2006

Sonnet 146

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.1089  Saturday, 9 December 2006

From:         Mike Shapiro <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Tuesday, 5 Dec 2006 15:17:59 -0500
Subject: 17.1030 Sonnet 146
Comment:     RE: SHK 17.1030 Sonnet 146

Is the fear of narcissistic wounds at the center of this sonnet? And, if 
so, is defending against public shame related to "my sinful earth" the 
action?  If the action is defense, perhaps the missing word supports 
that idea, such as aiding and abetting, arming, etc.

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Dying Unshriven

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.1088  Saturday, 9 December 2006

[1]     From:     Kenneth Chan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
    Date:     Thursday, 07 Dec 2006 02:05:02 +0800
    Subj:     Re: SHK 17.1082 Dying Unshriven

[2]     From:     Jeffrey Jordan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
    Date:     Wednesday, 6 Dec 2006 12:44:16 -0600
    Subj:     Re: SHK 17.1082 Dying Unshriven

[3]     From:     Elliott Stone <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
    Date:     Wednesday, 6 Dec 2006 15:49:43 -0500
    Subj:     Re: SHK 17.1082 Dying Unshriven

[4]     From:     David Bishop <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
    Date:     Thursday, 7 Dec 2006 02:18:45 -0500
    Subj:     Re: SHK 17.1082 Dying Unshriven

[5]     From:     Joseph Egert <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
    Date:     Thursday, 07 Dec 2006 18:35:22 +0000
    Subj:     RE: SHK 17.1082 Dying Unshriven


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:         Kenneth Chan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Thursday, 07 Dec 2006 02:05:02 +0800
Subject: 17.1082 Dying Unshriven
Comment:     Re: SHK 17.1082 Dying Unshriven

In response to Will Sharpe's comments, perhaps I can amend my statement 
(which is a response to an earlier comment by Donald Bloom) by adding 
four words at the end. The more important point I was trying to make was 
that any interpretation of a Shakespearean play should be based on the 
entire play and not only on arbitrarily selected portions of it. The 
point is that it is extremely difficult to find an interpretation that 
fits every line of the play. So if one can be found, surely we should 
take note of it.

Anyway, I am interested to find out whether this amended statement is 
now acceptable or not. If not, I would be grateful to learn why not. The 
whole amended statement now reads as follows:

"Donald Bloom writes:

"In "Hamlet" even more than in most of the plays you tend to find what 
you look for, and say more about yourself than about the title character 
or any of the others"

This is definitely true if we selectively use only the portions of the 
play that suit our interpretation, while ignoring the rest. On the other 
hand, if we have to fit our interpretation to the entire play - every 
portion of it, without leaving anything out - we will find that there is 
actually very little room for multiple varying interpretations. Then, 
and only then, will we come close to the meaning of the play as 
Shakespeare intended if he intended any."

Regards,
Kenneth Chan

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:         Jeffrey Jordan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Wednesday, 6 Dec 2006 12:44:16 -0600
Subject: 17.1082 Dying Unshriven
Comment:     Re: SHK 17.1082 Dying Unshriven

Replying to Paul E. Doniger.

 > I can accept the possibility that Horatio's
 > comment may be seen as a criticism ...

As the wording in the play actually stands, it's no harsh criticism from 
Horatio, and the "go to it" line can even be read as approval by 
Horatio.  Horatio could nod thoughtfully as he says his line, and it 
would play alright, as far as that line, itself, goes.

It's notable that Hamlet's "make love - employment" line is only in the 
Folio, not in the Second Quarto published in the author's lifetime.  
Then, the use of "man" in the line is a departure from its use elsewhere 
in the dialogue, throughout the play.  Further, it's discordant that 
Hamlet abruptly calls Horatio "man" after calling him "sir" earlier in 
the passage.  Hamlet's "employment" line may not be authorial.  It's at 
least suspicious.  It may be editorial, added by the Folio editor(s), 
thinking Hamlet needed more excuse.  The possibility deserves mention.

It's impossible to be certain, but I suggest at least a little 
skepticism about that "employment" line.  There's some argument that it 
isn't authorial.  We do know the Folio was bowdlerized to some extent, 
in comparison to Q2, although the only certainty on that is  in the 
oaths that were changed.

