2005

A Shrew

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1698  Thursday, 6 October 2005

From: 		Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Tuesday, 04 Oct 2005 15:36:29 -0400
Subject: 	A Shrew

I have recently had occasion to revisit the issue of the relationship 
between The Shrew and the 1594 quarto of A Shrew, and I find that the 
current state of scholarship is murky.  For example, the summary in the 
textual note in Riverside 2d indicates that there is a consensus in 
favor of the "bad quarto" theory and cites, inter alia, Wells/Taylor. 
But the Oxford Textual Companion does not seem to adopt that view, or 
any other.  Is there a consensus, and, if so, for which theory?  If not, 
how do the various current textual scholars line up for the various 
theories:

1.  A Shrew is a memorial reconstruction of The Shrew.  (Improbable it 
seems to me, since the texts are so vastly different.  Presumably, this 
is why Gwynne Evans prefers the expression "memorial imitation.")

2.  A Shrew is WS's source.  Evans says this theory "is no longer accepted"

3.  A Shrew and The Shrew have a lost common source

4.  A Shrew is a revision of The Shrew

	a.  by Shakespeare (astronomically unlikely according to 
Elliott/Valenza) or

	b.  by someone else (any ideas who?)

Of course there is the inextricably related question of what happened to 
the Sly continuation --

1.  WS lost interest in the Sly motif, which he had begun to follow from 
The Shrew or the lost common source

2.  The hypothesized reviser of The Shrew added those scenes

3.  WS completed the Sly frame but it was blotted, and Compositor B did 
not notice the blot until he had set the induction and first interscene. 
  If that was the case, who deleted the Sly motif -- WS, the book 
holder, Hemmings & Condell -- and why?

4.  A Shrew is based on a later version of The Shrew in which WS 
completed the Sly frame, while F1 was set from an earlier version which 
was still incomplete.  This last conjecture is floated by Wells/Taylor, 
who offer it as a "possibility" in Textual Companion.

Perhaps there are still other explanations.

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Palermo Conference

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1697  Thursday, 6 October 2005

From: 		Michele Marrapodi <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Wednesday, 5 Oct 2005 18:00:40 +0200
Subject: 	Fourth International Palermo Conference - Shakespeare Yearbook 
(2007)

Conference Announcement
(with apologies for cross posting)

Fourth International Palermo Conference - _Shakespeare Yearbook_ (2007).

Call for Papers

Papers are solicited on the theme of "Shakespeare and Renaissance 
Literary Theory" for the Fourth International Palermo Conference to be 
held (in association with the General Editor of _Shakespeare Yearbook_) 
at the Faculty of Arts of the University of Palermo from Thursday 15 to 
Saturday 17, June 2006.  Topics may deal with early modern Italian and 
English dramatic theories, the question of genre and decorum, the 
English response to tragicomedy and Italian dramatic theories, the 
influence of Italian touring companies and _commedia dell'arte_ types, 
Shakespeare's reliance on and resistance to classical rules, fixed 
genres, and dramatic conventions.  The deadline is 30 April 2006. 
Contributors will include Louise George Clubb, Robert Henke, Robin 
Headlam Wells, Keir Elam, J. H.  Halio, and Frances K. Barasch.

Proposed contributions should be presented according to the style sheet 
of _Shakespeare Yearbook_. The length of an article should not exceed 
7000 words, including endnotes. The title of papers together with a 
one-page abstract must be sent to Michele Marrapodi (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.) 
and to Douglas Brooks (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.) by 31st January 2006.

Michele Marrapodi
University of Palermo

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Caliban's Father

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1695  Tuesday, 4 October 2005

From: 		Joseph Egert <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Monday, 03 Oct 2005 02:28:16 +0000
Subject: 16.1665 Caliban's Father
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1665 Caliban's Father

Alan Horn, yet another budding censor, chastises this humble amateur for 
wondering out loud about possible anagrams Myriad Man may have wrought 
for his TEMPEST figures--are they "All coincidence?"--likening me, 
horror of horrors, to David Basch, our tireless leader in that department.

Hardy, allow me one last swing at Alan Horn's hardball before snipping 
the thread.

The question mark after "coincidence" is only partly rhetorical. I was 
hoping to draw light from august scholars in our lively community on 
just how to evaluate such possible wordplay. Are we to ignore "J.C." as 
initials for both "Julius Caesar" and "Jesus Christ"? Are we to 
discourage novel imaginative exegesis?

While I reject Basch's overall thesis of Shakespeare as a 
crypto-converso, I'd limit censorship only to obsessive repetition of 
specific points by the same poster, and not otherwise. One woman's 
flower is another man's weed. Skepticism, yes. Censorship, no. Why not 
heed our fellow SHAKSPERite (SHK 16.0620): "Perhaps we should do without 
all-purpose rules about what we can and cannot know..."

