1995

Re: Jowell/Taylor Argument: *MM*

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0505.  Thursday, 22 June 1995.
 
From:           W.L. Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 21 Jun 1995 14:41:43 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 6.0493  Re: Taylor/Jowell Argument: *MM*
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0493  Re: Taylor/Jowell Argument: *MM*
 
Last night I spent some time analyzing the Jowett/Taylor argument that the
Folio MM was set from a transcription by Ralph Crane of a "prompt-book." Part
of their case rests on the assumption that TLN 1248 (3.1.43), "Enter Isabella."
is a misreading.  They claim that the following speech "is without doubt spoken
within" (114) -- "within" -- i.e., not on stage.  They believe that Isabella
enters six lines later, and that Crane misinterpreted a premonitory direction
written in the margin by the bookkeeper.
 
There is no reason to accept their assertion that this speech is "without doubt
spoken within" (114). Bevington  in his edition has Isabella enter at TLN 1248
-- and supplies a stage direction to indicate how this entrance can be handled
onstage.  (The Signet Classic brings her on at the same place without comment.)
 So Jowett and Taylor are wrong about "without doubt."
 
There are other problems with the Jowett/Taylor argument.
 
Yours, Bill Godshalk

Announcement: Upstart Crow 1995-96 Season

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0504.  Thursday, 22 June 1995.
 
From:           Timothy Reed <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 21 Jun 1995 10:23:25 -0600
Subject:        SHAKSPER: Play announcements
 
Of interest only to those in a limited geographical area
 
The Upstart Crow Theatre Company in Boulder, Colorado announces its 1995-1996
Season.
 
Romeo and Juliet (Shakespeare), August 4-12, 1995
The Second Maiden's Tragedy (Middleton), August 25-September 16, 1995
The Oratorio of Lear (Shakespeare, edited by J. Crouch), October 13-28, 1995
Heartbreak House (Shaw), November 10-December 2, 1995
Much Ado Aout Nothing (Shakespeare), January 26-February 17, 1996
The Wild Duck (Ibsen), April 26-May 25
 
The Upstart Crow Theatre Company is a classical theatre company that emphasizes
the beauty of the language of the playwright's text. For information about The
Upstart Crow or any of its performances, call (303) 442-1415.
 
Timothy Reed
The Upstart Crow Theatre Company
Boulder, Colorado

Re: A Cook's Garments

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0502.  Thursday, 22 June 1995.
 
(1)     From:   Sarah Cave <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 20 Jun 1995 16:52:15 EST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0499  Q: A Cook's Garment
 
(2)     From:   Chris Stroffolino <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 21 Jun 1995 00:42:36 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0499  Q: A Cook's Garment
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sarah Cave <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 20 Jun 1995 16:52:15 EST
Subject: 6.0499  Q: A Cook's Garment
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0499  Q: A Cook's Garment
 
Regarding the cook's garments in TITUS:
 
The Palliament used in the Atlanta Shakespeare Tavern production of this show
(Nov. 1994) was indeed a white sheath with gold trim. When Titus donned cooks
raiment, he wore a leather apron and a white hat. It worked well and was easily
recognizable by the audience, but I don't know how chronologically accurate it
was.
 
Yours,
Sarah Cave
Agnes Scott College
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Chris Stroffolino <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 21 Jun 1995 00:42:36 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 6.0499  Q: A Cook's Garment
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0499  Q: A Cook's Garment
 
Dear Bill Godshalk---I wish I knew the answer to your question. Hopefully
someone else will--because if the fact is true, it's easy to see the thematic
importance in TITUS of his finally accepting what he refused in the beginning
of the tragedy--in ways that could be considered more complex and interesting
than Lear's analogous rejection and acceptance of Cordelia. Besides, there are
other things in Titus that seem to support the reading you give--but they are
more thematic "internal textual evidence"- This could actually be an instance
in which "new historicists" could be helpful. Chris

Q: Allusions to *The Tempest*

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0503.  Thursday, 22 June 1995.
 
From:           Ulle Lewes <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 21 Jun 1995 10:11:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:        Allusions to The Tempest in Popular Culture
 
A member of our English faculty asked me to submit this post to the list.
Please reply directly to her at the address following the post.
 
I seek allusions and take-offs on Shakespeare's The Tempest, be they comic
books, films, poems, titles, books, etc.  I see The Tempest as a germinal tale
for western culture, touching on forbidden knowledge (Faustus), island
shipwreck (Crusoe), revenge tales set on an island (Ten Little Indians),
drunken slapstick (numerous silent films), love as a game of chess, patriarchal
obsession with daughter's sexuality, postcolonial interpretations (e.g.,
Gunesekera's Reef), etc.
 
