spirits of the Internet (Two Possibly Missed Digests)
 
SHAKSPEReans,
 
Perhaps because of the season, over the weekend some of you received double
copies of some of the SHAKSPER digests and did not receive others at all.
The gliches occured sometime after the digests left the University of Toronto
and before they came to you.  I thank everyone who informed me of the
abnormalites, and I am reposting below two digests that some, including
myself, did not receive.
 

From     

Message-Id: <.>

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 697.  Monday, 1 November 1993.
 
From:           Steve Urkowitz <SURCC@CUNYVM>
Date:           Sunday, 31 Oct 93 08:56:44 EST
Subject:        12th Night Production NYC
 
Announcing a production of TWELFTH NIGHT at Baruch College and City College:
November 10-12 at 7pm, November 13 at 3pm at Baruch College, Lexington Avenue
at 23rd Street, in the Studio Theatre, Room 911, and at City College, Shepard
Hall Room 291, entrance on Convent Avenue and 140th Street, Thursday, November
18, at 12 and 6pm.  [The Baruch performances are just about sold out; we are
working there in a 60-seat house.]
 
The play is set on a mythical island at the beginning of the 20th Century, when
for a brief flowering peoples from Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas built
diverse and concordant communities in the islands of the Caribbean Sea.
Shakespeare imagined such a world, and this production brings it into life.
The play explores the delights of mirror images; delightedly it mirrors the
accomplishment of concord our schools achieve and celebrate.
 
The production is directed by Susan Spector, Speech Department, Baruch College,
and Steven Urkowitz, English Department, City College.
 
For reservations, call 387-1345,  area code 212.
 
Yikes!  The prose of this advertising flyer seems heavily orotund in the
electronicly fluid context of e-mail, but I'm scrambling to finish props for
the show and to catch up with student papers accumulating ominously on my desk.
 
We'll have photos and a videotape to document the production, but at the moment
I wish people could come see it in its happy fullness.
 
                      Best wishes,
                        Urk SURCC@CUNYVM
 

From     

Message-Id: <.>

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 701.  Monday, 1 November 1993.
 
(1)     From:   David Schalkwyk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 1 Nov 93 14:04:34 SAST-2
        Subj:   Versions
 
(2)     From:   Piers Lewis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 01 Nov 1993 09:36:14 -0600 (CST)
        Subj:   Versions of Shakespeare
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           David Schalkwyk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 1 Nov 93 14:04:34 SAST-2
Subject:        Versions
 
I'd like to ask what is at stake in the debate about whether or not
each instance of a Shakespeare text is a "new independent 'version'"
or not?  In one sense the latter claim is unimpeachable, in another
it runs counter not merely to common sense, but to our ability to
refer across time to the same play, say _Macbeth_.  For we could ask
the same thing about the scores of symphonies, coins and even words.
Is Beethoven's Ninth by Harnoncourt the same sympony as Beethoven's
Ninth by Klemperer?  Are the words I am using now the same as the
ones used so far on this list or those I used yesterday?  Or are
they in each case "new independent versions"?  Some considerations
incline us to answer in one way, others in the opposite.  One thing
is certain: what philosophers call the type/token distinction enables
us to see how and why we can refer to Beethoven's music or
Shakespeare's plays as the same piece across the differences
*necessitated* by repetition across time (what Derrida calls
iterability), and also why we *must* continue to regard each new
instance as a token of the same type in order to maintain consistency
of reference.  In other words, in order to speak about _Macbeth_ in
the first place (even if to raise the possibility that each
instantiation is new and different), we have to assume that we're
referring to the same thing.  Otherwise no-one would be able to
discuss, advertise and ask for and about videos of the plays, stage
performances, textual editions and so on.  This list would not exist,
and we couldn't teach _Macbeth_.
 
