Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 7, No. 0470.  Monday, 24 June 1996.

(1)     From:   Jane A Thompson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 21 Jun 1996 17:21:39 -0500 (CDT)
        Subj:   Humouring Scholarship

(2)     From:   Peter L Groves <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 24 Jun 1996 12:55:19 GMT+1000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 7.0463  Re: Shylock


(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jane A Thompson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 21 Jun 1996 17:21:39 -0500 (CDT)
Subject:        Humouring Scholarship

Shortly after posting my questions about parody and Shakespeare scholarship, I
ran across the following in an article:

        "Many cases," [Stephen Orgel] writes, "were recorded
        of women becoming men through the pressure of some
        great activity."  The endnote to this large claim refers
        not to women, but to alligators, but as the previous note
        referred the reader to Laqueur's _Representations_ article
        and to Greenblatt's "Fiction and Friction," we can be
        reasonably sure that the "many cases" in question are in
        fact the single case of Marie-Germaine, cited by both
        Pare and Montaigne. (Hutson 145)

This quote, I realize, seems even daffier out of context.  Perhaps the endnote
about alligators also made better sense in context, but I rather doubt it.  All
this seems to me exactly the kind of thing that makes a good parody hard to
find.

Source:

Hutson, Lorna.  "On not Being Deceived:  Rhetoric and the Body in
        _Twelfth Night_." _Texas Studies in Literature and Language_
        38:2.  140-147.

(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Peter L Groves <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 24 Jun 1996 12:55:19 GMT+1000
Subject: 7.0463  Re: Shylock
Comment:        Re: SHK 7.0463  Re: Shylock

Jesus Cora asks
>
> This is for Lisa Hopkins: not to mention Gloucester (Gloster), Glamis (Glams)
> and changeable Perdita (P'erdita / Perd'ita, which syllable is stressed? For
> me, as a Spaniard, Perd'ita -stress on the second syllable- makes more sense)

The evidence of the metre is mercifully unamiguous: for Shakespeare, at least,
it is invariably PERdita.  The name people come to blows over (in my
experience) is Coriolanus.

Peter Groves,
Department of English,
Monash University,