Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1999 :: May ::
Re: Henry
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.0819  Wednesday, 5 May 1999.

[1]     From:   Dana Shilling <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 4 May 1999 10:46:31 -0400
        Subj:   Hank the Cinq

[2]     From:   Brian Haylett <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 4 May 1999 19:33:31 +0100
        Subj:   Re: Henry and Tro.

[3]     From:   Hugh Grady <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 04 May 1999 18:32:07 -0600
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.0801 Re: Henry and Tro.


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Dana Shilling <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 4 May 1999 10:46:31 -0400
Subject:        Hank the Cinq

Dominant characteristic if any of Henry V? I think of him as a kind of
Candide, a nice guy who gets taken advantage of by everybody. First the
bishops get him out of the way with a lot of double-talk about the Salic
Law, then the King of France maneuvers him into a no-lose position (for
France)--whoever wins the war, the King's grandson is going to rule over
France and England.

Apropos of nice guys, Orlando is not the brightest fellow you'd ever
hope to meet, but I wouldn't call him a sexist "big". Romeo can't help
being "fortune's fool" (and a victim of clergy malpractice) but he seems
not merely devoted to Juliet but willing to listen to her.

Dana Shilling

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

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Brian Haylett <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 4 May 1999 19:33:31 +0100
Subject:        Re: Henry and Tro.

>'Why do we have to read Henry's actions-killing Hotspur,
>denying justice in the person of Lord Chief Justice, etc,--as aspects of
>his personal development? '

You do not have to. Clearly most people do not, though the recent notes
on The Tempest show that at least one play is exempted. Just as you are
sure that such a dimension does not exist, some of us feel that it
does.  Regard us as a bunch of eccentrics who run the odd flag up the
masthead to see if someone else does not delete it. I hope it is seen by
everyone else as harmlessly useless, to be tolerated as I have to
tolerate announcements of productions in Tucson, allusions to American
television shows, and references to literary theory.

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Hugh Grady <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 04 May 1999 18:32:07 -0600
Subject: 10.0801 Re: Henry and Tro.
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.0801 Re: Henry and Tro.

In regards to Judith Craig's objection to my supposed substitution of
Machiavellianism for idealism (actually I think it is Shakespeare's), I
want to report my relief in reading her characterization of Falstaff and
the taverners, as "disease-ridden cells of vice that should be expunged
to save the whole." With such idealism, who needs Machiavelli?
        A
las, is only Harold Bloom with me on behalf of that Falstaff? A bad
world, I say.

--Hugh Grady
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.