    On the other hand, when we start talking about the problems of an
authoritative text, performance, or interpretation, thereby
examining distinctions between tokens (or even begin to question
the "originality" of the type itself) then difference trumps
similarity and we're drawn in the opposite direction.  What I think
we should do is clarify *why* we should want to incline one way
rather than the other.  In other words, we need to move beyond
affirmation or denial or even positions like "I think we're actually
in agreement", and spell out what is at stake in the debate -- why it
matters to talk in one way rather than the other, always remembering
that the bugbear of reference (which will not go away despite
Saussure) has already stacked the cards in favour of sameness.
 
David Schalkwyk
English Department
University of Cape Town
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Piers Lewis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 01 Nov 1993 09:36:14 -0600 (CST)
Subject:        Versions of Shakespeare
 
Is one version of a play as good as another?  Or are some better than
others?  If so, what criteria do we or should we rely on in making such
judgments?  Or has that question already been answered?
 
Piers Lewis

Perriere

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 711. Wednesday, 3 November 1993.
 
From:           Robert O'Connor <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 3 Nov 1993 17:08:10 +0700
Subject:        Perriere
 
Dear SHAKSPEReans,
 
In an article by Franco Moretti ('"A Huge Eclipse": Tragic Form and the
Deconsecration of Sovereignity' in _The Power of Forms in the English
Renaissance_) I came across a reference to "The Mirrour of Policie", a
translation of an earlier French work by Guillame de la Perriere.  To my
aggravation, I have been unable to find out anything about it.  The two
brief quotations used by Moretti make it sound like an anti-monarchy piece,
blunt enough to have got the printer in real trouble.  It is certainly one
of the strongest expressions of such sentiments that I have seen from the
period.
 
Has anyone out there any more information about the "Mirrour", and is this
apparent anti-monarchism an accurate representation of it?  Was it a
well-known work at the time?  The lack of any info suggests to me that it
was not, but I would appreciate any other information that people might
have.
 
Ta
 
ROC
**********************
    Robert F. O'Connor
    This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
    English Department
    Australian National University
**********************

CD-ROM Expo: Multimedia Publishing

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 709. Wednesday, 3 November 1993.
 
From:           Peter Scott <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 02 Nov 1993 12:14:52 -0600 (CST)
Subject:        CD-ROM Expo: IBM Rolls Out Eight New Multimedia Titles 11/01/93
 
NB: Not for general distribution, since it came from a commercial resource...
 
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, U.S.A., 1993 NOV 1 (NB) -- At CD-ROM Expo,
IBM's Multimedia Publishing Studio (MPS) rolled out eight new
interactive CD-ROM titles, including a space encyclopedia, four
volumes of specialized digital imagery, and online editions of The
Lawnmower Man, MacBeth, and Star Trek.
 
MPS has been producing multimedia software since 1991, and CD-ROM
titles since late 1992, officials said during a news briefing at the
show. But the new market entries are the first to emerge from MPS'
new Affiliated Labels Program, an effort in which IBM is teaming up
with third-party developers.
 
Also at the briefing, IBM announced delivery dates of before the
end-of-the-year for a string of previously announced titles now
under internal development by the company. This group includes "The
Playboy Interviews," ""Adventures of Curious George and the ABCs,"
"Biosphere 2," and "Peter and the Wolf."
 
The IBM studio's solo and joint ventures cover Windows, DOS and
Macintosh platforms, in addition to just about every conceivable
subject matter, Crista C. Freeman, director of the Affiliated Labels
Program, noted at the briefing. "There's room for everything," she
commented.
 
Of the eight new CD-ROM joint productions, four run on Windows as
well as Macintosh. These are "Rick Doyle Digital Imagery" and Sound
Source Unlimited's "Lawnmower Man," "Star Trek, The Original TV
Series," "Star Trek, The Next Generation."
 
