October
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.2131 Friday, 25 October 2002 [1] From: Frank Whigham <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 10:10:28 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 13.2128 Re: More about "Julius Caesar" [2] From: Roger Schmeeckle <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 09:08:57 -0700 (PDT) Subj: Re: SHK 13.2128 Re: More about "Julius Caesar" [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Frank Whigham <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 10:10:28 -0500 Subject: 13.2128 Re: More about "Julius Caesar" Comment: Re: SHK 13.2128 Re: More about "Julius Caesar" >Are there any parallels in Caesar with Elizabeth (clearly approaching >the end of her reign in 1598-99) and the Essex Rebellion? FYI, cf. Rebhorn, Wayne A. "The Crisis of the Aristocracy in Julius Caesar." Renaissance Quarterly. 43(1):75-111. 1990 Spring. Frank Whigham [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Roger Schmeeckle <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 09:08:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 13.2128 Re: More about "Julius Caesar" Comment: Re: SHK 13.2128 Re: More about "Julius Caesar" Brian Willis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > writes, >is Cassius playing upon Casca's superstition and Brutus's honor to win >them into the conspiracy, or Shakespeare's use of Antony to make us >believe Brutus is (not) an "honorable" man only to declare him the >noblest Roman of them all at the end of the play. It has long been my personal interpretation that the final lines were meant sarcastically, the implication that none of the Romans were very noble. The "noblest" was an assassin of his benefactor and patron. I am curious whether others have so interpreted the play. I noticed in Norton that there is a controversial line about Caesar, "Caesar never does wrong, except by just cause," the last four lines omitted in the Folio, but presumably spoken by the actors, since Jonson so quoted them. That contradiction would emphasize a critical attitude towards Caesar as intended. Roger Schmeeckle _______________________________________________________________ S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List Hardy M. Cook,This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net> 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.2130 Friday, 25 October 2002 [1] From: Claude Caspar <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 10:40:39 -0400 Subj: Re: SHK 13.2126 Re: Haunted by the Ghost in Hamlet [2] From: John W. Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 12:01:47 -0400 Subj: Re: SHK 13.2126 Re: Haunted by the Ghost in Hamlet [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Claude Caspar <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 10:40:39 -0400 Subject: 13.2126 Re: Haunted by the Ghost in Hamlet Comment: Re: SHK 13.2126 Re: Haunted by the Ghost in Hamlet I had a thought, though that perhaps mischaracterizes it- just a wisp of understanding, a velleity. Gertrude doesn't see the ghost because she has become thoughtless, up until this scene, not recollecting, not "remembering." The ghost is there, but not seen until invoked, it is an interactive experience. Even the first soldiers "knew" him, had not forgot his deeds- he was not unknown. Just as Hamlet gets through to her, the ghost departs -- he no longer needs to return, but if he had, then, perhaps, Gertrude would experience the phenomena because now she has him in mind, has kept a place for him to return. The person who most vividly remembers, who can't forget, even forget in order to recall, is Hamlet- he is, in this sense, haunted. And, those interested should see Garber's "Shakespeare's Ghost Writers." [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: John W. Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 12:01:47 -0400 Subject: 13.2126 Re: Haunted by the Ghost in Hamlet Comment: Re: SHK 13.2126 Re: Haunted by the Ghost in Hamlet David Bishop <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > writes, >Critics who blow up the ghost's >daytime abode into a contentiously doctrinal Purgatory seem to me to >misrepresent the play. "Contentiously doctrinal", yes; for it's departing from the subject after the manner of the bardolators who see a whole constitutional doctrine in "I will make a Star-Chamber matter of it." Nevertheless, it clearly _is_ Purgatory, enough to show (if his profession did not already) that the playwright is no puritan. One wonders whether Shakespeare would not have agreed with C. S. Lewis, who was once taken to task for saying that he believed in Purgatory, when Article XXII of the 39 Articles reads: OF PURGATORY The Romish doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Worshipping and Adoration as well of Images as of Reliques, and also invocation of Saints, is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God. "But," said Lewis, "not the Romish doctrine." _______________________________________________________________ S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List Hardy M. Cook,This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net> 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.2129 Friday, 25 October 2002 [1] From: Kenneth Rothwell <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 10:19:16 -0400 Subj: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew [2] From: Hugh Davis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 