Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2003 :: September ::
King John and The Troublesome Play
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.1893  Tuesday, 30 September 2003

[1]     From:   Bill Lloyd <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 29 Sep 2003 08:00:27 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1885 King John and The Troublesome Play

[2]     From:   Marcus Dahl <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 30 Sep 2003 10:15:27 +0100
        Subj:   RE: SHK 14.1885 King John and The Troublesome Play


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Bill Lloyd <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 29 Sep 2003 08:00:27 EDT
Subject: 14.1885 King John and The Troublesome Play
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1885 King John and The Troublesome Play

Silly me!  It is Mac Jackson's own book on the authorship of Pericles
that is coming this fall from Oxford U. Press.  The Jackson festschrift,
=Words That Count=, is, I believe, coming in 2004 from Univ of Delaware
Press.  I think.

Bill Lloyd

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Marcus Dahl <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 30 Sep 2003 10:15:27 +0100
Subject: 14.1885 King John and The Troublesome Play
Comment:        RE: SHK 14.1885 King John and The Troublesome Play

Dear Bill

My impression of TR has always been that it is early (c.1590) predates
Shakespeare's play and was probably written by someone like Peele (too
straight for Greene or Nashe too low for Lodge). There is in my view
little evidence that Shakespeare was a great originator of plots and
therefore it seems likely that as with Leir, Shrew,  (etc etc the list
is too long) Shakespeare re-wrote an earlier precursor adding and
subtracting as he willed (no pun intended!).

The slightly plodding style of TR does however have something more in
common with 1HVI rather than say 'King Leir' or 'Selimus'.

I am sure that Brian Vickers has done a less impressionistic analysis!

All the best,
Marcus 'Nashe still didn't write 1HVI' Dahl

_______________________________________________________________
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.