2005

G. Wilson Knight Films and Videos

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0120  Friday, 21 January 2005

From:           Ira Zinman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Thursday, 20 Jan 2005 11:55:37 EST
Subject:        Inquiry on G. Wilson Knight Films and Videos

I understand that some films or videos were made of G. Wilson Knight
that were available in the UK and in the US.  In addition were some BBC
productions.  If anyone knows how to find these, I would very much
appreciate being pointed in the right direction.

A response off line may be best.

Regards to all,
Ira Zinman

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Job Opportunity

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0119  Friday, 21 January 2005

From:           David Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 21 Jan 2005 09:31:41 -0000
Subject:        Job Opportunity

May I draw to the attention of members of the list a job opportunity at
the University of Leeds.  We are advertising a post in English
Literature (Critical and Cultural Theory).  The post is open to scholars
who work in any period - including Early Modern/Shakespeare - who have a
specialist interest in critical/cultural theory.  More details can be
found at:

http://wwwnotes2.leeds.ac.uk/jobs/unijob.nsf/778c659fe6c55f8880256c01004b076c/7cb4b3d918ec440180256f8d00319be2?OpenDocument

David Lindley

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Prince Hal in the News Again

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0117  Thursday, 20 January 2005

[1]     From:   Kathy Dent <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 12:50:11 +0000
        Subj:   RE: SHK 16.0096 Prince Hal in the News Again

[2]     From:   Abigail Quart <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 14:55:56 -0500
        Subj:   RE: SHK 16.0102 Prince Hal in the News Again

[3]     From:   Al Magary <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 13:59:19 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0102 Prince Hal in the News Again


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Kathy Dent <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 12:50:11 +0000
Subject: 16.0096 Prince Hal in the News Again
Comment:        RE: SHK 16.0096 Prince Hal in the News Again

 >Prince Harry's not Hal either. Hal didn't blame Daddy for getting rid of
 >Mommy.

Hey, I'm no royalist, but I don't think there's any evidence that Harry
Windsor has expressed this opinion of his family history.

Kathy Dent

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Abigail Quart <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 14:55:56 -0500
Subject: 16.0102 Prince Hal in the News Again
Comment:        RE: SHK 16.0102 Prince Hal in the News Again

Mr. Sanders:

Noting the use of Shakespeare as a reference in American discussion,
whether political or otherwise, IS a legitimate use of this list.

We still have the choice of not reading threads we have no interest in,
don't we?

And I know from experience that Hardy is adamant in reining in the
really "cheap shots." Which is why I have already edited several
comments and pithy adjectives out of this post.

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Al Magary <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 13:59:19 -0800
Subject: 16.0102 Prince Hal in the News Again
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0102 Prince Hal in the News Again

Alan J. Sanders wrote: "I suppose we must go through four more years of
cheap shots under the guise of a Shakespeare discussion?  Were I to head
down a particular path, I could say that the previous 'blue' office had
some very mysterious murders and unexplained pardons occur in its eight
years. Is there a Shakespeare reference here?  Was that a modern-day
Macbeth and Lady M.?"

I see from Susanne Greenhalgh's post today that the BBC is recostuming
four sets of Elizabethan characters in modern dress:  "The frame of
reference for the 4 commissioned plays appears to be British
celebrity/media culture--Kate [in Taming] as a young politician, Macbeth
set in a Gordon-Ramsay style kitchen (no shortage of sharp implements
..), MND set in the 'Center Parcs-like Dream Parks' and Beatrice and
Benedick as a TV talkshow couple."

Doesn't this suggest the durable quality of Shakespearean characters on
the world stage, and represent something worth discussing on this list?
  The recent Bush-as-Hal/H5 meme developed in the media, not here, and
now the aptly named Prince Harry is likened to Hal, again not here
initially.  If in 2008 Hilary Rodham Clinton is portrayed as Lady
Macbeth, I expect we will take note, and Mr. Sanders can then be
satisfied that we plebs may throw tomatoes at kings no matter what color
their robes.

Cheers,
Al Magary

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Greenblatt Discussion Forum

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0118  Thursday, 20 January 2005

From:           David Basch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 12:27:37 -0500
Subject: 16.0106 Greenblatt Discussion Forum
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0106 Greenblatt Discussion Forum

Peter Bridgman questions my use of quotes around "Catholic" when I
referred to Archbishop Borromeo's will ofrmat? I merely repeated what
one scholar wrote about the subject. He pointed out that after the
division between the Catholic and Protestant religions, the doctrinal
differences in many respects were not clear or even formulated and that
what was deemed Catholic as opposed to Protestant was arguable. Such a
will might have served for Protestants.

What did the cover of the will tell? It may have had some written-in
material that explained what the circumstances of the will were and what
it denoted. We cannot know about this since the cover page is missing.
That it is missing leads to speculation that there was a reason why it
was made to disappear.

