Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1994 :: May ::
Re: The Nature of Discussion Groups
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0463.  Friday, 27 May 1994.
 
(1)     From:   Nick Clary <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 26 May 1994 11:44:09 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Printing as Protection
 
(2)     From:   Noel Chevalier <CHEVALIE@UREGINA1>
        Date:   Thursday, 26 May 94 10:30:41 CST
        Subj:   Nature of Discussion Groups
 
(3)     From:   Steve Urkowitz <SURCC@CUNYVM>
        Date:   Friday, 27 May 94 06:25:43 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 5.0459  Re: Discussion Groups
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Nick Clary <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 26 May 1994 11:44:09 -0500 (EST)
Subject:        Printing as Protection
 
I like the notion that ideas may be safeguarded by printing them.  I'm not
thinking of publication as a mechanism for keeping intellectual property from
being ripped off, however; I'm thinking of it as a hedge against forgetfulness,
not poachers or pirates.
 
Nick Clary
 
[NB: All five years of SHAKSPER discussions are available on the SHAKSPER
Fileserver for retrieval by email.  Further, the previous discussions can
be read and retrieved through the University of Toronto's VM GOPHER Server.
Every digest from the first to the most recent carries with it a header
that contains both the volume and the digest number.  In a real sense (or
should I say virtual sense), SHAKSPER disussions are published and
retrievalable.  --HMC]
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Noel Chevalier <CHEVALIE@UREGINA1>
Date:           Thursday, 26 May 94 10:30:41 CST
Subject:        Nature of Discussion Groups
 
Thanks to John Boni for stating what I've been feeling for some time--that
this discussion group has become less a forum for serious discussion of
WS and his plays and more a Kaffeeklatsch for Oxfordians.  I myself couldn't
care less about the "authorship question"--and I know my students feel the
same way.  Not that that makes any difference, I know--but the whole debate
has led to me to question seriously what an electronic conference is really
all about.  Perhaps John Boni is right, and the SHAKSPER group really is a
place for trivia--y'all will save your *real* scholarship for *real*
conferences.  If I am totally off the mark, please let me know.  It could
be that I've just lost my innocence.  But I am (or was) quite excited about
the idea of electronic conferences, and had hoped to tap into the best of
current Shakespeare scholarship.  I sincerely hope that the Oxfordians have
had their day, and that we can move on to something a little more useful.
 
Petulantly,
Noel Chevalier.
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Steve Urkowitz <SURCC@CUNYVM>
Date:           Friday, 27 May 94 06:25:43 EDT
Subject: 5.0459  Re: Discussion Groups
Comment:        Re: SHK 5.0459  Re: Discussion Groups
 
John Boni anticipated and richly expanded on some crack-of-dawn thoughts I had
this morning about the processes behind the authorship controversy.  In a lot
of ways, I should be more sympathetic to the holders of these theories of
authorship, since only a tenure-run ago folks like Fredson Bowers were
thundering at me about my "impossible" theory that Shakespeare could have had
anything to do with the First Quarto of HAMLET, or that there was anything in
Q1 HENRY V worth looking at.  Well, maybe I should be sympathetic.  I'm not,
primarily because of what I read as petulance and ill humor in a dogged form of
argument where one side must win and therefore the other must lose.
 
In such an ungenerous testesterone-swamp, no one wants to be shown a fool.
Another way of putting it, as John Boni says, is that folks don't want to be
ripped off.  The property-right anxiety flourishes in a world where
intellectual and emotional resources are conceived of as scarce, a
Beowulf-dragon hoard that can only be diminished rather than a garden where new
flowers and cantaloupes are coming up all the time.  The debate over the flow
of hurley-Burleigh gossip seems to be structured this way.  (Psssst!  Here's a
juicy bit of news . . . No one else knows it.  Don't tell a soul, promise?)
Like a new dance, or a way of wearing a hat, or a clever "I am that I am"
application into current speech, in a generous world these things circulate
swiftly and joyously, but under a parsimonious emotional regime they circulate
just as swiftly but angrily, jealously.  Oops, it's bright day over the upper
harbor outside my window, and I'm off to plant my garden.
 
                               As ever,
                                       Steve Hortorwitz
 

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.