1994

Re: Psycho Macbeth

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0163.  Monday, 28 February 1994.
 
From:           James McKenna <MCKENNJI@UCBEH>
Date:           Sunday, 27 Feb 1994 18:54:29 -0500 (EST)
Subject:        macpsychbeth and th'expense of spirit
 
Thanks Mr. McKay for the reminder of classical ideas of tragedy: right!  I'm
off the beam to present Macbeth as Everyman.  With Willy Loman 350 years in the
future, Shakespeare is not writing from a modern perspective but from a
modified classical one.  But even that aside, does classical tragedy present
characters who are truly other than ourselves?  One of the blessed byproducts
of psychoanalysis is the discovery that these high characters often reside
within us.  We say that explicitly now, but might it be that the Renaissance
was aware that extreme behaviors are not so much other than normal as extremes,
normality stretched by obsession and circumstance?
 
I ask that as a real question.  In reading comedies of humors, I can see types
constructed that are clearly just what they are; not distortions but oddities.
Yet such oddities are the staple of television today.  Comedy of humors is more
alive now than it was then.  The existence of truly unhuman characters is not
evidence that there is no awareness of the link between godlike ambition and
human frailty.  You are right to call me on the Everyman slant: that's taking
the point too far.  But Renaissance writing demonstrates that writers, at
least, if not most people, were interested in the question of whether
enormities were the actions of a bizarre few or the acting out of common
passions by unfortunates.
 
Finally, on Sonnet 129:  Why do you pick this one as an example of outlandish
behavior?  Do I reveal too much about myself?  It seems to me that this very
hyperbole is the core of the Renaissance megalomaniac: a familiar passion,
commonly unacted or mostly suppressed or acted in a very small sphere, expanded
onto a stage of nations and kings.  What thinkest'ou?
 
James McKenna
University of Cincinnati
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Anthony Bacon

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0162.  Monday, 28 February 1994.
 
From:           William Robinson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Sunday, 27 Feb 1994 12:15:16 -0500 (EST)
Subject:        Anthony Bacon is Shakespeare
 
   According to the Greek legend, the Phoenix is a lone beautiful
bird, the only one of its kind. It is said to live for nearly
five hundred years where it then begins to build a nest of dry
sticks and twigs while at the same time singing a melodious
dirge. When completed it then flaps its wings furiously setting
the nest on fire. Resting on top of the burning pile it slowly
consumes itself into ashes. It then rises from the ashes a new
bird equally alone and unique to live for another five hundred
years. The bird not only represents immortality but also an
individual who stands apart from the rest, a person of rare
qualities. In the play Cymbeline we find that Shakespeare was
truly aware of this when he compared Imogen with the Phoenix:
          If she be furnished with a mind so rare,
          She is alone the Arabian bird.
                                        I,vi.
Not only was Shakespeare aware of the symbolism behind the bird
but throughout Europe the comparison and significants comes up in
the literature of the time. There is an interesting comparison
made in a poem written to Anthony Bacon anonymously by some
European. It has survived the centuries by being packed away in a
bundle of correspondence written by and to Anthony Bacon and is
now safely housed at Lambeth Library in London:
 
          A. anglais phenix de celeste origine,
             (English phoenix of celestrial origin)
          N. Ne pour orner et la terre et les cieus:
             (Born to adorn the earth and the heavens)
          T. Ton renom bruit jusques aux envieux:
             (Thy renown clamours down even to the jealous)
          H. Honneur te sert, et vertu te domine:
             (Honorable you serve and virtually you dominate)
          O. Ornement seul de sagesse et doctrine,
             (Ornament of wisdom and doctrine)
          I. Jour, et clairte de tout coeur genereux:
             (light and clarity to all generous hearts)
          N. Nous ne scaurions regarder de nos yeux
             (When we no longer look at you with our eyes)
          E. Eternite qui devant toi chemine.
             (you will still walk though eternity)
 
          B. Bacon fior di virtu, raro e perfetto
          A. Animo pronto, angelico intelletto,
          C. Chiaro lume d'honor e caritade,
          O. Ornamento e belta di nostra etade,
          N. Natural real di fidelta pieno
          E. Essempio d'ogni bon sempre sereno.
 
So this anonymous European thought Mr Bacon was a man who like
the Phoenix, had a mind so rare and perfect, that there was no
other like him.
 
          O Anthony! O thou Arabian bird!
                    Anthony and Cleoprata III,ii.
 
