The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.1421 Wednesday, 26 July 2000.
[1] From: Terence Hawkes <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Jul 2000 13:22:27 -0400
Subj: SHK 11.1398 Re: Exploitation, Marx, and Shakespeare
[2] From: W. L. Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Jul 2000 16:34:55 -0400
Subj: Re: SHK 11.1414 Re: Exploitation, Marx, and Shakespeare
[3] From: John E. Perry <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 19 Jul 2000 00:03:31 -0400
Subj: Re: SHK 11.1414 Re: Exploitation, Marx, and Shakespeare
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Terence Hawkes <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Jul 2000 13:22:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Exploitation, Marx, and Shakespeare
Comment: SHK 11.1398 Re: Exploitation, Marx, and Shakespeare
Belinda Johnston cries, 'TERENCE HAWKES WHERE ARE YOU?'
Mike Jensen wonders, 'Who knows, maybe even Shakespeare will reenter the
conversation'
Courage! You drag it from me, but I have been modestly preparing for the
publication of a new volume in the 'Accents on Shakespeare' series.
Matchlessly edited by Jean Howard and Scott Shershow, it is called
MARXIST SHAKESPEARES. It will be available from your local bookstore in
October. Sophie Masson will need several copies.
Terence Hawkes
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: W. L. Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Tuesday, 18 Jul 2000 16:34:55 -0400
Subject: 11.1414 Re: Exploitation, Marx, and Shakespeare
Comment: Re: SHK 11.1414 Re: Exploitation, Marx, and Shakespeare
>> The opposite of ideology is not passivity, but
>> art, in which I include many things, incidentally, and not just formal
>> art. It includes such things as ceremony, folklore, traditions, etc.
What we need is a more abstract definition of "art." If one
discriminates between art and nature, isn't an ideology a work of art?
Yours, Bill Godshalk
[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: John E. Perry <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 19 Jul 2000 00:03:31 -0400
Subject: 11.1414 Re: Exploitation, Marx, and Shakespeare
Comment: Re: SHK 11.1414 Re: Exploitation, Marx, and Shakespeare
Michael Myers writes,
> Geralyn, your view of my industry from afar is far different than the
> view I have close up. I personally know of 1000's of open job in my
> company alone, with starting salaries more than triple what you quote
> above.
Unless you're in the HR department, you really don't know what you're
talking about, and if you are, you're likely part of the Big Lie. I'm a
56-year-old engineer, thoroughly experienced in computer hardware and
software, who has spent 13 months out of the last 4 years trying to find
jobs -- even as a temp. I'm now working for 25% less than I made four
years ago, in a job for which I'm grossly overqualified.
And the 200+ resumes I sent out went to advertisements that seemed to be
copies of my resume.
Now I'll drop the matter, and go back to eavesdropping.
John Perry
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
