The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.1312  Thursday, 29 June 2000.

[1]     From:   Ed Taft <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 28 Jun 2000 10:53:13 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Shakespeare and the Bible

[2]     From:   Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 28 Jun 2000 08:19:07 -0700
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.1304 Re: Shakespeare as Bible

[3]     From:   Mike Jensen <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 28 Jun 2000 08:38:44 -0700
        Subj:   SHK 11.1304 Re: Shakespeare as Bible

[4]     From:   Sam Small <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 28 Jun 2000 21:49:02 +0100
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.1295 Re: Shakespeare as Bible

[5]     From:   Florence Amit <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 29 Jun 2000 08:32:32 +0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.1304 Re: Shakespeare as Bible


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Ed Taft <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 28 Jun 2000 10:53:13 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:        Shakespeare and the Bible

Abigail Quart needs to know that Ian Munro is innocent!  The guilty
party -- the one responsible for asking, "Why are we wallowing in
William's works -- is none other than Terence Hawkes. Own up to it,
Terry.

--Ed Taft

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 28 Jun 2000 08:19:07 -0700
Subject: 11.1304 Re: Shakespeare as Bible
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.1304 Re: Shakespeare as Bible

Philip Tomposki writes:

> I am often amused, and sometimes appalled, when I hear or read
> "Shakespeare said..." , since we do not really know if then words
> written for a character reflect his own beliefs and sentiments.
> Shakespeare as Bible is a dangerous concept.  Shakespeare as literature
> is quite sufficient.

Again, this depends not only on taking the canon as scripture, but also
assuming a fundamentalist/literalist hermeneutic.  It's not much more
dangerous than quoting "the Bible says" out of all historical and even
linguistic context.  Mike Jensen circulated to me (off list) a set of
questions for a Biblical literalist that nicely illustrate this point:
since the Scriptures allow one to sell daughters, what's a good asking
price?  since they allow one to make slaves of neighbouring peoples,
does this include Canadians (if you're American--I would have to reverse
the logic and ask whether we can enslave Americans)?  and so forth.

Cheers,
Se