2003

Re: Othello on Bloom

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.1363  Thursday, 3 July 2003

From:           Martin Steward <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 20:46:12 +0100
Subject: 14.1343 Re: Othello on Bloom
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1343 Re: Othello on Bloom

"She marries him--OK this is a stretch--to rescue the racist society
from its odious prevailing [not just prevalent but prevailing] idea,
still-existent 400+  years later, racism, i.e., the belief that skin
color is significant."

And yet her decision can only reify that racist assumption.

But anyway - how can skin colour NOT be "significant"...?

When a producer casts a black guy as Henry Bolingbroke, say, doesn't he
make skin colour MORE significant?

m

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Re: Old Adam in AYL

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.1362  Thursday, 3 July 2003

[1]     From:   Sherri Fillingham <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 15:28:24 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1357 Old Adam in AYL

[2]     From:   David Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 21:02:08 GMT0BST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1357 Old Adam in AYL


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sherri Fillingham <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 15:28:24 EDT
Subject: 14.1357 Old Adam in AYL
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1357 Old Adam in AYL

In the production the RSC did at the Kennedy Center, Old Adam dies just
before the curtain at the interval.

Hope this helps.

Sherri Fillingham

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           David Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 21:02:08 GMT0BST
Subject: 14.1357 Old Adam in AYL
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1357 Old Adam in AYL

One production which did so was Stephen Pimlott's 1996 RSC main-stage
production.  Robert Smallwood writes:

'Steven Pimlott's version . . . goes down in theatre history as the
first Stratford Arden to sacrifice a victim to its wintry harshness.
Carried in by Orlando after his collapse in the most hostile of several
snowstorms to hit that year's Arden . . . Adam lay wrapped in blankets
at the end of the ducal table with attentive foresters trying in vain to
feed and revive him.  At the end of the song the Duke walked over to
Adam, utterly failing to notice how critical was his condition.
"Support him by the arm" he said, and escorted Orlando, who was quite
unaware of his servant's state, from the stage.  As they strode off arm
in arm poor old Adam breathed his last, the first half of the comedy
ending (perhaps a little dubiously in terms of genre)  with his death -
providing a "big moment" for the interval, its downbeat quality to be
balanced by the upbeat of the ending of the second half.  During that
second half there was a huge mound of earth, with daffodils strewn over
it, upstage centre.  No one ever behaved as if it was anyone's grave (it
was big enough, indeed, to have contained a dead horse or two), but as
Silvius and Touchstone, Ganymede and Orlando, ran round and over it, it
was difficult not to think of Adam lying at peace below.  Stephen
Pimlott is on record as saying that the notion of its being Adam's grave
was an unlooked-for, but not unwelcome, addition to his idea that it
should suggest an ancient and sacred place in the forest'.  (Robert
Smallwood, As You Like It, Shakespeare at Stratford Series, Arden: 2003
p. 69)

David Lindley
Professor of Renaissance Literature
University of Leeds

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Re: "But me no buts"

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.1360  Thursday, 3 July 2003

[1]     From:   Fran Teague <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 15:20:44 -0400
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1348 Re: "But me no buts"

[2]     From:   Clark J. Holloway <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 21:27:41 -0700
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1348 Re: "But me no buts"

[3]     From:   William Davis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 3 Jul 2003 02:21:07 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1348 Re: "But me no buts"


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Fran Teague <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 15:20:44 -0400
Subject: 14.1348 Re: "But me no buts"
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1348 Re: "But me no buts"

Checking the OED2 (quotation search) for the phrase "me no " gives 160
results if you include the space after "me ".  The earliest one that
seems to conform to the pattern in question is as follows:

(C. 1300) Maximon in Rel. Ant. I. 120
"Hunten herd y blowe, Hertes gonne rowe, Stunte me no ston."

Fran Teague
http://www.english.uga.edu/~fteague

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Clark J. Holloway <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 21:27:41 -0700
Subject: 14.1348 Re: "But me no buts"
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1348 Re: "But me no buts"

Bill Lloyd wrote:

>"Ease me no easings..."  George Peele, Edward I, Act 1 sc 2, TLN 422
>[Q1593]
>
>Presumably this is not evidence of Shakespeare's hand in Edward I[!].
>I think this is the earliest one so far cited on SHAKSPER? It would be
>interesting to see how early we can find them. Anyone been catching up
>on Lyly or Gascoigne lately? Skelton? Chaucer? Tell me no tales...

1592, Kyd, Soliman & Perseda, i. iii:

BASILISCO: What, would'st thou have me a Typhon
To bear up Pelion or Ossa? ...

PISTON: Typhon me no Typhons, but swear upon my Dudgeon
dagger not to go till I give thee leave, but stay with me and
look upon the tilters.

- Clark

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           William Davis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 3 Jul 2003 02:21:07 EDT
Subject: 14.1348 Re: "But me no buts"
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1348 Re: "But me no buts"

Bill Lloyd writes,

>I think that "but me no buts" and similar phrases ( X me no Xes) must be
>examples of a formula that predates Shakespeare. SHAKSPEReans have
>recently shown that these phrases can be found in a number of authors.

