2000

Re: Pop Reference

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.2144  Wednesday, 22 November 2000.

[1]     From:   Douglas M Lanier <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 21 Nov 2000 10:25:16 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.2139 Re: Pop Reference

[2]     From:   Kenneth S. Rothwell <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 21 Nov 2000 10:52:50 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.2139 Re: Pop Reference

[3]     From:   Arthur Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 22 Nov 2000 09:37:35 +0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.2139 Re: Pop Reference


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Douglas M Lanier <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 21 Nov 2000 10:25:16 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 11.2139 Re: Pop Reference
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.2139 Re: Pop Reference

I believe the film Stephanie Hughes referred to is "Los Tarantos"
(1962), directed by Francisco Rivera Beleta and adapted by Beleta from
Alfredo Manas's play.

Cheers,
Douglas Lanier
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Kenneth S. Rothwell <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 21 Nov 2000 10:52:50 -0500
Subject: 11.2139 Re: Pop Reference
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.2139 Re: Pop Reference

Barry Parker's Folger Shakespeare Filmography (1979)carries a nice note
on Los Tarantos (Spain 1964),   a dance/musical adaptation of Romeo and
Juliet transferred to an impoverished quarter of Barcelona. Haunting
guitar music and the Carmen Amaya flamenco dance company accompany this
Spanish West Side Story.  My own Shakespeare filmography (1990) echoes
Parker but the chances of locating it on video are slim.  Films
Incorporated once carried it on 16mm. A query to them might be
worthwhile. Ken Rothwell

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Arthur Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 22 Nov 2000 09:37:35 +0800
Subject: 11.2139 Re: Pop Reference
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.2139 Re: Pop Reference

My favourite research tool, the Internet Movie Database, lists Los
Tarantos (complete title), Spain, 1962; directed by Francisco Rovira
Beleta. Carmen Amaya is the lead. The film was nominated for the
foreign-language Oscar in 1964. The 11 people who have voted on it for
the IMDb give it a very high 8.0out of 10 rating.  It's not available on
video, however.

Arthur Lindley

Re: Julie Taymor's TITUS

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.2143  Wednesday, 22 November 2000.

[1]     From:   Milla Riggio <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 21 Nov 2000 09:18:36 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.2135 Re: Julie Taymor's TITUS

[2]     From:   Werner Br


Re: Far-fetched Stage Directions

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.2141  Tuesday, 21 November 2000.

From:           Arthur Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 21 Nov 2000 10:24:24 +0800
Subject: 11.2117 Re: Far-fetched Stage Directions
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.2117 Re: Far-fetched Stage Directions

The exact stage direction in The Atheist's Tragedy (at 5.2.235,
following the line 'You shall see / How easily I can put you out of pain
. . . Oh!') is: 'As he raises up the axe strikes out his own brains.
Staggers off the scaffold.'  As well he might.

Arthur Lindley

Online Shakespeares

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.2142  Tuesday, 21 November 2000.

From:           Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, November 21, 2000
Subject:        Online Shakespeares

A gentle warning about online Shakespeare editions: my experience has
been that the majority of editions of Shakespeare found on the Internet
are based on the Complete Moby(tm) Shakespeare, an edition that I
believed was based on The Stratford Town modern-spelling edition of
1911, edited by Arthur Bullen. The indefatigable Terry A. Gray of Mr.
William Shakespeare and the Internet
<http://daphne.palomar.edu/shakespeare/default.htm>, however, cautiously
notes of "The 1866 Globe Edition from the University of Virginia.  The
Globe edition seems to have been the source for the aforementioned
'Complete Moby Shakespeare'."  Both Matty Farrow on her seemingly now
defunct site and the MIT: The Complete Works of William Shakespeare
<http://tech-two.mit.edu/Shakespeare/> acknowledge the Moby Shakespeare
as source text. The Bartley texts mentioned in an earlier post are from
W. J. Craig's the 1914 Oxford edition of the Complete Works of William
Shakespeare <http://www.bartleby.com/70/index.html >. William A.
Williams says that many of the texts for his Concordance to the Works of
Shakespeare <http://www.concordance.com/shakespe.htm> came from Project
Guttenberg, which offers four texts, two from World Library Inc.
(1ws3310 and 1ws3311), one from the Collins edition (2ws3310), and one
from Shakespeare's First Porfolio [sic] Titled The Tragedie of King Lear
(0ws3310).

