The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0622  Wednesday, 19 September 2007

[1] 	From: 		Thomas Pendleton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 		Monday, 17 Sep 2007 12:25:23 -0400
	Subj: 		RE: SHK 18.0616 Deadly Shakespeare

[2] 	From: 		David Evett <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 		Monday, 17 Sep 2007 13:09:48 -0400
	Subj: 		Re: SHK 18.0616 Deadly Shakespeare

[3] 	From: 		Sean King <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 		Tuesday, 18 Sep 2007 09:51:31 -0400
	Subj: 		Re: SHK 18.0616 Deadly Shakespeare


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Thomas Pendleton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Monday, 17 Sep 2007 12:25:23 -0400
Subject: 18.0616 Deadly Shakespeare
Comment: 	RE: SHK 18.0616 Deadly Shakespeare

It seems hard to exclude the "But five and twenty" "of all other men" 
who seem to be not just merely dead, but also most sincerely dead.

The French, of course, don't count.

Tom Pendleton

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		David Evett <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Monday, 17 Sep 2007 13:09:48 -0400
Subject: 18.0616 Deadly Shakespeare
Comment: 	Re: SHK 18.0616 Deadly Shakespeare


 >Only for those named as dead:

I'd be interested to see John Briggs's argument for keeping Davy 
Gam--not otherwise a personage of the play, and enjoying the status of 
being named only because he's a gentleman rather than a commoner. Where 
does that leave the nameless boy, who is a commoner and who is also a 
speaking character, and who presumably is one of the casualties whom 
Briggs summarily expunges from the list. The problem does illustrate 
some more general problems of constructing such a list, which also 
include the matter of suicide, accidental death (e.g. Arthur in *KJ*), 
uncertainty (the Fool in *Lr*) and no doubt many others.

Mortally,
David Evett

[3]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Sean King <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Tuesday, 18 Sep 2007 09:51:31 -0400
Subject: 18.0616 Deadly Shakespeare
Comment: 	Re: SHK 18.0616 Deadly Shakespeare

 >In counting the deaths do we include Agincourt and other battles, or
 >not?
 >
 >Only for those named as dead:
 >
 >"Edward the Duke of York, the Earl of Suffolk,
 >Sir Richard Ketly, Davy Gam, esquire:"
 >
 >John Briggs

Say, what about "And my poor fool is hang'd"?.... For depending on the 
critic, the "poor fool" is the Fool;[1] or it's Cordelia...

(And then there's the fella who says the Fool is Cordelia in disguise...)

And of course, the "Cordelia's not dead" idea...

Which reminds us that, *whoever* was hanged, they ain't necessarily dead...

Deep waters, Watsons, deep waters...

(I'll bet there's a way of having Lady Macbeth's children raise some 
hell here, the little brats...)

I'm not helping, am I?  ;-)

S.


_______________________________________________________________
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.