Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1998 :: March ::
Re: SHAKSPER Description
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.0267  Friday, 27 March 1998.

[1]     From:   Dana Spradley <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 26 Mar 1998 09:27:00 -0800 (PST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 9.0261  Re: SHAKSPER Description

[2]     From:   Nick Kind <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 26 Mar 1998 18:11:50 +0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 9.0247 Announcing ArdenNet

[3]     From:   Ed Peschko <epeschko@den-mdev1>
        Date:   Thursday, 26 Mar 1998 11:50:52 -0700 (MST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 9.0261  Arden arrogance

[4]     From:   Belinda Johnston <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 27 Mar 1998 10:30:24 +1100 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 9.0247  Announcing ArdenNet

[5]     From:   Tim Richards <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 27 Mar 1998 10:21:42 +1000
        Subj:   Arden.net description of SHAKSPER


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Dana Spradley <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 26 Mar 1998 09:27:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 9.0261  Re: SHAKSPER Description
Comment:        Re: SHK 9.0261  Re: SHAKSPER Description

Though but a lurker on SHAKSPER, I heartily agree with Marilyn Bonomi.
Unfortunately, Arden's academic snobbery extends to almost every other
participatory Shakespeare site on the Web, where the customary panoply
of peer review to ensure the "highest academic standards" is being
recreated ad nauseum. Surely even academics have something better to do
with their time than forge new Web-based eyes of the needle through
which the untenured must pass on their way toward professional
salvation?

Still, I can understand the motivations for such exclusivity. I once
more or less inactively maintained a Web site (www.shakespeare.com)
where my (foolish?) goal was to democratize the appreciation,
interpretation, and public discussion of Shakespeare. But alas, the
volume of traffic from students simply posting their essay assignments
and hoping to get a ghostwrite for free proved overwhelming - for me...

Hardy, on the other hand, is to be congratulated on finding just the
right balance between openness and seriousness in admitting people to
the SHAKSPER list. Anyone with enough gumption to write a brief essay
about their interest in Shakespeare is accepted into the fold. And that,
combined with all the long hours he must put in collating and moderating
the traffic, seems plenty to keep discussion here at a very high level -
if anything, I find it a little too high, rather than the reverse.

Maybe the Arden editor or his employer (a subsidiary of The Thompson
Corporation, an evil media empire focused almost exclusively on
generating 20% annual return for its owner that took over Information
Access Company when I worked there) is simply jealous of the
competition? "ArdenNet is the place to come on the Internet for all
those interested in Shakespeare scholarship. No other resource like it
exists" - sure seems like they want to corner the market on this kind of
forum. Still - at least they're doing a lot of what I only had the
capacity to dream of doing, in their fashion.

--Dana (formerly 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 )

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Nick Kind <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 26 Mar 1998 18:11:50 +0000
Subject: 9.0247 Announcing ArdenNet
Comment:        Re: SHK 9.0247 Announcing ArdenNet

With relation to Marilyn Bonomi's comments:

As the person in charge of ArdenNet, I commissioned Gabriel Egan to
write a review of Shakespeare sites for research on the Internet.
However, as I have made clear within ArdenNet, his article does not
necessarily reflect the views of the Arden Shakespeare or myself, but
his own.

ArdenNet is designed to be a moderated place for scholarly debate where
people can discuss the merits of SHAKSPER and any other issues that
derive from the resources we are providing within ArdenNet. It is not,
however, designed to be exclusive. Indeed, we have a Teaching section
whose purpose is to encourage the cross-fertilization of ideas between
high school teachers and university-level academics. Please see my
"About Us" section in ArdenNet for more details.

I trust this clears up any misunderstandings.

Nicholas Kind
Electronic Acquisitions Editor
The Arden Shakespeare

 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Ed Peschko <epeschko@den-mdev1>
Date:           Thursday, 26 Mar 1998 11:50:52 -0700 (MST)
Subject: 9.0261  Arden arrogance
Comment:        Re: SHK 9.0261  Arden arrogance

> >"The electronic mailing list SHAKSPER includes many eminent scholars as
> >its members, but unfortunately also has many high school and
> >undergraduate students and amateurs. It has suffered increasing
> >trivialisation as Internet access has spread beyond academia. An
> >unmoderated Shakespeare Usenet newsgroup exists but its discussions
> >rarely rise above high school level."

Whoa... I missed that particular piece of arrogance!

As *another* amateur myself, I've noticed that insightful comments come
from all quarters; high-school students, professors, graduates,
under-graduates, even lowly computer consultants... And more to the
point, I've noticed that BS comes from all quarters as well.

How dare they assume that narrowness of focus is the end-all be-all?
Cross-pollination of ideas is what is great about the electronic forum.
Without it, people of all types tend to become in-bred in their ideas.

And as long as there is a good editor in place to divert spam, the
'signal-to-noise' ratio can be kept relatively high.

Or perhaps the editors of ArdenNet believe in a warped version of the
'Great Chain of Being' to suit their own fancy?

Ed

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Belinda Johnston <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 27 Mar 1998 10:30:24 +1100 (EST)
Subject: 9.0247  Announcing ArdenNet
Comment:        Re: SHK 9.0247  Announcing ArdenNet

I'm with Marilyn on this one.  I may well be an academic but I think
it's pure unadulterated snobbery to consider the input of "high school
and undergraduate students and amateurs" valueless.  I haven't been
active on this list for a while but in the past I've had debates on the
list with people whose experience of Shakespeare comes from a broad
variety of contexts and this has allowed me to rethink some of my own
assumptions.  The notion that academics represent a 'non-trivial'
constituency on the list is laughable: one only needs to look at the
Postmodernism thread...

Rather than unsubscribing from Arden, Marilyn, perhaps we should
initiate some discussion there of the notion that valuable Shakespeare
discussion only emanates from  a privileged, highly educated elite few?
I've only just signed up for ArdenNet but I'd be happy to go back and
visit and help stir up some debate!

In solidarity,
Belinda

[5]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Tim Richards <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 27 Mar 1998 10:21:42 +1000
Subject:        Arden.net description of SHAKSPER

Marilyn Bonomi wrote:

>Do other SHAKSPERians feel that the list should be reserved for
>"scholars" and the rest of us should at best be allowed to lurk on the
>sidelines observing the debate?  Or do we actually have something to say
>that can stimulate discussion even from those lofty "scholars" Ardenites
>seem to find the only worthy participants?

I thought the Arden dismissal of SHAKSPER was quite insulting, and an
excellent example of why Shakespeare is often viewed by the masses as
the property of snobs in ivory towers.  What arrogance.

Tim Richards.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.