Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0242.  Friday, 24 March 1995.
 
(1)     From:   G. I. Egan <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 23 Mar 1995 21:22:12 +0000 (GMT)
        Subj:   RE: Africans in London
 
(2)     From:   Sarah Cave <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 22 Mar 1995 11:09:36 EST
        Subj:   Re: Much Ado Performance
 
(3)     From:   Michael Field <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 23 Mar 1995 16:58:15 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Blood in *Titus*
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           G. I. Egan <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 23 Mar 1995 21:22:12 +0000 (GMT)
Subject:        RE: Africans in London
 
Bill Godshalk writes
 
>Probably Gabriel Egan and Anna Cole do not wish to suggest that sixteenth and
>early seventeenth century Africans in London could not learn to read. But the
>implication seems to be there -- to my eye. How do people who have had little
>or no formal education learn to read? Why not Africans?
 
No one is saying they could not. Actually no one is asking "could they?",
because it is a patently stupid question, the obvious answer being "yes, anyone
CAN learn to read". The implied question answered by Anna Cole and myself was
"did they?" to which we responded: "Probably not as much as other people
unhampered by enslavement", the corrolary of which is "well probably fewer of
them became players then!"
 
Any attempt to divert this thread into a discussion of literacy in the period
will get my full, under-informed, support.
 
Gabriel Egan

 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sarah Cave <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 22 Mar 1995 11:09:36 EST
Subject:        Re: Much Ado Performance
 
The Soul-Stice Repertory Theatre in Atlanta, GA is opening MUCH ADO ABOUT
NOTHING Thursday, March 23 at the back door theatre at 7 Stages in Little 5
Points. It will run in repertory with Anton Chekhov's THE SEAGULL through April
16th. Performances are Wednesday - Sunday at 8:00 p.m. Ticket prices range from
$9 - 12.
 

 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Michael Field <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 23 Mar 1995 16:58:15 -0500 (EST)
Subject:        Blood in *Titus*
 
I recently came across the comment that Shakespeare "didn't intend authentic
portrayal" of the most bloody scenes in *Titus Andronicus*. This notion floored
me, for I have been raised on the "buckets of blood" image of ultra-realistic
presentation in Elizabethian theater. I assumed, in other words, that Lavinia
enters with two bloody stumps and real (stage) blood oozing from her lips:
 
                        Alas, a crimson river of warm blood,
                        Like to a bubbling fountain stirred with wind,
                        Doth rise and fall between thy rosed lips,
                        Coming and going with thy honey breath.
 
Was I mistaken?