Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2005 :: November ::
Dead Horses and Closing Threads
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1969  Wednesday, 30 November 2005

[1] 	From: 	Larry Weiss <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Tuesday, 29 Nov 2005 16:29:55 -0500
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1958 Dead Horses and Closing Threads

[2] 	From: 	Abigail Quart <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Tuesday, 29 Nov 2005 18:18:03 -0500
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 16.1958 Dead Horses and Closing Threads

[3] 	From: 	Bill Lloyd <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Wednesday, 30 Nov 2005 00:43:00 EST
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1958 Dead Horses and Closing Threads


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Larry Weiss <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Tuesday, 29 Nov 2005 16:29:55 -0500
Subject: 16.1958 Dead Horses and Closing Threads
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1958 Dead Horses and Closing Threads

I hope Hardy will permit a brief response to Bill Lloyd's post, just to 
say (1) I have no substantial objection to his proposed modifications of 
my lists -- as I thought I made clear, they are tentative ideas offered 
for discussion; (2) to answer his questions:

 >It's difficult without some preliminary discussion to determine which
 >textual or critical theories are 'crackpot'.  Does Larry mean A Lover's
 >Complaint?

No.

 >Titus Andronicus?

No.

 >Woodstock?

Yes.

And (3) to correct a misrecollection:

 >Some may have thought the Measure for Measure/Currency theory
 >that Larry defended so vehemently bordered on the crackpot.

Please!  I stood foursquare with Thomas Larque in *opposition* to that 
conjecture.  I chimed in only after I felt that Tom was being ganged up 
on unfairly by the two proponents.

And, finally, to endorse Bill's comments to the effect that non-scholars 
should not be discouraged from participating.  As most SHAKSPERians 
know, my professional qualifications lie elsewhere, but there are some 
members who think I have from time to time made a useful and "serious" 
contribution.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Abigail Quart <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Tuesday, 29 Nov 2005 18:18:03 -0500
Subject: 16.1958 Dead Horses and Closing Threads
Comment: 	RE: SHK 16.1958 Dead Horses and Closing Threads

I'm with Bill Lloyd on this:

 >"It's difficult without some preliminary discussion to determine which
 >textual
 >or critical theories are 'crackpot'.  Does Larry mean A Lover's
 >Complaint? Titus Andronicus? Woodstock? Some may have thought the
 >Measure for Measure/Currency theory that Larry defended so vehemently
 >bordered on the crackpot. (For the record, I didn't buy the theory, but
 >didn't think it crackpot.) Sometimes there's not a clear demarcation,
 >but rather a continuum between responsible speculation and crackpotation."

As the only living proponent of the theory that Will wrote at least 
Sonnet #1 to a guy named Edmund, most likely his kid brother, am I not 
allowed to mutter about it without having a published paper to back it 
up? Which is fair, I suppose, but it does get so very lonely.

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Bill Lloyd <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Wednesday, 30 Nov 2005 00:43:00 EST
Subject: 16.1958 Dead Horses and Closing Threads
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1958 Dead Horses and Closing Threads

It's been pointed out to me that in my sermon on the scholarliness of 
SHAKSPER I inadvertently confused Larry Weiss [who offered a 
permissible/impermissible list] with Ed Taft [who defended Tom Krause's 
*Measure For Measure* thesis against Thomas Larque].

Apologies to both, if necessary. Hope I've got the names right this time.

Confused Bill Lloyd

_______________________________________________________________
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.