   The above is an excerpt from one of several unpublished articles that I
have written centering around the life of Anthony Bacon. I am submitting it
to this forum for possible discussion in the hopes of getting more
information. So far the only sources loaded with information on the subject
have consisted of several books:
    du Maurier, Daphne, Golden Lads (which opened the door)
    Strachey, Lytton, Elizabeth and Essex
    Birch, Thomas, Memoirs of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth
    Spedding, James, The Life and Letters of Francis Bacon
 
   By far the most important discovery for me has been Anthony Bacon's
correspondence, which is housed in 16 volumes in the Lambeth Palace Library
in London. Luckily someone saw fit to put the entire contents on microfilm
in distribute it to several libraries throughout the United States. This
information has provided me with some interesting parallelisms with the
Shakespeare plays and has stimulated me to proceed further. Unfortunately
much of the correspondence is written in old english, latin, french, spanish
and in some instances in cipher. Anthony Bacon was well versed in several
languages having spent 12 years of his life living in Europe gathering
intelligence for Sir Francis Walsingham, Secretary of State under Queen
Elizabeth.
   Hooking up to Shaksper I hope will be a godsend to me and anybody who
has any information on Anthony Bacon please contact me. Equally so anybody
that wants to add pro or con to this discussion, come on in the waters
fine.
 
                                    Until next time
                                    William A Robinson

Re: The Third Murderer in *Macbeth*

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0160.  Monday, 28 February 1994.
 
(1)     From:   William Godshalk <GODSHAWL@UCBEH>
        Date:   Saturday, 26 Feb 1994 21:24:50 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 5.0156  Third Man in *Mac.*
 
(2)     From:   Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Sunday, 27 Feb 1994 11:46:21 -0400
        Subj:   Re: SHK 5.0156  Third Man in *Mac.*
 
(3)     From:   Milla Riggio <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 28 Feb 1994 08:18:24 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 5.0156  Third Man in *Mac.*
 
(4)     From:   Luc Borot <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 28 Feb 1994 14:33:59 -0500
        Subj:   3rd murderer in *Macbeth*
 
(5)     From:   Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, February 28, 1994
        Subj:   The Third Murderer
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           William Godshalk <GODSHAWL@UCBEH>
Date:           Saturday, 26 Feb 1994 21:24:50 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 5.0156  Third Man in *Mac.*
Comment:        Re: SHK 5.0156  Third Man in *Mac.*
 
The Three murderers
Herb,
 
It just popped into my head (again) that the three murderers are the three
witches; I mean the same actors.
 
I've heard the idea of Macbeth as the third murderer debated, and the
refutation seemed good. If Macbeth had been at the murder scene, he would know
that Fleance had escaped. He wouldn't be surprised when he is told at the
banquet scene. For me, that rules out Macbeth.
 
I like the addition of the third murderer because we don't know why Macbeth
sent him (or her?). I'm sure that some textual scholars will argue that in the
"original, long version" this is all accounted for. I have argued, and I think
I will still argue, that MACBETH is not a play revised by what's his face. I
forgot Middleton's name for a moment. The play is structurally perfect as it
is. OTHELLO also lacks a subplot of any great status.
 
And, Jim McKenna, here we have another example of off stage scheming that is
not explained to the audience. We auditors remained puzzled and quarrel over
what's going on. We remain ignorant. Was the third murderer Seyton - as is
sometimes suggested? The insidious Rosse? Malcolm who has sneaked back to get
rid of a potential competitor? Perhaps Lady sneaks out for a little fun?
 
Does Shakespeare always tell his audience what's going on? What about the
Paulina/Hermione plot?
 
Paranoid Bill Godshalk
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Sunday, 27 Feb 1994 11:46:21 -0400
Subject: 5.0156  Third Man in *Mac.*
Comment:        Re: SHK 5.0156  Third Man in *Mac.*
 
Hi,
 
It seems a little unnecessary to suggest that the third murderer is
Macbeth himself.  Wouldn't the other two recognize him?  Granted, of course,
there are any number of disguises in Shakespeare that baffle credulity, and
it was night . . .
 
By the way, the BBC production has the third murderer off the other two
before walking off stage (or off camera).  I think they used Seyton as
third murderer.
 
        Good luck,
        Sean Lawrence
        This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Milla Riggio <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 28 Feb 1994 08:18:24 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 5.0156  Third Man in *Mac.*
Comment:        Re: SHK 5.0156  Third Man in *Mac.*
 
On the third murderer in Macboth:  One filmmaker (is it Polanski?) brings
a sinsiter Ross in as the third murderer, in a role he carries throughout
the play.
 
