2005

Shakespeare and "Customer Service"

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0637  Wednesday, 6 April 2005

From:           Abigail Quart <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 6 Apr 2005 00:24:03 -0400
Subject:        Shakespeare and "Customer Service"

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=18837

Sean Gonsalves
Cape Cod Times
04.05.05

Customer service or corporate prostitution?
'Company policy' makes us question who is serving whom

This week, let's examine what has become an oxymoronic euphemism --
"customer service."

According to The Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins, "customer" was
first meant to describe someone who owned a house after having rented it
for a long time, deriving from the Latin word custodia, which means
"guarding or keeping."

By the end of the 15th century, the word came to mean "one who frequents
any place for the sake of purchasing." But in the early 17th century the
meaning of the word "customer" took on another meaning, used as a
synonym for a common prostitute. In fact, Shakespeare used the word to
refer to prostitution twice in his work.

Though marketing minions, corporate executives, and "free-market"
ideologues use the word in its technical sense -- "one who frequents any
place for the sake of purchasing" -- as a longtime customer of many
businesses, I feel more like a Shakespearean prostitute than I do a
"valued customer."

...The rest didn't refer to Shakespeare.

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Shakespeare's Personal Faith

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0636  Tuesday, 5 April 2005

[1]     From:   D Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 1 Apr 2005 14:11:25 -0600
        Subj:   RE: SHK 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith

[2]     From:   Peter Bridgman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 1 Apr 2005 21:31:14 +0100
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith

[3]     From:   Abigail Quart <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Saturday, 2 Apr 2005 00:21:32 -0500
        Subj:   RE: SHK 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith

[4]     From:   John Perry <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 01 Apr 2005 10:36:47 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith

[5]     From:   Colin Cox <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Sunday, 03 Apr 2005 11:41:34 -0700
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0608 Shakespeare's Personal Faith

[6]     From:   David Basch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Sunday, 03 Apr 2005 11:38:56 -0400
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           D Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 1 Apr 2005 14:11:25 -0600
Subject: 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith
Comment:        RE: SHK 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith

Norman Hinton quotes Terence Hawkes --

 >the act of writing itself which, far from
 >transparently giving utterance to the writer's innermost state of
 >mind,
 >notoriously imposes its own bending, shaping devices upon it. Whatever
 >authors think, writing also writes. In the case of Shakespeare, this
 >means that whilst it may be profitable at any crucial point to ask what
 >the play is saying, it is both pointless and naive to ask what the Bard
 >is thinking or believing.

And asks,

"Then we must not believe what you write in your notes?"

1) You are not obliged to believe anything (though you can be obliged,
in totalitarian systems, to say you do).

2) What Hawkes (or anyone) writes is simply what he writes; you may
agree or disagree or whatever. What Hawkes *believes* is unavailable-
unless, of course, he writes, "I believe this and that." But then you
are again dealing with what he has written. He may indeed believe it, or
he may be lying (for protection from totalitarian persecution), or he
may be speaking ironically.

Cheers,
don

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Peter Bridgman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 1 Apr 2005 21:31:14 +0100
Subject: 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith

John Briggs writes ...

 >I don't think
 >that anyone has mentioned that in "Henry V" Act 4, Scene 8, line 124:
 >
 >"Let there be sung /Non nobis/ and /Te Deum/,"
 >
 >Shakespeare appears to display a greater familiarity with the Book of
 >Common Prayer than with the Vulgate Psalter.  This has the effect -
 >whether intentional or not - of turning King Henry V into an Anglican!

I do not follow John Briggs' reasoning.

The 'Non nobis Domine' is Psalm 115 from St Jerome's Vulgate (completed
405 AD) and is traditionally a song of deliverance.  The 'Te Deum
Laudamus' is a canticle of thanks that dates from the 7th century.  As
both hymns are apt choices for celebrating a military victory, WS
clearly knows something about Latin hymns.

Now what has any of this got to do with the Book of Common Prayer?

Peter Bridgman

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Abigail Quart <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Saturday, 2 Apr 2005 00:21:32 -0500
Subject: 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith
Comment:        RE: SHK 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith

Ignorant of Christian ritual as I am, I didn't know "Non nobis/ and /Te
Deum/" are Anglican. But I'm not surprised. John Briggs is correct in
guessing that Shakespeare's Henry V, as opposed to the historical king,
was, as I've said before, Anglican.

