The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0360 Tuesday, 22 February 2005
[1] From: Jack Heller <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 21 Feb 2005 09:24:30 -0500 (EST)
Subj: Re: SHK 16.0343 Date of King John
[2] From: Bob Grumman <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 21 Feb 2005 09:31:26 -0500
Subj: Re: SHK 16.0343 Date of King John
[3] From: Edmund Taft <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 21 Feb 2005 12:03:45 -0500
Subj: Date of King John
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jack Heller <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 21 Feb 2005 09:24:30 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 16.0343 Date of King John
Comment: Re: SHK 16.0343 Date of King John
Michael Egan's post advancing Shakespeare as a possible collaborator
with George Peele on Troublesome Reigne ends with these assertions:
>This conclusion continues to be resisted by scholars only because TR's
>verse (not its plot) seems so unlike what we find in King John. <snip>
Yet this
>hypothesis accounts not only for everything that is known about the
>publication and performance histories of both works but (more important)
>their contrasting stylistic qualities, plot similarities and narrative
>contradictions. It also extends by one the list of Peele's and
>Shakespeare's known collaborations.
I'll resist this conclusion for a very different reason: ideological
differences between the two plays. Troublesome Reigne is the work of a
writer (or writers) with militant Protestant sympathies consistent with
its source, John Foxe's Acts and Monuments. While I am agnostic on the
Lancastrian theories of Shakespeare's recusant Catholicism (a change
from my earlier endorsement of such theories), I still find Shakespeare
taking positions opposed to Foxe's ideology, both in his King John and
in the creation of Falstaff/John Oldcastle in the second Henriad.
Troublesome Reigne presents John as a flawed but essentially godly
militant proto-Protestant martyr. Shakespeare presents John as a
would-be Machiavel, one who would envy Richard III's steely resolve.
There are more differences between the two plays than what Michael Egan
allows for.
Jack Heller
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bob Grumman <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 21 Feb 2005 09:31:26 -0500
Subject: 16.0343 Date of King John
Comment: Re: SHK 16.0343 Date of King John
>This conclusion continues to be resisted by scholars only because TR's
>verse (not its plot) seems so unlike what we find in King John. But
>Vickers has recently conclusively demonstrated that the verse writer was
>Peele.
Conclusively? I don't see how he could have. You were making good
sense up to there, for me.
--Bob G.
[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Edmund Taft <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 21 Feb 2005 12:03:45 -0500
Subject: Date of King John
Michael Egan writes:
"But Vickers has recently conclusively demonstrated that the verse
writer was Peele. Until now however no one has considered the
possibility that T.R. might have been a collaboration between him and
the young Shakespeare, who created TR's Author's Plot and perhaps
contributed a few phrases."
This is an intriguing hypothesis. Shakespeare learned a lot from Peele,
and in more than one genre. Surely MND is deeply indebted to Peele's
conceptions of comedy, and _Henry V_ has a chorus much like Peele's in
_The Battle of Alkazar_. It's not inconceivable that they collaborated
on _TR_.
Ed Taft
_______________________________________________________________
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.
|