2003

Re: Privy Chamber

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0479  Thursday, 13 March 2003

From:           Steve Roth <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 12 Mar 2003 11:53:13 -0800
Subject: 14.0418 Re: Privy Chamber
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0418 Re: Privy Chamber

John Briggs wrote:

>When the King's Men had ranked as Grooms of the Chamber under
>James I, that meant the Great Chamber and they had no access to the
>Privy Chamber.

I've always wondered and have not come across an answer: what access and
privileges *did* it give them?

Thanks,
Steve

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Vergleiche

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0478  Thursday, 13 March 2003

From:           Graham Hal <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 12 Mar 2003 21:11:07 +0000
Subject:        Vergleiche

Does anyone know if other nationalities employ theatrical convention in
respect of accents when performing Shakespeare in their own language?
The Germans come to mind, z.B., being a nation that has an admirable
record of Shakespearean activity. Do servants and messengers effect a
Plattdeutsch and utilise a Bavarian accent and the nobility Hochdeutsch
with Lautverschiebung?

Reading in translation provides no real clue. Which raises a secondary
question. Any recommended recordings available?

Best,
Graham Hall

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Roommate Needed for SAA

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0476  Thursday, 13 March 2003

From:           Bruce Young <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 12 Mar 2003 09:38:30 -0700
Subject:        Roommate Needed for SAA

To anyone going to Shakespeare Association in Victoria, BC, and needing
or wanting a roommate:

Until recently I was planning to attend SAA in Victoria and had arranged
to room with a former student of mine, a fine young man now doing
graduate work at Arizona State (and I believe serving as president of
the graduate student association there).  I'm now bailing out on him and
would like to arrange a subsitute roommate for him.  I've already booked
the room at the Fairmont Empress; it's a moderate sized room, $105 US
currency per night (so if split between two that would be about $52.50
plus tax per night).  I requested a room with two beds, but so far
they've only been able to give me a room with a queen-sized bed, so a
cot may need to be imported.

He's staying only Thursday and Friday nights.  The room has been booked
for three nights (Thursday, Friday, and Saturday), but the last night
could be canceled if need be.

Please get back to me at <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.> and I'll put you in touch
with him.

Thanks,
Bruce Young

_______________________________________________________________
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: The strangest thing happened....

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0477  Thursday, 13 March 2003

From:           Steve Roth <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 12 Mar 2003 08:56:57 -0800
Subject: 14.0289 The strangest thing happened....
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0289 The strangest thing happened....

I've been plopping my daughters down in  front of Shakespeare plays
(always front row--important tactic) and movies since they were two or
three. Actually had to explain the birds and the bees when they were
three and four in preparation for Measure. (Interesting and amusing
conversation, that...)

I would often ask them during the play, "do you know what's going on?"
They'd often reply, "Not really." But in the car afterwards, they'd be
in the back seat discussing every character and their relationships
without the slightest difficulty. Children are exceptionally good at
watching and analyzing human relationships.

Even a self-acknowledged Shakespeare dweeb like me misses probably 60%
of a Shakespeare play on first viewing--maybe more. I think kids are
about the same. But I still "get" it, and so do they.

Steve

_______________________________________________________________
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: LA Times Review of M for M

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0475  Thursday, 13 March 2003

[1]     From:   Martin Steward <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 12 Mar 2003 16:34:35 -0000
        Subj:   SHK 14.0470 LA Times Review of M for M

[2]     From:   Nancy Charlton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 12 Mar 2003 11:15:16 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.0470 LA Times Review of M for M


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Martin Steward <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 12 Mar 2003 16:34:35 -0000
Subject: LA Times Review of M for M
Comment:        SHK 14.0470 LA Times Review of M for M

So the LA Times reviewer thinks Measure was a "1623 study of political
and sexual hypocrisy", does he?

Oh dear. Shakespeare's "genius" truly knew no bounds!

martin

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Nancy Charlton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 12 Mar 2003 11:15:16 -0800
Subject: 14.0470 LA Times Review of M for M
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0470 LA Times Review of M for M

This review almost but not quite would persuade one to hop on a plane
and go to LA for this performance--provided it could combine a foray to
the Huntington to see the Elizabeth exhibit and the gardens including
the immense lily.

There were two minor things about this review that were bothersome to
me.

First: "... Although the Folio listings identify this 1623 study ..." A
quibble perhaps, but the Folio was 1623 and MM is said to have first
been performed in 1604.

Second: The reviewer, after stating what seemed to him as imbalances
among the actors, dismisses it with this: "These disparate forces will
likely develop more cohesive layers in continued performance; such is
the nature of repertory theater."

Granted that 99% of my experience of theater has been as part of the
audience, I don't quite know what to make of this. Does he mean that all
repertory companies must settle into their performances, and if so why
would that not apply to, say, the RSC as well? Or, why is this
peculiarly true of repertory theater? Is this a kindly or is it a
disparaging comment?

Thanks much for the link.

Nancy Charlton

_______________________________________________________________
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.