2003

"Aiming for Shakespeare"--NY Times Story on Kingpin

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0181  Monday, 3 Feburary 2003

From:           Richard Burt <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Sunday, 02 Feb 2003 09:39:00 -0500
Subject:        "Aiming for Shakespeare"--NY Times Story on Kingpin

February 2, 2003

Aiming for Shakespeare (if Not 'The Sopranos')
By HAL HINSON
URBANK, Calif.

WHEN David Simon learned that his friend David Mills, the creator and
executive producer of the new NBC series "Kingpin," had pitched the show
to the network as "Macbeth" set in a Mexican drug cartel - even though
Mr. Mills had never read a word of the play - he wasn't surprised.

"David Mills is absolute and definitive proof," Mr. Simon said, "that
the benefits of a classical education have nothing to do with great
writing."
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/02/arts/television/02HINS.html?ei=1&en=7c92151ad82d7ff9&ex=1045194643&pagewanted=print&position=top

_______________________________________________________________
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.

New Ejournal on the Interdisciplinary Study of

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0180  Monday, 3 Feburary 2003

From:           Bryon Grigsby <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Saturday, 1 Feb 2003 21:04:06 -0500
Subject:        New Ejournal on the Interdisciplinary Study of Medicine

Dear Shakespeare Electronic Conference:

Medica: The Society for the Study of Health and Healing in the Middle
Ages and Early Modern Periods is proud to announce a new ejournal
available on the web.  This journal has both a pre-prints sections, like
some journals in the sciences, and a peer-reviewed section, and it is
currently accepting submissions.  Submissions may be on any subject
matter of medieval medicine, health, or healing as well as the
interrelationships between disciplines, such as medieval medicine and
literature, law, politics, or religion. You can find submission
guidelines and other information at
http://faculty.centenarycollege.edu/medica/   We look forward to hearing
from you.

Best,
Bryon Grigsby
President of Medica

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Re: Shylock Redux

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0178  Monday, 3 Feburary 2003

[1]     From:   Don Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 31 Jan 2003 09:45:10 -0600
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.0172 Re: Shylock Redux

[2]     From:   Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 31 Jan 2003 13:01:58 -0400
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.0172 Re: Shylock Redux


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Don Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 31 Jan 2003 09:45:10 -0600
Subject: 14.0172 Re: Shylock Redux
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0172 Re: Shylock Redux

All right. I lied. I DO have another minor point to make.

Can we please get away from Venetian law, Elizabethan law, canon law,
Jewish law, modern law, and any other kind? The only law that exists in
MOV is that which is stated, and which is thus created by the fevered
brain of WS.

The contract appears to be valid until overturned by the disguised
Portia.  That's THE PLAY. Legalisms that might have informed S's
thoughts while he was concocting MOV can be interesting, but cannot be
determinative. Venice is no more real than the sea coast of Bohemia.

Cheers,
don

PS. Before somebody pounces, I mean by "Venice is no more real than the
sea coast of Bohemia" that it belong to the same Never-Never-Land that
most of the comedies exist in, whether set in the Forest of Arden or
Athens or Illyria. Shrewsbury, by contrast, is a real place where a real
battle was fought during which Prince Hal led a royal army against
rebellious Percies. d.a.b.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 31 Jan 2003 13:01:58 -0400
Subject: 14.0172 Re: Shylock Redux
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0172 Re: Shylock Redux

John W. Kennedy writes that

>Well, it's a nice philosophical point, but it does not reflect the
>reality of law.  On the one hand, a gentile government would pay very
>little attention to Jewish law.  (I would say "none", except that, for
>all I know, an enlightened judge might have taken Jewish law into
>consideration when dealing with a contractual dispute between two Jews
>-- it if came before him in the first place.)  And, on the other hand,
>except for certain "not even if they threaten you with death" religious
>points, Jewish law in the Diaspora traditionally defers to the law of
>the state.

Maybe, but the conflict might not be between Jewish law as such and
Venetian law, but between a law code applying to Jews and another to
Venetians.  The judge would hardly have to be respectful in order to see
the local Jewish community as not Venetian, and therefore not subject to
the norms of a law code which governs relations between Venetians.
Shylock is, after all, held by a law applying specifically to aliens.