Milla Riggio
 
(4)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Luc Borot <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 28 Feb 1994 14:33:59 -0500
Subject:        3rd murderer in *Macbeth*
 
Herb,
        I can refer you to the excellent analysis of Polanski's film
treatment of this question, by two of my Montpellier colleagues, Patricia
Dorval and Jean-Marie Maguin, in their paper "Playing on Things as well as
Words: Antanaclasis on Screen and Stage", which they read at the first
conference of the European Society for the Study of English in 1991, and
which was published in *Cahiers Elisabethains* nb42 (Oct 92), pp.57-63 (esp.
see 59-60).
        It is a very subtle and close analysis of the devices and semantic
structures involved.
 
hope it helps
 
Luc
 
(5)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, February 28, 1994
Subject:        The Third Murderer
 
In the Plummer-Jackson *Macbeth* of several years back (as with a number of
other productions I've seen) the Third Man (strains of Reed-Welles film) is
the conflated, omnipresent henchman -- Seyton.

Re: Staging *The Tempest*

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0161.  Monday, 28 February 1994.
 
(1)     From:   Jerald Bangham <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Saturday, 26 Feb 1994 19:16:34
        Subj:   Re: SHK 5.0156  *Tempest* Problem
 
(2)     From:   Cary M. Mazer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Sunday, 27 Feb 94 11:31:34 EST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 5.0156  Staging The Tempest
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jerald Bangham <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Saturday, 26 Feb 1994 19:16:34
Subject: 5.0156  *Tempest* Problem
Comment:        Re: SHK 5.0156  *Tempest* Problem
 
>I've been reading through the Tempest and I want to do it for the Fall
>production at my university.  However, the vanishing banquet scene has got me
>boggled.  I want to do the play in the round and I am curious if any one has
>seen this play done in the round and if so how was this scene done.
 
I saw the scene at Stratford Ont, but don't remember how it was
staged.  One possibility would be a platform that could be carried
on stage that had some kind of a flip top and a flash box.
 
You might just have "spirits" come in and whisk the stuff away, again
with lights, smoke etc.
 
Jerry Bangham
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Cary M. Mazer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Sunday, 27 Feb 94 11:31:34 EST
Subject: 5.0156  Staging The Tempest
Comment:        Re: SHK 5.0156  Staging The Tempest
 
To Chris Daigle,
 
Before you get tied up in the logistics of blocking, you might ask some
more fundamental questions about magic and theatre and audiences in the play.
What--to borrow a concept from Alan Dessen--does it mean to see or not to
see something?  What can Prospero see that the other Italians can't (e.g.
Ariel)?  What does he see that we in the audience can or cannot?  Find a
theatre conventon that helps you to establish how seeing works vis-a-vis
magic, and you can throw away the strobe lights, blackouts, fairy dust and
trap doors.
 
Have fun.
 
Cary M. Mazer

Re: Hosehold Words

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0159.  Monday, 28 February 1994.
 
(1)     From:   Leslie Thomson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. >
        Date:   Saturday, 26 Feb 1994 20:25:05 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 5.0156  Household Words;
 
(2)     From:   James Schaefer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Sunday, 27 Feb 1994 11:47:02 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 5.0156  Household Words;
 
(3)     From:   James McKenna <MCKENNJI@UCBEH>
        Date:   Sunday, 27 Feb 1994 19:18:49 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   household words
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Leslie Thomson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. >
Date:           Saturday, 26 Feb 1994 20:25:05 -0500
Subject: 5.0156  Household Words;
Comment:        Re: SHK 5.0156  Household Words;
 
Regarding Shakespearean phrases that have become part of the language:
 
Recently a non-academic friend gave me Richard Lederer's *The Miracle
of Language* which has a chapter titled "A Man of Fire-New Words"
giving an extensive list and commentary on just such phrases.  The
chapter is very short and could easily be photocopied and distributed
to students (if copyright didn't exist, that is).  I hope this helps.
 
Regards,
Leslie Thomson
U of Toronto
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           James Schaefer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Sunday, 27 Feb 1994 11:47:02 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 5.0156  Household Words;
Comment:        Re: SHK 5.0156  Household Words;
 
Ms. Earthman:
 
One source for finding popularized phrases from Shakespeare is
Bartlett's.  The recent edition (16th) ed. by Justin Kaplan devotes
pages 163-226 to quotes that have become part of the "common culture."
 
Jim Schaefer
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           James McKenna <MCKENNJI@UCBEH>
Date:           Sunday, 27 Feb 1994 19:18:49 -0500 (EST)
Subject:        household words
 
Ms. Earthman,
 
BARTLETT'S FAMILAR QUOTATIONS should give you more of these than you can stand.
 
James McKenna
Univ of Cincinnati
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.