His conversion occurs in Henry V Act I, Scene 1. And Wicked Will uses
the Catholic clergy to do it. It's downright sneaky.

The Catholic clerics enter speaking in financial rather than religious
imagery:

CANTERBURY
It must be thought on. If it pass against us,
We lose the better half of our possession:
For all the temporal lands which men devout
By testament have given to the church
Would they strip from us; being valued thus:
As much as would maintain, to the king's honour,
Full fifteen earls and fifteen hundred knights,
Six thousand and two hundred good esquires;
And, to relief of lazars and weak age,
Of indigent faint souls past corporal toil.
A hundred almshouses right well supplied;
And to the coffers of the king beside,
A thousand pounds by the year: thus runs the bill.

...But then they quickly get to the king:

CANTERBURY
The king is full of grace and fair regard.

ELY
And a true lover of the holy church.

..Nice set up? The real cue is in the next speech. The word in caps is
REFORMATION, a damned odd word in a Catholic bishop's mouth:

CANTERBURY
The courses of his youth promised it not.
The breath no sooner left his father's body,
But that his wildness, mortified in him,
Seem'd to die too; yea, at that very moment
Consideration, like an angel, came
And whipp'd the offending Adam out of him,
Leaving his body as a paradise,
To envelop and contain celestial spirits.
Never was such a sudden scholar made;
Never came REFORMATION in a flood,
With such a heady currance, scouring faults
Nor never Hydra-headed wilfulness
So soon did lose his seat and all at once
As in this king.

..We've been prepped and cued. Now comes the conversion:

ELY
We are blessed in the change.

CANTERBURY
Hear him but reason in divinity,
And all-admiring with an inward wish
YOU WOULD DESIRE THE KING WERE MADE A PRELATE

..What just happened????? Ely blesses a change and Canterbury describes
the change: "You would desire the king were made a prelate:" which is a
perfect, dead-on description of the English Reformation. Could it be
sweeter? Still not sure? Well, there was a beaut of a difference between
Catholics and Protestants and, just a little further down, here it comes:

ELY
The strawberry grows underneath the nettle
And wholesome berries thrive and ripen best
Neighbour'd by fruit of baser quality:
And so the prince obscured his contemplation
Under the veil of wildness; which, no doubt,
Grew like the summer grass, fastest by night,
Unseen, yet crescive in his faculty.

CANTERBURY
It must be so; for MIRACLES ARE CEASED;
And therefore we must needs admit the means
How things are perfected.

"Miracles are ceased." Yep, that's it. Elizabethan Catholics believed we
still have miracles and Protestants didn't. This is now an Anglican
clergy, ready to wage war on Catholic France. Let the play begin!

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           John Perry <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 01 Apr 2005 10:36:47 -0500
Subject: 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0620 Shakespeare's Personal Faith

Michael Egan wrote:

 >But these are hard issues. It would be both useful and interesting if
 >some of the deeper thinkers on this list would share their thoughts
 >about them.

This, too, is a hard issue.  My last post prompted an off-list comment
from a list member that many of the more thoughtful members had been
driven into silence, and even off the list, by all the posturing and
sneering.

I appreciate very much those who endure it and continue to send
thoughtful and knowledgeable comments.

John Perry

[5]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Colin Cox <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Sunday, 03 Apr 2005 11:41:34 -0700
Subject: 16.0608 Shakespeare's Personal Faith
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0608 Shakespeare's Personal Faith

 >In the case of Shakespeare, this
 >means that whilst it may be profitable at any crucial point to ask what
 >the play is saying, it is both pointless and naive to ask what the Bard
 >is thinking or believing.

How pointless and na


A Claudius Question

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0634  Tuesday, 5 April 2005

From:           Robin Hamilton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 1 Apr 2005 17:55:19 +0100
Subject: 16.0621 A Claudius Question
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0621 A Claudius Question

 >>Hamlet, after his return from his voyage to
 >>England, says:  "This is I, Hamlet the Dane" (5.1), asserting his-in
 >>whatever terms -- status as the *legitimate* ruler of Denmark.

         [K -- I withdraw "legitimate".]

 >Sorry, Robin, this line does not alter the legal situation.

I entirely agree, Larry, but what I'm suggesting is that more important
than the technical legalities (elective monarchy, primogeniture, English
Common Law and the rights of a murderer to profit from his crime), all
of which have been argued again and again on SHAKSPER, is the dramatic
movement of the play.

