Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2001 :: August ::
Re: Funeral Elegy
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 12.1978  Monday, 13 August 2001

[1]     From:   Vick Bennison <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 10 Aug 2001 10:29:33 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.1975 Re: Funeral Elegy

[2]     From:   Mike Jensen <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 10 Aug 2001 08:04:49 -0700
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.1975 Re: Funeral Elegy

[3]     From:   Takashi Kozuka <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Saturday, 11 Aug 2001 08:57:05
        Subj:   Funerall Elegye

[4]     From:   B. Vickers <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 13 Aug 2001 12:17:17 +0200
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.1975 Re: Funeral Elegy


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Vick Bennison <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 10 Aug 2001 10:29:33 EDT
Subject: 12.1975 Re: Funeral Elegy
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.1975 Re: Funeral Elegy

>>but it's only a game set out to show that if the
>>Funeral Elegy was written by Shakespeare in the year
>>he wrote the Tempest, the man had so severely fallen
>>off his genius that his work can't be told apart from
>>John Ford's early elegiac verse or the scratchings of
>>a 21st century hack poet.

If this "game" "show"s Shakespeare didn't write the elegy, then similar
games could be used to show that Shakespeare didn't write a great deal
of what Shakespeare definitely did write.  That's why I say it's
pointless.  In truth, it's, at heart, propaganda wrapt in a game's
skin.  And how joyfully the anti-Don-Fosterites dance around it.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Mike Jensen <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 10 Aug 2001 08:04:49 -0700
Subject: 12.1975 Re: Funeral Elegy
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.1975 Re: Funeral Elegy

Mr. Kennedy's "exercise" fails to address any of the evidence Donald
Foster presents in his book, thus it fails to demonstrate that *The
Funeral Elegy* is not by William Shakespeare.  Perhaps Mr. Kennedy is
not capable of answering Foster's evidence as presented?

I'm not.  I do not think the elegy is Shakespeare's.  It feels wrong,
but I don't usually make that statement in a public forum because my
"feeling" is subjective and may be wrong.  I am not able to answer
Foster's points.  Since I know my limitation, I stay aware of Foster's
reasons and wait to learn something new.

Mr. Kennedy has failed to meaningfully engage Foster.

Mike Jensen

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Takashi Kozuka <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Saturday, 11 Aug 2001 08:57:05
Subject:        Funerall Elegye

Since there has been a thread about "Funerall Elegye", I thought the
following information might be of your interest.

About a month ago I informed you of Brian Vickers' review of Author
Unknown by Don Foster in the TLS, in which Vickers mentioned very
briefly that "three independent studies" would be published claiming the
"Funerall Elegye" to be the work of John Ford, not Shakespeare. In the
recent issue (10 August) of the TLC Vickers identifies these three
studies:

- Brian Vickers, Counterfeiting Shakespeare: Evidence, Authorship and
Jon Ford's "Funerall Elegye" (CUP, next spring)

- an essay by Ward Elliott and Robert Valenza in Literary and Linguistic
Computing 3:3 (fall 2001)

- an essay by Gilles D. Monsarrat in Review of English Studies 53:210
(May 2002)

Vickers proclaims that "[b]etween them they put the issue dispute". I'm
curious how the later editions of the Bevington, the Norton and the
Riverside will handle the poem. (By the way, my Riverside lacks the
decorated "F" at the beginning of the introduction to the poem (p.
1893).  Did the ghost of Shakespeare remove it because the poem is not
his work?)

Off to the Shakespeare Institute Library,
Takashi Kozuka

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           B. Vickers <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 13 Aug 2001 12:17:17 +0200
Subject: 12.1975 Re: Funeral Elegy
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.1975 Re: Funeral Elegy

A propos Richard Kennedy's practical criticism exercise, the TLS of 10
August (p. 15) carried the following letter from me:

"Sir, - In my review of Don Foster's 'Author Unknown: On the Trail of
the Anonymous' (July 6), I mentioned that three independent studies will
be published shortly identifying the 'Funerall Elegye' as the work of
John Ford, not Shakespeare. Since some of your readers have requested
details, it may be of general interest to record them. They are: my
book, 'Counterfeiting Shakespeare: Evidence, authorship, and John Ford's
'Funerall Elegye", to be published by Cambridge University Press next
spring; an essay by Ward Elliott and Robert Valenza in 'Literary and
Linguistic Computing', Volume Sixteen, no 3 (autumn 2001); and an essay
by Gilles D. Monsarrat in 'Review of English Studies', Volume
Fifty-three, no 210 (May 2002). Between them they put the issue beyond
dispute."

Brian Vickers

_______________________________________________________________
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.
 

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.