2003

Rhyming Couplets in "All's Well"

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.2374  Tuesday, 16 December 2003

[1]     From:   Annalisa Castaldo <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 15 Dec 2003 09:06:18 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.2362 Rhyming Couplets in "All's Well"

[2]     From:   Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 15 Dec 2003 14:08:27 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.2362 Rhyming Couplets in "All's Well"


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Annalisa Castaldo <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 15 Dec 2003 09:06:18 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 14.2362 Rhyming Couplets in "All's Well"
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.2362 Rhyming Couplets in "All's Well"

Thomas Larque and David Evett are right, but it seems (I qualify because
I haven't consulted anything but my memory) that Helena is the only
character who is successfully socially upward despite sharp protests
from a main character. Malvolio drams of rising socially and is cruelly
mocked for it. The characters mentioned either eventually unsuccessful -
Othello, Richard III - or are accepted into their new level with open
arms - the Bastard, the shepherds in Winter's Tale.

I'm discounting those characters who are mistaken for a lower social
rank, or whose fortunes have fallen, such as Perdita. They are always
recognized as having innate nobility, and often the plot turns on that
characteristic.

Annalisa Castaldo

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 15 Dec 2003 14:08:27 -0500
Subject: 14.2362 Rhyming Couplets in "All's Well"
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.2362 Rhyming Couplets in "All's Well"

>Michael Skovmand's proposition that Helena is "the only socially upward
>character in all of Shakespeare's plays, and a woman to boot" is belied
>by Falconbridge in *Jn*

Actually, Falconbridge is downwardly mobile.  He starts out as the
acknowledged heir of a gentleman.  He then concedes his bastardy, thus
forsaking both his material inheritance and his social status.

WS correctly anticipates the 18th Century "irrebutable presumption" --
Lord Mansfield's Rule --  that the child of a married woman is the child
of her husband.  Does anyone know if the same rule prevailed in the
early 13th Century and the late 16th Century?

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.2373  Tuesday, 16 December 2003

From:           Holger Schott <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 15 Dec 2003 10:39:23 -0500
Subject: 14.2368 Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.2368 Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist

Steve Roth:

>Erne makes the strong point supported by Blayney et al. that an
>entry in the stationer's register didn't just protect a given text. It
>protected the stationer's member from *any* similar work which might
>interfere with sales.

Not exactly a new argument. Leo Kirschbaum argued pretty much the same
case in 1938 ("Is _The Spanish Tragedy_ a Leading Case? Did a Bad Quarto
of _Love's Labour's Lost_ Ever Exist?" _JEGP 37, 501-121). See also
Sidney Thomas, "The Myth of the Authorized Shakespearean Quartos," _SQ_
27 [1976], 186-92. It's an aspect of early modern publishing conventions
that has faded in an out of bibliographical and critical consciousness
throughout the century...

I'm not sure, however, that I understand how one can jump from this
observation (i.e., the fact that a publisher's ownership of a particular
title, say, "King John," gave him certain rights over _any_ text by that
name, Shakespearean or otherwise), to the claim that

>every pre-1603 Shakespeare play that was not so enjoined
>(or otherwise impeded) was, in fact, published.

Does this mean that Erne argues that _every_ play Shakespeare wrote
before 1603 was either published or entered into the register? (On the
basis of the negative evidence that entry wasn't necessary for
publication? Does he claim that the plays for which we don't have an
early text are "lost" quartos?) A few more details would be much
appreciated -- I haven't had a chance to look at Erne's book yet, but
his _SQ_ article of two (?) years ago on the same subject was
intelligent and pretty well argued. (Although his book on Kyd did
display a certain taste for broad speculation of the kind that he seems
to engage in here as well...)

Best,
Holger Schott

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Another Quiz Question

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.2371  Tuesday, 16 December 2003

[1]     From:   John Savage <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 15 Dec 2003 09:03:43 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
        Subj:   Quiz Answer

[2]     From:   Alfredo Michel Modenessi <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 4 Jul 1990 00:35:33 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.2360 Another Quiz Question

[3]     From:   Tom Pendleton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 15 Dec 2003 13:23:07 -0500
        Subj:   RE: SHK 14.2341 Another Quiz Question

[4]     From:   Tom Pendleton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Monday, 15 Dec 2003 13:32:26 -0500
        Subj:   RE: SHK 14.2341 Another Quiz Question


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           John Savage <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 15 Dec 2003 09:03:43 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject:        Quiz Answer

Dear SHAKSPER-type persons:

My thanks to all who have helped me with my strange and disturbing
dream.  Dr. Trachtenberg tells me that I'll soon be able to go outside
for an occasional stroll, though only on the hospital grounds at first,
of course.

At any rate, here are the answers.  (One person or another seems to have
gotten them all, except for "Garland of Roses" -- no one got that.)

Beautiful Hill, Belmont; Mountain of Happiness, Montjoy; Feast, Feste;
Large City in Central Florida, Orlando; Boat Dock, Marina; Fleet of
Ships, Armado (Armada); Angel, Angelo; Armstrong, Fortinbras; Drunkard,
Borachio (borracho); Chap Who Could Change His Shape, Proteus; Little
Bear, Orsino; Garland of Roses, Rosencrantz (Rosenkranz); Little
Blondie, Biondello; Lost, Perdita; Nicolas Derriere, Nick Bottom;
Ill-Will, Malvolio; Words, Parolles; Wasn't Very Deep, Shallow.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Alfredo Michel Modenessi <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 4 Jul 1990 00:35:33 -0500
Subject: 14.2360 Another Quiz Question
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.2360 Another Quiz Question

I agree that most of Richman's answers look right, but aren't "Ill-Will"
Malvolio; "Words", Parolles; "Little Blondie", Biondello (TShrew); "Rose
Garland", Rosencrantz; and "Drunkard", Borachio? (This last one I should
know.) By the way, did the quiz require an answer for "France"?