Please help!  All specific references used in the article will be acknowledged.
This resource should turn out to be not only useful but fun!  Thank you in
advance for your time and assistance.
 
Dr. Ulle Lewes
English Department
Ohio Wesleyan University
Delaware, OH 43015-2370
FAX:  (614) 368-3299

Re: Issues Surrounding Biography

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0501.  Thursday, 22 June 1995.
 
(1)     From:   Stephanie Hughes <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 20 Jun 1995 12:50:38 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0498  Re: *Metamorphoses*
 
(2)     From:   Terrence Ross <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 20 Jun 1995 13:59:01 -0400
        Subj:   Why biography
 
(3)     From:   Richard J Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 21 Jun 1995 14:32:34 -0700
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0497  Re: Why Biography?
 
(4)     From:   Michael Yogev <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 22 Jun 95 09:18:35 IST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 6.0495  Re: Why Biography?
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Stephanie Hughes <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 20 Jun 1995 12:50:38 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 6.0498  Re: *Metamorphoses*
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0498  Re: *Metamorphoses*
 
Sorry Everybody;
 
David Kathman has handed me a fistful of arguments surrounding my recent post
regarding the authorship issue, and he, and others who responded privately, are
correct in taking me to task for opening this issue when I had promised not to.
He is right that we will soon have another forum for this, and I will wait
until then to respond.
 
Penitently yours,
Stephanie Hughes
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Terrence Ross <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 20 Jun 1995 13:59:01 -0400
Subject:        Why biography
 
David-Wilson Okamura cites the movie "Amadeus" as justification of his low
opinion of Mozart.  I suggest he look at Maynard Solomon's new biography, which
is at least meant to be a plausible chronicle of Mozart's life.  If "Amadeus"
is persuasive as biography, perhaps we should decide matters of Shakespearean
biography by reference to the old Second City TV skit "Shake & Bake," in which
WS and Bacon were crime-fighting buddies when they weren't writing "Hamlet."
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Richard J Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 21 Jun 1995 14:32:34 -0700
Subject: 6.0497  Re: Why Biography?
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0497  Re: Why Biography?
 
Poor Stephanie Hughes, strayed onto the Stratfordian turf and couldn't make it
around the block without getting slugged and mugged by the same old doorstep
sitters, knowing nothing new, wanting to know nothing new, having no new
insights and a real attitude about strangers traveling to know more of
Shakespeare and his world and his life.
 
She might have been warned by Thomas Carlyle, his Heroes and Hero- Worship and
the Heroic in History. He considers Shakespeare along with Dante: "Shakespeare
and Dante are saints of poetry; really, if we think of it, *canonized*, so that
it is impiety to meddle with them." He admits to the nothingness of his
biography, the total nowhere and nowhen that connects him with being a writer
of the poems and plays, but that's ok with Carlyle:  "How much in Shakespeare
lies hid...Speech is great; but silence is greater."
 
On the other hand, the Oxford group has invited a well-known
Shakespearean/Stratfordian scholar to discuss with us his arguments and
findings. We can't always agree, of course, but he is being treated with
courtesy, and there are things to learn from him, and I believe we consider him
an asset to our discussions.
 
But the greater part of speech on the subject of Shakespeare's biography, is
silence on this line, therefore....
 
(4)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Michael Yogev <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 22 Jun 95 09:18:35 IST
Subject: 6.0495  Re: Why Biography?
Comment:        Re: SHK 6.0495  Re: Why Biography?
 
Just a few mainly chastened thoughts about the issue of biography as far as
Shakespeare is concerned.  The desire to connect the man with his works is
indeed one born of our interest in such artistic figures as Mozart, Freud, etc.
but as Stephen Orgel points out ("What is a Text?" in, I think, _Shakespeare
Reproduced_), the problem with making links of Shakespeare's life or presumed
character is that his texts are a very compromised mixture of his own papers,
the cuts and changes suggested by players or directorial interventions in the
heat of rehearsals for production, and the myriad hands of editors and other
playwrights who took it upon themselves to add to or amend the plays.  As a
result, the texts we would like to use to figure Shakespeare the man are just
not (as poststructuralist critics endlessly reiterate) "authored" in anything
close to the same fashion as are Mozart's works or Freud's writings.
 
The interest in constructing Shakespeare the man pales, in my mind, compared to
the fascination with the subjectivities his texts suggest and subvert.
 
Yours in dis-content,
Michael Yogev
University of Haifa

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.