The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0124 Sunday, 24 February 2008
From: Hugh Grady <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Thursday, 21 Feb 2008 09:52:13 -0500
Subject: 19.0117 Harry, Hal, Henry
Comment: RE: SHK 19.0117 Harry, Hal, Henry
I read with interest David Crosby's praise for Don Bloom's "observation"
about Falstaff's almost exclusive use of the name "Hal" for the Prince
in 1 and 2 Henry IV, which he says "must be the starting point for any
further discussion of the name's significance. All the other
speculations seem fatuous or overblown until grounded in this way. I
hope Don's example will inspire us all to make similar close readings."
Since one Warren J. Macisaac pointed out exactly the same thing in an
article in Shakespeare Quarterly 30 years ago ("A Commodity of Good
Names in the Henry IV Plays, SQ 29.3 (Summer 1978): 417-19), I am not
optimistic that this "discovery" will prove as ground-breaking or
earth-shattering as Crosby thinks.
Best,
Hugh Grady
_______________________________________________________________
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.
