Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2000 :: June ::
Re: James and Elizabeth
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.1151  Monday, 5 June 2000.

[1]     From:   Florence Amit <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 02 Jun 2000 17:45:35 +0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.1139 Re: James and Elizabeth

[2]     From:   Abigail Quart <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 2 Jun 2000 12:36:31 -0400
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.1139 Re: James and Elizabeth


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Florence Amit <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 02 Jun 2000 17:45:35 +0000
Subject: 11.1139 Re: James and Elizabeth
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.1139 Re: James and Elizabeth

To Marilyn Bonomi,

I shall write you off line. I do not feel much like apologizing for no
good reason.

He-bona like Dona-bella are words for medicines that have connotations
beyond the pharmacy. Please reject this as it pleases you. I no longer
will respond on line to the thread.

Florence Amit

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Abigail Quart <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 2 Jun 2000 12:36:31 -0400
Subject: 11.1139 Re: James and Elizabeth
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.1139 Re: James and Elizabeth

>What Abigail Quart writes here is lovely propaganda, but atrocious
 "history."

I suggested that the man who became King James I was originally a human
child and human children fantasize. Nobody thinks it "atrocious" when
Little Orphan Annie sings "Tomorrow" unless she can't sing.

>People were hardly as pusillanimous in the seventeenth century as Ms.
>Quart suggests.

During Elizabeth's reign, a popular playwright was jailed and tortured
for some religious opinions he had written in college. A man who wrote a
flyer criticizing a proposed  marriage for Elizabeth got his writing
hand removed.  And that was a monarch they knew. Prudence is not
cowardice.

>-and James's passion for the mother who had abandoned him
> as an infant,

Running for her life, wasn't she?

>ignored him as an adult

He was born in 1566. She was executed in 1587 when he was 21.  Every
minute that he was an adult, she was dead.

>sweetly offered to "allow"
>him to "share" the English throne to which she had not a snowball's hope
>in hell of claim,

"sweetly?" Mary's hopes or delusions were not my subject.

 >is well-documented. He had much more "love" (if you
>can call it that)

I persist in believing that human beings have human feelings and human
motives. Can't help it. That thing he did in 1612, moving his mother's
bones to Westminster, to a tomb opposite and as sumptuous as
Elizabeth's, was my idea of a clue.

>for the old lady who had her head. And that
>"Protestant" male king had a Catholic mother, and a Catholic Queen.

Okay, I obviously wasn't clear enough. My position is that
If-Paris-is-worth-a-mass-then-London-is-worth-a-Bible James was a
political Protestant and a personal Catholic. His choice was simple: Be
Protestant, be alive, be king of two countries, and your mother is a
murdering whore OR be Catholic, be de-throned, be dead, but your mother
is a martyred Queen. You choose.

>As
>well as a number of homosexual favorites on whom he made no scruple of
>doting publicly, before homosexuality was accorded its modern status in
>polite society.

Well, well, I guess history really is nothing more than old gossip
published in thick books.

Since James had children, who he giggled with meant what? Anger at the
preferential treatment received by his favorites came later and wouldn't
have been an issue in how he was perceived in the beginning, would it?

But interesting how you managed to drag it in.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.