 > Also, it could be quite simply a quiet reaction
 > that carries no reproof at all. Horatio is
 > something of a stoic who is "not passion's
 > slave;" consequently, it's quite probable that
 > his comment carries no judgment in it at all.

That's a credible position.

 > Hamlet's self-defense (if that's what it is) may
 > come from his own inner turmoil or sense of
 > guilt and not at all from Horatio's personal reaction
 > to the news.

And may also, in the Folio-only "employment" line, come from a Folio 
editor who was uncomfortable with Hamlet's cavalier attitude.  It's  
possible.

Replying to Will Sharpe.

 > It is very unlikely that we are ever going to find
 > Shakespeare's diary ... , and even less likely
 > that we are going to find his mind, so we can say,
 > I feel confident, with absolute certainty that we
 > are never going to know 'the meaning of the
 > play as Shakespeare intended'. ...

The way to know the meaning of the play, as Shakespeare intended, is to 
look at the words he actually used to write the play.  He intended what 
he wrote.  It would not be rational to suppose he wrote wording he 
didn't intend.  He certainly did intend the play to have meaning - as a 
play!

But it's extremely doubtful he intended Hamlet to be a guidebook on 
philosophy, religion, politics, or how to buy a used car.  Where one 
gets into trouble is when he departs from Hamlet as a play, and ventures 
into something like philosophy, or politics, etc. based on Hamlet.  We 
can be sure the Bard did not write Hamlet to support one's favorite 
notions of 21st century utopia.

But if one denies ALL meaning of Hamlet, it denies the author was 
anything but a monkey at a keyboard, and that can't possibly be right.  
We know he wasn't.  Of course Hamlet has meaning, as a play, and was so 
written.  The difficulty of Hamlet is no argument against.

[Editor's Note: Regarding "The way to know the meaning of the play, as 
Shakespeare intended, is to look at the words he actually used to write 
the play," please tell me what Shakespeare intended when he wrote,

What's Montague? It is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other word would smell as sweet. (Rom. 2.2.82-85, Oxford)

Or

Is it e'en so? Then I defy you, stars. (Rom. 5.1.24, Oxford)]

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:         Elliott Stone <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Wednesday, 6 Dec 2006 15:49:43 -0500
Subject: 17.1082 Dying Unshriven
Comment:     Re: SHK 17.1082 Dying Unshriven

Gentlemen,

"the meaning of the play as Shakespeare intended".

I believe Prince Hamlet had some excellent thoughts on that subject.

Hamlet II.ii 522 "Good my lord, will you see the players well bestow'd? 
Do you hear, let them be well us'd, for they are the abstract and brief 
chronicles of the time."

Hamlet III.ii 20  "--the purpose of playing, whose end, both at the 
first and now, was and is, to hold as 'twere the mirror up to nature: to 
show virtue her feature, scorn her own image, and the very age and body 
of the time his form and pressure."

We do not have Shakespeare's newspaper. We have his play which is a 
"brief chronicle of the time".
We do know that one of the greatest "pressures" of Shakespeare's time 
was the struggle with the Old Faith.

It does not seem unreasonable to me to look at Elizabethan History to 
come to an understanding of what this play is telling us. It may be that 
this story is not one we want to hear or that is quite different then 
the story we heard years ago when we were undergraduates, but 
nevertheless it does not follow that such an examination is not worth 
pursuing.

Best,
Elliott H. Stone

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:         David Bishop <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Thursday, 7 Dec 2006 02:18:45 -0500
Subject: 17.1082 Dying Unshriven
Comment:     Re: SHK 17.1082 Dying Unshriven

Will Sharpe disapproves of those who "witter on about [Shakespeare's 
meaning] in the hope of convincing others of [their] interpretations." 
He approves of "hard research and considered opinions". How exactly do 
we tell the difference?

Hardy is against those who push "their own pet theory that they are 
convinced is the one and only way to interpret the meaning of the work, 
the TRUTH. Will has well expressed the futility of such efforts here." 
But what is in question here? What's the difference between a theory and 
a pet theory? It seems a pet theory is one whose author is ever ready to 
repeat it, and claims that it's the TRUTH. But I can stamp my foot all I 
want, and say that my theory is the one and only possible truth, and it 
won't make that theory any more true or any more false.

