Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1999 :: May ::
Various Responses
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.0837  Monday, 10 May 1999.

[1]     From:   H. R. Greenberg <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 7 May 1999 10:01:45 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.0827 Clint Eastwood: Shakespearean Actor?

[2]     From:   Jack Heller <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 07 May 1999 07:58:36 PDT
        Subj:   A B&F Edition

[3]     From:   John Savage <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 7 May 1999 12:08:53 -0400
        Subj:   SHK 10.0826 Taming in DC (girls, girls, girls)

[4]     From:   Anthony Burton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 7 May 1999 15:51:58 -0700
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.0759 Stage Devils in Art

[5]     From:   R. Schmeeckle <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Saturday, 8 May 1999 09:15:07 -0700 (PDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.0821 Assorted Responses

[6]     From:   Ed Taft <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Saturday, 08 May 1999 12:58:07 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Assorted Responses


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           H. R. Greenberg <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 7 May 1999 10:01:45 EDT
Subject: 10.0827 Clint Eastwood: Shakespearean Actor?
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.0827 Clint Eastwood: Shakespearean Actor?

An interesting post.  I do not know if Eastwood has ever played
Shakespeare, but his preoccupations are intermittently Shakespearean
notably in terms of the latent nihilism and chaos in Lear.  I would
particularly direct attention to UNFORGIVEN, Eastwood's anti-Western. It
has the same spirit as Kurosawa's RAN and Kurosawa's connection to
Shakespeare and Eastwood are equally intriguing. I will ask around but
doubt that he ever played any Shakespearean role anent Coriolanus and
the American rugged individualist.  Whereas Coriolanus obviously brings
the temple crashing down upon his own Head, the American warrior
individualist, whether vigilante, cop, western Hero, usually prevails,
while bringing rack and ruin to friend alike. You might want to like at
an essay called ON THE MCMOVIE in my SCREEN MEMORIES: HOLLYWOOD CINEMA
ON THE PSYCHOANALYTIC COUCH  Columbia U  1993  for more on this score

Best,  hr greenberg md endit

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jack Heller <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 07 May 1999 07:58:36 PDT
Subject:        A B&F Edition

Dear List Members:

I have decided to pursue the task of putting together a marketable
edition of Beaumont and Fletcher plays. "The Maid's Tragedy"
(co-written) is currently available with "The Tragedy of Valentinian"
(Fletcher only) in the Oxford edition of "Four Jacobean Sex Tragedies."
Therefore, the plays I am thinking of including are "The Knight of the
Burning Pestle," "The Faithful Shepherdess," "Philaster," and "A King
and No King." Am I overlooking any more-necessary play by Beaumont and
Fletcher? Do these choices seem appropriate and sufficient? Your
comments offlist will be appreciated.

Jack Heller

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

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           John Savage <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 7 May 1999 12:08:53 -0400
Subject: Taming in DC (girls, girls, girls)
Comment:        SHK 10.0826 Taming in DC (girls, girls, girls)

>The play is set in a 1940's Parisian
>bookshop, where the shop owner and her patrons (all women) decide to
>stage Taming of the Shrew to determine if Shakespeare was worthy enough
>to remain on the shelves of this strongly feminist bookstore.

Obviously had Sylvia Beach and "Shakespeare & Co." in mind?

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Anthony Burton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 7 May 1999 15:51:58 -0700
Subject: 10.0759 Stage Devils in Art
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.0759 Stage Devils in Art

You can find one and probably two images of stage devils in Allardyce
Nicoll's 1966 The Development of the Theatre, at figs. 64 and 65; the
accompanying text doesn't make it clear whether the author considers any
of >the images in the first illustration to be a devil, but the
identification seems clear enough.

[5]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           R. Schmeeckle <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Saturday, 8 May 1999 09:15:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: 10.0821 Assorted Responses
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.0821 Assorted Responses

Clifford Stetner wrote re Hamlet:

>His hesitation at the door of the chapel is based on Christian
>principles.  So how come he never considers the unambiguous Christian
>position: turn the other cheek?  Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord and
>all that.  As some kind of Christianized pagan, a right move is offered
>him, but seems to be beneath his contempt.  He needs a dramatic
>rendition of the Trojan War to remind him that doing nothing is
>"inherently wrong."

Hamlet's motive in hesitating is that he desires Claudius' damnation and
killing him while he is praying might result in the salvation of his
soul.  This might be dismissed as a mere rationalization, particularly
if one takes the conventional view that Hamlet's delay in fulfilling the
ghost's request is attributable to negligence.  I do not take that
view.  I see this as an example of Hamlet's utter degradation.  ("O what
a noble mind is here oe'rthrown.)  To wish another's damnation is the
most extreme example imaginable of a lack of Christian charity.  This is
evidence not that Hamlet is a Christianized pagan, but that he is a
Christian whose soul has been corrupted by his desire for vengeance.
This raises the question of Shakespear's own Christianity.  It seems
demonstrable that Hamlet possesses Christian faith and a Christian
conscience.  What, if anything, can be inferred about the author's view?

      Roger Schmeeckle

[6]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Ed Taft <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Saturday, 08 May 1999 12:58:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:        Assorted Responses

I hope that next time Bill and Terence meet, the latter will bend over
backwards in attempt at reconciliation. For, I have heard that Bill is
quite good at inserting his point when the occasion arises.

--Ed Taft
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.