1997

Re: New Globe's H5

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 8.1002.  Sunday, 5 October 1997.

[1]     From:   Marilyn Mosher <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 02 Oct 1997 10:40:28 -0300
        Subj:   Re: SHK 8.0993  Qs:  New Globe's H5

[2]     From:   Peggy O'Brien <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 02 Oct 1997 23:08:43 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 8.0993  Q:  New Globe's H5


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Marilyn Mosher <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 02 Oct 1997 10:40:28 -0300
Subject: 8.0993  Qs:  New Globe's H5
Comment:        Re: SHK 8.0993  Qs:  New Globe's H5

>I have seen a couple of posting that the Globe's production of H5 will
>be on Great Performances in November.  Does anyone know if this will be
>a fulllength production or a documentary on it?

>Mike Jensen

The information I was given is that it is an actual performance,
although it is possible that it is a special performance for television.
The date, again, is Nov.5.

Marilyn

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Peggy O'Brien <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 02 Oct 1997 23:08:43 -0500
Subject: 8.0993  Q:  New Globe's H5
Comment:        Re: SHK 8.0993  Q:  New Globe's H5

The information on the Great Performances can be had from Jac Venza,
Executive Producer of Great Performances at WNET (the public television
station) in NYC.

Re: Malone

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 8.1001.  Sunday, 5 October 1997.

[1]     From:   Simon Malloch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 03 Oct 1997 00:31:07 +0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 8.0993  Q:  Malone

[2]     From:   Judy Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 3 Oct 1997 09:44:37 -0300 (ADT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 8.0993  Q: Malone


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Simon Malloch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 03 Oct 1997 00:31:07 +0800
Subject: 8.0993  Q:  Malone
Comment:        Re: SHK 8.0993  Q:  Malone

The 1790 chronology was not Malone's sole or final position: for this
work he revised the earlier 1778 *An Attempt to Ascertain the Order in
which the Plays Attributed to Shakespeare Were Written*, changing the
dates of seven plays. A third revised survey was included by James
Boswell Jun. in the 1821 edition of Shakespeare's plays, in which
seventeen dates were adjusted.

For discussion, you would do well to look at Peter Martin's *Edmond
Malone: Shakespearean Scholar.*  For a reproduction of one of the texts
it might be fruitful to consult E.K.Chamber's *William Shakespeare*
which may reproduce it - I cannot remember off-hand.  Otherwise,
Routledge has recently re-published the 1778 *Johnson-Steevens Edition
of the Plays of William Shakespeare*,  which includes the 1780
two-volume supplement by Malone (ISBN:0415120705) - this set contains
the earlier 1778 piece.

Simon Malloch.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Judy Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 3 Oct 1997 09:44:37 -0300 (ADT)
Subject: 8.0993  Q: Malone
Comment:        Re: SHK 8.0993  Q: Malone

Katie Hannah wrote:

>I am looking for information on Edmond Malone's work on the chronology
>of Shakespeare's plays. Is his 1790 chronology reprinted in a modern
>source that anyone knows of? I know that there were at least a couple of
>replies to this work (not sure about his earlier chronology), e.g., in
>the _Monthly_Review_, LIX, pp. 71-72, but I'd like to know generally how
>people in the early nineteenth century (and, more specifically, Charles
>Lamb & his circle) felt about the chronology. Did they accept it? Did
>they care what order the plays were written in? Any help you can provide
>would be appreciated.

I'm not quite sure what you're looking for, but Malone's 1790 edition is
available in a modern facsimile, as is the 1821 variorum.  I do not know
of a modern edition proper.  Specifically on the _Attempt_, I suppose
you have looked at Peter Martin's book on Malone (Cambridge, 1995),
especially pp.30-35.  Malone himself, of course, changed his mind fairly
often, as Martin sketches out.

For example, here is a summary of how he treated MND:  'In 1778 [the
first appearance of the _Attempt_] Malone dated MND 1595; this date is
repeated in the 1785 edition.  The 1793, 1803, and 1813 variorum
editions follow Malone's own edition of 1790 in assigning the date of
1592.  In the posthumous edition of 1821 it is dated 1594.'