I may argue that Shakespeare intended such and so, and my argument may 
be more or less competent, plausible, or interesting. That is what 
literary criticism is. We can't call up Shakespeare and ask what he 
intended (and if we could, should we believe him?), but he left us some 
evidence: his work. I would argue, for example, that if your theory is 
that Shakespeare intended us to believe that Gertrude secretly murdered 
Ophelia, you are reading very badly. Am I not allowed to say that 
because I can't consult Shakespeare in person? Can I read without 
interpreting? It seems doubtful to me. Can I read and interpret wrongly? 
Undoubtedly.

Best wishes,
David Bishop

[5]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:         Joseph Egert <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Thursday, 07 Dec 2006 18:35:22 +0000
Subject: 17.1082 Dying Unshriven
Comment:     RE: SHK 17.1082 Dying Unshriven

Once more into the breach.

Will Sharpe writes:

 >...  I feel confident, with absolute certainty that
 >we are never going to know 'the meaning of the play as Shakespeare
 >intended'.[...] we can
 >see the fruitlessness of the exercise of striving for authentic
 >meaning, [...] we
 >should have round-table discussions, with guest moderators, that
 >might actually involve hard research and considered opinions on
 >published work. That way, this forum might become what it was
 >intended to be: a way of using technology to maintain a scholarly
 >community, a sort of year-round conference that allows ideas to be
 >swapped without needing to all fly to a particular city. Sadly, it
 >seems to be going the way of most things on the internet, where any
 >old thing can get published.

Who is stopping Will Sharpe from committing scholarship on this List? Is 
it Hardy, who sifts and plants only those seeds available to him? Is it 
those nasty enthusiasts, who bring energy and passion (if at times 
obsessive) along with their pet theories?

In the subject at hand, Jeffrey Jordan's roll of unshriven deaths in 
HAMLET omits King Fortinbras, the "first corse" of this play. Are we 
permitted to speculate whether King Hamlet's victim died unshriven (of 
sword envenomed by Old Norway, perhaps)? Was it customary for the lords 
and kings of feudal Den-way or Renaissance Europe to confess their sins 
before butchering each other in honorable combat? Jordan's roll goes on 
to include Gertrude. Yet didn't the Prince, acting as her priestly 
confessor, shrive the Queen at least partially during their closet 
encounter, forcing her to confront her own sins. By Catholic or 
Protestant lights, did this constitute a sufficient shriving despite the 
absence of formal clergy or detailed recitation? Finally, would such a 
shriving carry a shelf life, its efficacy expiring before Gertrude 
herself expired?

To this member, all roads lead to theme. Textual, historicist, 
performative, and other forms of critique are all helpful in explicating 
the meanings probably intended by their authors, as interpreted by 
audiences and critics down the years. Such groups will necessarily even 
if unconsciously mould and appropriate these meanings to conform with 
their own background, values and objectives. Granted, we can never fully 
recapture "original" meaning. Does it follow then, we should no longer 
aspire to the Grail? no longer seek to solve the puzzles Shakespeare 
explicitly poses for us over and over again in all his plays?

Let the eagle soar!

Joe Egert   

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Graduate Summer School on the Renaissance

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.1086  Saturday, 9 December 2006

[1]     From:     Arthur Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
    Date:     Wednesday, 6 Dec 2006 16:18:56 +0000
    Subj:     Re: SHK 17.1079 Graduate Summer School on the Renaissance

[2]     From:     Jim Helfers <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
    Date:     Thursday, 7 Dec 2006 10:48:32 -0700
    Subj:     Shakespeare/Renaissance Summer Graduate Programs


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:         Arthur Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Wednesday, 6 Dec 2006 16:18:56 +0000
Subject: 17.1079 Graduate Summer School on the Renaissance
Comment:     Re: SHK 17.1079 Graduate Summer School on the Renaissance

You could try the Shakespeare Institute in Stratford-upon-Avon: 
www.shakespeare.bham.ac.uk
 
Arthur Lindley

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:         Jim Helfers <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Thursday, 7 Dec 2006 10:48:32 -0700
Subject:     Shakespeare/Renaissance Summer Graduate Programs

In reply to Ms. Trevisan's post concerning graduate 
Renaissance/Shakespeare summer programs:

The Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies (affiliated with 
the University of Arizona, Arizona State University, and Northern 
Arizona University) hosts an annual study program at St. Catharines 
College, Cambridge, July 6-August 13, 2007.  The program includes 
courses on Shakespeare in performance, the economics of Jacobean 
theater, the performative aspects of Anglo-Saxon poetry, and the English 
Renaissance exploratory and colonization movement.  Courses are offered 
at both the undergraduate and graduate levels.

