Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1998 :: October ::
Re: Ed3
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.0934  Monday, 5 October 1998.

[1]     From:   David Kathman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 02 Oct 1998 15:31:59 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 9.0931  Re: Ed3

[2]     From:   Jerry Bangham <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Saturday, 3 Oct 1998 09:26:55 -0500
        Subj:   Edward III

[3]     From:   Justin Bacon <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Saturday, 03 Oct 1998 03:00:23 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 9.0929  Re: Ed3


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           David Kathman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 02 Oct 1998 15:31:59 -0500
Subject: 9.0931  Re: Ed3
Comment:        Re: SHK 9.0931  Re: Ed3

Scott Oldenburg wrote:

> What is the probability that the next
> Riverside (or other publication of the complete works) will include
> _Edmund Ironside_?

Extremely low, approaching zero.  I'm not aware of any Shakespeare
scholar other than Eric Sams who takes seriously Sams' claim that this
play was written by Shakespeare.  Shakespeare certainly was familiar
with *Edmund Ironside* and used it as a source for Titus Andronicus, but
the arguments against his authorship are good ones, in my opinion.
Donald Foster, in a review of Sams' *Edmund Ironside* book in
Shakespeare Quarterly (around 1988, I think) summarized the arguments
against the attribution to Shakespeare and presents some arguments in
favor of Robert Greene's authorship.

> What is the consensus among members of this list
> regarding Edmund Ironside and other Shakepeare apocrypha?

There's little consensus regarding most of the Shakespeare apocrypha-by
definition, or it would be considered part of the canon rather than
apocrypha.  But some plays formerly considered apocrypha have made their
way into the canon.  As this thread has indicated, a consensus has
slowly been emerging that Shakespeare was at least the part author of
*Edward III*, with the Arden, New Cambridge, and new Riverside editions
including the play. Hand D of *Sir Thomas More* is even more widely
accepted as Shakespeare's-it has been included in all the major
one-volume editions since the first Riverside (1974), and several books
arguing for the attribution have been published.  Early in this century,
*The Two Noble Kinsmen* and *Pericles* were widely considered
apocryphal, and as recently as 1969 both were excluded from the
one-volume Penguin edition, but today they are generally considered to
be collaborations between Shakespeare and other authors, and are
included in all major editions.  More recently, the subject of whether
the *Funeral Elegy* was written by Shakespeare has been a contentious
one, with many people arguing passionately against Shakespeare's
authorship of the poem despite its inclusion in the recent new
Riverside, Bevington, and Norton editions.  There was a lot of
discussion of the poem on this list back in early 1996, and that
discussion is archived on the web at:
http://mbhs.bergtraum.k12.ny.us/cybereng/ebooks/fe-crit.txt

Other recent attributions to Shakespeare, such as Charles Hamilton's
claim that the well-known *Second Maiden's Tragedy* is actually
Shakespeare and Fletcher's *Cardenio* with the names changed, have met
with much less favor.

Dave Kathman

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

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jerry Bangham <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Saturday, 3 Oct 1998 09:26:55 -0500
Subject:        Edward III

Play gets first staging as Shakespeare's work

By Leah Eichler

TORONTO (Reuters) - A small Canadian theater will stage the first
production of ``Edward III'' since the official arbiter of The Bard's
legacy pronounced it a bona fide Shakespearean play.

Shakespeare by the Sea, a Halifax-based theater company dedicated to the
presentation of classical plays, will demonstrate its thespian prowess
Friday with its production of the work, which was authenticated by the
Arden Shakespeare Series, the world's leading publishers of William
Shakespeare's works.

``To our knowledge, Shakespeare by the Sea will be the first theater
company in the world to publicly perform excerpts of the play since
authentication,'' Elizabeth Murphy, the theater company's general
manager, said Thursday.

The Sunday Times of London reported earlier this week that Arden had
confirmed the play's authorship.

The last time the play was performed was in 1987 by Theatr Clwyd in
Wales, which listed it as written by ``question mark.''

With just three days' notice, the Canadian theater company downloaded
the play in Old English from the University of Virginia's Web site and
translated an excerpt for production.

Patrick Christopher, head of the acting program at Dalhousie University
in Halifax, adapted the excerpt from the Old English text for the
theater company on Wednesday.

The play, which will be staged before an audience expected to number
200, will be performed as a one-man show acted by Christopher.

``It's extraordinary,'' he said. ``I took the copy to my class of acting
students yesterday. I didn't realize how exciting it was to have a new
play that's 400 years old to add to such a small canon of work by
Shakespeare.''

Since the play ``Edward III'' emerged approximately 400 years ago, its
author has been unknown. Arden concluded its authenticity after running
a computer analysis of text and language. Scholars now presume the play
to be one of Shakespeare's earliest works, written in 1594-95 between
``Titus Andronicus'' and ``Romeo and Juliet.''

The play tells the story of the first campaigns of the Hundred Years
War, when British monarchs tried to reclaim their Norman territories in
France while holding off the Scots from the North.

Reuters/Variety

[3]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Justin Bacon <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Saturday, 03 Oct 1998 03:00:23 -0500
Subject: 9.0929  Re: Ed3
Comment:        Re: SHK 9.0929  Re: Ed3

> Finally, what's this about _E3_ bringing Shakespeare's canonical count
> to 39? Was another contested play recently added?

The Two Noble Kinsmen (supposedly recognized in the 1970s) would bring
it to 38, with E3 bringing it to 39.

Justin Bacon

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

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.