10:35:24 -0400 Subj: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew [3] From: R. Schmeeckle <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 08:52:38 -0700 (PDT) Subj: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew [4] From: Stephen Buhler <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 10:56:34 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew [5] From: Matthew Henerson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 12:36:57 EDT Subj: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew [6] From: Jay Louden <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 09:46:33 -0700 Subj: RE: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew [7] From: Katy Stavreva <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 12:18:48 -0500 Subj: RE: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew [8] From: William Babula <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 11:03:18 -0700 Subj: RE: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew [9] From: Richard Burt <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 15:41:29 -0400 Subj: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kenneth Rothwell <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 10:19:16 -0400 Subject: 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Comment: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Dear Michael Luskin, From the brief description given, the Taming of the Shrew you are looking for sounds like the 1976 American Conservatory Theatre production, directed by William Ball. For complete details, see Rothwell and Melzer, Shakespeare on Screen: An International Filmography. New York: Neal-Schuman, 1990, Item 602. The book was compiled to answer just such questions as this one but apparently many libraries do not own a copy. All the best, Ken Rothwell [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hugh Davis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 10:35:24 -0400 Subject: 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Comment: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew This *sounds* like the commedia dell'arte version of Shrew from the early 1980s by the San Francisco Repertory Company. It aired on PBS, perhaps on Great Performances? Marc Singer (later star of V and Beastmaster) starred, and I recall Harry Hamlin (later star of Clash of the Titans and LA Law) was a player. I don't believe it's available commercially. Hugh Davis [3]------------------------------------------------------------- From: R. Schmeeckle <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 08:52:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Comment: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew >It was filmed in front of a live audience. The scenery was sparse. It >was quite slapstick, and, after almost every line, there would be a >short drum or other instrument comment. It was FUNNY, and I would like >to use it to introduce a class of thirteen year olds to Shakespeare, if >only I could find out what it was. It sounds like a production by a San Francisco group that I used myself with high school seniors in the 70's and 80's. It was excellent for introducing Shakespeare, because it proved immediately that Shakespeare could be fun. It was treated as a farce, which, horror the claim, I believe to have been S's intention. Wish I could be more specific. Roger Schmeeckle [4]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stephen Buhler <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 10:56:34 -0500 Subject: 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Comment: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Michael Luskin is very likely thinking of the Public Broadcasting System's 1976 version of *The Taming of the Shrew*, which captured a performance from William Ball's American Conservatory Theatre production. Ball freely borrowed from the traditions of commedia dell'arte and made the synthesis work engagingly well. For decades this staging was very difficult to track down, but in recent years a commercial-release VHS version has been available. I know, for example, that Tanya Gough carries it as part of her Poor Yorick catalog at www.bardcentral.com. By the way, the Shenandoah Shakespeare Express's Brave New World staging of the play, currently on tour, includes some delightful echoes of the Ball production and adds interesting and involving dimensions of its own. The tour also includes a bracingly clear and tough-minded *Coriolanus*. For more information about these shows, visit the Shenandoah Shakespeare site at ishakespeare.com. Regards, Stephen Buhler [5]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Matthew Henerson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 12:36:57 EDT Subject: 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Comment: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew That's almost certainly Bill Ball's American Conservatory Theatre production from the mid 70's. It's available from Broadway Archives (www.broadwayarchives.com, I think.) It's also in circulation in the Los Angeles City library system. Matthew HenersonThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. [6]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jay Louden <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 09:46:33 -0700 Subject: 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Comment: RE: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew The production you are