2005

The Use of Rolls?

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0777  Sunday, 24 April 2005

From:           Marcus Dahl <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 22 Apr 2005 16:03:15 -0000 (GMT)
Subject: 16.0768 The Use of Rolls?
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0768 The Use of Rolls?

Dear All,

Further reflections:

(1) I didn't say that Q lines are not in Alleyn's Part, I said they were
not REPEATED in Alleyn's Part.

(2) I still hold that 'Clora' is clearly wrong. It is obviously meant to
be Flora.

(3) The next time you want to wash your cheeks (assuming Greg's reading)
try have a drink at the same time. Unless your mouth is in your cheek
(and not your tongue) I feel you will struggle. The sense of the Alleyn
MS is then still deficient even with the forced reading. Clearly the Q1
text requires no such interpolation and is therefore to be prefered.

(4) On the subject of Quarto / MS comparison my point was not that Q1 is
necessarily superior - only that there is no clear view of which text
can be considered 'authoritative' when both contain difficulties to
reading.  Both texts are actorly. One was clearly in the possession of
an actor and the others (Q1-4) clearly contain oral additions, cuts and
other stage-type changes, as well as simple errors of print (which most
likely derive from the printers as much as anyone else) which are again
contained in all texts (both MSS and Q).

(5) Laurie Maguire, though rightly famous for her work on 'Bad Quartos'
is not necessarily right in her conclusions. Her work on Quartos is
erratic and hurried. Though clearly she did a lot of reading, her book
of uncertain value for indepth continued scholarship since it requires
that we accept her opinions about the status of her examined texts at
face value. I am not familiar with the work of Van Dam (though I did see
some class fight scenes by Claude) but will look him up.

A few points about the specifics of the Quarto variants of Orlando vs.
the Alleyn Ms.

(1) Grosart states in his introduction to his 1883 edition of Greene's
works: 'I gladly accept Dyce's readings, etc., from the Alleyn MS.,
albeit it is singularly corrupt and needs critical study. It exemplifies
how unauthoritative were the acting copies often.'

(2) Considering the above there are clear corruptions in both the Quarto
variants and the Alleyn text of Orlando Furioso. It is not simply a
question (and this was my point) of saying Q1 = Bad Quarto; Alleyn =
Good Text. There appears to be an interplay between both texts - some
passages are cut from Q where they are extended in the MS; some sections
of the MS are clearly actorly extensions; many individual words and
phrases are mixed up between Q and MS - orders reversed, individual
words changed, mispelt, ammended etc.

e.g.s of alternatives / corruptions etc (Readings from Grosart's text -
the only one I have to hand at the moment!)

LL 638 Q:
'I finde her drift: perhaps the modest pledge
of my content, hath with a secret smile
And sweet disguise restrained her fancie thus;'

Alleyn has 'a privy thought' for 'secret smile'

---

LL 701Q:

Angelica doth none but Medor Love.
Orlando. Angelica doth none but Medor loue?

AMSS

Nought but Angelica and Medors loue,
Orl. Nought but Angelica and Medors loue!'

---

L 755Q:

See where he comes ... [Oral Formulae]

---

AMSS

art thou not fayre Angelica,
with browes as faire as faire Ibythea,

LL 1058Q:

Why art thou not that faire Angelica
Whose hiew ['s] as bright as faire Erythea

---

[&c. = Actor's cut?]

LL 1248Q:

Feare not Achilles ouer-madding boy;
Pyrrus shall not, &c.
Sounes, /Orgalio, why suffrest thou this old
trot, to come so nigh me?
Orgalio. Come, come, standy by, your breath
stinkes.
Orlando. What? be all the Troianes fled?
Then giue me some drinke.
Melissa. Here, Palatine, drinke;
And euer bee thou better for this draught.
Orlando. What's here?
The paltrie bottle that Darius quaft?

He drinkes, and she charmes him with her wand,
and he lies downe to sleepe. [Notice misplaced (but full) stage direction
- hardly done by actors or playwrights but most likely by printers from
messy copy?]

