Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2000 :: November ::
Re: Guilio Romano
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.2003  Wednesday, 31 October 2000.

[1]     From:   Ed Taft <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 31 Oct 2000 11:44:53 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Julio Romano

[2]     From:   Don Bloom <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 31 Oct 2000 10:57:57 -0600
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.1993 Re: Guilio Romano

[3]     From:   Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 31 Oct 2000 09:28:55 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.1993 Re: Guilio Romano

[4]     From:   Fran Barasch <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 1 Nov 2000 08:40:28 EST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.1993 Re: Guilio Romano


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Ed Taft <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 31 Oct 2000 11:44:53 -0500 (EST)
Subject:        Julio Romano

By the by, Julio Romano was not only a sculptor but, as I remember, a
famous (infamous?) pornographer.

--Ed Taft

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Don Bloom <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 31 Oct 2000 10:57:57 -0600
Subject: 11.1993 Re: Guilio Romano
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.1993 Re: Guilio Romano

Dennis:

>You wrote: In "The Winter's Tale", all those Catholic fragments (miraculous
>statues etc.) are reanimated like old clothes on a scarecrow that turns
>out to be Fred Astaire.  Or better Catholicism is Astaire's artificial
>leg which he somehow makes into something natural.

As a matter of historical accuracy, the Scarecrow was Ray Bolger, not
Fred Astaire, another superb hoofer though not quite so great as
Astaire.

There is, it suddenly occurs to me, a bizarre suggestion of the
crucifixion and resurrection in the hanged scarecrow coming down off its
cross to join the virgin on her trip to the wonderful land. I leave
further development of this idea to another kind of critic.

(I did not, I hasten to add, write the preceding under the influence of
anything except my trimesterly office-cleaning frenzy. It reads a little
like a parody of one or another of our listers, but I hestitate to
specify whom since it arose unconsciously.)

With all blessings of All Hallow's Eve,
don

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 31 Oct 2000 09:28:55 -0800
Subject: 11.1993 Re: Guilio Romano
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.1993 Re: Guilio Romano

I'll have to take a look at Lupton's book, since your description of it
is so intriguing.

> Perhaps
> there is the question:  does the end of "The Winter's Tale" really
> 'deflate', as Lupton argues, the old Catholic iconography?

As I said, I have not read Lupton's argument, but would tend to doubt
it.  The ending of the Winter's Tale seems to precisely overturn the
stigma attaching to idols, and, by a process of extension to
representative art generally, in the Reformation--that they are not
alive, that they have eyes and see not, mouths and speak not, etc.
Normally, we see characters trapped within their condition as artworks,
but in this case, a statue comes to life.  A different aesthetic from
that of iconoclasm seems to be proposed in this instance.

Cheers,
Se

 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.