The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.0221 Monday, 28 January 2002
[1] From: R. A. Cantrell <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Sunday, 27 Jan 2002 11:48:52 -0600
Subj: Re: SHK 13.0199 Re: Authorial Intention
[2] From: Mike Jensen <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Sunday, 27 Jan 2002 13:51:22 -0800
Subj: Re: SHK 13.0199 Re: Authorial Intention
[3] From: Don Bloom <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 28 Jan 2002 09:46:47 -0600
Subj: Re: SHK 13.0199 Re: Authorial Intention
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: R. A. Cantrell <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Sunday, 27 Jan 2002 11:48:52 -0600
Subject: 13.0199 Re: Authorial Intention
Comment: Re: SHK 13.0199 Re: Authorial Intention
> As always, it is Ben Jonson who provides us with the exemplary case in
> these matters. He never stopped writing about his work. The stuff in
> "Discoveries", "Conversations with Drummond", begging-letters, and the
> various prefaces, prologues and epilogues to the plays bring invaluable
> exegetical tools to interpreting those plays, but no one would be naive
> enough to take it all as gospel.
I think that the 1605 printing of Sejanus had extensive marginal notes
as well as the prefaces, pro and epi logues.
All the best,
R.A. Cantrell
<
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mike Jensen <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Sunday, 27 Jan 2002 13:51:22 -0800
Subject: 13.0199 Re: Authorial Intention
Comment: Re: SHK 13.0199 Re: Authorial Intention
Why does this discussion remind me of *The Prisoner* television series?
Back when the show was rebroadcast on one of our local PBS stations, the
hour was filled with what was called *The Prisoner rap session.* The
host had some very odd ideas about the show. Late in the process
someone dug up a television interview with the show's co-creator, star,
sometime writer/director, Patrick McGoohan. In it, McGoohan completely
contradicted everything the host had been saying for weeks.
The host's response was, "Well, that's just his opinion."
Mike Jensen
[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Don Bloom <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 28 Jan 2002 09:46:47 -0600
Subject: 13.0199 Re: Authorial Intention
Comment: Re: SHK 13.0199 Re: Authorial Intention
Brandon Toropov writes,
> . . . In plays premiering when S may not have lived in London (and
> thus been unable to attend rehearsals and clarify his intent), do others
> besides me notice an abundance of "spoken stage directions"? In other
> words, dialogue that cannot persuasively be delivered WITHOUT a given
> physical action taking place on stage, and that may be considered
> "direction from afar"?
I hate to be too nitpicky, but there seems to be a massive, ongoing
dispute amongst the foremost experts about the dates of Shakespeare's
plays and very little information about where he lived when. Have I
missed something major here?
A little worried,
don
_______________________________________________________________
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.
|
