The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1431 Tuesday, 30 August 2005
[1] From: Robin Hamilton <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 29 Aug 2005 13:54:02 +0100
Subj: Re: SHK 16.1418 Shylock, Hamlet, et al.
[2] From: Stuart Manger <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 29 Aug 2005 17:06:55 +0100
Subj: Re: SHK 16.1418 Shylock, Hamlet, et al.
[3] From: Kenneth Chan <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 30 Aug 2005 01:15:08 +0800
Subj: Re: SHK 16.1418 Shylock, Hamlet, et al.
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Robin Hamilton <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 29 Aug 2005 13:54:02 +0100
Subject: 16.1418 Shylock, Hamlet, et al.
Comment: Re: SHK 16.1418 Shylock, Hamlet, et al.
>However I like to
>remember the latest and strongest transfiguration of the character -
>Luther. In that context the father of Luther is referred to by Hamlet's
>comment of "old mole". Luther's father was a miner.
>
>Florence Amit
I often think of Hamlet and Luther and Faust (Johann Sobellicus) sitting
together supping ale in a tavern in Wittenberg, when up comes a drawer
with a letter. Hamlet opens it and mutters, "Oh bother, Dad's just
snuffed it and I have to go back to Elsinore for the funeral. See you
later, folks."
"Go with God, my son," intones Luther piously.
"I seriously doubt that," avers Faust, prophetically.
Robin Hamilton
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stuart Manger <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Monday, 29 Aug 2005 17:06:55 +0100
Subject: 16.1418 Shylock, Hamlet, et al.
Comment: Re: SHK 16.1418 Shylock, Hamlet, et al.
From Florence Amit:
>Joseph Egert asks 'who is Hamlet's father?'. The most obvious answer to
>that one in consideration of his religiosity and the inclusion of his
>"prophetic soul" is that Hamlet's father is God. However I like to
>remember the latest and strongest transfiguration of the character -
>Luther. In that context the father of Luther is referred to by Hamlet's
>comment of "old mole". Luther's father was a miner.
Please, please tell me someone - this is a joke, right? Joe..... this
is all your fault!
[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kenneth Chan <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 30 Aug 2005 01:15:08 +0800
Subject: 16.1418 Shylock, Hamlet, et al.
Comment: Re: SHK 16.1418 Shylock, Hamlet, et al.
Bill Arnold writes:
>"if I read you correctly you are arguing that Will
>Shakespeare was a preacher and his plays are
>sermons, right?"
Actually, the words "preacher" and "sermons" contain many connotations
that are not applicable to Shakespeare; so I would avoid using those terms.
Shakespeare's messages are not derived from a mere intellectual
interpretation of any particular religion's scriptural doctrine. The
nature of the messages strongly suggests that they are the direct
realizations of an advanced mystic who has actually undertaken the
arduous task of transforming his life and personality towards the
spiritual ideal. True aspirants of the spiritual path - the saints and
the bodhisattvas - attain their realizations from direct experience.
Shakespeare's plays are designed to impart profound messages in a truly
unique manner. The plays are carefully crafted to make us learn via
direct emotional experience. This is a far more effective way to convey
a message than merely stating it in words. Shakespeare's plays are thus
more akin to initiations, where one learns because one has effectively
lived through it.
For these reasons, Shakespeare's plays are a unique and priceless gift
to mankind. It would be a tragedy if we continue to deny this fact.
While I respect everyone's right to their own opinions, it is important
that we first look closely at the evidence. The evidence in
Shakespeare's plays are actually overwhelming.
If a blind man wants to walk off a cliff because he insists on his right
to believe that there is no cliff, are we just going to sit back and do
nothing more than respect that right? Surely, we would plead with him to
at least examine the evidence before proceeding.
So, in the same vein, I am pleading that we also examine the evidence
carefully before denying the priceless legacy that Shakespeare has left
us. Please, please look at the evidence.
With best wishes,
Kenneth Chan
http://homepage.mac.com/sapphirestudios/qod
_______________________________________________________________
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.
|