Instead of imagining a self-governing Jewish ghetto following Talmudic
law, we might want to imagine a situation a bit like South Africa under
apartheid, or Canada under more extreme interpretations of the original
Indian Act, in which there are separate systems of law for members of
different races.  The question then obtains as to whether relations
between these communities would be governed by a single code of law, or
whether relations between them would be strictly contractual and
therefore whether a conflict between the demands of the contract and of
the law code would negate the former.

In response to Martin's point, I'm not sure if systems of civil or
natural law would bridge the two communities.  Shylock is, as I
mentioned, an alien, which I'd take to be the opposite of a civic
citizen.  Human rights are, as I understand it, one of the last vestiges
of natural law, and as you said yourself only a couple of days ago,
human rights are often said to flow from God, so even they might not
extend automatically to members of a different religion.  Rather than
seeing the Jewish community as also human, and therefore also endowed by
their creator with certain inalienable rights, could the Venetians just
have seen them as an alien community, needing to be somehow controlled
and contained, but with which deals have to be made occasionally?

Yours,
Sean.

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Julius Caesar's Protagonist

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0179  Monday, 3 Feburary 2003

From:           Jeff Barker <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 31 Jan 2003 11:06:08 -0600
Subject:        Julius Caesar's Protagonist

I'm having a friendly discussion with a colleague in the English
department (I'm in theatre) about the protagonist in Julius Caesar.

Who's your vote for protagonist in that play?  Julius seems a likely
choice.  Anybody for Brutus?

Jeff Barker
Northwestern College

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Re: Claudius' Incestuous Marriage

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0177  Monday, 3 Feburary 2003

[1]     From:   Carol Cole <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 31 Jan 2003 10:43:03 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.0173 Re: Claudius' Incestuous Marriage

[2]     From:   H. David Friedberg <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Sunday, 02 Feb 2003 21:14:14 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.0173 Re: Claudius' Incestuous Marriage

[3]     From:   H. David Friedberg <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Sunday, 02 Feb 2003 21:35:33 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.0166 Re: Claudius' Incestuous Marriage


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Carol Cole <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 31 Jan 2003 10:43:03 -0500
Subject: 14.0173 Re: Claudius' Incestuous Marriage
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0173 Re: Claudius' Incestuous Marriage

Michael B. Luskin wrote:

>>Claudius did MORE than "dishonor his brother...

>Recall Abigail and her no-account husband, Naval, whom David shames to
>death.  And, in addition, she keeps him from a blood-guilt.  There is
>soot on David for what he did.

A few clarifications:  Abigail's husband was Nabal, not Naval, and David
did not shame him to death.  Abigail provided food to David's men after
Nabal churlishly refused, and her action forestalled David taking
revenge against Nabal.  Afterward, as related in I Samuel 25:37-38
(KJV):  "it came to pass in the morning, when the wine was gone out of
Nabal, and his wife had told him these things, that his heart died
within him, and he became as a stone.  And it came to pass about ten
days after, that the LORD smote Nabal, that he died."  There is no
suggestion that David was wrong to seek revenge or to marry Abigail or
that he was responsible for Nabal's death.  Bathsheba and Uriah are
another matter; that was clearly adultery and murder, and David is held
to account.

Best,
Carol

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           H. David Friedberg <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Sunday, 02 Feb 2003 21:14:14 -0500
Subject: 14.0173 Re: Claudius' Incestuous Marriage
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0173 Re: Claudius' Incestuous Marriage

Michael B. Luskin <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.> wrote,

>Recall Abigail and her no-account husband, Naval, whom David shames to
>death.  And, in addition, she keeps him from a blood-guilt.  There is
>soot on David for what he did.

I recall Nabal, described in the Scriptures as a boor by name and a boor
by nature  All David did was to tell Abishag (not Abigail) to wait
awhile because Nabal would surely have a coronary at the next feast, and
then they could make whoopee  And so it came to pass,

"The Lord smote Nabal and his heart stopped within him.  Ten days later
the Lord smote him again  so that he died."

 I am quoting from memory but this is the earliest account of a Morgagni
Adams Syncope on record The moral is not to doubt a doctor called David

>All Jewish oriented attempts to whitewash Claudius, whether one uses the
>Torah, the histories, Talmud, or commentaries are doomed.