Peter Bridgman also poo poos the value of having a Catholic/Protestant
will around for a Jew in a Protestant England. If the Borromeo will was
considered passable for Protestants, it could be helpful to a beseiged
Jewish family. On the other hand, in a Catholic England that adopted the
horrors of a Catholic inquisition its usefulness is obvious. It is to be
noted that the issue of how things would end up religiously in England
was not clear for many decades and such a will could have been very
handy for a Jew.

Concerning recusancy, which seems not to be explainable by wishing to
avoid apprehension by law court officials for debt, John in his later
years, getting more zealous as he approached closer to death and to a
heavenly accounting, may have lost patience with sitting through such an
ordeal that mocked his Jewish faith, especially when he found he could
avoid it without danger of being exposed.

I would also comment on the presence in Shakespeare's work of some
doctrinal material that was Catholic, aside from its explanation as part
of the plot, cannot be considered as definitive evidence of his
religious origin.  It could also reflect Judaic thinking. For example,
in the case of purgatory, Catholic and Jewish belief coincides. Jacob
says "I will go down mournful to Sheol-purgatory? -- the grave. Romeo
remarks to Tybalt that Mercutio's soul still hovers about, a view that
Jews subscribe to. Pergatory was deemed necessary as a concept for Jews
since, in contradistinction to the righteous, only within the suffering
of such an existence could the various degrees of evil be sorted and
punished before a soul ascended to heaven, apparently agreed to by
Catholics.

These issues are pertinent if they lead to deeper understanding of the
message of the poet. I have shown that it does indeed offer a new window
for consideration and some profound insights that we ignore to our own
loss.

David Basch

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Did the Bard Have Syphilis?

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0116  Thursday, 20 January 2005

[1]     From:   Nora Kreimer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 10:02:16 -0300
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?

[2]     From:   Jack Kamen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 08:04:31 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?

[3]     From:   Todd Pettigrew <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 09:10:01 -0400
        Subj:   RE: SHK 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?

[4]     From:   Abigail Quart <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 15:11:03 -0500
        Subj:   RE: SHK 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Nora Kreimer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 10:02:16 -0300
Subject: 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?

In his _Dark Lady_(1998), Michael Baldwin speaks of the lord
Chamberlain, Lord Hunsdon, as the illegitimate son of Henry VIII, who
had passed the disease on to his son. Lord Hunsdon was Emilia Lanier,
nee Bassano's lover and had infected her, who in turn had infected
Marlowe, the Earl of Southampton, and Shakespeare. In this novel, apart
from some medical resources, the infected agonizers went to Bath, and as
the ride seems to have been very painful, there were special saddles
intended to alleviate their pain.

 From the Sonnets, I would be inclined to infer Shakespeare had been
infected, but whether that was the cause of his death, I very much
doubt, in the light of what we know about the terminal cases of syphilis
today, and Henry VIII's own final days. But then, when all is said and
done, couldn't we just leave WS alone as he required?

Regards,
Nora Kreimer

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jack Kamen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 08:04:31 -0500
Subject: 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?

Robin Hamilton wrote

 >Closer to the Bard's time, Henry Vaughan's elder brother Edward exited
 >prematurely due to precipitating an infusion of mercury up his left
 >nostril, but that was a failed alchemical experiment rather than an
 >attempted cure for the clap.

Although there may be some overlap, Syphilis is not the clap.

Caused by neisseria, the clap is gonorrhea.

Jack Kamen

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Todd Pettigrew <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 09:10:01 -0400
Subject: 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?
Comment:        RE: SHK 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?

Robin Hamilton wonders whether "the alleged mercury cure for syph was
18th C rather than
Elizabethan."

For a consideration of mercury in syphilis from the Elizabethan period,
one might consult William Clowes' "A Short and Profitable Treatise
Touching the Cure of the Disease called Morbus Gallicus by Vnctions"
from 1579, available in facsimile in the Early English Experience
Series. At the end of that treatise is an appendix on "The nature and
propertye of Quicksilver" which suggests that the use of mercury was
highly controversial: "I finde none more in doubt at this day, than is
the Quick silver which is most commonly vsed about the curation of the
disease called the French Pocks for the opinion of the learned men are
on both partes" (sig. E7).

Todd Pettigrew

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Abigail Quart <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 19 Jan 2005 15:11:03 -0500
Subject: 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?
Comment:        RE: SHK 16.0104 Did the Bard Have Syphilis?

Mr. Thompson:

We don't stop guessing because the best part of the human mind is its
gift for inquiry. That's also the basis for all academic and scientific
research, too, isn't it? That we can't help ourselves from wondering,
from suggesting, from looking at the tiny shreds of evidence we have and
piecing together a larger picture?

That's probably why jigsaw puzzles sell so well, too.

To "stop guessing" would require an aggressive attempt to reverse
evolution (may I still say that word?) and bring us back to a previous
incurious life form, possibly one-celled. But that's a guess.

_______________________________________________________________
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 Gift to SHAKSPER

Consider making a gift to support SHAKSPER.