Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1995 :: March ::
Yesterday's Digests
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0214.  Thursday, 16 March 1995.
 
From:           Hardy M. Cook <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, March 16, 1995
Subject:        Yesterday's Digests
 
There seems to have been a problem yesterday with the distribution of the
Wednesday digests to some of you, especially members in the UK.  Other lists
encountered the same difficulty.  I have decided to include below the two
digests I mailed out yesterday for those who may have missed them.
 
===============================================================================
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0212.  Wednesday, 15 March 1995.
 
(1)     From:   Skip Shand <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 14 Mar 1995 09:58:13 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0208  Re: Freeman's *Scripts*
 
(2)     From:   Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 14 Mar 1995 09:59:14 -0800 (PST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0208 Re: Freeman's *Scripts*
 
(3)     From:   David M Richman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 15 Mar 1995 10:32:59 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0208 Re: Freeman's *Scripts*
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Skip Shand <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 14 Mar 1995 09:58:13 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 6.0208  Re: Freeman's *Scripts*
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0208  Re: Freeman's *Scripts*
 
Re: Freeman's *Scripts*
 
The address is:
 
                Folio Scripts
                2515 Caledonia Avenue
                Deep Cove
                District of North Vancouver
                British Columbia
                Canada  V7G 1T8
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 14 Mar 1995 09:59:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 6.0208 Re: Freeman's *Scripts*
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0208 Re: Freeman's *Scripts*
 
Since I'm taking a course with Neil Freeman at the moment, specifically on the
use of early texts in acting, I thought I'd reply to the query regarding the
Folio Scripts.  The address at the back of my text is 2515 Caledonia Avenue,
Deep Cove, District of North Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V7G 1T8, or
telephone 1-604-924-1401.  Yes, he has done a _Winter's Tale_.  The hard copy
is $20.00 including tax, and a Mac disk version is $50.00, which you can edit
down to a working text more easily.
 
BTW, there's also a companion volume (also privately printed--apparently
someone wanted a lot of copies in a hurry) called _Shakespeare's First Texts_
and costing $22.50.  It's what we're working through in class. The study is
rather intriguing, using the early punctuation, etc., as guides to
pronunciation, often linking them closely with Elizabethan rhetorical style, as
well as modern acting method.  This may seem like a contradiction, but it works
in practice, which is the acid test.
 
The Folio text of _Hamlet_ was used for the Winnipeg production, reviewed
extensively on this list a short while ago.
 
Cheers,
Sean.
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           David M Richman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 15 Mar 1995 10:32:59 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 6.0208 Re: Freeman's *Scripts*
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0208 Re: Freeman's *Scripts*
 
This is in response to Skip Shand's useful and informative posting on Freeman's
*Scripts.*
 
While I have not yet made use of these myself, I have done what is perhaps the
next best thing--videlicet:  I have based performances I have worked on for the
last several years on the Oxford Text Archive Folio and Quarto texts.  I have
modernized *some* spelling, but have preserved punctuation (quite useful--with
Skip Shand's caveats) capitalization, and versification.  A sense of short
lines, Hamlet's "no", or Helena's "Yes, faith" is enormously useful--essential,
I would say.
 
I have detected a tendency (perhaps my own paranoia) to elevate one early text
over another.  (Canonize the Folio over the Quarto, or vice versa.) The real
usefulness of Oxford Text Archive is that it gives you both texts, Q and F.
You may choose, for example, to include or cut Lear's mock trial or Hamlet's
"How all occasions" soliloquy--to give the two most controversial examples.  If
You were consulting only the Folio texts, you would not have such choices.  In
sum, the early texts remain live, essential sources for performers and
directors, as well as for scholars and editors.  Let us be grateful that such
texts are so much more readily available than they were ten or fifteen years
ago.
 
David Richman
University of New Hampshire
 
===============================================================================
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0213.  Wednesday, 15 March 1995.
 
