2006

Shakespeare Reading -- Where?

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0684  Friday, 21 July 2006

From: 		William Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Thursday, 20 Jul 2006 13:43:44 -0400
Subject: 17.0679 Shakespeare Reading -- Where?
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.0679 Shakespeare Reading -- Where?

John Cox wrote: "A good recent discussion of Shakespeare's reading is 
the article by Charles Forker, "How Did Shakespeare Come by His Books?" 
Shakespeare Yearbook 14 (2004), 109-120."

I recently pointed out that Robert Miola in Shakespeare's Reading (2000) 
does not mention Forker in his index. Of course, he doesn't -- since 
Forker's article would not be published for another four years.

Thanks, Hardy, for pointing out this embarrassing error.

Bill

_______________________________________________________________
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.

20th Century Poets Who Critique/Celebrate Shakespeare

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0683  Friday, 21 July 2006

From: 		Edmund Taft <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Thursday, 20 Jul 2006 12:26:27 -0400
Subject: 	20th Century Poets Who Critique/Celebrate Shakespeare

My colleague Tim Burbery sent me the email below. Can anyone on this 
list help him out? Send responses to

Tim (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.) or me (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).

Thanks,
Ed Taft

**********
Hi  Ed,

I'm currently compiling a list of poems on poems and/or poets.  Not so 
much ars poeticae, but rather, poems that specifically mention other 
poems/poets, and that are both critically and aesthetically engaging.  I 
wondered if you have any suggestions for poems about Shakespeare, Mary 
Wroth, and others. (I have Milton covered.) Obvious examples are Keats's 
sonnet on re-reading Lear, Milton's tribute to Shakespeare, and Yeats's 
"Lapis Lazuli," but there must be many others.  I'm especially 
interested in 20th century poets who critique/celebrate Shakespeare.

Thanks a lot,
Tim

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Shakespeare and Islam

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0681  Thursday, 20 July 2006

[1] 	From: 	John Finnis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 17:16:29 +0100
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 17.0675 Shakespeare and Islam

[2] 	From: 	V. K. Inman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 18:01:22 -0400
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 17.0675 Shakespeare and Islam


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		John Finnis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 17:16:29 +0100
Subject: 17.0675 Shakespeare and Islam
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.0675 Shakespeare and Islam

Larry Weiss finds religious anachronism rare in Shakespeare.  But what 
about right under our noses, in Titus Andronicus itself?  Start the list 
with the "ruinous monastery" and the "popish tricks and ceremonies" 
(V.1.21, 76).  Elizabethans will doubtless have sensed allusions to 
Roman Catholicism, Reformation or Counter-Reformation martyrdom and 
other anachronisms, not later than I.1.145, and found this hypothesis 
well reinforced by the time they met the truly blatant in V.1 -- what 
Jonathan Bate in the 1995 Arden edition of Titus (p. 19) calls 
"purposeful anachronism" (though we may debate and refine Bate's 
suggestions about the precise purpose in question).

John Finnis

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		V. K. Inman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 18:01:22 -0400
Subject: 17.0675 Shakespeare and Islam
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.0675 Shakespeare and Islam

Cary DiPietro writes:

 >in Titus Andronicus, Aaron, by virtue of being a Moor, is
 >necessarily an Orientalized other and therefore potentially anticipates
 >in a proto-colonial context similar contemporary constructions of an
 >Orient in the same or related geographical regions (well, this is
 >another crux).  Such constructions, Elizabethan or contemporary, serve
 >in addition to narrative and theatrical ends, necessarily political
 >ends, choose to interpret or ignore them how you will.

Here is an important study, if you follow this line: Moors do not exist! 
There is no ethnic or religious group which identifies itself as 'Moor.' 
The whole depiction of a 'Moor' is therefore a fabrication based on 
positing a group of people known as "Moors" and Aaron is a character 
representing that alleged race.  Now I think that most of us could 
recall several productions of Shakespeare in which Moors are black, even 
if a white actor has to color himself for the role e.g. Olivier and the 
British actor who is more known for his role as the Enterprise captain, 
but whose name escapes me, both wore black makeup to play Moors in 
Shakespeare.  Why? Very few North Africans are black.  Arabs tend to be 
olive skinned and the Amazight (formerly called Berbers) who conquered 
Spain are very light and sometimes blond.  So what is a Moor? Are modern 
portrayals of Moors as blacks in Shakespeare consistent Shakespeare's 
concept of Moors? And how did this idea that Moors are black come about?

I would appreciate some thoughts along these lines.

