2000

Re: Scene Divisions in MND

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.0428  Wednesday, 1 March 2000.

From:           Briggs John <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 1 Mar 2000 08:29:59 -0000
Subject: 11.0410 Scene Divisions in MND
Comment:        RE: SHK 11.0410 Scene Divisions in MND

Bill Godshalk seemed to be requesting help with the scene divisions in
MND.  Ever willing to be helpful, I checked Arden 2, Oxford, and Oxford
Complete Shakespeare (Original-Spelling Edition + Textual Companion).
In fact, the scene divisions seem quite straightforward.  There are two
examples of the "scene division" in dispute (clear stage with no
time-break) at OCS lines 1394 and 2064.  Rather more interesting is the
fact that the Folio Act divisions for Acts 3 and 4 occur when the stage
is not quite clear (sleeping characters)!  There are no scene divisions
in F.

I would make the following recommendations for scene divisions.  If you
are making a modern-spelling edition, follow the traditional act and
scene divisions:
1.1  1-251
1.2  252-355
2.1  356-623
2.2  624-785
3.1  786-981
3.2  982-1441
4.1  1442-1657
4.2  1658-1700
5.1  1701-2132

If you are making an original-spelling edition, ignore the act
divisions:
1.  1-251
2.  252-355
3.  356-623
4.  624-981
5.  982-1657
6.  1658-1700
7.  1701-2132

If you are putting on a production, have your interval after 3.1/981.

My argument is that F scene divisions may be trusted, but act divisions
should be treated with scepticism.

John Briggs

MSD in Art

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.0427  Wednesday, 1 March 2000.

From:           Jinny Webber <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 28 Feb 2000 22:52:23 EST
Subject:        MSD in Art

To the SHAKSPER List:

Right now I'm trying to put together a slide show to precede a public
'faculty lecture' entitled "Myth, Magic, and Metamorphosis" which I'm
delivering on March 22 at my community college.  I'm focusing on Ovid
and Shakespeare (with a passing nod to Apuleius) and specifically, among
related ideas, on ass' ears.  Henry Fuseli and, more weirdly, Richard
Dadd, painted Midsummer Night's Dream/Bottom-Titania works.  The nearest
university arts library has non-circulating catalogues of some these
paintings but offers no color xerox or slide-making facilities.  I've
been trying to get some images from the Internet, so far
unsuccessfully.  If anyone has further suggestions, either of other art
images or where to find them, please let me know-off line is fine.

Thank you!
Jinny Webber

MLA Special Session

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.0425  Wednesday, 1 March 2000.

From:           Justin Drewry <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 29 Feb 2000 13:18:46 -0500
Subject:        MLA Special Session

I am posting to discover the interest in a special panel at MLA on
Shakespeare's "Aspects of Influence."  This title recalls the Harvard
Literary Series publication that featured several essays considering
Shakespeare's continued influence in the field of literature.  Since it
is a special session I would like to narrow the topic specifically to
the Victorian period.  Perhaps even more narrow.  If you think that you
would have interest in participating in such a panel please send me a
personal email so that I can evaluate the general interest.  If there is
enough interest, then I anticipate that I would require abstracts of
papers be submitted by 3/21 so that I could select the participants.

Thank you,
Andy Drewry
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Re: Twelfth Night

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.0426  Wednesday, 1 March 2000.

From:           John Briggs <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 29 Feb 2000 08:32:51 -0000
Subject: 11.0410 Re: Twelfth Night
Comment:        RE: SHK 11.0410 Re: Twelfth Night

I am actually quite circumspect in my assertions, but I shall try and
answer Bill Godshalk's points as best I can.  Firstly, I regard 1623 as
"contemporary": whoever made the transcript of TN that was the printer's
copy (and whenever they made it), they were considerably closer to the
time of the performance of the plays than we are.  Secondly, I make the
rash assumption than the person (presumably the transcriber, possibly an
"editor") who inserted the act and scene divisions knew what they were
doing: if we think they were "wrong", how do we know we are "right"?
Act divisions are believed to post-date 1609 (don't ask: it is
presumably something to do with indoor theatres...), and hence not be
authorial.  Scene divisions are relatively unusual in the First Folio
(about one third of the plays).  Thirdly, the "scene division" in
question (exit without a time-break), is not particularly unusual: there
are three examples in Edward III, and the latest editorial thinking is
not to insert a scene division in these circumstances.

John Briggs

Re: Stage Combat

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.0424  Wednesday, 1 March 2000.

From:           Mary Jane Miller <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 28 Feb 2000 13:00:00 -0500
Subject: 11.0327 Re: Stage Combat
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.0327 Re: Stage Combat

As I understand the scene, Hamlet is wounded, therefore the point is
unbated and he knows it . He wants the other sword. He forces the issue
and gets it. I like Olivier's staging when he forces Laertes to the
ground, steps on his foil and forces the exchange by handing him his own
bated foil -- but other ways also work. No double disarm is needed.
Hamlet is already ahead on points when Laertes stabs him and fuelled by
rage controls the final bout. [I'm not fond of the Olivier but no one
did the duel better.]

What I am not sure about is what difference the change of the actual
weapons used as signified in the difference between F1 edition and the
Q.  Perhaps someone could tell me?

Mary Jane

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.