(1)     From:   Melissa Aaron <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 14 Mar 1995 09:12:12 +0200
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0207 Re: Hero
 
(2)     From:   Diane Mountford <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 15 Mar 1995 01:33:24 -0500
        Subj:   Re: The Problem of Hero
 
(3)     From:   Al Cacicedo <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 14 Mar 1995 14:04:23 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   RE: SHK 6.0206  Re: *MM* Ending;
 
(4)     From:   W.L. Godshalk <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 14 Mar 1995 21:52:34 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0206 Characters and Imagination
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Melissa Aaron <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 14 Mar 1995 09:12:12 +0200
Subject: 6.0207 Re: Hero
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0207 Re: Hero
 
I'm not sure that a swoon is so easily read as a defense.  It could just as
easily be read as an admission of guilt.  So is her blushing.  Claudio insists
that "her blush is guiltiness, not modesty," and all the other "exterior
shows."  (Back to Desdemona.  Her chastity is an essence that's not seen.)  As
far as playing on the Globe stage, chances are the audience couldn't see a
blush even if the actor could have called one up on command.
 
It's not so much that the audience trusts the Friar's noting, IMHO (Friar
Lawrence?  The Duke as Friar?)  It's that the audience heard the villains
plotting.  Without that simple plot directive, there is nothing *in the
playtext* that Hero says or does which, theoretically, could not be interpreted
to her discredit, until after the Prince and Claudio have left.
 
Flame-proof suit on,
Melissa Aaron
University of Wisconsin-Madison
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Diane Mountford <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 15 Mar 1995 01:33:24 -0500
Subject:        Re: The Problem of Hero
 
Sarah,
 
Here's my two cents about Hero.  Hope you find it thought-provoking if not
useful.
 
I find Hero fascinating because I think she changes more than anyone else in
the play. Sure Beatrice & Benedick stop lying to themselves about their
feelings, but Hero really goes through fire. I once heard an interview with
Laura Dern in which she described David Lynch's view of innocence. In Lynch's
world, innocence has nothing to do with naivete, but rather is an outlook
chosen and maintained through knowledge and against great odds.  I think Hero
takes Claudio back not because she's co-dependent or spineless, but because she
has come to understand suffering and makes the conscious choice for innocence.
 
As for the night before the wedding, my theory is that in the afternoon someone
told her about sex for the first time, and she's terrified! She might send
Beatrice away so that she can cry all night . . . or at least think it over.
 
And as for the much-pondered-over silence at the wedding, I think shock is very
playable. And indignant pride. In any case, finding words (especially if you're
an objectified Renaissance woman) in the face of unmitigated rage is never
easy.
 
Best wishes in crafting your own personal interpretation.  Let us know how it
goes.
 
-- Diane Mountford   <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Al Cacicedo <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 14 Mar 1995 14:04:23 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 6.0206  Re: *MM* Ending;
Comment:        RE: SHK 6.0206  Re: *MM* Ending;
 
Of course characters in plays are mere words, words, words with no existence
outside those words.  To paraphrase Howard Cossell, when *MM* ends, the future
is behind the characters.  However, it is downright silly to suppose that an
audience, certainly now and probably in 1600, will stop considering characters
as soon as a play comes to its end.  If there *is* an irony in the notion that
"all is well that ends well," isn't the irony based at least in part on
conjectures about the non-existent future of the non-people whose non-lives
have been presented on stage?
 
Just a thought,
Al Cacicedo
Albright College
 
(4)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           W.L. Godshalk <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 14 Mar 1995 21:52:34 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 6.0206 Characters and Imagination
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0206 Characters and Imagination
 
Michael Saenger reminds us that the Duke and Isabella are characters in a play,
and, thus, they are not real people with pasts, futures, and realistic
emotions. I certainly agree -- in part. Of course characters are not real
people, though the characters are played, acted by real people. But when I go
to a play, I give my imagination full sway, and I pretend that I'm watching
real people (as indeed I am) with real emotions. I flirt with the idea that
these characters have a future beyond the script.  And, believe it or not, no
one can stop me from imagining a future for these imaginary people, the Duke
and Isabella -- just as no one can stop Terence Hawkes from seeing these same
characters in political terms.
 
And I imagine that, when Isabella finally gets the Duke's drift, she looks at
him with growing horror -- and flees back to the comfort of the poor Clares.
 
Yours, Bill Godshalk
 

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.