Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2003 :: January ::
Re: Shakespeare and Marlowe
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.036  Tuesday, 7 January 2003

[1]     From:   Geralyn Horton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 6 Jan 2003 14:29:39 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.029 Re: Shakespeare and Marlowe and The Rose

[2]     From:   Don Bloom <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 6 Jan 2003 14:17:35 -0600
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.017 Re: Shakespeare and Marlowe

[3]     From:   David Kathman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 6 Jan 2003 22:52:07 -0600
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.029 Re: Shakespeare and Marlowe


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Geralyn Horton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 6 Jan 2003 14:29:39 -0500
Subject: 14.029 Re: Shakespeare and Marlowe and The Rose
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.029 Re: Shakespeare and Marlowe and The Rose

I hoped that someone else would supply the author of the quoted Boston
Globe "Shakespeare Was Shakespeare" article re: the "Much Ado" film.
This "common sense" article is by the uncommon Tina Packer, the
brilliant actor, director, and teacher who is the force behind
Shakespeare & Company in Lenox, MA.    Here is a Monitor article on her
project to build in Lenox a replica of The Rose within which to perform.

<http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0103/p13s01-almp.html>

Geralyn Horton

 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
http://www.stagepage.info

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Don Bloom <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 6 Jan 2003 14:17:35 -0600
Subject: 14.017 Re: Shakespeare and Marlowe
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.017 Re: Shakespeare and Marlowe

Listen, guys. I've got a great idea. It's pretty obvious to me that WS's
plays were written by the queen -- I mean, how else could he know so
much about how women think? -- but the problem is there isn't any money
in such a wonderful literary insight unless we get a lot of cheap
publicity.

So here's my plan. Everybody send me all the evidence they can think up
that the author was (a) of royal blood and (b) a woman. I'll put it all
together and then get some actor friends who can play squirrelly
pseudo-critics to be interviewed by a pretentious TV documentary
director. We can sell it to public television for a couple hundred
grand, I figure, and "go snacks," as Pope would say.

I'm counting on this project to make up for the loss of income I
suffered when my history of strumpet music fell afoul of crupto-fascist
postal authorities. But I think it's sure-fire -- Shakespeare, mystery,
feminism, pseudo-intellectualism -- what more could you ask? (Well, a
portrait of the young Queen Bess in a bikini or her underwear would be
good: if anybody knows of one, let me know.)

Hardy: we'll be depending on you to keep the lines of communication
open. I can promise you a double share in return.

To outrageous profits from little knowledge,
don

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           David Kathman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 6 Jan 2003 22:52:07 -0600
Subject: 14.029 Re: Shakespeare and Marlowe
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.029 Re: Shakespeare and Marlowe

Bill Arnold wrote:

>Dave Kathman writes, "To take the Marlovian scenario at all seriously,
>one must believe that Marlowe's death was somehow faked despite the
>explicit evidence of the coroner's inquisition, the burial record, and
>the many subsequent mentions in print of Marlowe's untimely death. Once
>somebody makes that leap, however, they can basically make up anything
>they want for Marlowe's imagined life in exile writing the works of
>Shakespeare.  With the Earl of Oxford, they have to deal with the
>inconvenient fact that he died in 1604, that he wrote many letters in
>the 1590s, none of which mention plays or poetry, and so on. The
>Shakespeare Authorship Page http://ShakespeareAuthorship.com"
>
>I want to personally thank Hardy Cook and Dave Kathman for this final
>nail in the coffin of the Marlovian and Oxfordian theorists, as anyone
>who has gone to the ShakespeareAuthorship.com website and read all the
>scholarly evidence presented there WILL in all fairness come to the
>logical conclusion that Will Shakespeare was Will Shakespeare, and the
>Swan-of-Avon was Will Shakespeare, and the Will Shakespeare of history
>was the English bard we have come to know and revere as the greatest
>playwright of all time.

Thanks for these comments, and I hope Hardy will allow me a few final
comments.  I've had a spirited e-mail exchange with Mike Rubbo over the
past few days after someone forwarded him my comments on his film from
this list.  Although we have many profound disagreements, I think Mike
is a good guy who tried to be fair in his film, even though he didn't
quite succeed.  He's always been courteous to me and invited debate,
which I've tried to provide as my schedule allows.

I know he's a bit frustrated that more "Stratfordians" won't debate him,
but I'm afraid that's not going to change.  Most Shakespeare scholars
have better things to do with their time than arguing with
antistratfordians, just as mathematicians have better things to do than
argue with people claiming to have squared the circle, and physicists
have better things to do than listen to every crank who claims to have
invented a perpetual motion machine.  Frankly, I have better things to
do with my time as well, and even though I only spend a small fraction
of my scholarly energies rebutting antistratfordians, I would be more
than happy if the whole thing would go away.  But as long as there are
ignorant people out there attacking Shakespeare, I'm happy to defend
historical accuracy and scholarly standards.  It's those standards, as
much as Shakespeare per se, that motivate me to make the effort.

Dave Kathman

 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
The Shakespeare Authorship Page:
http://ShakespeareAuthorship.com
Biographical Index of English Drama Before 1660:
http://ShakespeareAuthorship.com/bd/

_______________________________________________________________
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.