Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2007 :: January ::
Globe-ness
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0044  Friday, 19 January 2007

[1] 	From: 	Peter Bridgman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Thursday, 18 Jan 2007 16:56:42 -0000
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 18.0039 Globe-ness

[2] 	From: 	Ted Nellen <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Thursday, 18 Jan 2007 11:14:25 -0600 (CST)
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 18.0042 Globe-ness

[3] 	From: 	Will Sharpe <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Thursday, 18 Jan 2007 17:59:17 +0000
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 18.0039 Globe-ness

[4] 	From: 	Ruth Ross <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Thursday, 18 Jan 2007 17:16:24 -0500
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 18.0039 Globe-ness


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Peter Bridgman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Thursday, 18 Jan 2007 16:56:42 -0000
Subject: 18.0039 Globe-ness
Comment: 	Re: SHK 18.0039 Globe-ness

John Drakakis writes ...

 >And another thing...the Globe won't burn (like the original)!
 >There are no orange sellers, prostitutes, or pickpockets!
 >And everybody washes before they go to the theatre!

I dunno.  I've seen the odd prozzie there.

And some of us take great pains to besmear and besmirch our
 >breeches with badger ordure before visiting the place.  Or
 >maybe use a ripe stilton as an underarm roll-on.

 >It's a Disneyfication of Shakespeare ...

No it isn't.  It's a brave and magical attempt to recreate the 
Shakespearean stage.  It is one of the great things about London.

Peter Bridgman

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Ted Nellen <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Thursday, 18 Jan 2007 11:14:25 -0600 (CST)
Subject: 18.0042 Globe-ness
Comment: 	Re: SHK 18.0042 Globe-ness

I have missed this fun thread. Upon a recent visit to London, I went to 
the Globe replica and was on a most enlightening tour, given by a young 
man who has been involved with this project from the beginning. In fact 
I was studying in Stratford the summer they began the sonar readings of 
the original Globe. So returning recently to see the Globe was a full 
circle.  I was very impressed with the whole place and much of the 
explanation about it. For one, they have the only thatched roof in 
London and it took an American to make this happen. Fire ordnances 
prevent a thatched roof, but not on the new Globe. There are fire 
sprinklers in it to prevent major disaster, but it could burn down. 
Second, the explanation of why only 1500 instead of 3000 people made 
perfect sense and is very civilized. Thirdly, the floor was experimented 
with and eventually ended up as cement for logical and sensible reasons. 
Other than those tweaks, the place is as close to real as we could get. 
Then again there is no one who could contend this anyway, so discussion 
of it is moot. As for me, I was thrilled to be there and to see how 
closely the new Globe lives up to my expectations from my own research. 
The Swan is delightful, but the new Globe is fantastic.

Ted Nellen

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Will Sharpe <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Thursday, 18 Jan 2007 17:59:17 +0000
Subject: 18.0039 Globe-ness
Comment: 	RE: SHK 18.0039 Globe-ness

I wholeheartedly support Gabriel Egan's retort to Carol Barton's 
scattergun attempt at cultural criticism. When she says:

 >. . . if you're going to bother to recreate the bloody
 >thing . . . why not do it as accurately as you can?

Gabriel Egan's response:

 >If that means destroying a Georgian terrace to put up a replica
 >of what was previously on the site, >almost everyone involved
 >in the scholarship of old buildings-indeed almost everyone at
 >all-would rightly oppose the plan.

is exactly right. If Barton is suggesting that 'doing it properly' means 
putting it where it was, or leveling Southwark and returning it to a 
largely rural outskirt of London in order to recreate the original 
environment, then Gabriel Egan's comment can be seen as fair and 
entirely without sarcasm. If, however, 'doing it properly' insinuates 
that the current reconstruction is inaccurate, that must mean that 
either Barton has a theory about the physical structure of the original 
Globe which I would implore her to share for the sake of the furtherance 
of our scholarly understanding, or it simply means (as I think Egan is 
suggesting) that she assumes it must all be phoney as there's nothing 
special under the sun.

 >It was funny, to see the number of bewildered people wandering
 >around Southwark, looking for wattle and daub where only red
 >brick was visible to the pedestrian eye.

Perhaps this might be a neat segue into the upcoming discussion on 
'presentism': we can attempt to reconstruct a historical building on 
more or less the same site that it originally stood, but we can't get 
rid of the 18th/19th/20th-century buildings that, for one reason or 
another, are there now. But does it mean that because direct communion 
with the past is unavailable to us we should give up our interests in 
researching it altogether?

Whatever you want to say about the Globe, it is an exciting attempt (and 
I stress the word 'attempt' as the Globe, as far as I'm aware, doesn't 
purport itself to be a perfect reconstruction), executed with truly fine 
craftsmanship, to bring to life something that has received enormous 
amounts of interest from all sorts of people (and, God forbid, some 
entertainment and enjoyment for its visitors). If they could just get a 
few decent shows on the boards and arrange for Heathrow airport to close 
down during performances I'd be a bit happier about going there, but 
that's scarcely important and is an entirely different debate altogether.

Will Sharpe

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Ruth Ross <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Thursday, 18 Jan 2007 17:16:24 -0500
Subject: 18.0039 Globe-ness
Comment: 	RE: SHK 18.0039 Globe-ness

Addressing Carol Barton's charge that the new Globe is not historically 
accurate, I recall that the current stage configuration is different 
from the design in the original replica. The columns holding up the 
"heavens" canopy are different (thicker, I think) and there have been 
some other modifications to make the stage more historically accurate. 
As the archaeologists discover more about the original Globe Theatre, I 
assume they will make modifications in the reproduction. I find that 
refreshing.

Ruth Ross

_______________________________________________________________
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.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.