Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2003 :: August ::
Re: Tillyard (Again)
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.1700  Friday, 29 August 2003

[1]     From:   Hugh Grady <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 28 Aug 2003 10:00:26 -0400
        Subj:   RE: SHK 14.1695 Re: Tillyard (Again)

[2]     From:   D Bloom <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 28 Aug 2003 09:19:05 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1695 Re: Tillyard (Again)


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Hugh Grady <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 28 Aug 2003 10:00:26 -0400
Subject: 14.1695 Re: Tillyard (Again)
Comment:        RE: SHK 14.1695 Re: Tillyard (Again)

Clifford Stetner is right of course that Shakespeare was not a
nineteenth-century revolutionary socialist. I plead poetic license.

Cheers,
Hugh Grady

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           D Bloom <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 28 Aug 2003 09:19:05 -0500
Subject: 14.1695 Re: Tillyard (Again)
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1695 Re: Tillyard (Again)

Clifford Stetner writes

>Marx was a Shakespearean ahead of his time, but Shakespeare, although he
>held the bourgeoisie in contempt, spent too much time sucking up to the
>aristos to be called a Marxist.

I don't wish to be a knee-jerk bardolator, but it strikes me that this
has much to do with which side of the French Revolution you happened to
live on.

I imagine that, had he lived in the time of Wordsworth and Coleridge, he
would likely have been a kind of ideal combination of both. But he would
not, I think, have been a playwright, and would have spent no time
"sucking up to the aristos."

(This might make an interesting parlor game: trying to decide what
writers from other eras would have to be pasted together to make the
Shakespeare of that time. On the other hand, it might be self-indulgent
and stupid. Maybe I should withdraw it. No, too late.)

Cheers,
don

_______________________________________________________________
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.