Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2001 :: December ::
Re: 3 Henry VI
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 12.2744  Wednesday, 5 December 2001

[1]     From:   Marcus Dahl <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 4 Dec 2001 12:25:48 EST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.2728 Re: 3 Henry VI

[2]     From:   John Briggs <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 5 Dec 2001 09:18:54 -0000
        Subj:   RE: SHK 12.2728 Re: 3 Henry VI


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Marcus Dahl <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 4 Dec 2001 12:25:48 EST
Subject: 12.2728 Re: 3 Henry VI
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.2728 Re: 3 Henry VI

Today I finally managed to get my hands on the Cox/ Rasmussen 3HVI. I
will withhold any detailed comment except to say that on brief perusal I
am impressed with its modesty and vaguely cautious textual analysis. I
think it is revealing of our modern fear of demarcation that the new
edition along with most recent editions of any play in the Henry Sixth
sequence has scrupulously avoided one clear line of textual argument. I
am however very glad to see that after long absence Joseph Moxon has
re-emerged into the light of modern editorial reading. I was also
impressed that finally some modern editors have bothered to check
spelling and editorial variation between Hall and Q / F variants rather
than merely following Bullough - in this edition to good effect! Lastly
it seems to me rather a shame that discussion of linguistic analysis for
authorial attribution was only
consigned a paragraph in the edition -being rejected questionably by a
reference to a passe french philo-sophist of the sixties school.

More anon!

Marcus

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           John Briggs <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 5 Dec 2001 09:18:54 -0000
Subject: 12.2728 Re: 3 Henry VI
Comment:        RE: SHK 12.2728 Re: 3 Henry VI

Mike Jensen wrote,

>I would hardly describe someone of John Cox learning and even-handedness
>as *hapless.*

I am sure that Mike Jensen is absolutely correct, and I would certainly
not wish to describe Professor Cox as "hapless" in general.  But I was
writing (and not entirely seriously) about the situation of Cox &
Rasmussen and Martin publishing rival editions of the same play
simultaneously, and specifically about their respective positions on
"date, sequence, authorship".  Cox & Rasmussen have adopted a perfectly
academically respectable position, and could reasonably have expected to
receive, at worst, polite applause.  Instead, Professor Martin has
unexpectedly adopted a definite view, and stated his conclusions with
such clarity that even I was able to summarise them with tolerable
accuracy!  (There are probably subtleties in the Cox & Rasmussen
position which still elude me.)  The primary meaning of hapless is
"unlucky", and Cox & Rasmussen will have every right to feel aggrieved
that circumstances have placed them in what will inevitably be seen as a
defensive position.

John Briggs

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
The S H A K S P E R Webpage <http://ws.bowiestate.edu>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.