November
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.1894 Thursday, 4 November 1999. From: Ellen Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 13:31:47 -0500 Subject: 20th Century Poetry I am doing research on a mid to late 20th century American painter, one of whose paintings is titled "The King and The Fool Go For a Walk in the Rain." I am curious to know if Lear figures in any 20th century American poetry (as Hamlet, does for example, in Eliot's Love Song of J Alfred Prufrock) and would appreciate hearing from anyone who might have references. Thanks in advance. Ellen Lawrence, Director Cantor Art Gallery College of the Holy Cross
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.1893 Thursday, 4 November 1999. From: Dana Shilling <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 17:20:19 +0000 Subject: 10.1864 Re: Productions of Much Ado Comment: Re: SHK 10.1864 Re: Productions of Much Ado In defense of Benedick, the tactic of shutting off inconvenient conversation with a kiss was earlier suggested by Beatrice, to Hero, in connection with Claudio. Dana (Shilling)
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.1892 Thursday, 4 November 1999. [1] From: Carol A Cole <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 3 Nov 1999 11:38:28 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 10.1880 Re: Wedding Proposal [2] From: Marion Aston <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 22:54:12 +0000 Subj: Re: SHK 10.1870 Please Help with My Wedding Proposal [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Carol A Cole <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 3 Nov 1999 11:38:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: 10.1880 Re: Wedding Proposal Comment: Re: SHK 10.1880 Re: Wedding Proposal Dear Ron, I see that a number of listmembers have written in with lovely suggestions, from which you probably can find one that suits you. My only qualm is with the horse and knight suit. Unless your intended is really into reenactment spectacle, you might rethink that part. If plain old you isn't enough (and I should hope it would be), how about a tux and roses? Best of luck in any case, and please do let us know how it turns out. Carol (silver anniversary this year and still going strong) [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marion Aston <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 22:54:12 +0000 Subject: 10.1870 Please Help with My Wedding Proposal Comment: Re: SHK 10.1870 Please Help with My Wedding Proposal Why not try the proposal scene from Henry V - okay, you are not a King - but you certainly come on like one. You might have the modify the text a little (I've left out the references to France etc.) If you are devastatingly handsome, maybe this is not the text for you. Good luck! '..by mine honour, in true English, I swear I love thee, by which honour I dare not swear thou lovest me. Yet my blood begins to flatter me that thou dost notwithstanding the poor and untempering effect of my visage. Now beshrew my father's ambition. He was thinking of civil wars when he got me: therefore I was created with a stubborn outside, with an aspect of iron, that when I come to woo ladies I fright them. But in faith (insert name) the elder I wax the better I shall appear: my comfort is that old age, that ill layer on of beauty, can do no more spoil upon my face; thous hast me, if thou hast me, at the worst! And thou shalt wear me, if thou wear me, better and better. And therefore tell me, most fair (insert name) will you have me? If that doesn't melt her heart, I don't know what will. You can't lose! Marion Aston
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.1891 Thursday, 4 November 1999. [1] From: Carl Fortunato <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 3 Nov 1999 11:37:47 EST Subj: Re: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha [2] From: David Evett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 14:32:06 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha [3] From: Mike Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 17:00:38 -0800 Subj: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha [4] From: Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, November 04, 1999 Subj: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Carl Fortunato <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 3 Nov 1999 11:37:47 EST Subject: 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha Comment: Re: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha >Small picky point, but ... > >All of these posts refer to the OLD TESTAMENT Apochrypha. There was >(is) a NT Apocrypha as well. Raises different issues, but ... They are very different things. The Old Testament Apocrypha are called "Deuterocanonicals" by Roman Catholics, and they find the term Apocrypha to be slightly offensive, since the word implies that they are inauthentic. In reality, I don't think there was any edition of the Bible that did NOT include them until the 1600's. The New Testament Apocrypha would be the equivalent of the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha - works that were pretty much never used by any church, at least not since the 4th Century. [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Evett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 14:32:06 -0500 Subject: 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha Comment: Re: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha Robin Hamilton rightly reminds us that "There was (is) a NT Apocrypha as well. Raises different issues, but ...". Because the apocryphal gospels and other early Christian texts raise doctrinal questions in ways the OT material does not, they were precisely not made part of the vernacular Bibles, and were (and remain) much more difficult to get access to. Dave Evett [3]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 17:00:38 -0800 Subject: Re: Apocrypha Comment: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha >All of these posts refer to the OLD TESTAMENT Apochrypha. >There was (is) a NT Apocrypha as well. Raises different issues, but ... True, and a fascinating set of texts they are. Most available today were not known in Shakespeare's time, of course. I am not aware of Shakespeare ever quoting or referring to Second Clement or any of the others. Am I wrong about that, or does Professor Hamilton have another point? (Hope that doesn't sound sarcastic. I'm very impressed by most of Robin Hamilton's posts and hope my question is read as respectful.) Best, Mike Jensen [4]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, November 04, 1999 Subject: Re: Apocrypha Comment: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha This morning, I had intended to pick up some of my books containing some of the so-called New Testament Apocrypha, but I forgot. I would add, though, that the Gospel of Thomas was included by Robert W. Funk, Roy W. Hoover, and members of the Jesus Seminar in their fascinating edition *The Five Gospels : The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus : New Translation and Commentary*, New York : Macmillan Pub. Co., 1993.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.1890 Thursday, 4 November 1999. [1] From: Stanley Wells <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 3 Nov 1999 16:12:18 -0000 Subj: Re: SHK 10.1878 Re: Old Bill [2] From: Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 09:54:23 -0800 Subj: Re: SHK 10.1878 Re: Old Bill [3] From: Mike Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 16:52:13 -0800 Subj: SHK 10.1878 Re: Old Bill [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stanley Wells <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 3 Nov 1999 16:12:18 -0000 Subject: 10.1878 Re: Old Bill Comment: Re: SHK 10.1878 Re: Old Bill Is it not possible that the Chinese President asked to visit the Globe rather than that he was dragooned (or dragoned) into going there? Stanley Wells [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 09:54:23 -0800 Subject: 10.1878 Re: Old Bill Comment: Re: SHK 10.1878 Re: Old Bill Hi, Terence. >Thanks for your response. I think I was able to follow most of the >argument until the point where you started to refer to President Jiang >Zemin's visit as 'dissident'. Think about how anyone merely visiting China was reviled in some quarters until quite recently (say, the period of the Vietnam war), and how expressing any sort of interest in the Chinese system was an almost flawless sign of "dissident" views. Given Sir Sam's labeling as some sort of proto-communist, he'd probably see accepting the visit of a Chinese communist leader as dissident, rather than vice-versa. >The Golden Quill committee has been informed. Thanks. No doubt they're allied with the Spellchecker General? By the way, the recent newsletter of the Societ