Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0822. Wednesday, 19 October 1994.
(1) From: Arthur Pearson <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Oct 1994 12:46:31 -0600
Subj: Two for one
(2) From: Lee A. Jacobus <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Oct 94 16:41:59 EDT
Subj: Re: SHK 5.0817 Re: Hamlet's Insanity
(3) From: Stephen C. Schultz <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Oct 94 14:04:25 EDT
Subj: SHK 5.0814 Trusting Sh.
(4) From: W. L. Godshalk <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Oct 1994 22:40:32 -0500 (EST)
Subj: Re: SHK 5.0819 Closets
(5) From: Skip Shand <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Oct 1994 17:02:38 -0500 (EST)
Subj: Re: SHK 5.0819 Re: Gertrude's Closet:
(6) From: Steve Urkowitz <SURCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Date: Wednesday, 19 Oct 94 06:49:20 EDT
Subj: Re: SHK 5.0820 Re: *AYL*
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Arthur Pearson <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Oct 1994 12:46:31 -0600
Subject: Two for one
In the Tuesday, October 18 Living Arts section of the NY Times there are two
articles of interest: People v. Hamlet at the City Bar Association in
Manhattan and a review of Peter Sellars' MERCHANT. If he hadn't alreay left
Chicago, I am sure a number of Goodman Theatre patrons would like to see Mr.
Sellars stand trial for the assassination of Shakespeare.
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Lee A. Jacobus <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Oct 94 16:41:59 EDT
Subject: 5.0817 Re: Hamlet's Insanity
Comment: Re: SHK 5.0817 Re: Hamlet's Insanity
Just a note on the trial of Hamlet. The New York Times has a story on Daniel
J. Kornstein of the City Bar Association in NYC defending Hamlet. See The
Tuesday October 18, 1994, issue, pp. B-1; B-2. It's a curiosity.
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stephen C. Schultz <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Oct 94 14:04:25 EDT
Subject: Trusting Sh.
Comment: SHK 5.0814 Trusting Sh.
I don't know about the WORDS "Trust Shakespeare." The idea derives from William
Poel, as clearly as it derives from anyone. Beginning in 1881 with a production
of Q1 "Hamlet" on a [supposedly] Elizabethan stage, he directed until the
mid-thirties a series of productions of which the first principle was to do the
scripts uncut insofar as possible (because he trusted Shakespeare's dramaturgy)
and to scrape the barnacles of "traditional" interpretations and business from
the scripts. (That's TWO first principles, a bargain at any price.) Barker
performed for Poel, beginning with a "Richard II" sometime before the turn of
the century. I've tried to demonstrate that Barker derived most of the central
notions animating the criticism in his "Prefaces" from Poel. In any case,
Barker's productions used more of the original text than had been common in
commercial theatre and he achieved the rapidity and clarity of performance that
Poel desired, though his productions had more visual appeal than Poel's rather
dowdy-appearing (at least in surviving b&w photos) attempts. If Poel didn't
say, Trust Shakespeare" first, he should have.
(4)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: W. L. Godshalk <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Oct 1994 22:40:32 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 5.0819 Closets
Comment: Re: SHK 5.0819 Closets
Michael Best asks about closets. The OED informs us that cabinets and cupboards
are also called closets. So a medical cabinet might be called a closet.
Probably Gertrude is in her withdrawing room.
Yours, Bill Godshalk
(5)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Skip Shand <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Oct 1994 17:02:38 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 5.0819 Re: Gertrude's Closet:
Comment: Re: SHK 5.0819 Re: Gertrude's Closet:
Michael Best is quite right, of course. I'm reminded of the use of 'closet'
in *The Changeling*, where Alsemero's closet, in which he has arranged all
the books and vials for pregnancy tests and the like, is often glossed as
a 'cabinet' in 4.1, but has become a space large enough to lock up Beatrice
and De Flores by 5.3. ("But then, what's a 'cabinet'?" he mused, unwittingly
throwing open the SHAKSPER floodgates.)
Skip Shand
(6)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve Urkowitz <SURCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Date: Wednesday, 19 Oct 94 06:49:20 EDT
Subject: 5.0820 Re: *AYL*
Comment: Re: SHK 5.0820 Re: *AYL*
Dan Mufson is right about what he saw at the Brooklyn Academy of Music. By all
means, if you can, go see it for the intelligence, the originality of its
conception, the swift economy of stage movement that leaps magically into lush
visual sensuality and laughter for the eye and the belly. My students were
delighted. I was asking for several impossibilities -- an experience of its
very concept unrepeatable (is it Kierkegaard who has a small book called
REPETITION, about how dramatic and religious events must be experienced _ab
origine_?). I saw it first in a rustic campus setting during a warm easy
summer vacation. Saw it again in the post-modern crumple of the Majestic
Theatre after weeks of non-stop climbing the chairmanship learning curve. Not
the same river, not the same dude stepping into it. Oops. Dan Mufson's
testimonial rings truer. (Reading over my other comments about editors sent
out that same session makes me see the layers of irritation in my texts. Hmmm.
A lesson for chairs? For this chair. Thanks for the correction.)
As ever? As now, Steve Urchairkowitz
|
