Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2005 :: December ::
Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.2027  Thursday, 8 December 2005

[1] 	From: 	Marcus Dahl <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Wednesday, 7 Dec 2005 15:44:06 -0000 (GMT)
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.2018 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...

[2] 	From: 	William L Davis <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Wednesday, 07 Dec 2005 13:24:42 -0500
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 16.1999 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...

[3] 	From: 	William L Davis <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Wednesday, 07 Dec 2005 13:26:57 -0500
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 16.1999 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...

[4] 	From: 	Steven Urkowitz <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Thursday, 08 Dec 2005 10:36:00 -0500
	Subj: 	Re: Lions, Tigers, Wagers . . .


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Marcus Dahl <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Wednesday, 7 Dec 2005 15:44:06 -0000 (GMT)
Subject: 16.2018 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.2018 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...

Hi all

Sorry just to clarify - I used the whole Folio and Quarto Shakespeare 
canon as well as 24 other author groups - 87 linguistic tests and more 
recently the 100 most frequently used words in Shakespeare Folio 
compared (using Zscores and Sum of Squares etc) with each Folio text and 
the Shakespeare Apocrypha (plus Pericles and Wilkins' Miseries)

Interestingly Richard 3 does seem linguistically quite distinct from 1-3 
HVI. 2 and 3 HVI definitely cling together too.

I could not at this stage confirm whether John Brigg's proposition re: 
earlier dating of Rich III is true. I tend to think of 1HVI as one of 
the earliest 'Shakespearean' texts but then the whole issue of dating 
the early plays is pretty uncertain in my view.

More soon!

All best,
Marcus

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		William L Davis <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Wednesday, 07 Dec 2005 13:24:42 -0500
Subject: 16.1999 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...
Comment: 	RE: SHK 16.1999 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...

Don Bloom writes:  "I'm not sure just what these early London years are? 
What firm dates do we have for them?"

I'm not sure we do have firm dates, at least as far as Shakespeare's 
arrival in London is concerned.  That's why I have avoided trying to pin 
down an exact timeframe defining Shakespeare's early years there.  But 
even though we may not know when exactly it happened, we obviously do 
know that it did happen, and so for me the issue then becomes finding 
out how that arrival and early experience affected his writing.

Best,
William Davis

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		William L Davis <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Wednesday, 07 Dec 2005 13:26:57 -0500
Subject: 16.1999 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...
Comment: 	RE: SHK 16.1999 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...

With respect to Hardy's post on staying focused, I would like to make a 
suggestion.  I had originally hoped to go into greater detail with 
stylometry in general, without necessarily going into great detail on 
any particular play, and pursue further questions and clarifications of 
how those studies relate to Shakespeare's early work and how we go about 
the task of identifying his developing hand.  This thread, however, 
oftentimes has become heavy with its specific references to stylometry 
as it relates to Woodstock/1R2.  While I feel that all of these issues 
are important for discussion, I also believe it would be more effective 
to separate these lines of thought.  To that end, and with the hopes of 
pursuing greater clarification on the stylometric studies in general, I 
will be addressing those issues under a separate topic heading.

William Davis

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Steven Urkowitz <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Thursday, 08 Dec 2005 10:36:00 -0500
Subject: 	Re: Lions, Tigers, Wagers . . .

A suggestion for stylometric analysts: How about running your programs 
on the "bad" quarto texts -- some, or maybe all of them -- as well as 
their better brethren?  Ever standing up for bastards, I've been arguing 
since back in the last century that these earliest-printed texts are 
really interesting documents.  Whatever their genesis, they're closer in 
time of publication to the likely time of composition.

The results of stylometric analysis might be helpful in ascertaining 
their possible singular or multiple authorship.  If they're "pirated," 
or "memorially reconstructed," or compiled from different authorial 
hands, we'd still learn something about the pirates, actors, or authors.

(See my "Peter Alexander's Textual Analysis of Shakespeare's Early 
Histories," English Literary Renaissance 18 (1988), 230-57.

"Texts with Two Faces: Noticing Theatrical Revisions in Henry VI, Parts 
2 and 3." In Thomas Pendleton, ed., Henry VI: Critical Essays. New York: 
Routledge, 2001. 27-37.)

Steve Urquartowitz


  _______________________________________________________________
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.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.