1995

*The Tempest* at Columbia U

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0158.  Friday, 3 March 1995.
 
From:           Elizabeth Nancy Olesh <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 22:35:51 -0500 (EST)
Subject:        The Tempest
 
According to a poster I saw today, the Oscar Hammerstein Center (Columbia U's
graduate theater program) will be presenting The Tempest from March 9-11 at St.
Paul's Chapel at 117th and Amsterdam on the CU campus.  Tickets are $7 for the
general public, $5 for students.  I left the phone number for info and
reservations upstairs in my bag, but if anyone is interested I will post this.

Qs: Barton Videos; Teaching *Macbeth*

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0157.  Friday, 3 March 1995.
 
(1)     From:   Mark Webster <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 21:32:03 -0600 (CST)
        Subj:   Barton videos
 
(2)     From:   Jennie Johnson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 18:12:45 +0000 (GMT)
        Subj:   [Teaching *Macbeth*]
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Mark Webster <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 21:32:03 -0600 (CST)
Subject:        Barton videos
 
Does anyone on the SHAKSPER list know who (if anyone) owns the home video
rights to the PLAYING SHAKESPEARE series by John Barton and the RSC?  I
would like to buy or rent these videos for my own use. They are available
from Films for the Humanities, but since the price includes public
performance rights, it is far beyond my limited grad school resources
(nearly $1000 for the set).  I contacted the BBC but no one there seemed to
know anything about the videos.
 
I would be most grateful if anyone can tell me where I might obtain copies
of these tapes at a reasonable price without violating too many
international copyright laws.  Please respond on the list or directly to me
at the address below.
 
Thanks.
Mark Webster
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jennie Johnson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 18:12:45 +0000 (GMT)
Subject:        [Teaching *Macbeth*]
 
Does anyone have any good ideas on how to teach Macbeth to a group of fourteen
year olds? They will be looking at character, themes, etc. Does anyone have any
interesting insights into Macbeth that I have not thought of? I am a P.G.C.E.
student, at the University of Hertfordshire, near London, and am 'doing'
Macbeth on my teaching practice. I am looking at the theme of the supernatural,
Kingship and what that meant in Shakespeare's time, sleep, nature V chaos, role
reversal .....anything else?
 
        Thanks in advance.....
                        ............Jennie.

Re: Pronunciation

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0155.  Friday, 3 March 1995.
 
(1)     From:   Melissa Aaron <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 10:44:02 +0200
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0147 Re: Prounciation
 
(2)     From:   Ray Allen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 12:26:39 -0600 (CST)
        Subj:   Name Pronuncation
 
(3)     From:   John Gouws <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 20:30:34 +0200 (GMT+0200)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0147  Re: Prounciation
 
(4)     From:   Michael Swanson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 13:39:23 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0147  Re: Prounciation
 
(5)     From:   Don Wall <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 11:49:53 -0800 (PST)
        Subj:   Pronunciation
 
(6)     From:   Steven Gagen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 03 Mar 1995 16:44:35 +1100
        Subj:   Re: Pronuciation
 
(7)     From:   Anna Cole <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 27 Feb 1995 05:52:35 GMT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0143  Q: Prounciation of P & K
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Melissa Aaron <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 10:44:02 +0200
Subject: 6.0147 Re: Prounciation
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0147 Re: Prounciation
 
While "Kate" sometimes forms a pun with "cat,"  it also is used to pun with
"cate"--"for dainties are all cates, and therefore Kate."  Sorry to muddy the
waters.  Would "cate" be pronounced like "cat?"
 
M. Aaron
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Ray Allen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 12:26:39 -0600 (CST)
Subject:        Name Pronuncation
 
For name pronunciation I use a book aimed exclusively at the question. The
title: _How To Pronounce The Names In Shakespeare_ (apt, huh?) It was
copyrighted in 1919 and the author is Theodora U. Irvine. ISBN 1-55888-911-6.
It costs around $48.  If everyone already has it on their shelves, my apologies
for wasting your eyesight.
 
