1999

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.0521  Wednesday, 23 March 1999.

[1]     From:   John Cox <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 23 Mar 1999 10:48:15 -0500
        Subj:   Miola's Complaint

[2]     From:   Michele Marrapodi <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 24 Mar 1999 11:47:15 +0100 (GMT+0100)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.0506 Miola's Shakespeare's Rome


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           John Cox <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 23 Mar 1999 10:48:15 -0500
Subject:        Miola's Complaint

Thanks to Robert Miola for a remarkably restrained and civil response to
a fairly brutal injury.  Posting such a response on SHAKSPER strikes me
as an appropriate way to deal with that kind of treatment-letting a wide
audience know about it without being rancorous.  It's an effective way
to get justice in the court of scholarly opinion, if nowhere else.

John Cox

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Michele Marrapodi <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 24 Mar 1999 11:47:15 +0100 (GMT+0100)
Subject: 10.0506 Miola's Shakespeare's Rome
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.0506 Miola's Shakespeare's Rome

We were surprised (and, indeed, amazed) to read of the misattribution
and misuse of Robert Miola's essay on Cymbeline. As one of the most
innovative exponents of the classical legacies in early modern drama,
Miola deserves proper acknowledgement for his outstanding contribution
to Shakespeare studies.

More generally, this unfortunate error might well open a discussion on
the uses and functions of collecting past criticism as a means of
justifying new theoretical agendas. Every novelty in literary study
emerges within the context of previous work and we must acknowledge our
links with tradition.  No new academic product arises independent of a
legacy of close reading and literary theory. And we should mistrust any
pronouncement which attempts to score easy points by challenging earlier
scholarship.

Michele Marrapodi
Michael J. Redmond
University of Palermo
Dipartimento di Scienze filogiche e linguistiche

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.