The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 12.0923 Tuesday, 24 April 2001
From: Takashi Kozuka <
Date: Monday, 23 Apr 2001 21:15:23
Subject: Re: Historical Accuracy
R. A. Cantrell <
>...you might want to
>take more care in your expressions lest you confuse others,
>inadvertently or otherwise.
I sincerely hope I didn't confuse anyone on here. But if it was my
fault, and if I did confuse other SHAKSPEReans, I do apologize.
(This is nothing to do with Shakespeare, but) I wonder why R. A.
Cantrell didn't e-mail me this message personally/directly, instead of
criticizing me publicly. Once in a while I receive personal e-mails from
some other SHAKSPEReans, and I always appreciate their sensitivity.
Cantrell's posting is something these SHAKSPEReans would have e-mail me
I don't mind being challenged in public, as it happens all the time in
the academic world. I'm just pointing out the fact that *some*
SHAKSPEReans are not sensitive (compared to members on another online
discussion group I'm subscribing to) and that some other SHAKSPEReans
thus consider unsubscribing. This issue seems to come back again and
again; I remember Hardy decided to post a message from another SHAKSPER
on this issue. I think it's a shame...
There was another posting on here in which a SHAKSPER complained that on
another discussion group he/she didn't get sufficient responses to
his/her enquiries about the 'Thomas's. I think I should take this
opportunity to defend the discussion group in question. The fact is many
members did respond. Unfortunately, these replies didn't directly answer
his/her question. But I must say that it was due to the nature of
We always have a writer and a reader, and they often don't interpret one
and the same sentence in the same way... vita numquam est facilis...
With apologies to those whom my previous posting may have confused,
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook,
The S H A K S P E R Webpage <http://ws.bowiestate.edu>