Snip away, Hardy!
Joe Egert

[Editor's Note: This thread is at an end. Further correspondence should 
be done privately.]

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Performing Angelo

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1696  Tuesday, 4 October 2005

[1] 	From: 	Peter Bridgman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 15:59:23 +0100
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1682 Performing Angelo

[2] 	From: 	Tom Krause <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 11:03:28 -0400
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1682 Performing Angelo

[3] 	From: 	David Basch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Saturday, 01 Oct 2005 20:51:49 -0400
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1682 Performing Angelo

[4] 	From: 	Robert Projansky <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 18:21:13 -0700
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1667 Performing Angelo


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Peter Bridgman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 15:59:23 +0100
Subject: 16.1682 Performing Angelo
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1682 Performing Angelo

Abigail Quart writes ...

 >ISABELLA IS NOT A NUN.

Quite right, she is a novice of the Poor Clares.  According to their 
website (www.poorclares.org), a modern-day Isabella would take her final 
vows six years after entering the nunnery.  The following is from 
www.newadvent.org ...

"The daily life of the Poor Clares is occupied with both work and 
prayer. It is a life of penance and contemplation.  The rule says that 
the sisters shall fast at all times except on the feast of the Nativity. 
  The constitutions explain that meat may not be used even on Christmas. 
  The "great silence" is from Compline [night prayer] until after the 
conventual Mass.  During the day there is one hour of recreation except 
on Friday. Meals are taken in silence.  The Divine Office is recited, 
not sung.  The Franciscan breviary is used.  The habit is a loose 
fitting garment of gray frieze; the cord is of linen rope about one-half 
inch in thickness having four knots representing the four vows; the 
sandals are of cloth".

Peter Bridgman

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Tom Krause <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 11:03:28 -0400
Subject: 16.1682 Performing Angelo
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1682 Performing Angelo

John-Paul Spiro writes:

"It would take many pages (pretty much my whole dissertation) to discuss 
this fully, but while we're on it, I think that Shakespeare made a 
choice to keep her silent."

Does your dissertation consider the following:  Since the Duke can be 
seen to represent King James, and since Isabella can be seen to 
represent Elizabeth ("Isabella" is "Elizabeth" in various Romance 
languages, and there's at least one obvious parallel), might not the 
"marriage proposal" represent the succession of Elizabeth by James? 
As Marjorie Garber puts it in "Shakespeare After All," a "fantasmic 
outcome" of viewing Elizabeth as Isabella "is to see the romance at the 
end as an iconographic rendering of James's final victory, the deceased 
Elizabeth's capitulation to the new King's hand and to his will."

And if the iconography is correct, perhaps it makes sense not to have an 
express acceptance.

Tom Krause

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		David Basch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Saturday, 01 Oct 2005 20:51:49 -0400
Subject: 16.1682 Performing Angelo
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1682 Performing Angelo

John Paul Spiro wrote:

The Duke does say, "Whereto if you'll a willing ear incline,/
What's mine is yours and what is yours is mine"
                                                   MfM (5.1.550-51)

John Paul doesn't realize it but he has presented a direct quotation 
from the Talmud's Pirke Avoth, the tract popularly known as "The Ethics 
of our Fathers." (One of many such Talmudic quotations in his plays.) 
This portion of the Talmud gives the sayings of four types of persons, 
as follows:

(5.13.)  There are four characters among men:  he who says, What is
mine is mine and what is thine is thine, his is a neutral character:
-- some say, this is a character like that of Sodom; he who says, What
is mine is thine and what is thine is mine, is an unlearned person;
he who says, What is mine is thine and what is thine is thine,
is a saint; he who says What is thine is mine and what is mine is mine,
is a wicked man.

Notice that in this typology the Duke would be an unlearned person, that 
is, a person who does not understand life in the deep way of the 
learned.  For example, the Duke's prescription of marriage as the cure 
for all ills has been noted as arbitrary and naive, not bound to bring 
solutions to problems that it is applied to. Nor is he wise in trusting 
so complex a job as running city to an untried young man. It sure looks 
like Shakespeare through this quotation has given a direct clue to his 
intention in this play in creating a spoof and tour de force for the 
purpose of exploring the reactions of his characters when they find 
themselves facing the measures that they have applied to others.

The play is an ingenious crafting of events in which these things come 
to pass. But, in doing so, Shakespeare has had to compromise on the 
realism of the story line that features a shallow Duke that takes a 
holiday. It is this Duke's assumed character that enables the situations 
to unfold.

David Basch

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Robert Projansky <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 18:21:13 -0700
Subject: 16.1667 Performing Angelo
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1667 Performing Angelo

Peter Bridgman says:

 >Of course she "blows off the Duke". If Shakespeare's intention
 >is that Isabella accepts the Duke's marriage offer, there is no
 >reason at all for WS not to show this.

