Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 626.  Monday, 4 October 1993.
 
(1)     From:   Cary M. Mazer <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 4 Oct 93 8:43:40 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 4.0622  Re: *Coriolanus* Ban
 
(2)     From:   Jean Peterson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 4 Oct 1993 11:58:17 -0400
        Subj:   Re: SHK 4.0623  Re: Editing *Ham*
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Cary M. Mazer <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 4 Oct 93 8:43:40 EDT
Subject: 4.0622  Re: *Coriolanus* Ban
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0622  Re: *Coriolanus* Ban
 
William Godshalk may (for all I know) be accurate in correcting Terence
Hawkes's statement about the ban on _Coriolanus_ in occupied Berlin,
noting that the ban may have only extended to "translations, adaptations,
and independent versions."  But he should consider that EVERY production
of a playscript is a translation, adaptation, and/or independent version, and
that no production--whether by the King's men, the BBC, the RSC, or at
Wanamaker's Globe--isn't.
 
Cary M. Mazer
University of Pennsylvania
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jean Peterson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 4 Oct 1993 11:58:17 -0400
Subject: 4.0623  Re: Editing *Ham*
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0623  Re: Editing *Ham*
 
>How about weaving Stoppard's *Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead*
>into it? Perhaps as a separate project for teaching, without all
>the Q and F layerings.
 
Director Gordon McCall DID "weave" *R&G are Dead* into a provocative, very
dark production of *Hamlet* at University of British Columbia a few years
back.
 
If this is of interest, there's a review/description of the production in
*Shakespeare Bulletin* 10, Winter 1992.
 
Jean Peterson
Bucknell University