Ray Allen
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           John Gouws <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 20:30:34 +0200 (GMT+0200)
Subject: 6.0147  Re: Prounciation
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0147  Re: Prounciation
 
> I've always assumed (I guess from the iambic pentameter) that "Romeo" was
> pronounced as two syllables rather than three: Rome-yo as opposed to
> Rome-eee-o. But the last two productions of the play I've seen have used the
> three-syllable moniker. Expert opinion? (other than mine?)
>
> O Rome-e-o, Rome-e-o, Where-fore art thou Rome-e-o: feminine dactylic
> tetrameter?
 
Surely "Romeo" is disyllabic in this instance: Rom-yo.  This is supported by
Helge Koekeritz, _Shakespeare's Names_.
 
(4)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Michael Swanson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 13:39:23 -0500
Subject: 6.0147  Re: Prounciation
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0147  Re: Prounciation
 
Scansion need not mean that every line is in absolute iambic rhythm.  Iambic
pentameter in Shakespeare really means that the basic rhythm is iambic, and
that the basic structure is pentameter.  But there are plenty of lines which
don't scan in pentameter, and have 8, 9, 11, or 12 syllables.  And plenty of
metric feet are only possible as trochees, spondees, pyrrhics, or even dactyls
or anapests.  So, Romeo need not be RoMEo.  Check Cecily Berry, The Actor and
The Text, for more info on this.
 
(5)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Don Wall <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 11:49:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject:        Pronunciation
 
About the pun on "household Kates"--why not another pun on "household CATES"
[choice viands, tasty morsels, nourishing delicacies]?  It seems also to fit
the context.
 
Don Wall
Eastern Washington University
 
(6)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Steven Gagen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 03 Mar 1995 16:44:35 +1100
Subject:        Re: Pronuciation
 
> In AYLI, shouldn't Rowland de Boys be pronounced "Rowlan de Buwah"?
> de Boys is akin to old French.
 
No!  Old French did not have the "wah" pronunciation of "oi", neither did it
have the present gutteral "r", rather Rs were rolled, as in some present-day
English dialects.  Loius XIV would have called himself something like "le
rrroi-yee", as close as I can get it in English.  I understand that the old
French pronunciations are preserved to some extent in French Canada.
 
Best Regards,
Steve Gagen.
 
(7)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Anna Cole <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 27 Feb 1995 05:52:35 GMT
Subject: 6.0143  Q: Prounciation of P & K
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0143  Q: Prounciation of P & K
 
Re the pronunciation of Kate.  I think it unlikely that it would have been
pronounced as Kat.  There is some evidence of Shakespeare's partiality for the
name.  He gives it to Hotspur's wife Lady Percy as well as the Shrew herself.
His intention it seems to me is to depict a woman of spirit, not of
spitefulness which is the usual association with cats.
 
Anna Cole

Re: Casting; Malvolio; Chronology

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0156.  Friday, 3 March 1995.
 
(1)     From:   Christina M. Robertson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 16:35:08 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0150 Re: colorblind casting
 
(2)     From:   Michael Saenger <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 14:41:15 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Malvolio
 
(3)     From:   Pat Buckridge <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 3 Mar 1995 11:56:25 +1000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0151 Chronology
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Christina M. Robertson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 16:35:08 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 6.0150 Re: colorblind casting
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0150 Re: colorblind casting
 
A production a few years ago at the Georgia Shakspeare Festival placed a very
talented black actor in the role of Caliban in _The Tempest_. The play was
performed entirely for comedic effect, but this angle complicated it because
there are significant interpretations of Caliban as a displaced minority
(black, Native American, etc.) One didn't know if we were to take it in a
socio-political context, and therefore sympathize more with his enslavement, or
to simply ignore his race and concentrate on him as a fine actor. I suspect the
latter was the intention, but it made the part a bit painful to watch,
considering the farcical atmosphere that surrounded it.
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Michael Saenger <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 14:41:15 -0500 (EST)
Subject:        Malvolio
 
On the question of Malvolio, I published a brief note in Shakespeare Newsletter
1993 (43), 67, ("Manningham on Malvolio") drawing attention to an overlooked
line in the famous diary account, which I took to be a statement on Malvolio:
"Quae mala cum multis patimur laeviora putantur" -- "Those evils which we
suffer in the presence of many are made easier" or "...are made more foolish."
 