Else would I set my mouth to Tygres streames
And drinke up ouerflowing Euphrates.
Mine eyes are heauie, and I needes must sleepe.
---

ALMSS

Feare not Achilles ouer-madding boy;
Pyrrus shall not. Aragalio, why suffrest
this olde trott to come so nere me
away with thes rages!
fetch me the Robe that proud Apollo wears,
that I may Iett it in the capytoll.
Araglio, is Medor here? say whiche of
these is he. courage! for why, the palatyne
of fraunce straight will make slaughter
of these daring foes. currunt [italics]
.....
are all the troyans fledd? then giue me
some drynke, some drink...my lord
els will I sett my mouth to Tigris streames
and drink up ouerflowing Euphrates. [notice there is no definate article
in either Q or MSS]
... My lord.
This is the gesey shepherdes bottle, that Darius
quaft. so , so, so , oh so ....

---

LL1294Q

Orlando. What sights, what shapes, what strange-conceited dreames,
More dreadful than appeard to Hecuba

AMSS

What sights, what shewes, what fearefull shapes are these.

---

LL1364Q:

Orlando. I am, thou seest, a mercenarie souldier,

[the word mercenarie is repeated twice later in Q and where later AMSS has
'sluish Indian mercenary' Q has 'common mercenary soldier']

AMSS

I am, thou seest, a cuntry seruile swayne

---

LL1403Q:

Base villaine, vassall, Vnworthy of a crowne

AMSS

vassal! base villaine! worthlesse!

---

etc etc

All the best,
Marcus 'see it's more complicated than you think' Dahl

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Martin Green on 'Quondam

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0776  Sunday, 24 April 2005

[1]     From:   Steve Sohmer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 22 Apr 2005 13:05:19 EDT
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0761 Martin Green on 'Quondam'

[2]     From:   Martin Green <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Friday, 22 Apr 2005 23:03:24 +0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 16.0761 'Quondam'


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Steve Sohmer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 22 Apr 2005 13:05:19 EDT
Subject: 16.0761 Martin Green on 'Quondam'
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0761 Martin Green on 'Quondam'

Dear Friends,

I, for one, found this argument utterly convincing.

Steve

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Martin Green <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 22 Apr 2005 23:03:24 +0000
Subject: 16.0761 'Quondam'
Comment:        Re: SHK 16.0761 'Quondam'

I very much appreciate Gerald Downs' kind words about my suggestion in
1974 that Shakespeare might have punned (as I believe he did), on
quondam and condom. Mr. Downs asks whether the word condom might be
derived from condum, a Latin word meaning cup or pot.

In 1994, in my book. Wriothesley's Roses in Shakespeares Sonnets, Poems,
and Plays, I noted (on page 271) that when Thomas Wriothesley, upon the
dissolution of the monasteries by Henry VIII, was able to acquire the
Premonstratension Monastery in Titchfield for his country manor, one of
his agents notified him that the monastery was burdened with debts,
including a pension "granted to the old quondam." which Wriothesley was
obliged to pay. In a footnote to the word "quondam" (footnote 15 on
pages 389-90), I wrote the following:

[Beginning of quoted footnote:] This appearance of the word "quondam,"
used as a noun, to designate a former member of a monastic order - of
whom there must have been thousands in England after 1539 - may provide
the solution to the mystery of the origin of the word "condom." In
TheLabyrinth of Shakespeare's Sonnets, pp. 22-24, I showed that
"quondam," in Shakespeare's time, was pronounced "condom," and I
suggested that a number of Shakespearean lines, such as

Your quondam wife swears still by Venus Glove [Troilus and Cressida, IV,
v, 179, following typography in First Folio] have a mordant wit about
them, if the word "quondam" is understood to be a punning reference to
"condom." This observation was made in aid of an interpretation of
Sonnet 34 to the effect that the "cloak" therein referred to was a
protective device like a "condom"; I pointed out that any article of
clothing is an apt metaphor for "condom," and noted that common French
terms for that device are articles of clothing: "la redingote anglaise"
(English coat or cloak) - and "la capote anglaise" (English cloak). But
I was unable to offer any explanation for the origin of the word. (Nor
has anyone else explained the word; see William E. Kruck's Looking for
Dr. Condom (University of Alabama Press, 1981).) Now, however. I venture
to suggest that the quondams of England, going about the countryside in
their monastic garb, often wearing hoods or cowls, were the inspiration
for the term. The quondams persisted in wearing their habits, out of
habit: [an entry in the] DNB. s. v. Cromwell, Thomas, relates that
Cromwell, "happening to meet one Friar Bartley near St. Paul's still
wearing his cowl after the suppression, 'Yea.' said Cromwell, 'will not
that cowl of yours be left off yet? And if I hear by one o'clock that
this apparel be not changed, thou shalt be hanged immediately, for
example to all others.'" Cromwell could not police all of England,
however, and we may suppose that many cowl-wearing quondams in the
provinces escaped his notice, and were a striking enough part of the
landscape to give their name to the then newly-devised disease
prevention sheathe, which physically and functionally resembled their
cowls, hoods and capes. (The use of the word "quondam" in the quoted
letter as a noun is not unique; other examples in the [volumes of the
Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII, cited as L & P] are VII,
No. 1658, p. 613; XII, Part 2, No. 822, p. 289; XIII, Part I. No. 19, p.
6, and No. 847, p. 314.)

