Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2005 :: March ::
Othello's Name
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0584  Tuesday, 29 March 2005

[1]     From:   Ruth Ross <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 25 Mar 2005 14:35:41 -0500
        Subj:   RE: SHK 16.0567 Othello's Name

[2]     From:   Stuart Manger <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 25 Mar 2005 21:07:58 -0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0567 Othello's Name

[3]     From:   Larry Weiss <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 25 Mar 2005 16:23:44 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0567 Othello's Name

[4]     From:   Robin Hamilton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Saturday, 26 Mar 2005 06:21:54 -0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0567 Othello's Name

[5]     From:   Robin Hamilton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Saturday, 26 Mar 2005 06:21:54 -0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0567 Othello's Name


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Ruth Ross <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 25 Mar 2005 14:35:41 -0500
Subject: 16.0567 Othello's Name
Comment:        RE: SHK 16.0567 Othello's Name

My vision of Shakespeare is one of a playwright creating for a living,
profitable theater, anxious to give his audience plays that will
entertain the lower strata of society and intrigue those with more
education. All this in addition to acting in these plays and perhaps
having a hand in staging and directing them-in repertory, with a new one
on stage every day. I can't picture him with the time to embed his
name/initials in his work (to what end would he do that since these were
scripts he was producing for the actors to use-why would they care if WS
appeared in a speech) or time to study the Talmud in the original Hebrew
(I doubt that it had been translated into English in 1600). And where
would he have learned that language anyway?  From the 53 clerics who
translated the Bible into English for King James, I suppose. This is a
lot of nonsense, perpetrated by 2 people (scholars, I guess) who really
have too much time on their hands. David Basch and Florence Amit's long,
convoluted, enigmatic explanations and digressions are getting tiresome
to read. Hardy, please bring an end to this ridiculous thread.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Stuart Manger <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 25 Mar 2005 21:07:58 -0000
Subject: 16.0567 Othello's Name
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0567 Othello's Name

When did circumcision as a routine operation at birth for Christian and
/or Jewish boy start / stop? There are Christian boys / men who are
circumcised now. BUT in Shakespeare's day did circumcision always and
exclusively indicate a particular faith / ethnic group?

I ask because I am now totally confused: is David Basch assuming that
ONLY Jews were circumcised in Elizabeth Europe / Middle East? If so,
what is his evidence?

And, frankly, does it matter?

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Larry Weiss <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 25 Mar 2005 16:23:44 -0500
Subject: 16.0567 Othello's Name
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0567 Othello's Name

Basch again:

 >Larry Weiss again reveals his capacity to misunderstand the written word
 >and to stamp what he reads with his own personal preoccupations. As he
 >himself says, "no amount of information or reason can supply vision to
 >the willfully blind." So be it with Larry. But others on the list may be
 >willing to sort through what I have wrote and what Larry chooses to make
 >of it.

Good; lets put it to a vote.

 > I referred to the Bible as evidence
 >that such things do happen, as if that were needed in a world in which
 >rage shootings have become all too common.

No; you didn't cite it only as cumulative evidence of the obvious.  What
need is there for that?  Anyone who would trouble to read your posts
will see what you did represent. Now I amend the indictment to add
intellectual dishonesty to the charges.

 >The ordeal protected the wife from direct harm
 >whether she was guilty or not. If she was guilty, she might suffer pangs
 >of guilt and physical or psycho-somatic suffering through the ordeal as
 >her punishment, but nothing more than this.

But, obviously, an innocent wife would not suffer any physical pangs
from drinking the filthy water.

 >since the specific physical effect on the guilty wife
 >could not be predicted, her fate would literally have been "left to
 >Heaven."

On the other hand, we can predict with absolute certainty that the
innocent wife would be unscathed.   No matter how he tries to appear
rational, Basch reveals his superstition at every turn without even
knowing he is doing it.  I challenge him to do one of two things: (1)
admit that the ordeal is no more likely to injure the guilty than the
innocent; or (2) subject himself or his own wife to it under verifiable
conditions.

 >Concerning embedment in Shakespeare's Sonnets that Larry says do not
 >exist, I have presented numerous instances of these, one of them
 >involving the poet's full name and proving that he made use of such
 >devices. Here is that one from Sonnet 148 repeated below. Let Larry
 >laugh that one off:
 >
 >[11]                                    ake
 > [12]               selfe               h         eere
 > [13]                l                 s          p
 > [14]                w                            s
 >
 >
 > [11] No maruaile then   though  I   mistake my view,
 > [12] The  sunne it selfe sees not,till heauen  cleeres.
 > [13]   O cunning    loue,with    teares  thou keepst me blinde,
 > [14]   Least eyes   well seeing  thy foule  faults should finde.

Ha, ha.

Basch's examples of the letters of the tetragrammaton appearing in the
sonnets can prove the same thesis about any author who uses the letters
I, H and W within 14 lines of each other.

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Robin Hamilton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Saturday, 26 Mar 2005 06:21:54 -0000
Subject: 16.0567 Othello's Name
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0567 Othello's Name

William Godshalk <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >

 >The following passages taken from the OED, however, indicate
 >that Moor was not always used to mean Muslim or Indian Muslim.

As always, the EMEDD forms a useful supplement to the OED.

             http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/english/emed/emedd.html

Here are a few examples -- for the sake of brevity, I've omitted the
sources (found in the EMEDD).  [To cut-down the range of {mostly
irrelevant} citations thrown up, I searched on <moor NEAR black>.]

[Ethiopo], a blacke Moore, or man of [Ethiope.]

Capezzadi moro, blacke like a moore, cole blacke.

Saracino, a saracine, a sarcen, a blacke

 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.