Since publishing the note, it has occured to me that the line approximates a
quote that is echoed numerous times in the play -- "(Malvolio) hath been most
notoriously (i.e. in front of many) abused." In a subsequent SN, John Hale
wrote suggesting that the line might be suspect since the diary was originally
brought to light by John Payne Collier, who was at times guilty of forgery.
(The obvious response is if he had forged the line, why did he not "find" it?)
I merely took the line from a published transcription, so I leave it to
holographic experts to sort this out (no doubt they will).  What I would like
to know is how are people receiving this?  My note is not too long, but
probably too long for this medium.  I am proposing entering what is essentially
new evidence into Shakespearean criticism, and I would be eager to hear
positive, negative, or other feedback.
 
Michael Baird Saenger
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Pat Buckridge <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 3 Mar 1995 11:56:25 +1000
Subject: 6.0151 Chronology
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0151 Chronology
 
I do hope some of you scholars out there are preparing your detailed critiques
of Dan How's Handy Dating Kit for Shakespeare's plays.  If the orthodoxy really
wants to maintain its credibility (which I sometimes doubt) it should not be
left to authorship-skeptics like myself to point out such elementary truths as
the following:
 
1.The earliest quarto you find is not necessarily the earliest published.
 
2.There is no necessary correlation anyway between dates of publication and
dates of composition for any of the plays.
 
3.Dramatic settings do not reflect theatrical environments. (On reading this
handy hint my jaw - to borrow a Kathman hyperbole - hit the floor).
 
4.Dating by style and versification is entirely circular (hence entirely
useless), except in those rare instances where external evidence gives an
approximate date for a particular recognisable style - e.g. Euphuism - and even
then judgments (i.e. guesses) have to be made about how much of the play it
dates.
 
And of course (as the scholars would know) it's even more complicated than
that, since such styles are often only recognisable because they're parodies.
How long after a style was seriously fashionable would a parody be likely to be
written?  On the evidence of the Euphuistic parody in _Love's Labour's Lost_ it
seems we might have to allow ten to fifteen years! The Elizabethans liked their
topical satire well-matured.
 
Pat Buckridge

Re: *Romeo and Juliet*

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0154.  Friday, 3 March 1995.
 
(1)     From:   James Schaefer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 09:43:09 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Juliet's Nurse
 
(2)     From:   Laurie White <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 10:21:07 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0149  Re: *Romeo and Juliet*; Love
 
(3)     From:   E. H. Pearlman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 08:02:27 -0600 (MDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0149  Re: *Romeo and Juliet*; Love
 
(4)     From:   Takako Nagumo <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 11:23:16 -0800
        Subj:   *R&J* - a tragedy of unawareness
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           James Schaefer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 09:43:09 -0500 (EST)
Subject:        Juliet's Nurse
 
Frank Savukinas suggests that Juliet's Nurse must have been of an advanced age
because she has only four teeth left.  Once again, the problem of applying
current standards (in this case, of public health) to past eras rears its head.
 
My wife, a biologist, tells me that in Colonial America, one of the health
risks of child rearing was summarized in the expression, "A tooth a child."
Lacting women's bodies devote their resources, especially of calcium, primarily
to the production of milk and only secondly to their own well being.  Before
the importance of good nutrition was understood, and especially the need for
increased calcium intake, women who nursed regularly suffered tooth loss from
calcium deficiency.  The more children, the more teeth lost.
 
