The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0818  Saturday, 8 December 2007

From:		William Sutton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:		Friday, 7 Dec 2007 04:39:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 18.0807 Understudies
Comment:	Re: SHK 18.0807 Understudies

Are any of these parts extant?

A roll manipulated by an actor's hand?

How big are they?

How manipulated whilst acting?

Did the actors need a magician's dexterity?

Does 18th Century theatrical tradition/practice have any bearing on the 
Elizabethan Jacobean practice? This tale of Bulloc's and all that, does 
it show the inextricability of actor and role at the expense of the 
play? Does it stand up to common Jacobethan practice?

'Sorry no Hamlet today, Burbage has the flu, and he's got his part with 
him. No not even a stand in i'm afraid, his is the only part.'

Would you want to be the one to have give the groundlings their pennies 
back?

So these parts, do actors get to take them home? Which begs the answers 
to the question of its location such as the dog ate it, my wife sat on 
it, I just forgot etc.

Or are they kept at the theatre? Which begs a whole other series of 
questions.

We don't really know do we?

Hoping for elucidation from Simon Palfrey and Tiffany Stern's new book. 
I wish you'd given the Tarleton anecdote Bill. p.51. All right I'll buy 
the book already.

In the name of will,
W.Sutton
http://blog.iloveshakespeare.com

_______________________________________________________________
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.