Alfredo Michel Modenessi

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Tom Pendleton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 15 Dec 2003 13:23:07 -0500
Subject: 14.2341 Another Quiz Question
Comment:        RE: SHK 14.2341 Another Quiz Question

It just dawned: Rosencrantz means a garland of roses.

Tom Pendleton

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Tom Pendleton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 15 Dec 2003 13:32:26 -0500
Subject: 14.2341 Another Quiz Question
Comment:        RE: SHK 14.2341 Another Quiz Question

Would Ursula be a better little bear than Orsino?

Tom Pendleton

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Shakespeare's Library

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.2372  Tuesday, 16 December 2003

From:           W.L. Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 15 Dec 2003 13:32:32 -0500
Subject: 14.2361 Shakespeare's Library
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.2361 Shakespeare's Library

R. A. Cantrell writes:

>I think that Stoppard's insights into Shakespeare's "process" are a
>better direction than trying to make an academic researcher of the
>playwright.

Do you mean that Shakespeare, when he was at a loss in his writing,
hunted up Kit Marlowe for a drink or two, and Marlowe gave Shakespeare
the proper direction?  I doubt if this is a totally serious suggestion,
but Shakespeare does seem to follow some texts very closely -- and he
either had a very good memory (which is quite possible), or he had the
books before him as he wrote.  This is not to say that Shakespeare
wasn't influenced by conversations with other writers, or influenced by
audience reaction in his revisions.

Bill Godshalk

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Why List Moderation Is Good

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.2370  Tuesday, 16 December 2003

From:           Al Magary <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 12 Dec 2003 18:42:40 -0800
Subject:        Why List Moderation Is Good

I receive the NYTimes Book Review weekly email, followed a sidebar link
to the Readers' Forums
(http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?14@@.ee73881), and clicked onto
Shakespeare.  The following selection of prize prose
(This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.">http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.@
.f0a79cc/5345) will prove my proposition that lists need to be
moderated.

Note:  This is well into the discussion, which began in February 2000,
and has reached msg #5063; msg #8 read, "My only regret is that sooner
or later this forum is going to be infested by those HIGH-IQ nuts who
believe that Shakespeare did not write the plays attributed to him."

On with the show:
-----

carolpolk0 - 06:40pm Nov 19, 2003 EST (# 5015 of 5063) Well, since no
one's discussing the play, I will just drift down memory lane to talk
about the margin notes in my Yale volume. I have never been much of an
underliner, but plead guilty to copious marginalia and interleaving. In
this particular volume, however, the margin notes are interesting little
marks like @ and ^ and >, only less obviously purposive. They are the
handiwork of my older daughter, at age 2, busily doing what she saw her
parents do. She will be 40 in a couple of days. I hope by then she will
be able to explain what these notes mean.

whiskeypriest - 09:53pm Nov 19, 2003 EST (# 5016 of 5063) "[N]o
bitterness, no recrimination, just a good swift left in the jaw."
I am waiting for msussman to change the header from the Henry V
discussion to the Twelfth Night discsuuion. But I think he has abandoned
the entire books forum for a wanton dalliance with a World Trade Center
forum. I feel soooooo cheap, abandoned and used.

chartres5 - 10:01pm Nov 19, 2003 EST (# 5017 of 5063) Beauty enough and
brains to spare - Motto of the Tadich Four At least you aren't pregnant,
Whiskey. Anyway, I hope not.

carolpolk0 - 10:29pm Nov 19, 2003 EST (# 5018 of 5063) Should we include
in this discussion any consideration of the numerous tropes used in this
play which Shakespeare had alrady used, or would use later? But perhaps
the word tropes does not admit including all the puns? I have a very
shaggy sense of the extent to which this word can be applied. Comes of
not doing any academic reading in a lot of years. One loses one's
agility with the vocabulary.

chartres5 - 11:57pm Nov 19, 2003 EST (# 5019 of 5063) Beauty enough and
brains to spare - Motto of the Tadich Four Are we intended to make much,
if anything, of the Olivia/Viola anagram?

karlhenning - 08:53am Nov 20, 2003 EST (# 5020 of 5063)
Hey, guys!! I want to be an American Maverick, too!!
I, Viola
Extra i in Olivia ....
Bonjour, chartres!

chartres5 - 09:03am Nov 20, 2003 EST (# 5021 of 5063)
Beauty enough and brains to spare - Motto of the Tadich Four
Bonjour, Karl, comment allez vous?
Yes, an extra i in Olivia but the same five letters in both names
nonetheless.

chartres5 - 09:04am Nov 20, 2003 EST (# 5022 of 5063)
Beauty enough and brains to spare - Motto of the Tadich Four
This doesn't belong here, Karl, but there is a character in Robertson
Davies first trilogy that puts me in mind of you or vice versa. I
haven't any of the books at hand so will have to look out his name on my
next visit to the bookstore.

Q.E.D.,
Al Magary

_______________________________________________________________
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.