V. K. Inman

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Against All-Male Productions

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0682  Thursday, 20 July 2006

[1] 	From: 	David Frankel <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 11:26:21 -0400
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 17.0676

[2] 	From: 	Geralyn Horton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 12:48:22 -0400
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 17.0676

[3] 	From: 	John W. Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 13:34:35 -0400
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 17.0676

[4] 	From: 	Charles Weinstein <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 18:16:50 -0400
	Subj: 	SHAKSPER Roundtable and Impending Hiatus


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		David Frankel <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 11:26:21 -0400
Subject: 17.0676
Comment: 	RE: SHK 17.0676

Charles Weinstein said:

 >"When Shakespeare's greatest female character spurns the thought of
 >viewing 'some squeaking Cleopatra boy my greatness' she is mocking the
 >idea that she could be adequately incarnated by a male."

And then commented on his previous posting:

 >That seems to me indisputable.  Why did Shakespeare devise such a
 >sentiment and make Cleopatra utter it (in her death scene, no less)?
 >Metatheatrics notwithstanding, I think he shared her opinion of its
 >justice.

Did he (the actor playing Cleopatra) deliver the line in a squeaking 
voice? Or did he deliver it in "Cleopatra's" voice, thus, perhaps, 
calling attention to his skill?  We don't know, nor do we know how the 
audience reacted.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Geralyn Horton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 12:48:22 -0400
Subject: 17.0676
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.0676

Elizabeth S. Angello <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

 >And, not incidentally, Burbage did not perform Othello in
 >blackface. Does this make his performance, too, a travesty?

The drawing that seems to be of a production of "Titus Andronicus" shows 
Aaron in blackface.   The ladies of James' court performed "The Masque 
of Blackness" in black makeup. Is there some strong evidence to the 
contrary in the case of Burbage and Othello?   It's not as if the 
leading actor would be doubling another role and wouldn't have time to 
get the makeup on and off between entrances.....

G.L. Horton, playwright
http://www.stagepage.info/

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		John W. Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 13:34:35 -0400
Subject: 17.0676
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.0676

Charles Weinstein <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

 >>"When Shakespeare's greatest female character spurns the
 >>thought of viewing 'some squeaking Cleopatra boy my
 >>greatness' she is mocking the idea that she could be adequately
 >>incarnated by a male."
 >
 >That seems to me indisputable.  Why did Shakespeare devise such
 >a sentiment and make Cleopatra utter it (in her death scene, no
 >less)? Metatheatrics notwithstanding, I think he shared her opinion
 >of its justice.

How nice to know that Mr. Weinstein agrees with his own words when he 
sees them.

By a remarkable coincidence, I, too, agree with my own:

"/Cleopatra/ may be mocking the idea, but to suppose that /Shakespeare/ 
is doing so at that crucial point in the tragedy is madness. On the 
contrary, it shows his faith that his leading boy actor would turn in a 
performance good enough for scene to hold."

I leave it for Hardy to decide whether this be best viewed in the light 
of the Wheel of Karma, the Whirligig of Time, or George Jetson's dog walk.

John W. Kennedy

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Charles Weinstein <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Wednesday, 19 Jul 2006 18:16:50 -0400
Subject: 	SHAKSPER Roundtable and Impending Hiatus

Hardy Cook writes:

"[S]hort of a 'smoking gun' like a handwritten letter from the 
playwright no one is going to prove conclusively that Shakespeare had 
feelings one way or another about males playing females on the Earl 
Modern stage..."

In which case one must also avoid the standard sentimentalities, viz., 
that Shakespeare was marvelously happy with his acting company, 
including the boys who played his women. "Short of a smoking gun like a 
handwritten letter," there is no way of knowing whether Shakespeare 
thought those actors were superlative, merely adequate, partly good and 
partly bad, or wholly inadequate to his conception.

"...'some squeaking Cleopatra boy my greatness' is not 'indisputable' 
proof of anything other than [that] the Cleopatra character does not 
wish to have her love for Antony ridiculed and satirized in Rome."

I fail to see how that refutes my interpretation, and I have yet to hear 
a plausible different one.

--Charles Weinstein

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Brando, Depp, Hamlet

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0680  Thursday, 20 July 2006

From: 		John Crowley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Thursday, 20 Jul 2006 09:09:00 -0400
Subject: 	Brando, etc

Thinking about bad film Shakespeare:  Mel Gibson was the worst; Ethan 
Hawke made it easy on himself by his cuts, Sam Shepherd can't speak 
Shakespeare, but Bill Murray carried great conviction and Kyle Mclachlan 
was wonderful -- supple intelligible readings of every line and a great 
character.  Helped that he was a Claudius finally the right age.

But why was it that all the Hollywood stars in the Max Reinhardt MSN in 
the 1930s comported themselves so well?  Despite massive cuts, Mickey 
Rooney, Joe E Brown, James Cagney, Dick Powell -- they were all 
well-spoken, intelligible, and highly (if artificially in the Hollywood 
mode) characterized and distinct.  The Studio System at work.  (Also fun 
for Victor Jory's antique Shakespearean style of moaning singsong 
oration, learned maybe as a youth, the same style that Olivier parodied 
as James Tyrone in "Long Day's Journey into Night".)

_______________________________________________________________
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.