Interest in the chronology began before Malone, and continues actively
through the C19 (and through C20, but with less extreme disagreement).
Some of the earlier responses or discussions, apart from those in
reviews and Hurdis's _Cursory Remarks_ mentioned by Martin, are George
Chalmers, _Supplemental Apology etc_ (1799); Charles Dibdin, _Complete
History etc_ ([1800]); Schlegel's _Lectures_ (1815); Nathan Drake,
_Shakespeare and His Times_ (1817); Charles Knight in his 1839 edition
and elsewhere; Henry Hallam's _Introduction to the Literature of Europe_
(1839).

Judy Kennedy
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Re: Macbeth

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 8.0999.  Sunday, 5 October 1997.

[1]     From:   Richard Nathan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 2 Oct 1997 15:13:19 +0000
                Subj:   Re: SHK 8.0991  Re: Macbeth

[2]     From:   Tim Richards <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 03 Oct 1997 00:17:03 +0800
        Subj:   SHK 8.0991  Re: Macbeth

[3]     From:   Mike Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 02 Oct 1997 20:42:35 +0100
        Subj:   SHK 8.0984  Re: Macbeth -Reply

[4]     From:   Stuart Manger <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 2 Oct 1997 23:36:41 +0100
        Subj:   Re: SHK 8.0984  Re: Macbeth

[5]     From:   Eric Salehi <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 2 Oct 1997 19:31:41 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   The Witches made him do it (?)

[6]     From:   Julie Blumenthal <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 02 Oct 1997 12:34:12 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Re: Macbeth


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Richard Nathan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Oct 1997 15:13:19 +0000
Subject: 8.0991  Re: Macbeth
Comment:        Re: SHK 8.0991  Re: Macbeth

Sean Kevin Lawrence wrote:

>I'm wondering if anyone else notices a connection between the absent Sly
>and the absent witches at the end of their respective plays.

Not to mention the Fool disappearing in the middle of "KING LEAR" and
Poins disappearing in the middle of "HENRY IV, PART I"  and then coming
back again in the early part of "HENRY IV, PART II" and disappearing
again in the middle of that play!

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Tim Richards <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 03 Oct 1997 00:17:03 +0800
Subject: Re: Macbeth
Comment:        SHK 8.0991  Re: Macbeth

H. R. Greenberg wrote:

>One of the most egregious misadventures regarding casting of the witches
>was a church basement production in which my son-trained at London's
>Central Drama school-had the misfortune to play MacDuff. Anent the
>lunatic RICHARD III of Neil Simon's "THE GOODBY GIRL", this production
>featured but two witches-thus whittled down by a lunatic director, so
>that the two women could later play the two murderers.

Ouch, that must have grated.  Why on Earth couldn't he have kept three
witches in, having the third play the Third Murderer?

Tim Richards.

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Mike Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 02 Oct 1997 20:42:35 +0100
Subject: Re: Macbeth -Reply
Comment:        SHK 8.0984  Re: Macbeth -Reply

I have been reading and enjoying SHAKSPEReans reminiscences of
production choices for Macbeth.  I recommend a book that considers
several major productions on film, stage, and television,  examining how
different choices affected interpretation.  It is from the University of
Manchester's Shakespeare in Performance series.  The title is simply
Macbeth, unless it is Shakespeare in Performance: Macbeth.  The author
is Bernice W. Kliman.

There is a chapter on Orson Welle's Macbeth, both stage and film
versions, and another on Polanski's film, both of which were the subject
of yesterday's electronic chatter.  Many others are considered as well.
I saw a copy at Stanford Bookstore last week, if anyone in the
neighborhood wants to grab it.

Mike Jensen

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Stuart Manger <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Oct 1997 23:36:41 +0100
Subject: 8.0984  Re: Macbeth
Comment:        Re: SHK 8.0984  Re: Macbeth

Holinshed or Hall - not Halliwell. He's the film guide chap!


Stuart Manger

[5]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Eric Salehi <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Oct 1997 19:31:41 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:        The Witches made him do it (?)

Tim Richards' intriguing questions about _Macbeth_ got me thinking as
well:
does anyone know of a production in which the witches figured as the
Three Fates?  Perhaps the connection sounds obvious, but I can't recall
a production that's been done that way, with the sisters wielding
thread, scissors and the whole equipage.  Such a  move would raise
interesting questions about Macbeth's (and Lady Macbeth's)
responsibility, since the sisters basically would be puppetmasters,
manipulators rather than mere prognosticators.

About five years ago I saw a remarkable staging of the play by Stuffed
Puppet Theater at Theater Project in Baltimore (U.S.).  In that
production, a single actor (Australian puppetmaster Trevor ___, whose
last name escapes me just now) played Macbeth and used puppets to
portray the rest of the characters.  The identification of Macbeth with
the puppetmaster served to underscore the character's agency.  I suppose
my concept would produce the opposite effect by making Macbeth
essentially a puppet himself.  Has this been done?

