Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2002 :: January ::
Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.0155  Wednesday, 23 January 2002

[1]     From:   Mike Jensen <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 22 Jan 2002 15:59:07 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 13.0145 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance

[2]     From:   David Evett <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 22 Jan 2002 20:57:47 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 13.0145 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Mike Jensen <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 22 Jan 2002 15:59:07 -0800
Subject: 13.0145 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance
Comment:        Re: SHK 13.0145 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance

Karen E. Peterson wrote,

>Many of us are reticent in standing up to bigotry, not to mention other
>moral offenses both major and minor, because we are afraid of being
>accused of acting "virtuous," or of simply seeming uncool.  I am guilty
>of this more often than I care to admit. Yes, Mike gets "excited" by
>bigoted statements.  "Excited" is not, perhaps, the right word.  I think
>that the term, and the intellectual/
>emotional response represented by
>the term "moral indignation" has suffered a bad rap in recent years.
>Some situations and statements deserve
<moral indignation as a response.
>Some -- not all -- of your statements, Mr. Weinstein, *in my opinion*
>fall into this classification.

Thank you, Karen, for coming to my defense.  Actually, though I am prone
to embarrassment and will do much to avoid it, I didn't mind Mr.
Weinstein's sarcasm.  From the haranguing he has recently brought on
himself, it is clear that not very many people are swayed by him.  I
hope that means that list members cut me a break, rather than nodding
their heads in agreement.

The truth is that I am willing to look foolish and endure the scorn of
others if it is in a good cause, and I consider not tolerating bigotry a
good cause.  If someone wants to sneer at me for this, they may.  I'll
wear it as a badge on honor.  An added dynamic is that I inadvertently
served to make them expose their own prejudices, and I take it as such.
Perhaps others do as well.

Still, I thank you for the kindly motion that led you to make the post
quoted above.  If I believed in heaven, I'd tell you that you are
storing treasure there.

All the best,
Mike Jensen

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           David Evett <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 22 Jan 2002 20:57:47 -0500
Subject: 13.0145 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance
Comment:        Re: SHK 13.0145 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance

In connection with several recent posts resisting negative stereotyping
of various kinds, let me recommend Natalie Angier's piece on the radical
social value of disinterested indignation in the Science section of
today's (22 Jan. '02) NYTimes.  Its relevance to the SHAKSPER thread
seems to me to be that the anthropological root of altruistic
indignation, according to the article, is socialized humans' eagerness
to insure that everybody gets a sufficient share of the available
resources.  People who claim a disproportionate share of the goodies on
the ground that who they are, not what they have done, entitles them to
it (e.g. hereditary aristocrats, the officers of the Enron Corporation,
cheats and sneaks and bullies and thieves of all kinds), get
legitimately trashed and bashed.  To exclude from their share of
opportunities to play Iago or Hamlet people who are fat or gay or
female-regardless of their other claims on these spoils-is to claim for
the slender or the straight an unfair portion.  It's a tough argument
for most slender straight male Americans or Western Europeans to
sustain, of course, given that we all get more than our share.  But that
doesn't invalidate it scientifically or politically.  Or theatrically.

David Evett

_______________________________________________________________
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.