For more complete information, please follow this link:
http://www.asu.edu/clas/acmrs/web_pages/academic_programs/ac_pro_cambrid
ge.html

[Disclaimer:  I am this year's program director, and teach the 
exploratory and colonization course.]

James P. Helfers, Ph.D.
Professor of English
 
_______________________________________________________________
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.

Ideal Reading of a Sonnet?

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.1087  Saturday, 9 December 2006

[1]     From:     Adam Smyth <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
    Date:     Wednesday, 6 Dec 2006 11:53:47 -0500
    Subj:     Re: SHK 17.1081 Ideal Reading of a Sonnet?

[2]     From:     Abigail Quart <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
    Date:     Wednesday, 6 Dec 2006 17:13:56 -0500
    Subj:     RE: SHK 17.1081 Ideal Reading of a Sonnet?

[3]     From:     Elliott Stone <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
    Date:     Saturday, 9 Dec 2006 10:44:00 -0500
    Subj:     ideal reading of a sonnet?


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:         Adam Smyth <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Wednesday, 6 Dec 2006 11:53:47 -0500
Subject: 17.1081 Ideal Reading of a Sonnet?
Comment:     Re: SHK 17.1081 Ideal Reading of a Sonnet?

Bad sonnet readings are surely more entertaining than good ones: and the 
very apex of this category has to be Bryan Ferry's unintentionally 
hilarious performance of sonnet 18 on the 'Diana Princess of Wales 
Tribute CD'. Well worth a listen, if you can endure the embarrassment of 
acquiring the CD.

Adam Smyth.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:         Abigail Quart <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Wednesday, 6 Dec 2006 17:13:56 -0500
Subject: 17.1081 Ideal Reading of a Sonnet?
Comment:     RE: SHK 17.1081 Ideal Reading of a Sonnet?

Best voices I ever heard speaking Shakespeare used West Indian accents: 
all butter and honey and passion.

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:         Elliott Stone <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Saturday, 9 Dec 2006 10:44:00 -0500
Subject:     ideal reading of a sonnet?

I just want everyone to be aware that there are several good Shakespeare 
"gets" in this movie "VENUS" (just about to be released).

It doesn't approach the "gets" in "SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE" but of course 
that screen play was written by Tom Stoppard.

I love listening to Helen Vendler. You say 18. She then recites "Shall I 
compare--etc." You say 101. She then recites "O truant Muse--etc.

She has them all in her head!
She is a genius!!

Don't ever sell her short. If she wants to be humble then so be it. I am 
always amazed and humbled in her presence.

Best,
Elliott H. Stone

P.S. The movie critic for the Boston Globe told our movie club that 
Peter O'Toole will more than likely win the Oscar for his performance in 
"Venus."
 
_______________________________________________________________
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.

Making Publics "Making Publics"

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.1085  Saturday, 9 December 2006

From:         Paul Yachnin <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:         Thursday, 07 Dec 2006 21:17:04 -0500
Subject:     "Making Publics"

"Making Publics" SUMMER SEMINAR
http://makingpublics.mcgill.ca/
 
2007- July 18- August 13
 
MAKING PUBLICS IN INTERREGNUM ENGLAND
 A Research Seminar for Dissertation-Stage PhD Students and Junior Faculty
 
Leaders: Lesley Cormack (Alberta) and Michael Bristol (McGill)
 
