Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2005 :: November ::
Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1974  Wednesday, 30 November 2005

[1] 	From: 	Ward Elliott <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Tuesday, 29 Nov 2005 19:35:48 -0800
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 16.1964 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...

[2] 	From: 	Michael Egan <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Tuesday, 29 Nov 2005 19:59:29 -1000
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1964 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Ward Elliott <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Tuesday, 29 Nov 2005 19:35:48 -0800
Subject: 16.1964 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...
Comment: 	RE: SHK 16.1964 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...

My sense is that our Shakespeare ranges are pretty well validated back 
to 1590, since you can find two early plays, 2H6 and R3, that fit them 
pretty closely and no gold-standard Shakespeare play of any date that 
doesn't.  I can't claim to have validated our tests earlier than 1589, 
since we have no known Shakespeare that early to compare, nor for 
co-authored plays.  But I do know that other authors by the same tests 
look much the same stylometrically at 60 as they did at 18, and I'm 
skeptical that "punctuated development" does much to show that some 
other writer who tests on a different galaxy from Shakespeare at the 
other writer's age 20 or 30 or 43 could have morphed into Shakespeare at 
29, just as I would be of someone who argued that "punctuated 
development" could morph Jerome Kern into Paul McCartney.  We discuss 
this point at considerable length in the Oxford part of "Oxford by the 
Numbers" and have heard it reiterated many times since by Oxfordians, 
but SHAKSPER does not seem to me a proper place to rehash these arguments.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Michael Egan <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Tuesday, 29 Nov 2005 19:59:29 -1000
Subject: 16.1964 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1964 Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...

Ward Elliott is obviously looking for a fight. I'm not interested. If he 
wants to discuss the authorship of 1 Richard II/Woodstock, it must be in 
an appropriately scholarly manner.

--Michael Egan

_______________________________________________________________
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.