Blows him off? Not a chance. Isabella obviously accepts the Duke and 
there's good reason not to say so in the text.

As far as Isabella knows, the Duke is the great guy who has saved her 
brother through considerable effort and at no cost to her virginity. In 
the very next line after his proposal, the Duke says of Claudio, "He is 
my brother too". Seconds ago Claudio was a felon under sentence of 
death; now his prince calls him "brother". What could more sharply 
illustrate the immensity of the gift of Isabella's elevation to the 
highest social position in the land? And the Duke is her sovereign, with 
the same power Elizabeth or James had to decide who would marry whom. 
Furthermore, as Dr. Sigmund Shakespeare has shown us, Isabella's 
repressed sexuality wants the marriage bed, not a cloister:

Th' impression of keene whips, I'ld weare as Rubies,
And strip my selfe to death, as to a bed

I don't think an audience of that day could imagine her rejecting the 
Duke (or us arguing about it).

Why doesn't Isabella express her acceptance after the Duke says, "Give 
me your hand, and say you will be mine"? Because that's WS's dramatic 
choice. The real issue here is about how it plays onstage, not about the 
meaning of anything within the world of the play. The Duke reveals and 
pardons the still-living Claudio, proposes to Isabella, and dispenses 
Angelo's huge pardon in a single sentence -- it's the big payoff moment 
in the play. He winds down from these fireworks only when he wheels on 
Lucio, for the play's comic finish.

Isabella says nothing because WS didn't want to interrupt the big payoff 
and the sweep down to Duke v. Lucio, which we have been looking forward 
to since they first met. She's not being ignored; in the next line after 
the Duke's proposal, he postpones discussion, "But fitter time for 
that". A scripted Isabella response is unnecessary, she's just had her 
big moment, and the play doesn't need more talk from her. Onstage, her 
most loving, appreciative, and enthusiastic acceptance requires not even 
a pause [Duke takes her hand; Isabella glows]. Lots of obvious action in 
Shakespeare is inferred because it isn't explicit in the text or stage 
directions, e.g., the unmuffeling of Claudio and the unhooding of the 
Duke (and some not so obvious: see Hamlet v. Laertes). Her acceptance is 
equally obvious and in terms of stagecraft is less important than 
getting to the comic windup.

Also, mercy is the main subject in M4M, so WS deals with the love story 
summarily but sufficiently: boy gets girl, done, and you get your 
traditional happy-ending marriage. Too abrupt? Like Prospero, the Duke 
will fill it out at his after-the-play get-together:

Deere Isabell,
I haue a motion much imports your good,
Whereto if you'll a willing eare incline;
What's mine is yours, and what is yours is mine.
So bring vs to our Pallace, where wee'll show
What's yet behinde, that meete you all should know.

Isn't that sweet? Of course she accepts, which is why the Duke gives us 
"and what is yours is mine" to think about.

Peter Bridgman also says:

 >A "happy ending" would satisfy the conventions of Comedy
 >Writing, and would give the play the resolution it lacks.

Huh? M4M doesn't have a happy ending? Isabella, of late so uptight about 
her brother's human weakness, turns out to have the heroic goodness of 
heart to beg for mercy for the awful man who tried to ravish her (and 
cheat her, too), and the result: she gets the first ladyship of Vienna 
with her handsome prince (of course he's handsome; he's the leading 
man), and a happy ending for everybody onstage, even the bad guys. The 
wicked Angelo is snagged, contrite, and forgiven, Lucio merely has to 
marry the mother of his child, and even Barnardine -- a murderer! -- is 
pardoned and freed. Now that's a happy ending.

Best to all,
Bob Projansky

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Italian Translations of Shakespeare

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1694  Tuesday, 4 October 2005

[1] 	From: 	Alan Jones <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 15:07:17 +0100
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare

[2] 	From: 	Peter Bridgman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 16:33:00 +0100
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare

[3] 	From: 	Stuart Manger <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 16:35:41 +0100
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare

[4] 	From: 	Kathy Dent <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Sunday, 02 Oct 2005 00:50:39 +0100
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare

[5] 	From: 	Jack Kamen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Sunday, 2 Oct 2005 09:25:53 -0500
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare

[6] 	From: 	David Evett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Sunday, 2 Oct 2005 15:44:37 -0400
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1676 Marmite


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Alan Jones <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 15:07:17 +0100
Subject: 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare

Marmite (MARmight) is a dark-brown salty goo made from (chiefly) yeast 
extract and spices. It is spread very thinly indeed (scraped, really) on 
buttered toast, as a snack. One can also use it to flavour stews and 
suchlike. It has an Australian cousin, Vegemite, which to me tastes very 
similar. Both are revolting unless used very sparingly, but much enjoyed 
by many in the UK and the former colonies.

