2003

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0690  Wednesday, 9 April 2003

[1]     From:   Peter D. Holland <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 8 Apr 2003 10:09:44 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.0685 Re: Love's Labour's Wonne

[2]     From:   Fran Teague <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 8 Apr 2003 11:56:27 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.0685 Re: Love's Labour's Wonne

[3]     From:   Stephen Miller <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 9 Apr 2003 11:22:35 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
        Subj:   Re: Love's Labour's Wonne


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Peter D. Holland <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 8 Apr 2003 10:09:44 -0500
Subject: 14.0685 Re: Love's Labour's Wonne
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0685 Re: Love's Labour's Wonne

John Drakakis commented: 'Surely we need to relegate this query to the
same file that we relegate the Ur Hamlet, another fictional text (for
which there is some evidence of its existence) that has generated more
heat than light.'

I'm not sure about John's phrasing but Meres is, of course, not the only
person to have referred to the play. As T.W.Baldwin showed in 1957, an
Elizabethan bookseller thought there was such a play in a list of plays
including a number by Shakespeare which might otherwise have been
candidates. See his *Shakespere's Love's labor's won;  new evidence from
the account books of an Elizabethan bookseller* (Southern Illinois UP,
1957).

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Fran Teague <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 8 Apr 2003 11:56:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 14.0685 Re: Love's Labour's Wonne
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0685 Re: Love's Labour's Wonne

The discussion on Love's Labor's Won has ignored T. W, Baldwin's
discovery in the 1950s of a bookseller's catalogue that listed the play
for sale in 1603.  The arguments for the work's existence do not, then,
rest solely on the Meres' reference in Palladis Tamia.  The work
detailing Baldwin's discovery is entitled Shakspere's Love's labor's
won; new evidence from the account books of an Elizabethan bookseller,
and it was published at Southern illinois Univ. Press in 1957.

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Stephen Miller <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 9 Apr 2003 11:22:35 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject:        Re: Love's Labour's Wonne

As mentioned earlier in this discussion, Frances Meres does not provide
the only testimony to the existence of Shakespeare's lost play, Love's
Labour's Won, and the other evidence implies that it was not The Shrew.
When editing my thesis edition of the Taming of a Shrew I included the
following footnote to a suggestion by an earlier scholar that Love's
Labour's Won might have referred to The Taming of the Shrew:

    [the] suggestion that the mysterious play Love's Labor's Won
    mentioned by Meres refers to The Shrew was disproved when
    a booklist of August 1603 for the stationer Christopher Hunt
    was discovered in 1953 by S. Pottesman listing:
    'Marchant Of Vennis, Taming Of A Shrew, Loves Labor
    Lost, Loves Labor Won.'  See T.W. Baldwin, Shakspere's
    'Love's Labor's Won': new evidence from the account
    books of an Elizabethan bookseller. (Carbondale, Ill.:
    Southern Illinois Univ. Pr., 1957) vii, 11-15, 30-31.

Sincerely,
Stephen Miller

_______________________________________________________________
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.