2005

Shakespeare and the Qu'ran

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0393  Friday, 25 February 2005

[1]     From:   Julia Griffin <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 19:06:20 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0380 Shakespeare and the Qu'ran

[2]     From:   Al Magary <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 23:25:39 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0380 Shakespeare and the Qu'ran


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Julia Griffin <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 19:06:20 -0500
Subject: 16.0380 Shakespeare and the Qu'ran
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0380 Shakespeare and the Qu'ran

In answer to Professor Hawkes's post on Borges' Pierre Menard: not
quite.  The twist is that he has not copied Don Quixote, nor memorized
it, but invented it (parts of it) on the basis of memory - an exercise
he justifies on the weird grounds that a reader's knowledge of a book
read some time before and partly forgotten is equivalent to ("can well
equal" - Penguin trans) the knowledge the author has of it before it is
written.

But of course the result, though verbally identical, is quite different.

Julia Griffin

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Al Magary <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 23:25:39 -0800
Subject: 16.0380 Shakespeare and the Qu'ran
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0380 Shakespeare and the Qu'ran

T. Hawkes is incorrect in saying that Peter Bridgman was incorrect in
saying that "Pierre Menard" in Borges' story wrote an identical
_Quixote_ "without copying from Cervantes."  I might join Borges in
suggesting that Mr. Hawkes would "besmirch his illustrious memory," for
one must surely "be obliged to note that his goal was never a mechanical
transcription of the original:  he had no intention of *copying* it.
His admirable ambition was to produce a number of pages which
coincided--word for word and line for line--with those of Miguel de
Cervantes."

Menard explained in a letter that Borges quotes, "I have assumed the
mysterious obligation to reconstruct, word for word, the novel that for
him was spontaneous."  Borges describes how Menard produced the
fragments:  "He dedicated his scruples and his nights 'lit by midnight
oil' to repeating in a foreign tongue a book that already existed.  His
drafts were endless; he stubbornly corrected, and he ripped up thousands
of handwritten pages.  He would allow no one to see them, and took care
that they not survive him."

Cheers,
Al Magary

PS--I am uniquely privileged to have seen Menard's MS.  Though I have
forgotten where, and believe the pages were lost in the last war, I can
easily reproduce Menard's Quixote if someone would carefully describe
which parts are desired.  I will be happy to do that once I have
completed _Love's Labour's Won_.

_______________________________________________________________
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.

A Claudius Question

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0392  Friday, 25 February 2005

[1]     From:   Jay Feldman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 08:50:07 -1000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0378 A Claudius Question

[2]     From:   Bill Arnold <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 14:12:04 -0800 (PST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0378 A Claudius Question


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jay Feldman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 08:50:07 -1000
Subject: 16.0378 A Claudius Question
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0378 A Claudius Question

Abigail Quart: "Laertes makes a push to grab the throne of Denmark . . ."

I'm not so sure I agree. Given only the messenger's excited, perhaps
hysterical report of the crowd's call - "Laertes shall be king!" - one
might think so, but Laertes' command: "Sirs, stand you all without."
would seem to belie a desire to grab the throne. Turning to Claudius,
his focus is and continues to be the death of his father - " . . . Give
me my father [and] Where is my father?"

Jay Feldman

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Bill Arnold <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 14:12:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 16.0378 A Claudius Question
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0378 A Claudius Question

Abigail Quart writes, "Bill, Claudius usurped the throne from his
brother, not his nephew.   What's clear in the play is that the king was
elected, not guaranteed by primogeniture."

What is *CLEAR* is that William Shakespeare wrote the play *Hamlet* and
in ACT I there is a spectral spirit who claim that Claudius murdered
Prince Hamlet's father and usurped the throne from his brother and his
nephew.  Now, William Shakespeare had his reasons for ACT I, which seem
self-evident to me.  Do you deny the existence of ACT I?

If there were no elective process Claudius would not have killed his
brother because primogeniture, as in England of the time of Shakespeare,
would have dubbed the rightful heir as Hamlet.  Agreed?

Thus, Claudius murdered a lawful king, and married his brother's wife
who was a widow as a result of his murderous act, and was culpable in
the deaths of Polonius and Laertes and the madness of Ophelia, and tried
to murder Prince Hamlet, and you just seem to ignore all these embedded
facts and suggest Claudius is a nice guy.  Why?

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

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Venetian Usury

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0389  Friday, 25 February 2005

From:           David Evett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 23:12:34 -0500
Subject: 16.0368 Venetian Usury
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0368 Venetian Usury

Dorothy Dunnett wrote a monumental series of historical novels, the
House of Nicholas, centered on the adventures of a late medieval Flemish
businessman, whose ventures include the manufacture and sale of cloth,
alum, and other commodities, the management of several ships, and the
recruitment and deployment of a company of mercenary soldiers. He also
establishes a bank, headquartered in Venice, where it struggles for
market share against the Medici and a Genoan consortium (also with
important Flemish connections), not against Jews. I'm not sure how
reliable her history is, but she presents it with great conviction, and
the books are in other ways intelligent. It does strongly suggest that
any time after 1450, Antonio could have sought his 3000 ducats from a
Christian lender.

