Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1998 :: February ::
Re: Riverside JC
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.0131  Friday, 13 February 1998.

[1]     From:   Albert Misseldine <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 11 Feb 1998 15:01:13 -0500
        Subj:   Riverside Changes

[2]     From:   John Velz <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 11 Feb 1998 16:10:41 -0600 (CST)
        Subj:   Riverside JC


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Albert Misseldine <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 11 Feb 1998 15:01:13 -0500
Subject:        Riverside Changes

Larry Weiss asks about other amendments in the Riverside Shakespeare. In
the 1974 edition , intro to JC (p.1103, first column) we read "For
Plutarch, Caesar is already virtually a king, and Brutus'  an act of
deposition; it is not so for Shakespeare, who does not even mention that
Caesar, if he got it, was to wear the crown only outside Italy."

I, and a few thousand others I expect, wrote to Riverside and pointed
out I,iii,87-88. I noticed in a subsequent edition that this error was
corrected, but I don't have the later eds, so can't quote.

And may I add to this message my heartfelt thanks for all who responded
to my plea for help in producing JC. What a wonderful network this is.

Cheers, Albert Misseldine

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           John Velz <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 11 Feb 1998 16:10:41 -0600 (CST)
Subject:        Riverside JC

>Evans also pointed out the following changes to the footnotes:
>T/S,IV.ii.157; M/M,I.ii.129 & IV.i.1-6.  Nothing about JC,IV.iii.110.

Thus Larry Weiss.  But the copy of Riverside 1974 that I own reads
"yoked with: like".  It may have been the first printing of the 1974
edn. No indication of any rpt. involved on copyright page in my copy.  I
wrote the date "1974" and my signature on its flyleaf when I bought it,
so it came to me in that first year.  G. B. Evans may have forgotten
this change in footnote, or more likely he emended it long before the
1997 edn was dreamed of and the emendation of the note appeared in all
the rpts. that followed.  Until Bevington's later edns, 1980 amd 1992
appeared, RIV (-EVNS) was the edn. most often cited by U.S. scholars as
their textual authority-what Peter Alexander's (noteless) text pubd. by
Collins was in the Br. Isles.  I have no idea how many printings RIV
went through, but it must have been many.  Evans prob. didn't even
remember what had once been said about Cassius in the original note when
he compiled his list of textual and commentary note variants for you.

This, incidentally, may be the first time in all the years I have been
writing my name and date or putting a bookplate in newly purchased Sh.
books that it turns out to be useful.  (Wry smile.)

I sent John Andrews a reply to a private note he sent me about my
preference for the lamb as Brutus' vision of himself.  If he agrees to
share his view with the listserv, either he or I could forward our
correspondence to all.  A good idea, I think, because he argues the
matter strongly and cites his *Everyman's Sh.* notes on the alleged
crux.

A kindly older scholar once said we should all be part bloodhounds.
Smelling out and explaining strange things in texts is a delightful way
to spend one's life.

Yours, Larry, with admiration,
John Velz
 

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.