-- Eric Salehi

[6]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Julie Blumenthal <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 02 Oct 1997 12:34:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:        Re: Macbeth

I recently saw a production of "The Witches' Macbeth" at the First
Annual Fringe Festival in New York City.  It's a 75-minute adaptation
(fairly minimal cuts for the most part) based around the central
assumption of the witches as guiding forces of all the action of the
play.  As such, they're always lurking in the background and pulling
various little tricks and gestures on the rest of the ensemble -
sometimes seen by the ensemble, sometimes invisible.  I thought it was
interesting, but not necessarily a ground-breaking interpretation.  Fun
though.  In any case, it did figure them quite prominently throughout,
and if I remember right they did come in at the end to 'wrap things up'
just as they had come in to start things up at the opening.  This was
symbolized most by a huge red (bloody?) cord which they brought in at
the top of the show and unrolled to make a circle, in which most of the
action occurred throughout, and which they I think rolled back up and
took off at the end.

The company's called The Cannon Theatre Co.; this was their first work
as a company, so I don't have any more info.

Also, just as a note of interest on MacB, also at the Fringe was "Lady
Macbeth", a London Fringe two-person show which was a sort of
'backstage' Macbeth, positing a behind-the-scenes romance between the
Lady and MacDuff.  Interesting...

A votre sante,
Julie Blumenthal

Re: Some Notes on the CSF Hamlet

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 8.1000.  Sunday, 5 October 1997.

[1]     From:   Tim Richards <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 03 Oct 1997 00:11:05 +0800
        Subj:   SHK 8.0990  Some Notes on the CSF Hamlet

[2]     From:   Terence Hawkes <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 2 Oct 1997 12:35:04 -0400
        Subj:   SHK 8.0990 The CSF Hamlet


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Tim Richards <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 03 Oct 1997 00:11:05 +0800
Subject: Some Notes on the CSF Hamlet
Comment:        SHK 8.0990  Some Notes on the CSF Hamlet

W. L. Godshalk wrote:
>In this production, Hamlet is played as a woman by a woman...

Interesting idea.  How did they play the relationship with Ophelia, as a
lesbian love affair or in some other manner?

Tim Richards.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Terence Hawkes <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 2 Oct 1997 12:35:04 -0400
Subject: The CSF Hamlet
Comment:        SHK 8.0990 The CSF Hamlet

Hilarious! It's the way you tell them, Bill.

T. Hawkes

Qs: MND; Conferences; Address

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 8.0998.  Sunday, 5 October 1997.

[1]     From:   Mike Sirofchuck <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 1 Oct 1997 23:53:37 -0800
        Subj:   Midsummer's Night Dream

[2]     From:   Dan Dunnigan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 03 Oct 1997 16:48:36 -0600
        Subj:   Conferences in England

[3]     From:   Edna Z. Boris <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Sundy, 5 Oct 1997 06:02:06 -0400
        Subj:   Address


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Mike Sirofchuck <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 1 Oct 1997 23:53:37 -0800
Subject:        Midsummer's Night Dream

The drama teacher at our high school is planning a production of
Midsummer's Night Dream for the spring  (Hurrah!)  She would like to
hear staging ideas, etc from you.  As she is not a member of this forum,
please contact her directly.    Thanks.   Her name is Kathy Roberts and
her school email address is  This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..   I'd like to
hear some ideas for teaching MND in the classroom - please contact me
privately if you can help.  Thanks again.

Mike Sirofchuck
Kodiak High School
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Dan Dunnigan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 03 Oct 1997 16:48:36 -0600
Subject:        Conferences in England

I am looking for information on conferences in London, England.  I hope
there will be a conference of about a week's duration this winter or
spring.  I feel sure there must be a conference linked to Shakespeare,
study of plays, and of course a play or two at the Globe Theatre.  Do
you know of an address or person I might contact?

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Edna Z. Boris <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Sundy, 5 Oct 1997 06:02:06 -0400
Subject:        Address

Does anyone know how I can get in touch with Rinda F. Lundstrom, author
of WILLIAM POEL'S HAMLETS (1984)?  E-mail or snail-mail or phone would
be helpful.  Please reply off list.  Thanks.  Edna Boris

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.