Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1998 :: November ::
Re: Shakespeare's Edward III
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.1095  Friday, 6 November 1998.

[1]     From:   William Williams <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesdayy, 04 Nov 1998 06:58:00 -0600
        Subj:   Re: SHK 9.1090  Re: Shakespeare's Edward III

[2]     From:   Tim Perfect <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 5 Nov 1998 08:40:13 -0800 (PST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 9.1090  Re: Shakespeare's Edward III

[3]     From:   Michael Ullyot <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 05 Nov 1998 23:16:25 +0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 9.1090  Re: Shakespeare's Edward III


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           William Williams <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesdayy, 04 Nov 1998 06:58:00 -0600
Subject: 9.1090  Re: Shakespeare's Edward III
Comment:        Re: SHK 9.1090  Re: Shakespeare's Edward III

A question I have meant to ask during the flurry over Eddy 3: has anyone
seen, and could they provide a copy, of the press release that
Nelson/Arden sent out which produced the massive press coverage (all
major British, US, and Australian dailies that I see, BBC World Service
and probably home as well, etc.)?  It must have been a real peach.  This
story was carried almost as universally as the arrest of General
Pinochet.

William Proctor Williams

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Tim Perfect <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 5 Nov 1998 08:40:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 9.1090  Re: Shakespeare's Edward III
Comment:        Re: SHK 9.1090  Re: Shakespeare's Edward III

>The Theatr Clwyd production toured briefly in the
>summer of 1987.  I saw it at the Arts Theatre in
>Cambridge.  It was not called *The King and
> the Countess*; it was called *Edward III*.

Correct.  The production that was presented in 1911 in London was titled
*The King and The Countess*.

Thank you for those of you who did respond to my earlier post.  We are
in the week right now of finalizing dates for our season, so as soon as
I have those dates for *Edward III*, I will pass them on to the group.

So, from Mr. Hope's reply, I gather that the announcement made was more
concerning the fact that Cambridge was going to include *EIII* (as
Shakespeare's work) in their library, as it were. However I seem to
remember on SHAKSPER that there was some discussion of a "computer
program" which ran and compared *EIII* with the other plays in the
canon...any validity to that story?

Perhaps ArdenNet's Mr. Kind would like to comment on the validity of the
play in the canon as far as Arden is concerned?

Also, can anyone tell me when Riverside included it in their collected
works?

And the last point: Mr. Stodder mentioned that the production in LA in
1986 is possibly a US premiere, but my question is, was it a
professional premiere?  Melchiori does mention the LA production, but in
the next section mentions the Theatr Clywd production as the first
"professional" production.

Any help is most appreciated, and feel free to email me directly, or to
respond online.

Thanks again,
Tim Perfect

[3]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Michael Ullyot <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 05 Nov 1998 23:16:25 +0000
Subject: 9.1090  Re: Shakespeare's Edward III
Comment:        Re: SHK 9.1090  Re: Shakespeare's Edward III

Jonathan Hope is to be lauded for his point regarding the
canonical/apocryphal debate swirling about the play lately "discovered"
to be Shakespeare's, by a computer program of some sort:

>we have no more evidence this year about the authorship
>of Ed3 than we had last year, or the year before that.

He also rightly points out that Eric Sams' book _Shakespeare's Edward
III:
A new play restored to the canon_ made the same claim years ago, and
that Cambridge UP's edition has since been shelved alongside _The Two
Noble Kinsmen_  as a play once considered un-Shakespearean but now
regarded, rightly or otherwise, more reverentially for having (to borrow
from his own _Henry V_) "a little touch" of William. The day may yet
come to witness _Edmund Ironside_ (another canonical candidate for which
Sams makes a compelling case) at the centre of an equally tempestuous
controversy.  Meanwhile, scholars like Sams continue their work,
undistracted by the media's taste for "new" stories, shunning the basic
background information that, on examination, voids their right for our
attention.

Michael Ullyot
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.