Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2002 :: September ::
Re: James and Superstitions
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.1974  Wednesday, 25 September 2002

[1]     From:   Martin Steward <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 25 Sep 2002 09:12:55 +0100
        Subj:   SHK 13.1953 Re: James and Superstitions

[2]     From:   Michael Shurgot <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 24 Sep 2002 16:15:51 -0700
        Subj:   RE: SHK 13.1953 Re: James and Superstitions


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Martin Steward <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 25 Sep 2002 09:12:55 +0100
Subject: Re: James and Superstitions
Comment:        SHK 13.1953 Re: James and Superstitions

"If Prynne could have had his face branded and his ears cut off for
insulting James's queen simply by calling women who act in stage plays
whores, any obvious insults to James would have been suicidal..."

The reference to "women actors, notorious whores" appears in the index
of William Prynne's massive diatibe, Histriomastix, or the Players
Scourge...; the book was published in 1633 and the woman insulted is not
James's Queen but Charles's, Henrietta Maria.

m

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Michael Shurgot <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 24 Sep 2002 16:15:51 -0700
Subject: 13.1953 Re: James and Superstitions
Comment:        RE: SHK 13.1953 Re: James and Superstitions

Dear Colleagues:

Why not include in Prof. Stetner's list King Lear? Whither
kingship--i.e., a king's sense of his absolute power, to the point of
self-destructive arrogance and revenge that he sees as "justified"--in
this play? Alvin Kernan addresses this point well in his book on the
Jacobean Shakespeare and the Court of James--sorry, can't recall the
exact title--but would not a list of plays establishing problematic
views of kings and kingships, especially an absolute idea of unlimited,
irreproachable power, have to include Lear?

Regards,
Michael Shurgot

_______________________________________________________________
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 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.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.