July 18-August 13, 2007 at McGill University
 
This summer school will focus on selected writing from the tumultuous 
decades of the interregnum, roughly 1640 - 1660, with particular 
attention to the fields of literature, public lfe, science and 
religion.  The chief aim of the seminar will be to understand conditions 
for the possibility of engagement in public life during a time of 
intense polarization and social effervescence in England during The 
Commonwealth. We will be concerned with a number of specific questions: 
How were publics made and who made them in seventeenth-century England? 
How did authors imagine the target audiences reading their work? How 
were common interests, beliefs, or inquiries circulated and in what 
sense did this circulation create publics? How did the gradual shift 
away from manuscript to the printed book as the privileged medium for 
the dissemination of ideas affect the experience of public life.  Were 
publics created in the marketplace?   The seminar will examine the 
theory of publics through consideration of several case studies which 
may include:
 
1. The growing interest in mathematical and geographical instruments and 
information, especially focussed around the marketplace and growing 
imperial aspirations.
 
2. The circulation of idiosyncratic and perhaps heterodox religious 
ideas in the confessional texts of Sir Thomas Brown, the poetry of 
Andrew Marvel, and the studies of comparative religion of Edward, Lord 
Herbert of Cherbury.
 
3. The public significance of melancholia and the melancholy temperament 
in prose writings of John Donne and Robert Burton
 
4. Robert Boyle's network of colleagues and publics, examining the 
question of how 'facts' are created and agreed upon, through public 
witnessing and acquiescence.
 
Participants will have an opportunity to workshop their own research 
projects, which may focus on any aspect of early modern publics in the 
late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. We welcome both pre- and 
post-PhD scholars, working in English and continental history, 
literature, and cultural studies.

Sponsored by the MaPs Project (Making Publics: Media, markets, and 
Association in Early Modern Europe), headquartered at McGill University 
and funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of 
Canada..  The "Making Publics" project will develop an innovative and 
potentially transformative approach to the history of early modernity. 
The project will illuminate the artistic, intellectual, religious, 
social, and political culture of Britain and Western Europe between 1500 
and 1700, and it will also have a bearing on issues that confront modern 
society, especially questions about media, the culture market, and the 
possibilities of social agency on the part of cultural producers and 
consumers. At the heart of our work is the phenomenon that we are 
calling "making publics" -  the creation of small-scale forms of 
association that represented a new way of connecting with others, a kind 
of connection not founded in family, rank or vocation, but rather a form 
of voluntary community built on the shared interests, tastes, and 
desires of individuals.
 
We have adopted the word "publics" to refer to the open-membership 
groups that coalesced around certain practices, areas of interest, and 
forms of publication and/or performance. Publics differed from 
traditional groupings such as guilds, universities, or parliaments, 
which were characteristically exclusive, institutionalized, highly 
credentialized, and hierarchical in their internal workings. Publics 
were loosely organized, more or less egalitarian in their internal 
workings, and open to anyone that had the interest, competence, money, 
and time to participate. They fostered and were fostered by new 
technologies of representation and dissemination-the printing press, new 
pictorial forms, new sites for and styles of theatrical and musical 
performance. They were encouraged by the development of a market in 
works of art and/or printed works such as plays, paintings, musical 
compositions, sermons, news pamphlets, maps, histories, and scientific 
reports.
 
Canadian and non-Canadian dissertation-stage students and junior faculty 
are invited to apply to take part in a research seminar focusing on the 
political, intellectual, and cultural ferment of mid-seventeenth-century 
England. We hope to recruit outstanding young scholars working on any 
topic related to the seminar's central concerns across the span of the 
century.  The group's work on the interregnum will provide a background 
for discussion of key issues. As many as 12 successful applicants will 
participate in this seminar through mutual reading and discussion and by 
developing and presenting their own research. Participants will have 
access to McGill Library and important research collections such as the 
Redpath tracts, the Osler Library, the Canadian Centre for Architecture, 
microflim and electronic references such as EEBO, the Goldsmiths 
Library, and the Landsdowne manuscripts.
 
The travel and living expenses of the participants in the seminar will 
be covered by the MaPs project. The end of the seminar will coincide 
with the annual meeting of the MaPs research team. Members of the 
seminar will have the opportunity to participate in the annual team 
meeting of the MaPs project.
 
Please visit http://makingpublics.mcgill.ca/ for application materials 
and details. The deadline for applications is January 15, 2007.

_______________________________________________________________
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.