This is a great point.  From all the samples given so far, it certainly
looks like this particular phrase was a common one in Shakespeare's day
(which means it likely would have taken at least one generation
predating Shakespeare to become "common" - and most likely it goes
further back than that).  Even though it predates Shakespeare, however,
I just can't help wondering to myself if the phrase would have survived
into today's vernacular without Shakespeare's reinforcement
(particularly the variations in such a well-known play as Romeo and
Juliet).  I know this is hard to say, one way or the other, but is it
possible that Shakespeare's use of certain phrases may have popularized
them across generations, which otherwise would have died out?  Many
plays contain this formula phrase, but how often do people hear those
plays to reinforce it, particularly if they are more obscure?  (not that
a phrase needs to be in a play or a book to survive multiple generations
in a language, since some of them survive well enough on their own).
Yet, when I see how many words and phrases in our everyday speech come
directly from Shakespeare's texts, it makes me wonder which other words
and phrases owe their survival to his plays, even though they were not
originally coined by him.

Hmmm.  This sounds like the beginnings of a dissertation.  Has anyone
trod down this path before?  If so, I'd love to know where to look.

All the best,
Wm Davis

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Re: Daily Telegraph Review of Henry V

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.1361  Thursday, 3 July 2003

From:           Jan Pick <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 12:15:58 -0700
Subject: 14.1353 Daily Telegraph Review of Henry V
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1353 Daily Telegraph Review of Henry V

Yes, it's exciting, but it is as much an adaptation in its way as the
derided Olivier version - pro war, and the Victorian tinkerers.

Jan

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Re: Hamlet's Song

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.1359  Thursday, 3 July 2003

[1]     From:   Ted Dykstra <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 15:23:29 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

[2]     From:   Nora Kreimer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 16:27:12 -0300
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

[3]     From:   John Briggs <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 20:49:10 +0100
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

[4]     From:   Gerald E. Downs <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 19:14:27 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

[5]     From:   Matt Henerson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 3 Jul 2003 02:39:56 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

[6]     From:   Colin Cox <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 02 Jul 2003 23:55:51 -0700
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

[7]     From:   R L Widmann <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 3 Jul 2003 05:11:08 -0400
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

[8]     From:   Rainbow Saari <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 3 Jul 2003 21:54:50 +1200
        Subj:   Help with Hamlet's song


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Ted Dykstra <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 15:23:29 EDT
Subject: 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

>Following *The Mousetrap* Hamlet quotes a poem or song
>
>'For thou dost know, O Damon dear,
>This realm dismantled was
>Of Jove himself; and now reigns here
>A very, very--pajock.'
>Horatio then says: 'You might have rhymed.' (III.ii.281-285.)
>
>What's the missing word which might have rhymed with 'was'? Clearly an
>Elizabethan audience was supposed to know. Equally clearly the word is
>the opposite of Jove, therefore probably the name of some minor god or
>fallen deity.

I always thought that the missing rhyme was ASS, as several times I have
noted the word "was" (due to the words it used to rhyme with) must have
at one time been pronounced "wass". In fact, in Dutch, which has so much
old English in it, it still is! I don't think the song or poem is known,
I think Hamlet makes it up on the spot, and either misses the rhyme on
purpose to make Horatio laugh, or has "painted himself into a corner",
much to Horatio's delight.

Ted Dykstra

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Nora Kreimer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 16:27:12 -0300
Subject: 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

The Rhyme offered as a possibility in the annotated The New Cambridge
Shakespeare in III. ii, 255-8 is ass, which I feel very temped to accept
on the grounds of the pronunciation of Early Mod English.

Regards,
Nora Kreimer
Instituto Superior del Profesorado Joaquin V. Gonzalez
Buenos Aires, Argentina

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           John Briggs <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 20:49:10 +0100
Subject: 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

Michael Egan wrote:

>Following *The Mousetrap* Hamlet quotes a poem or song
>
>'For thou dost know, O Damon dear,
>This realm dismantled was
>Of Jove himself; and now reigns here
>A very, very--pajock.'
>Horatio then says: 'You might have rhymed.' (III.ii.281-285.)
>
>What's the missing word which might have rhymed with 'was'? Clearly an
>Elizabethan audience was supposed to know. Equally clearly the word is
>the opposite of Jove, therefore probably the name of some minor god or
>fallen deity.

Harold Jenkins (Arden2, 1982) and G.R. Hibbard (Oxford, 1987) concur
that the word was "ass".  (It is the word 'pajock' [F Paiocke] that is
problematic.)  In my innocence I had always assumed that it was the
pupose of annotated editions to answer questions such as these.  If
provoked, I shall give the origin of the term "Variorum".

John Briggs

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Gerald E. Downs <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 2 Jul 2003 19:14:27 EDT
Subject: 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

Lucrece 393 and 1764 the rhyme wass grass and glass.

[5]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Matt Henerson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 3 Jul 2003 02:39:56 EDT
Subject: 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

What's the missing word which might have rhymed with 'was'?

I always imagined it was "ass."  No?

Matt Henerson

[6]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Colin Cox <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 02 Jul 2003 23:55:51 -0700
Subject: 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

Michael Egan asks,

>Following *The Mousetrap* Hamlet quotes a poem or song
>
>'For thou dost know, O Damon dear,
>This realm dismantled was
>Of Jove himself; and now reigns here
>A very, very--pajock.'
>Horatio then says: 'You might have rhymed.' (III.ii.281-285.)
>
>What's the missing word to complete the rhyme.

The missing word is 'ass'.

[7]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           R L Widmann <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 3 Jul 2003 05:11:08 -0400
Subject: 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.1351 Help with Hamlet's Song

The missing rhyme is "ass," another insult to Polonius.

Best,
R L Widmann

[8]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Rainbow Saari <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 3 Jul 2003 21:54:50 +1200
Subject:        Help with Hamlet's song

Theobald ( Shakespeare Restored, p.94) suggested the final word of the
song was 'ass'. It would  both rhyme and suit the metre.

Cheers all,
Rainbow Saari

_______________________________________________________________
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.