Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1999 :: February ::
Re: Hotspur and Falstaff
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.0291  Monday, 22 February 1999.

[1]     From:   Edward Gero <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 19 Feb 1999 09:28:31 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.0288 Hotspur, Falstaff, Inside-Outside

[2]     From:   Ed Taft <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 19 Feb 1999 09:31:03 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Hotspur and Falstaff

[3]     From:   Giovanni Tallino <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 19 Feb 1999 09:24:28 -0900
        Subj:   Re: Fwd: SHK 10.0288 Hotspur, Falstaff, Inside-Outside


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Edward Gero <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 19 Feb 1999 09:28:31 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 10.0288 Hotspur, Falstaff, Inside-Outside
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.0288 Hotspur, Falstaff, Inside-Outside

Having had the privilege of playing Hotspur a few years ago, I can only
say that he is the furthest thing from insincere and superficial.
Although he may be misguided, Hotspur is deeply committed to his cause
and is willing to fight for what he believes in. He feels injustice at
the way Henry IV runs the state and will lead the rebels to restore the
perceived rightful heir to the throne, out of a sense of righteous
indignation.

Perhaps Mr. Tallino reads Falstaff's honor speech and makes the
comparison between Falstaff's finding of "Honor" as substantially
nothing but "air," as his jumping off point for his pointed criticism of
the President.

 >>Ignoring the reference to current events, is it Mr. Tallino or myself
>who has misunderstood both Hotspur and Falstaff?

>>Hotspur seems to me to lack substance in a big way; seems to be
>insincere and superficial.  Falstaff, on the other hand, has always
>seemed a marvelous character, with much to be admired, even among those
>traits superficially less desirable.

>>Have I so mis-read my Shakespeare all these years?

> > Sincerely,
> > Bob Dennis

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

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Ed Taft <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 19 Feb 1999 09:31:03 -0500 (EST)
Subject:        Hotspur and Falstaff

Bob Dennis's views of Hotspur and Falstaff command respect. Hotspur can
be very superficial and Falstaff "admired," at least in theory. I would
simply add that Hotspur, to my mind, is not really unintelligent nor is
he always superficial. He is blinded by an out-of-date concept of honor
and has not taken the time to examine the way the political world really
works. In this sense, he is truly Hal's opposite. Falstaff, like Hal,
HAS closely observed politics and therein lies his danger: Falstaff sees
through too much; he threatens the "necessary illusions" that the
emerging nation state must cultivate if it is to succeed and thrive. Of
course, whether the emerging and modern nation state is (or has been) a
GOOD development is, as Falstaff himself might say, "A question to be
asked."

--Ed Taft

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Giovanni Tallino <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 19 Feb 1999 09:24:28 -0900
Subject: SHK 10.0288 Hotspur, Falstaff, Inside-Outside
Comment:        Re: Fwd: SHK 10.0288 Hotspur, Falstaff, Inside-Outside

I wholeheartedly agree with the first half of Mr. Dennis' statement:
Hotspur lacks substance and comes across as an insincere and superficial
character-just as Mr. Clinton does, I should add, if one is not gullible
enough to be impressed by his well-rehearsed theatricals. (Let us NOT
ignore the reference to current events, since this whole discussion
originated from a superficial and inaccurate comparison between Hyde and
Polonius and Iago.) As to Mr. Dennis' admiration for Falstaff as a
(fictional) human being, that's his problem, not mine. I just can't
admire scoundrels and cowards. But I will defend Mr. Dennis' right to
admire scoundrels...blah, blah, blah...  I might also add that comparing
Hyde to a Polonius/Iago figure shows either Mr. Bloom's lack of
understanding of the two Shakespearean characters, or his bias against
Mr. Hyde. (I much prefer to think it is the latter that misguided his
thoughts and words.) Polonius is the epitome of political correctness,
and King Claudius' toady; Hyde is everything but politically correct,
and he certainly is no toady of King William Jefferson Clinton's. Iago
is an unprincipled man who would destroy others in order to achieve his
goals; Hyde is a man who has nearly destroyed himself to affirm certain
principles which some Falstaff admirers, I am sure, find ludicrous:
honesty, courage, etc.-all the traits Mr. Clinton, together with
Falstaff, so desperately lacks.

Giovanni Tallino

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

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.