Now that I have surveyed the territory, let me offer my gentle warning.
The conflated texts of all but one of the sites or texts I have
mentioned so far attribute the final speech in King Lear to Albany,
following Q2. Thus, I know of NO conflated edition of King Lear on the
Internet that attributes the final speech in Lear to Edgar, following
F1, the generally accepted reading in modern conflated editions of the
play.

Let me make a clarification. I am not talking about photo-facsimiles
like the marvelous ones from the Furness Library
<http://www.library.upenn.edu/etext/collections/furness/>. Neither is
the case with the diplomatic transcriptions of the first folio at the
Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library: Shakespeare,
William, 1564-1616. King Lear (1623 First Folio Edition)
<http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/ShaKLF.html>. Even the
so-called The 1866 Globe Edition at the University of Virginia
identifies the text in this collection as King Lear 1605
<http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/MobLear.html>; however,
the speaker prefix is "Albany" and not "Duke".

I hope these excurses prove valuable to some SHAKSPER reader.

Re: British "strangers"

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.2140  Tuesday, 21 November 2000.

[1]     From:   Marcus Dahl <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 21 Nov 2000 06:47:00 EST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.2127 Re: British "strangers"

[2]     From:   Stephanie Hughes <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 20 Nov 2000 14:09:44 +0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.2127 Re: British "strangers"


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Marcus Dahl <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 21 Nov 2000 06:47:00 EST
Subject: 11.2127 Re: British "strangers"
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.2127 Re: British "strangers"

Re: "Strangers"

I find Sam Small's (presumably knowingly) provocative account of
"Strangers" a little pat so I thought this section from my favourite pat
historian might add to things: ("strangers" definition at the bottom for
those of a skipping frame of mind).

...The English or "Saxons" as they are sometimes called were a race of
people who lived in the land bordering on the North Sea between what is
now called Denmark and Holland. They belonged to the great Teutonic
race, which inhabited the middle of Europe from the Baltic down to the
Alps. Of the English who settled in Britain there were three tribes:-
[note singular absence in this def'n of the mythic construct "celts"]

(1) The Jutes, who originally dwelt in the North of Jutland
(2) The Angles, who dwelt in the South of Denmark
(3) The Saxons, who inhabited the district now called Hanover

These three races, the Jutes, Saxons and Angles were afterwards known
amongst themselves as the "English". They held all the East, South East
and central parts of the island from the Firth of Forth to the English
Channel, and founded seven principle kingdoms to which the name of
Heptarchy has been given. These kingdoms were:-

(1) The Kingdom of Kent -founded by the Jutes

(2, 3, 4) The Kingdoms of Sussex, Wessex, Essex - founded by the Saxons.

(5,6,7) The Kingdoms of Northumbria, East Anglia and Mercia - founded by
the Angles.

The boundaries of these kingdoms were not definitely fixed, as the
boundaries of kingdoms are now. The Anglo-Saxon tribes were constantly
at war with one another, each trying to get the upper hand, so that the
kingdoms were often broken up and as often pieced together again.
Sometimes the greater part of the country acknowledged the supremacy of
one of these kingdoms, and sometimes that of another, and a very long
period elapsed before the English were united into one nation [here even
my love of the pat wilts somewhat].  This want of unity weakened the
English and made them an easy prey to invaders like the Northmen.

Fate of the Ancient Britons:

The struggle between the Britons and the English was long and deadly. As
the land was gradually occupied by the new-comers the Britains were
either put to death or driven out and compelled to take refuge in the
fens, woods and mountains of the unsubdued West. Those who survived were
called Welsh (i.e.  "foreigners" or "strangers") by the English, but
Kymry (i.e. "comrades") by themselves.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Stephanie Hughes <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 20 Nov 2000 14:09:44 +0000
Subject: 11.2127 Re: British "strangers"
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.2127 Re: British "strangers"

But why did the Puritans who settled the Plymouth Colony refer to the
secular colonists who made up about half the settlement "Strangers"
while they called themselves "Saints" when the strangers were every bit
as English?

Stephanie Hughes

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.