Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2004 :: January ::
Marlowe Inquest
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 15.0152  Wednesday, 21 January 2004

[1]     From:   Bill Arnold <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 20 Jan 2004 06:33:27 -0800 (PST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 15.0142 Marlowe Inquest

[2]     From:   Colin Cox <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 20 Jan 2004 08:12:36 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 15.0142 Marlowe Inquest


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Bill Arnold <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 20 Jan 2004 06:33:27 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 15.0142 Marlowe Inquest
Comment:        Re: SHK 15.0142 Marlowe Inquest

Thomas Larque quotes himself and my response, "...although I now have
better things to do with my spare time...."

OK: such as?

Then Thomas Larque writes, "Bill's entire posting seems little more than
a personal attack (or more accurately an outburst of sneering).  Do I
notice a touch of  bitterness?"

OK: Thomas, Thomas, Thomas, wherefore art thou so defense?  Forsooth,
Sire, do not let mad Ophelia lead you down to the river with stale
flowers!  This mad Marlowe inquest thing has you tied up in Hamlet
knots!  My entire post was meant as repartee, tongue-in-cheek, mild,
pleasant, kindly, good-humored fun, and your response was a tome of
bitterness and bile par excellence.  Yes, I have found my *delete*
button, it is right [<g> or :)] h

Bill Arnold
http://www.cwru.edu/affil/edis/scholars/arnold.htm

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Colin Cox <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 20 Jan 2004 08:12:36 -0800
Subject: 15.0142 Marlowe Inquest
Comment:        Re: SHK 15.0142 Marlowe Inquest

"I have always been something of a doubting

 >Thomas, but certainly nobody has put my hands in anything resembling
 >real wounds to date, in virtually any of the subjects in which I express
 >scepticism."

Might I recommend to you Elaine Pagels wonderful new book 'Beyond Belief'.

"Do we really have anything beyond the Privy Council letter to Cambridge
that suggests he was routinely spying?"

I agree in great part with what Mr. Larque has to say about Marlowe, if
one accepts the function of skeptic. It behooves critics to be
skeptical, and in this case I would have a hard time categorically
providing 'hard' evidence.  Even if one invokes Occam's Razor, I believe
we would have to side with Thomas' conclusions. However, I have a little
more leeway than Mr. Larque in my chosen profession and as an actor and
director am in fact expected to react with gut instinct. My gut instinct
tells me the scenario Mr. Nichols presents is not far from the true
course of events.

One of the links we haven't discussed thus far is Kit's connection to
Thomas and Audrey Walsingham. Thomas was, of course, related to Sir
Francis and Audrey had very strong connections to James VI (before he
added I to his title). Could this not add to our weight of evidence and
tip the balance in our (the conspiracy chaps) favour?

Eagerly, I await your surmise.

-- Colin Cox Artistic Director Will & Company

_______________________________________________________________
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.