I also speculated that Shakespeare had a special connection with
condoms, and that his father, who was a glover, may have been in the
business of making them (for they were then made of soft animal skins).
It has since occurred to me that Robert Greene's famous attack upon "
those Gentlemen of his Quondam acquaintance, that spend their wits in
making plaies, "may be an allusion to that connection;  if we remember
the meaning of "spend" (to ejaculate), and are aware of Herbert A.
Ellis' discovery that "wit" to Elizabethans meant the sexual organs of
either sex (Ellis, Shakespeare's Lusty Punning in Love's Labour's Lost,
1973), pp. 103-110), then Greene's line becomes especially apposite and
sarcastic. [End of quoted footnote.]

So, my answer to Mr. Downs' question is, "I don't know, but maybe"  -
and since most of the quondams wandering around England after the
dissolution of the monasteries probably knew some Latin, I suppose it is
not impossible that they perceived, and communicated to others, a sense
of the possibility of punning on quondam, quandom, and condum, (The
quondams were, of course, not wholly innocent of sexual matters: the
pseudo-justification for King Henry's seizure of the monasteries was the
finding, perhaps exaggerated, by his special investigative task force,
that sexual activities of all kinds were going on in most of them.)

M. Green

_______________________________________________________________
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 Flowers and Plants"

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0774  Sunday, 24 April 2005

From:           Daniel Traister <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 22 Apr 2005 10:06:23 -0400
Subject:        "Shakespeare's Flowers and Plants" (an exhibition)

The Pennsylvania Horticultural Society, 100 North 20th Street,
Philadelphia, has mounted (through May 28) an exhibition called
"Shakespeare's Flowers and Plants." Curated by Jude Robison, the
exhibition is on view at PHS from 9-5 weekdays.

Details may be available for some days at:
http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/life/2005/04/21seeingbotanyast.html

But, in case that site comes down, this is what it says:

  Seeing botany as the Bard liked it
  By KENT STEINRIEDE / The News Journal
  4/21/2005

Doctors, lawyers, scientists and the clergy have all claimed that
Shakespeare came from their ranks. So why not gardeners?

Nearly 30 scenes in his plays take place in a garden, and his characters
seem to know what they're talking about when it comes to weeds, trees,
flowers and herbs and their properties, both medicinal and poetic.
"A Midsummer Night's Dream" takes place in a woods, and "As You Like It"
is set in the forest of Arden. Hamlet calls Denmark "an unweeded garden"
and urges his mother to "not spread the compost on the weeds to make
them ranker."

"He was really quite knowledgeable," says Jude Robison, library
conservator for the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society in Philadelphia,
which features a small exhibit of Shakespeare's botanical world in the
library. The exhibit, which runs through June, includes botanical books
from Shakespeare's time and information on the Bard and his botanical
references.

The exhibit runs in conjunction with the Philadelphia Shakespeare
Festival's production of "As You Like It," which plays until May 28.

During Shakespeare's time, gardening became more common among all
classes, which meant that plants were a sort of common ground with which
all of his audience could identify, according to theater critic Tom
Prideaux in a 1977 article in Horticulture magazine about Shakespeare's
botanical connections.

If Shakespeare didn't garden himself, he probably knew many people who
did, or who at least knew about plants, Robison says.

His son-in-law, John Hall, was a doctor and herbalist and most likely
had botanical and medical books, such as John Gerard's "Herball or
General History of Plants," the best-known book on plants in English
during Shakespeare's time."It was the most comprehensive [herbal] until
the 17th century," Robison says.

