Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1996 :: December ::
Re: Kisses, Conclusions; Last Lines; Politics
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, SHK 7.0965.  Thursday, 19 December 1996.

(1)     From:   Scott Shepherd <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 17 Dec 1996 11:51:07 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 7.0953  Re:  Kisses, Conclusions

(2)     From:   Louis C. Swilley <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 17 Dec 1996 08:26:12 -0600 (CST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 7.0952 Re: Last Lines of Lear

(3)     From:   John V Robinson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 19 Dec 1996 01:05:56 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 7.0951 Re: Politics and Ossified Art


(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Scott Shepherd <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 17 Dec 1996 11:51:07 -0500
Subject: 7.0953  Re:  Kisses, Conclusions
Comment:        Re: SHK 7.0953  Re:  Kisses, Conclusions

Iago:

They met so near with their lips that their breaths embrac'd together. When
these mutualies so marshall the way, hard at hand comes the master and main
exercise, th'incorporate conclusion!

(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Louis C. Swilley <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 17 Dec 1996 08:26:12 -0600 (CST)
Subject: 7.0952 Re: Last Lines of Lear
Comment:        Re: SHK 7.0952 Re: Last Lines of Lear

May we approach the problem *formally* rather than *historically*? To whom
*should* these last lines be assigned?  And, granting only the argument of the
play, *why*?

(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           John V Robinson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 19 Dec 1996 01:05:56 -0500
Subject: 7.0951 Re: Politics and Ossified Art
Comment:        Re: SHK 7.0951 Re: Politics and Ossified Art

<< The most important document I have recently read on the subject of mixing
 politics and literature is Frank Lentricchia's recent contribution to the
 magazine *Lingua Franca*.  Once the "Dirty Harry" of literary theory," he
 has stopped teaching graduate students at Duke and retreated to the
 undergraduate classroom where he can share his love of the books themselves.
 He now thinks it is the height of arrogance for English teachers to use their
 classrooms to teach politics and sociology when there are whole departments
 assigned to that task.

 It's as if Robespierre had suddenly revealed that he was a nobleman, repudiated
 the French Revolution, and assumed his true nature.>>

Yes but the real question that faces Mr. Lentricchia is one Claudius
contemplates in Hamlet, namely: can you renounce the crime and keep the office?
Perhaps instead of lamenting the sorry state of pomo literary affairs he should
get to work cleaning up the mess he helped make.
 

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.