Alan Jones

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Peter Bridgman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 16:33:00 +0100
Subject: 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare

Norman Hinton asks ...

 >what is Marmite?

A vegetarian savoury spread made from yeast extract and salt.  If it 
wasn't for the high salt content (4.3% sodium) it would be incredibly 
healthy as the protein content is 38.4%.

What does it taste like?  We once had some friends over from New York 
who said it tasted like they "put a finger up their ass and licked it". 
  We did wonder how they might know (but then they were from NYC).

Peter Bridgman

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Stuart Manger <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Saturday, 1 Oct 2005 16:35:41 +0100
Subject: 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare

'Mar-might' is a concentrated beef extract. Deep black brown and 
thickish consistency. On fresh white bread - very Swallows and Amazons, 
but which if spread VERY thinly under peanut butter on very hot brown 
toast is delicious, but otherwise best in gingering up salad sandwiches, 
some meats eg ham etc. In a wonderfully squat, squashed orange shape, 
deep brown almost black glass jar, and a bright yellow screw top, and 
bright yellow and green label.  Used too as gravy browning and 
flavouring in less favoured days. Having sadly sad times at the moment 
because it is pretty high is salt. Frightfully redolent of Empire.

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Kathy Dent <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Sunday, 02 Oct 2005 00:50:39 +0100
Subject: 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare
Comment: 	RE: SHK 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare

 >Thanks for the definition -- but now I have to ask: what is Marmite
 >And is it pronounced 'mar-might' or 'mar-meet'', and which syllable 
gets the stress ?

Pronounced mar-might.  Don't be fooled about all that ambrosia stuff. 
What the Greek gods were actually eating was Marmite.  Otherwise known 
as yeast extract, it is a smooth, brown, salty goo that comes in a 
smooth, brown, dumpy jar with a sunny yellow lid.  The Aussies have an 
inferior version known as Vegemite, but it falls sadly short of the 
perfection of Marmite.  Marmite is available in the US, but you'd have 
to find a shop that sells stuff for ex-pat Brits.  Along with teabags 
and digestive biscuits, it is one of the foods that those in exile yearn 
for.

By the way, how has the Twiglet thread strayed from its home under the 
Southwark blue plaque discussion?

And I know it's a bit late in the day, but I was sorry that Larry Weiss 
was so sniffy about other recipients of the blue plaque.  Personally, I 
was delighted to hear that Una Marson has been honoured in this way.  As 
well as being a poet in her own right, she was instrumental in creating 
a broadcast forum for Caribbean literature on the BBC.  In this way, she 
assisted the emergence of Caribbean literature, just as Philip 
Henslowe's Rose Theatre was instrumental in bringing early modern drama 
to the world.  Perhaps Larry Weiss is unaware that Nobel prize winners 
Derek Walcott and Vidia Naipaul (among many others) gained an early 
platform for their work through the BBC's Caribbean Voices radio 
programme in the early nineteen fifties; Una Marson and later 
broadcaster Henry Swanzy are to be credited for this.

Kathy Dent

[5]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Jack Kamen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Sunday, 2 Oct 2005 09:25:53 -0500
Subject: 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1676 Italian Translations of Shakespeare

 >Thanks for the definition -- but now I have to ask: what is
 >Marmite ? I have seen the term in hundreds of British
 >thriller and detective novels, and in many modern British
 >novels, but I have never been able to figure out what it is,
 >nor have I seen it in a grocery store (I assume it is something
 >to eat),

I believe all list members should be made aware of two programs that 
offer almost instantaneous definitions and much, much more. The 
definitions may be accessed by simply placing the cursor bar on any 
word, in any document, and pressing Alt. The programs are:

GuruNet (http://www.gurunet.com) and AnswerBar , which is a free 
offshoot of gurunet.

I find these programs to be very timesaving and almost indispensable. 
Try it on 'marmite'.

Jack Kamen

[6]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		David Evett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Sunday, 2 Oct 2005 15:44:37 -0400
Subject: 16.1676 Marmite
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1676 Marmite

Marmite is vegetable-flavored brewers yeast processed to produce a 
gelatinous goo, dark brown in color, rather salty. I don't know what its 
actual nutritional value is, but it has been advertised for decades as 
being healthful, whether added by the spoonful to the gravy or spread on 
slices of bread-a standard snack for British children and for adults 
nostalgic for the nursery. The name comes from the kind of large ceramic 
pot in which the French cook pot au feu, and implies hours, even days of 
simmering. In my experience it's always anglicized, however, to rhyme 
with "starlight." Gourmet food shops and higher end grocery stores often 
stock it-look for a little squat round jar on one of the upper shelves 
in soups or imported foods.

Stockily,
David Evett

_______________________________________________________________
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 Gift to SHAKSPER

Consider making a gift to support SHAKSPER.