David Evett

_______________________________________________________________
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.

George Peele Query

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0390  Friday, 25 February 2005

[1]     From:   Norman Hinton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 15:53:36 -0600
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0377 George Peele Query

[2]     From:   Bill Lloyd <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 23:39:05 EST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0377 George Peele Query


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Norman Hinton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 15:53:36 -0600
Subject: 16.0377 George Peele Query
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0377 George Peele Query

 >can anyone in this community
 >recommend an affordable collection of George Peele's work, incorporating
 >some or preferably all of prose, poetry, and drama? My own research so
 >far points to costly late 19th/early 20th century editions. Any advice
 >very much appreciated...

While inexpensive (used) editions can be found of _The Old Wives' Tale_
and _The Arraignment of Paris_ at ww.addall.com (I believe they are used
paperbacks from the Mermaid series), full editions are indeed old and
expensive, as well as scarce.  And the better ones are out of print.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Bill Lloyd <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 23:39:05 EST
Subject: 16.0377 George Peele Query
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0377 George Peele Query

The current standard works of George Peele is the Yale edition, under
the general editorship of Charles Tyler Prouty.

Vol. 1 Life and Minor Works of G.P., ed David Horne (1952)

Vol. 2 Dramatic Works of G. P., including Edward I, ed. FS Hook & Battle
of Alcazar, ed. John Yaklovich (1961)

Vol. 3 Dramatic Works of G.P., including Arraignment of Paris, ed. RM
Benbow; David & Bethsabe, ed. EM Blistein; Old Wives Tale, ed FS Hook

These are old spelling editions and seem to be well and meticulously
done. They are now out of print but should be (I hope) in most
university libraries.  Looking them up on Bookfinder.com, I see that
Volumes 1 and 3 are available secondhand in the $35-$45 range, but for
some reason Volume 2 is only available at roughly 3 to 4 times those prices.

Who's an expert on Peele? I distrust the category 'expert'.  However,
one might consult not only the Yale edition, but the volume *George
Peele* by LRN Ashley (Twayne, 1970).  And I hear that Brian Vickers, in
addition to his work on Titus Andronicus and Troublesome Reign, will
include chapters on Peele in a forthcoming book to be entitled
*Shakespeare's Teachers*.

Bill Lloyd

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Tempest on Film

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0388  Friday, 25 February 2005

[1]     From:   Jack Heller <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 13:18:36 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0376 Tempest on Film

[2]     From:   M Yawney <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 11:48:02 -0800 (PST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0376 Tempest on Film

[3]     From:   Susan St. John <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 19:18:15 -0700
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0376 Tempest on Film


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jack Heller <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 13:18:36 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 16.0376 Tempest on Film
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0376 Tempest on Film

 >Thus my question is has any one ever seen a completely successful
 >performance of the Tempest; one that works all the way through?
 >
 >For a play about putting on shows, it occurs to me that it is a show
 >that is awfully difficult to put on.

This reminds me of my recent question on Measure for Measure. I haven't
seen a Tempest that I would say was completely successful; however, none
that I have seen have induced misery either. Most memorable was a
performance in the Germantown Park in Columbus, Ohio in the summer of
2001. A storm was brewing in the area without ever getting to the park
itself. Lightning was flashing in the distance. A drunk had to be
removed from the audience. Some youths on bicycles were boisterous
around the perimeter. And I even remember much of the performance. I
enjoyed it, maybe with all of this, rather than in spite of all of this.

Heller

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           M Yawney <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 11:48:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 16.0376 Tempest on Film
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0376 Tempest on Film

Kristen McDermott recommends a segment of PBS' "Behind the Scenes,"
which features a portion of Julie Taymor's production for Theater for
New Audiences. I second her recommendation since this production was one
of the finest Shakespearean productions I have ever seen.

McDermott goes on to credit Taymor with a Broadway production of The
Tempest with Patrick Stewart, but this is mistaken. Patrick Stewart did
appear on Broadway in a Tempest directed by George C. Wolfe, but Taymor
had nothing to do with this production.

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Susan St. John <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 24 Feb 2005 19:18:15 -0700
Subject: 16.0376 Tempest on Film
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0376 Tempest on Film

Thanks for all the great suggestions...I could never have found these
all on my own.

But since Susanne Collier asked:

 >my question is has any one ever seen a completely successful
 >performance of the Tempest; one that works all the way through?

I was IN a wonderful production in Phoenix, AZ several years ago
produced by an avante garde theatre company (Planet Earth Theatre) - we
had a mostly female cast (Prospero, Trinculo, Sebastian, Caliban, and
the brother were male - everyone else, including Ferdinand was played by
a woman.  I was King Alonzo).  Our production was quite theatrical
including an original soundtrack and an eclectic time period.  I believe
that it was our willlingness to go out on a limb with casting that
allowed us to go overboard (no pun intended) on the 'showiness' of the play.

It's hard to be objective when you are in a show but you generally have
a sense of how well it's going and this felt like a very successful and
well received production.  Now that I think about it, I should see if
the producers made a video recording of that production :-)

And just as a side note, the very first Shakes I ever saw was The
Tempest when I was about 8; my parents had seen it and thought so highly
of it that they sent my brother and I to see it the next night.  There I
was in the 2nd row, with only my 12 year old brother as companion, and a
shipwreck that reached out over the audience...I was mesmerized.  I
don't remember anything else about the production, but I know it's why I
love Shakespeare today...probably why I'm a director and a drama teacher
too!  Trying to recreate that experience!

Susan St. John

_______________________________________________________________
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.