thinking of may be William Ball's ACT production from the early 1970's. It starred Marc Singer (Beastmaster) and was done as a Commedia delle'Arte piece. It was athletic and very well done and almost made the 'troubling' aspects of the play palatable. It was shown on Masterpiece Theatre or Great Performances. I'm not sure where you could find a copy now. My copy is very old and cuts out in the middle. Jay Louden [7]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Katy Stavreva <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 12:18:48 -0500 Subject: 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Comment: RE: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Sounds like the production of the American Conservatory Theatre of San Francisco--available from the Broadway Theatre Archive--www.BroadwayArchive.com, 1-800-422-2827. GREAT show, indeed! Best! Katy [8]------------------------------------------------------------- From: William Babula <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 11:03:18 -0700 Subject: 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Comment: RE: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew I think it sounds like the A.C.T. of San Francisco production directed by William Ball which was shown on TV quite some time ago. [9]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard Burt <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 24 Oct 2002 15:41:29 -0400 Subject: 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Comment: Re: SHK 13.2124 Production of Taming of Shrew Sounds like the ACT production (from San Francisco). It's on video. _______________________________________________________________ S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List Hardy M. Cook,This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net> 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.2128 Thursday, 24 October 2002 From: Brian Willis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 23 Oct 2002 11:29:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 13.2121 Re: More about "Julius Caesar" Comment: Re: SHK 13.2121 Re: More about "Julius Caesar" Are there any parallels in Caesar with Elizabeth (clearly approaching the end of her reign in 1598-99) and the Essex Rebellion? What if Caesar was an exploration of revolution and the consequences of it? Shakespeare's company has been linked with Essex before (and with the notorious performance of Richard II). Is Brutus a portrayal of Essex? Is Elizabeth Caesar, a physically impaired aging monarch who is nevertheless a strong ruler (and perhaps neither too overbearing nor sympathetic)? I think there is a lot more going on here than "is Caesar good or bad". The four largest characters pull on our sympathies in many directions at different times. At different moments in the play, I find sympathy or scorn for Caesar, Brutus, Cassius, and Antony. As far as the depiction within the play, it is vitally important to remember that Shakespeare distances us from Caesar at many points, not the least of which is his decision to depict the offering of the crown to Caesar and the seizure offstage and through the interpretation of Casca. His sardonic reporting is meant to make us distrust many things about the play. But we neither loathe Caesar for how he manipulates the crowd nor do we feel sympathy for him because of his seizures (which would have been a spectacular piece of acting). The depiction is satirical, and quite funny as Brutus and Cassius comment upon it. Throughout the play, we are told by Cassius, Casca, and others about Caesar's actions and deeds until, like Brutus, we are convinced that it is best to act against him. What do we get when the assassination takes place? A statement of power and resolution from Caesar, and sympathy. We are most let into Caesar's character just before he dies, in his scene with Calphurnia and with his wounded, though now cliched, final words. Antony is very carefully placed to gain our sympathy through his actions and his dominance in Act III, and then he too fades into the background when we see him pricking his enemies into the legions of death. Like the plebians of the play, we are manipulated into believing what Shakespeare would have us feel. The play is much more complicated than we have been led to believe. It is about who is manipulating whom and when, and how those manipulations and sympathies shift from scene to scene, whether it is Cassius playing upon Casca's superstition and Brutus's honor to win them into the conspiracy, or Shakespeare's use of Antony to make us believe Brutus is (not) an "honorable" man only to declare him the noblest Roman of them all at the end of the play. Brian Willis _______________________________________________________________ S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List Hardy M. Cook,This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net> 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.2127 Thursday, 24 October 2002 From: Stuart Manger <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 23 Oct 2002 17:32:37 +0100 Subject: Desdemona I have a series of queries from my Y11 (16 yr olds) on Othello: obviously I have opinions on her, but the class, being 16, don't necessarily want or be seen to believe what teacher tells them and would like 'serious (their specific phrase) academics' on the net to produce some useful stuff: huh! talk of prophets in own country. [a] is Desdemona at least partially - some argued totally