Not so. The source of these attempts is to be found in the War of
Independence 1948, when the Israeli camp at Kfar Tsorfattit or Fench
Hill in their coded messages referred to Yasser Arafat as Claudius .
The Palestinians whose counterintelligence was limited to cooking
explosives in the bathtub, misread it as a reference to a Danish
counterrevolutionary

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           H. David Friedberg <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Sunday, 02 Feb 2003 21:35:33 -0500
Subject: 14.0166 Re: Claudius' Incestuous Marriage
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0166 Re: Claudius' Incestuous Marriage

John W. Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.> writes,

>>David Friedberg <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.> writes,
>
>>>Christianity has never accepted the Levirate Law (as it is known).  For
>>>that matter, it has customarily been discouraged within Judaism for a
>>>very long time.
>
>> Not so>
>To quote from the on-line version of the Jewish Encyclopedia:
>(Diacritics deleted, as they require full Unicode support.)
>
>      By Talmudic times the practise of levirate marriage was
>      deemed objectionable (Bek. 13a), and was followed as a
>      matter of duty only.  To  marry a brother's widow for her
>      beauty was regarded by Abba Saul as equivalent to incest
>      (Yeb. 39b). Bar Kappara recommends halizah (Yeb. 109a). A
>      difference of opinion appears among the later authorities,
>      Alfasi, Maimonides, and the Spanish school generally
>      upholding the custom, while R. Tam and the Northern school
>      prefer halizah (Shulhan 'Aruk, Eben ha-'Ezer, 165).
>
>Halizah being the shoe-throwing ritual.

John I will agree with you that a forced ritual marriage, a ritual
insemination and a shoe throwing ritual is definitely a thing of the
bygone past.

Blackmail to prevent an ex sister in laws remarriage being recognized as
I described does still happen from time to time

BTW, Judaism is not the kind of religion where an encyclopedic entry can
be regarded as authoritative

>David Friedberg writes, "Dear Colleagues [sic] My rather light hearted
>comment drew a virtual avalanche of replies, all of which I have read
>with delight [sic] Claudius certainly did dishonor his brother...You and
>I as men of the world may be quite sure that Gertrude bedded both
>brothers during Hamlet's lifetime, but the text maddenly does not fully
>confirm this. We only have the word of the Ghost, and his nature is
>always in doubt [sic]"
>
>Excuse me, Sir.  But Claudius did MORE than "dishonor his brother." In
>the realm of the ten commandments, he leaned more heavily on that one
>that ONE "shalt NOT kill [i.e., the husband of your future wife, Exodus,
>C 20, V 13]."  And that one that ONE "shalt NOT steal [i.e., the throne
>of a rightful King, Exodus, C 20, V 15]."  Nor that one that ONE "shalt
>NOT bear false witness against thy neighbour [i.e., the rightful heir to
>the throne, Prince Hamlet, Exodus, C 20, V 16]." I will leave it to
>others to explicate the relevance of Exodus, C 20, Vs. 14 and 17]."
>
>And is it not equally as glib, or "light hearted" as you put it, to
>suggest that in the play Hamlet by Will Shakespeare, "We only have the
>word of the Ghost, and his nature is always in doubt [sic]"
>
>Surely, you jest, Sir?  Consult my remarks in the SHAKSPER archives on
>the "nature" of the ghost of the MURDERED brother, the USURPED throne,
>and the FALSE WITNESS against the rightful and Good Prince!
>
>Bill Arnold
> http://www.cwru.edu/affil/edis/scholars/arnold.htm

Bill Arnold sends a blast a of bitter black bile from Palm Beach across
Florida to Sarasota

The correct usage of [sic] in square brackets is nicely set forth in
texts such the Oxford Companion to the English Language, which I
recommend you read. Such phrase are inapplicable to the words of mine
you posted

I also recommend that you read my original post once more.  My remarks
were about the charge of incest  I made no comment on whether Claudius
had contravened any other law or commandment

I challenge you Bill Arnold to look up incest in a dictionary and
reconsider your intemperate comments.

Please reply about Claudius and incest, or hold your tongue.

And No I am not jesting.

David

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.