Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2001 :: March ::
Re: Tempest Reference
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 12.0562  Friday, 9 March 2001

[1]     From:   Melissa D. Aaron <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 08 Mar 2001 13:04:27 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0550 Re: Tempest Reference

[2]     From:   Karen Peterson-Kranz <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 8 Mar 2001 14:09:37 -0800 (PST)
        Subj:   SHK 12.0550 Re: Kermode (Tempest Reference)


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Melissa D. Aaron <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 08 Mar 2001 13:04:27 -0800
Subject: 12.0550 Re: Tempest Reference
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.0550 Re: Tempest Reference

>Judy Craig <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 > writes:
>
>>What I personally found interesting about the lecture was his admission
>>that he was an aging radical and as such felt qualified to comment on
>>some of the stances taken by modern radicals.
>
>I was not present at Kermode's lecture. I'm curious on what ground (or
>in what sense) he considered/s himself a "radical". Is he a "radical"
>because he challenges "modern radicals"? <snip> I'm just curious on what
>ground Kermode
>said he was a "radical".
>Takashi Kozuka

It is easy to recognize a radical.

They are the ones with roots instead of feet. (radix=L. feet)

M. Aaron

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Karen Peterson-Kranz <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 8 Mar 2001 14:09:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Kermode (Tempest Reference)
Comment:        SHK 12.0550 Re: Kermode (Tempest Reference)

Takashi Kozuka writes:

> I was not present at Kermode's lecture. I'm curious
> on what ground (or
> in what sense) he considered/s himself a "radical".
> Is he a "radical"
> because he challenges "modern radicals"? When his
> book Shakespeare's
> Language came out last year, some reviewers
> considered him conservative
> rather than "radical". (The definition of "radical"
> can be another issue
> here...)

I wasn't at Kermode's lecture either, so perhaps I should have waited
for those who were there to respond to this.  But ignorance has never
stopped me before; why start now?

Mr. Kozuka quite rightly identifies the definition of "radical" as a key
issue.  It is quite possible to be a "radical conservative."  I am not
sure whether Ms.  Craig was quoting or paraphrasing Kermode when she
reported that he "admitted that he was an aging radical."  "Aging
radical" usually has "leftist" connotations, although how critical or
theoretical discourses might fit into a "left-right" dichotomy is
anyone's guess.

Again, IF Kermode actually used these words, he might also have been
using the phrase with self-conscious irony to highlight a different (and
perhaps non-political) sense of his own "radical" critical practice.  I
speculate, but PERHAPS he was thinking of "radical" criticism being
concerned more with uprooting the fundamental assumptions of
interpretation (both past and present), subjecting those assumptions to
scrutiny, and then retaining only those which seem useful and
productive.

I do hope that those listmembers who were at the Kermode lecture in
question can shed more authoritative light on this matter.

Cheers,
Karen E. Peterson
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.