Two titles -- Plum Productions' "Shapes, Volume Two: Design in
Nature," and "Shapes, Volume Two, Man-Made Design" now operate on
the Mac only. The other two -- Andromeda Interactive's "The
Interactive Space Encyclopedia" and Animated Pixels' "Karaoke
MacBeth" -- are currently for DOS only.
 
"But the ultimate intent is for all eight titles to run on Windows
and Macintosh," stated Terry Jenkins, a communications consultant
to IBM.
 
The two "Shapes" titles are much more than mere collections on
images, suggested Norman Clark, a partner in Plum Productions, a
company based in Brockenhurst, Hants, UK.
 
The 100 source images in each volume are supported with three
variants that are overlaid with a wide variety of creative effects,
meant to show the graphic possibilities of image manipulation, said
Clark, also at the briefing. Further, the images are accompanied by
text captions aimed at helping users analyze the composition of the
natural and manmade environment.
 
"The Interactive Space Encyclopedia" also deals with the natural
and manmade environment, but in this case, the environment is that
of outer space.
 
The disk contains over 1,000 text documents, with interactive
keywords, along with 2000 photos and 150 3D animations illustrating
scientific concepts and moonwalks, space launches, and other
spectacular events, Jonathan Taylor, president of Alamdeda, CA-
based Andromeda Interactive, explained at the briefing.
 
After the briefing, Newsbytes viewed "Interactive Space
Encyclopedia" and "Karaoke MacBeth" on the exhibition floor at
CD-ROM Expo. Mike Cox, creative producer, showed how the new
encyclopedia lets users conduct an online exploration of outer
space from a wide range of perspectives, including timelines, maps
of the solar system, and searches for words, still images, and
animation. The title is narrated throughout by Patrick Moore.
 
Newsbytes also saw how "Karaoke MacBeth" permits users to play the
roles of MacBeth, Lady MacBeth, MacDuff, the Witches, and other key
characters in the famous Shakespearean drama. Up to 10 users can
take part at once, enacting their roles against the voices of
professional actors on the disk.
 
"Karaoke MacBeth" is replete with other audio effects, as well,
including blaring trumpets and the sounds of the crowd at London's
Globe Theatre. On the visual front, graphics and animation are
both to be found.
 
Among the other newly announced titles, the two Star Trek titles
and the virtual reality-oriented "LawnMower Man" all present full-
motion video clips and sound bytes from their movie and TV
namesakes.
 
In addition, each comes with a utility that lets users assign the
clips to system events and other computer functions. You might
start up your computer to a clip in which Spock announces,
"Computing now, Captain," for example -- or delete a file to the
sound of a photon torpedo blast. "It's quite a way to liven up
your desktop," Jenkins pointed out.
 
Digital Imagery, on the other hand, is a volume of sports photos by
Rick Doyle, an internationally known photojournalist whose credits
include cover photos for Sports Illustrated and Surfer Magazine.
The photos were scanned in on a high-end Hell 341 drum scanner and
saved in TIFF formats.
 
Also according to Jenkins, IBM's upcoming, internally developed
"The Playboy Interviews" and "Adventures of Curious George and the
ABCS" will be released within the next two to three weeks. "The
other internally developed titles will be out by the end of the
year," he added. "Curious George and the ABCs" could be the first
of a series of Curious George titles, he revealed.
 
Another title under internal development, "Biosphere 2," will take
users inside of the innovative Biosphere 2 ecological research
program, for an exploration of the program's technology and basic
research results.
 
(Jacqueline Emigh/19931101/Reader contact: IBM's Multimedia
Publishing Studio, tel 800-898-VTGA; Terry Jenkins, Multimedia
Publishing Studio, tel 404-988-9957)

Re: Nubility

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 710. Wednesday, 3 November 1993.
 
From:           William Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 02 Nov 1993 20:55:34 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 4.0707  Nubility 'Mongst the Tudor Nobility
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0707  Nubility 'Mongst the Tudor Nobility
 
Juliet is supposedly 13 years old (still) when she first appears on stage. She
is a fictional character, living in a fictional world. This fictional world is,
of course, set in Italy which also exists in our real world. As far as I know,
and I've recently reread the play, there is no direct evidence as to the
fictional date of the action.
 