Published in 1597, Gerard's book is made from rag paper and thick
leather binding and is similar to one Shakespeare may have used as a
reference. The wood-cut illustrations came from a Dutch herbal.

To add a dramatic touch, there is a debate whether Gerard plagiarized
his herbal from a translation of an earlier Latin book on plants,
Robison says.

IF YOU GO
Shakespeare's Flowers and Plants
WHERE: Pennsylvania Horticultural Society library, 100 N. 20th St.,
Philadelphia
WHEN: 9 a.m.-5 p.m. weekdays through May 28.
COST: Free.
INFORMATION: (215) 988-8800 or www.pennsylvaniahorticulturalsociety.org

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Sonnets

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0775  Sunday, 24 April 2005

From:           Stefan Andreas Sture <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Sunday, 24 Apr 2005 21:57:49 +0200
Subject:        Sonnets

Is there any facsimile of Shake-speare's Sonnets available?

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Fake Flower

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0773  Sunday, 24 April 2005

From:           Al Magary <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 22 Apr 2005 16:21:39 -0700
Subject:        Fake Flower

The National Portrait Gallery, in studying six apparent portraits of
Shakespeare, has "categorically stated" that the Flower portrait, owned
by the Royal Shakespeare Company, is a early 19th century fake.

You can do a Google News search but one long article, with the painting,
is the Telegraph's, at
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/04/22/nbill22.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/04/22/ixhome.html
or *http://tinyurl.com/dxm7m

The NPG's website has this release, at
http://www.npg.org.uk/live/prelsearching.asp

*Update on National Portrait Gallery scientific research on Shakespeare
Portraits*

As a result of a major collaboration between the National Portrait
Gallery and the BBC, The Culture Show has been given unique access to
the scientific analysis commissioned by the Gallery on three portraits
of William Shakespeare. The Culture Show showed on Thursday 21 April the
first of three films on the portraits which will be exhibited for the
first time together in one of the Gallery's 150th anniversary
exhibitions /Searching for Shakespeare/ (2 March - 29 May 2006).

Viewers to the programme were able to watch a team of curators,
conservators and scientists undertake a series of tests on the portrait
including x-rays, ultra-violet examination, macro and micro photography
and the examination of microscopic paint samples. The Flower portrait
belonging to the Royal Shakespeare Company is one of the key objects
that will come to the National Portrait Gallery for the forthcoming
exhibition next March. The critical test proved to be paint sampling
which showed that most of the portrait was painted with pigments from
around Shakespeare's lifetime, yet the golden braid of the doublet was
painted with a pigment only available in the early 19th century, called
chrome yellow. When the pigment sample was seen under the microscope it
was evident that these particles were well integrated into the paint
layers, and thus it can be categorically stated that Flower portrait of
Shakespeare is a nineteenth century painting. The National Portrait
Gallery is undertaking investigation into two other paintings in
preparation for the exhibition; the Chandos portrait presented to the
Gallery in 1856 and the 'Grafton' portrait owned by the John Rylands
Library, University of Manchester. The results of this research will be
published in an illustrated exhibition catalogue to be published in
March 2006. Further programmes relating to the investigations and the
exhibition will be shown in the autumn and just prior to the opening
exhibition next year.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further information on:
SEARCHING FOR SHAKESPEARE

2 March - 29 May 2006

In 1856 the first portrait presented to the newly-founded National
Portrait Gallery was a compelling painting considered to be of William
Shakespeare, known as the "Chandos" portrait. At this date Shakespeare's
appearance had been a matter of national interest for around two
centuries. Yet the identity of this picture is still considered unproven
and today we have no certain lifetime portrait of England's most famous
poet and playwright. On the occasion of the National Portrait Gallery's
150th anniversary in 2006, an exhibition on the biography and
portraiture will be staged at the Gallery. Alongside the Chandos
portrait, five other "contender" portraits purporting to represent
Shakespeare will be displayed together for the first time. The
exhibition will present the results of new technical analysis and
research on several of these pictures casting new light on the search
for Shakespeare's authentic appearance. Shakespeare's life can only be
partially reconstructed, but this exhibition will also attempt to search
for the Shakespeare his contemporaries knew by looking closely at his
own circle. The exhibition will bring together original documents
relating to Shakespeare's life and portraits of his contemporaries
including actors, patrons and other playwrights, in order to place the
poet not in our historical imagination, but within his own time.

_______________________________________________________________
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.