Now this would seem to have several implications.  First, wealthy women (who
did not know any more than their lower class wet nurses that they ought to
increase calcium intake) would want to put their children out to nurse to
protect their own teeth -- that is to say, their own beauty.  (This is in
addition, of course, to their not wanting to be bothered with raising the
messy, noisy little pests.)  The wet nurses -- women who extended the natural
lactation period following birth by continuing to nurse other women's children
-- would continue to suffer from calcium deficiency, and therefore tooth loss.
Thus, the Nurse's comment that she has only four teeth left would be a sign of
how long she has devoted herself to the nursing of others' children, not
necessarily her age.  She could, in fact, be no older than Lady Capulet, and
possibly somewhat younger.
 
Lactation on a deficient diet has another effect that may tell us something
about the Nurse's character:  it suppresses ovulation. The folk wisdom that a
nursing mother cannot get pregnant is true -- for ill-nourished women (i.e.,
most women throughout history).  Thus a wet nurse could be a "loose woman"
without risking pregnancy (we'll ignore syphilis for the moment...).  Her bawdy
scene with Mercutio suggests more than a passing familiarity with the life of
the flesh.  Are there other examples of lusty nurses in literature?
 
Finally, remember that fluoridation of drinking water in the U S is less than a
generation old; topical treatment of children's teeth is even more recent.  I
have four children and step-children ranging in age from 13 to 20 and not a
single one has _ever_ had a cavity.  I find this staggering, since I had lost
all my upper teeth by the time I was a freshman in college.  Granted that my
parents were on the far end of the scale in terms of lax attention paid to
their children's health care, but many of my now-middle-aged peers have mouths
full of silver and gold.  The lower classes of Verona (not to mention London)
would have fared even worse.  Even George Washington had to put up with
ill-fitting dentures.  (Vide Stan Freberg:  "That's George all right . . .
talks up a storm with those wooden teeth of his; can't shut him up!)
 
Jim Schaefer
Georgetown University
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Laurie White <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 10:21:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 6.0149  Re: *Romeo and Juliet*; Love
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0149  Re: *Romeo and Juliet*; Love
 
I am teaching Romeo and Juliet now and look forward every day to this
discussion. One of the things bothering my students in our survey class is the
connection of true love and death.  I keep bringing in Keats as a gloss.  His
obsession with the ideal in "Ode to a Nightingale" and "Ode on a Grecian Urn"
and his knowledge that the ideal is static, dead, inhuman explains something to
me about Shakespeare's portrayal of that paradox (perfection and life cancel
each other; Romeo _will_ end up with egg in his beard, if the darlings make it
to Mantua.)
 
--Laurie White (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.)
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           E. H. Pearlman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 02 Mar 1995 08:02:27 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: 6.0149  Re: *Romeo and Juliet*; Love
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0149  Re: *Romeo and Juliet*; Love
 
The nurse is old when Shakespeare wants her to be old:  "ancient lady". She is
youngish when he wants her to be young:  young enough to wetnurse Juliet.  The
same goes for Juliet's mom:  she is sometimes 2 x 14, sometimes Old. La.  It's
a play.  She's a character, not a person.  Sh. has other priorities than to get
such trivialities right.  E. Pearlman
 
(4)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Takako Nagumo <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Mar 1995 11:23:16 -0800
Subject:        *R&J* - a tragedy of unawareness
 
Hello,
 
I was reading the introduction of *R&J* that appears in The Complete Pelican
Shakespeare (c1969), written by John E. Hankins of the U. of Maine, which
mentions a critic who "views it [*R&J*] as a tragedy of unawareness." (p. 857).
   I am really interested in locating this article/book/material that mentions
this.
 
If anyone has read this, or knows who wrote it, please email me directly.
 
Thank you all for your time.
 
Takako Nagumo
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.