My question is: how can 16th century history tell us anything - either way -
about a undated, fictional Italian city and its culture?
 
Jean Howard has asked this question more abstractly. I think it's a good
question.
 
Yours, Bill Godshalk

Re: Ophelia's Garland

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 708. Wednesday, 3 November 1993.
 
(1)     From:   Kevin Berland <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 2 Nov 93 13:25 EST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
 
(2)     From:   Fran Teague <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 02 Nov 93 14:36:10 EST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
 
(3)     From:   Stephen Orgel <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 2 Nov 1993 17:06:36 -0800 (PST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
 
(4)     From:   William Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 02 Nov 1993 20:47:28 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
 
(5)     From:   Michael Friedman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 02 Nov 1993 21:19:37 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Kevin Berland <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 2 Nov 93 13:25 EST
Subject: 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
 
It's gross enough: Dogstones = dog's testicles.  -- Kevin Berland
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Fran Teague <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 02 Nov 93 14:36:10 EST
Subject: 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
 
I'm not sure I know the answer to the question about Ophelia's garland, but
here's an answer.  In 1877 Joseph Crosby wrote, "Its botanical name is _orchis
morio mas_, anciently _testiculus morionis_.  _Orchis_, you know, means a
_testicle_; and I presume the 'grosser name' has some relation to the masculine
(_mas_) testicle, probably on account of its oval shape.  One of the notes says
that its various names, too gross for repetition, are preserved in _Lyte's
Herbal_,  1578; and another, that _one_ of its "grosser names" was "_the
rampant widow_, " a name that _Gertrude_ would not be very willing to recall."
The passage is included in _One Touch of Shakespeare_, which John Velz and I
edited.  I see we also have a note:  the grosser name may have been
cuckoo-pint (pint = pintle = penis).  The Wild Arum was so-called; it has a
long purple spadix of phallic shape.  See Karl P. Wentersdorff, "_Hamlet_:
Ophelia's Long Purples," ShQtly 29 (1978):  413-17.  (That's John's note, not
mine, so I'll refer you to him.)
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Stephen Orgel <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 2 Nov 1993 17:06:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
 
The 'grosser name' is any one of the ones given in Lyte's 1578 Herbal;
Hibbard's Oxford ed. cites priest's pintle, dog's cullions, fool's
ballocks, goat's cullions, all alluding to the appearance of the
roots. The note is on p. 319.
 
Stephen Orgel
 
(4)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           William Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 02 Nov 1993 20:47:28 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
 
"long purples" - Harold Jenkins' edition of HAMLET (Arden) has a good note on
the passage, The flower is probably a wild orchis which has testicle-like
tubers, and Jenkins records the following names: dogstones, dog's cods,
cullions, fool's ballocks, and variantions on these. And Jenkins points out
that we can't know precisely what Shakespeare had in mind. Personally, I think
"long purple" suggests an erect penis, the flower rather than the tubers. But
Farmer and Henley don't list "long purples" or "purples," nor does James Henke,
GUTTER LIFE AND LANGUAGE. . . . (West Cornwall: Locust Hill Press, 1988).
 
Shamefully yours, Bill Godshalk
 
(5)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Michael Friedman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 02 Nov 1993 21:19:37 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0704  Q: Ophelia's Garland
 
In case Ronald Dwelle hasn't seen it, here is editor Harold Jenkins' note
in the Arden *Hamlet* on the "grosser name" to which Gertrude refers:
 
"We cannot know which Shakespeare had particularly in mind, but recorded names
for the orchis, derived (like the term *orchis* itself) from the testicle-like
tubers of most species, include dogstones (L. *testiculus canis*), dog's cods,
cullions, fool's ballock's, and many variations on these."

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.