2005

Gender Question

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1332  Wednesday, 17 August 2005

From:           Richard Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 16 Aug 2005 16:02:54 -0700
Subject:        Gender Question

The "prick" in Sonnet 20 is of a puzzling gender. Barnebe Barnes also
seems to be messing with gender in this poem from his "Parthenophil and
Parthenophe," 1593

MADRIGAL 18

After AURORA's blush the sun arose
             And spread his beams !
             With whose clear gleams
     My prickless rosebud veils his purple leaves !
In whose sweet folds Morning did pearls enclose,
Where sun his beams in orb-like circle weaves,
     And then, t'enrich, stole those
Nature's beauty, PHOEBUS' virtue, Love's incense;
Whose favour, sap, and savour, my sense reaves.
     My Muse had these for themes:
They, to my Muse; my Muse to them, defence.
PH


Shakespeare's Will

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1331  Wednesday, 17 August 2005

From:           Ben Alexander <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 16 Aug 2005 01:02:37 +0100
Subject:        Shakespeare's Will

[Editor's Note: Once again, let me remind members, old and new, that I
do not permit postings on the so-called "authorship" question. If you
wish to contend that William Shakespeare of Stratford was not the author
of the plays and poems generally associated with him, then you have
subscribed to the wrong list. Other authorship issues are acceptable,
including apocrypha, collaborative writing, and possible misattributions
such as <I>A Lover's Complaint</I>. This is an academic list and I as an
educator have a responsibility not to distribute posting that I view as
misleading or scholarly unsound. A number of years ago, I gave
Anti-Stratfordians the floor to air their arguments. The ensuing
discussions threatened to consume the list, so I ended them. There are
plenty of places to have such discussions; SHAKSPER is just not one of
them. I will regard any (and please I am overburdened and in a great
deal of pain and physical discomfort as it is) responses to this
Editor's Note as PERSONAL e-mail to me and I will NOT post them or
respond to them. They will be quietly deleted.

Hardy M. Cook (Editor, Owner, Moderator), whose time and money make this
list possible with no other assistance except from webmaster and
technical advisor Eric Luhrs and the members of the SHAKSPER Advisory
Board.]

Dear SHAKSPEReans,

As a new subscriber to Shaksper I would like to know how many people
have had a look at William Shakespeare of Stratford-Upon-Avon's will. It
can be found on the following link to the National Archives.

http://www.documentsonline.nationalarchives.gov.uk/PROB1wills.asp

Having studied it, my view is that the bequest of 


Shylock, Hamlet, et al.

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1329  Wednesday, 17 August 2005

From:           John-Paul Spiro <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Friday, 12 Aug 2005 21:07:39 -0400
Subject:        Shylock, Hamlet, et al.

One thing I have learned from reading SHAKSPER is that, of all of
Shakespeare's works, "The Merchant of Venice" and "Hamlet" attract the
most commentary and the least insight.

W. R. Elton always used to say to me, "400 years and we still don't have
one good book about 'Hamlet'!"  He was right.  It seems near-impossible
to say anything even sensible about the play.  Why is this?

I can understand why people get passionate (and thus unreasonable) about
"Merchant."  But why are so many people so silly about "Hamlet"?  Is it
because they don't understand the textual issues, or do the textual
issues only make matters more confusing?

Both plays have plenty of mysteries and interpretive dilemmas.  Norman
Rabkin once compared reading "Henry V" to the duck-rabbit problem
(wherein one can see a certain drawing as a picture of a duck or as a
picture of a rabbit but not both at the same time), but "Henry V" at
least allows for a simple binary.  Is he this or is he that?  "Hamlet"
and "Merchant," on the other hand, allow for many more possibilities.
Is he crazy or isn't he?  Is he a villain or isn't he?  Well, what do
you mean by "crazy" and "villain"?  And what about the other people in
the play?  And what about this interesting generalization we can make
about the time period?

If the plays stimulate so many possibilities for interpretation, it's
probably because they were supposed to.  Perhaps Shakespeare meant them
as puzzled to be solved if you find the right clues, but I don't think
so.  There are many dark spaces in these two plays; shedding light on
them means they're not dark spaces anymore, which means the plays aren't
what they are anymore.

I don't mean that we should stop asking questions and making arguments
about the plays.  That said, I'm probably not the only person on this
list who prefers silence to reductive ranting.

John-Paul Spiro

_______________________________________________________________
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.

The Sonnets and the Plays

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1330  Wednesday, 17 August 2005

From:           Stefan Andreas Sture <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Saturday, 13 Aug 2005 09:52:19 +0200
Subject:        The Sonnets and the Plays

Which plays do you think correspond best with the sonnets?

LLL is obvious, and maybe Antony and Cleopatra.

Other suggestions?

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Swiss Academic Work on Shakespeare

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1328  Wednesday, 17 August 2005

From:           Tanja Walser <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Monday, 15 Aug 2005 20:35:49 +0200
Subject:        Swiss Academic Work on Shakespeare

For the last two years shakespeare.ch has mainly been dealing with
artistic work on
Shakespeare in Switzerland. Recently, we've added a page on academic
work on
Shakespeare at English Departments at Swiss Universities that might be
of interest to
the SHAKSPER community:

shakespeare.ch: http://www.shakespeare.ch

New page about Swiss academic work on Shakespeare on shakespeare.ch:
http://www.shakespeare.ch/act_V/swissuniversities.htm

Best wishes,
Tanja Walser

_______________________________________________________________
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 Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.