Crudely, at the beginning Hamlet casts himself as a private person, at
the end he sees himself in a public role.

Histrionic or otherwise, what else *can* the phrase, "This is I, Hamlet
the Dane," signify other than a claim to authority?

         "I'm Hamlet the Dane, not Hamlet the drawer in an Eastcheap tavern"

???
 >He could
 >claim to be emperor, but it wouldn't make him such.  This sort of
 >grandiosity is typical of Hamlet at this stage of the play, like piling
 >Pelion on Ossa, and may be symptomatic of mental illness.

Trust you to put your finger on the crucial passage!

I ground my teeth over this till eventually (working with Barry Hawkins
on a series of staged-scenes for a sixth-form conference on Hamlet),
found my own answer.

For once (and I'm usually more page than stage) acting this out makes it
clear.  Hamlet isn't mad, it's more that he's thoroughly irritated (to
say the least) over Laertes' behaviour in Ophelia's grave, and parodies
Laertes' overblown rhetoric.

 >If, in fact, Hamlet was asserting that he was king, it was he, not
 >Claudius, who was usurping.

This only applies if Claudius was a *legitimate* king in the first place
-- or did Malcolm "usurp" Macbeth?

Robin Hamilton

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Words Ending in eth/th

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0635  Tuesday, 5 April 2005

[1]     From:   Robin Hamilton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 1 Apr 2005 17:24:30 +0100
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0622 Words Ending in eth/th (Psalm 46)

[2]     From:   Peter Bridgman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 1 Apr 2005 22:22:49 +0100
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0622 Words Ending in eth/th

[3]     From:   Bob Linn <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 01 Apr 2005 15:23:04 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0622 Words Ending in eth/th


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Robin Hamilton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 1 Apr 2005 17:24:30 +0100
Subject: 16.0622 Words Ending in eth/th (Psalm 46)
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0622 Words Ending in eth/th (Psalm 46)

David Basch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

 > I gather this from the
 > finding of his name embedded in Psalms, a finding that is well known and
 > kicking around for many years and even mentioned in one of Rudyard
 > Kipling's short stories.

Not so.

 From the SHAKSPER archives:

(http://www.shaksper.net/archives/2000/0391.html):

 >From:           Jay Johnson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
 >Date:           Tuesday, 22 Feb 2000 15:48:37 -0700
 >Subject: 11.0379 Fire
 >Comment:        Re: SHK 11.0379 Fire
 >
 >Syd Kasten asks:
 >
 >    "Did Kipling mention the Psalm xlvi thing?"
 >
 >No, there is no mention of the Psalm 46 thing in Kipling's "Proofs of
 >Holy Writ."  In that story, we watch Shakespeare and Jonson work on
 >Isaiah 60:1-3 and 19-20.

For the Kipling text:

         http://www.kipling.org.uk/rg_proofs1.htm

Robin Hamilton

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Peter Bridgman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 1 Apr 2005 22:22:49 +0100
Subject: 16.0622 Words Ending in eth/th
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0622 Words Ending in eth/th

John Briggs writes ...

 >The answer to that is that Shakespeare did not 'translate' the Psalms.
 >The Psalms were translated into English before he was born.

Long before.  The earliest English translations being the Glossed
Psalter (9th century), the Paris Psalter (c. 900), a complete Old
Testament in Anglo-Norman (early 14th century), and the West Midland
Psalter (1340-50).

Peter Bridgman

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Bob Linn <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 01 Apr 2005 15:23:04 -0500
Subject: 16.0622 Words Ending in eth/th
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0622 Words Ending in eth/th

So, David Basch is in agreement with Bill Arnold.  Is there a figure of
speech, more precise than irony, for this state of affairs?

Bob Linn

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Ralph Crane: Accidental Editor

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0633  Tuesday, 5 April 2005

From:           William Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 01 Apr 2005 19:47:50 -0500
Subject: 16.0592 Ralph Crane: Accidental Editor
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0592 Ralph Crane: Accidental Editor

Has anyone so far mentioned T. H. Howard-Hill's essay in Shakespeare
Survey 44 (1992) 113-29: "Shakespeare's Earliest Editor, Ralph Crane"?
If so, it has evaded my search engine.

Bill Godshalk

_______________________________________________________________
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.