The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.1498 Wednesday, 23 July 2003
Date: Wednesday, 23 Jul 2003 03:59:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: 14.1481 Re: Bloom on Hamlet
Comment: Re: SHK 14.1481 Re: Bloom on Hamlet
>What, so Bloom doesn't peddle theories, then? Or
>What was that Keynesian quote, again?
>I've found that a sound knowledge of English grammar
>- even a "love" of
>it - has been helpful in my understanding of
>Come, come... To be human is to be a theorist.
> T. Hawkes
Go, go, you jest. So, i am therefore I theorise. Is there no escape from
the imposition of theory on everything we do? Obviously not in the
Hawkesian universe, nor mine if he is right. Some people prefer their
flowers pressed in a book, though I myself prefer them on the stem where
the perfume is sweetest. (A metaphor best not to be sniffed at).
Yes Martin, Harold Bloom uses theory and/or Theory, he uses language
doesn't he? Your Keynesian quote about grammar, mixed with phonetics, is
exactly where my theorising begins. But when a Theory dictates a
specialised theoretical vocabulary and as a consequence only from within
that theory's boundaries not even a sigh escapes scrutiny, I can sigh no
However my point was that the passionate HB does leave room for
intangibles such as magic, myth and mystery as components in the
authorial process. I take your points gentlemen, but you know what I
mean. At least I think you do.
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
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.