March
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0173 Thursday, 13 March 2008 [1] From: Paul Budra <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Mar 2008 13:14:56 -0700 Subj: Re: SHK 19.0161 The Best Hamlet [2] From: Marilyn A. Bonomi <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Mar 2008 18:46:17 -0400 Subj: Re: SHK 19.0150 The Best Hamlet [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul Budra <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Mar 2008 13:14:56 -0700 Subject: 19.0161 The Best Hamlet Comment: Re: SHK 19.0161 The Best Hamlet The best Hamlet I ever saw was a theatre at Langara College in Vancouver BC. Langara College has what is arguably the best theatre program in Canada (Studio 58), and I try to attend its performances whenever I can. Anyway, this student cast was headed by Kyle Rideout, who has gone on to be a regular in Vancouver's summer Shakespeare festival, Bard on the Beach. Rideout is a slight man, almost elfin man. In this modern day production he wore a tight, black suit and spiky hair, giving him a punk look - think Johnny Rotten without the safety pins. The entire production was intelligent and ingenious, but Rideout was a knock-out. His delivery of the "to be or not to be" speech was simply the best I have ever heard. He delivered it while walking through the audience, pausing over the cruces of the speech as though he were are once teaching us its lessons and trying to work out the implications of where his mind was taking him. He knew when to be funny, and his camaraderie with Horatio felt just right. Anyway, I thought I was mad to be so impressed with a student performance, but another colleague of mine who has seen the production asked me about it. When I replied, "Best Hamlet I've seen," she said, "Thank goodness you said that. I thought I was crazy, because it's the best I've ever seen." Paul Budra Associate Professor Simon Fraser University [2]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marilyn A. Bonomi <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Mar 2008 18:46:17 -0400 Subject: 19.0150 The Best Hamlet Comment: Re: SHK 19.0150 The Best Hamlet Considering that I named Stacy Keach as one of my most powerful Hamlet experiences, I found the following quite listed on Mr. Keach's website most interesting: "... of American Hamlets? I was too young to have seen Barrymore, but I suppose the three most notable American Hamlets since have been Stacy Keach, Kevin Kline and Sam Waterson. Kline was an athletic soldier-prince, a sort of Henry V with doubts, while Waterson suggested a scholar whose resolution was 'sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought.' But for me, the best of that bunch was Keach, whose neurotic passion and fierce poetry were quite wonderful." Clive Barnes, New York Post, Sunday Dec 26, 1999 " Having seen Mr. Waterson live on stage in both a comic and a tragic mode (albeit not Shakespearean) I rather wish I had seen his performance to compare it. Mari Bonomi _______________________________________________________________ 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. >
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0172 Thursday, 13 March 2008 [1] From: Tanya Gough <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Mar 2008 16:29:25 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Re: SHK 19.0158 Sonnets Performed [2] From: Olwen Terris <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Mar 2008 09:07:20 -0000 Subj: RE: SHK 19.0167 Sonnets Performed [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tanya Gough <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Mar 2008 16:29:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: 19.0158 Sonnets Performed Comment: Re: SHK 19.0158 Sonnets Performed Derek Jarman did an 80 minute film piece based on the sonnets, called The Angelic Conversation, narrated by Judi Dench, back in 1985. I believe it's still out of print, but there were video copies available as of our 2003 catalogue, so you might be able to e-bay a copy in decent shape. Tanya "A lass" Gough PS. Will miss you all at SAA. [2]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Olwen Terris <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Mar 2008 09:07:20 -0000 Subject: 19.0167 Sonnets Performed Comment: RE: SHK 19.0167 Sonnets Performed Simon Callow read the Sonnets on BBC's Radio 3 in April 1994 following the re-ordering of John Padel. Callow read them daily for 15 minutes over 6 days and these broadcasts may be listened to at the British Library Sound Archive. Simon Callow also reads the Sonnets in the Poets for Pleasure series issued by Hodder Headline Audio - released in 1995, these two recordings can be bought through Amazon. Olwen Terris Shakespeare Project British Universities Film & Video CouncilThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. _______________________________________________________________ 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0171 Thursday, 13 March 2008 [1] From: Judi Crane <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Mar 2008 13:12:56 +1100 Subj: RE: SHK 19.0165 EMLS 13.3 Now Available [2] From: Donald Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Mar 2008 07:58:07 -0500 Subj: RE: SHK 19.0165 EMLS 13.3 Now Available [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Judi Crane <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Mar 2008 13:12:56 +1100 Subject: 19.0165 EMLS 13.3 Now Available Comment: RE: SHK 19.0165 EMLS 13.3 Now Available Precisely what does Nicole mean by 'Catholically-aligned'? Charles and his Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud, both embraced what later became known as Anglo-Catholic or High Church practices and dogma, so may be thus described. Both were executed for treason, and the charges included endangering the Protestant faith. Charles 1's sons and eventual successors were both Roman Catholics, so their father could hardly be 'the last... in English history'. Charles formally embraced the faith on his deathbed, but his younger brother and successor was a baptised and practicing Catholic. He was the last Roman Catholic king of England. The eventual birth of a son to him and his (Catholic) second wife raised fears of an eventual Catholic succession, and was a significant factor in his removal in The Glorious Revolution of 1688. By Act of Parliament, the monarch may not be a Roman Catholic, marry a Roman Catholic or bring his/her children up as Catholics. Any member of the royal family who marries a Catholic loses his/her place in the succession, however children of that union retain their rights, provided that they are baptised and raised as Anglicans. Anglicanism is described as a 'broad church', and encompasses a wide range of practices, from Low Church evangelicalism to High Church/ Anglo-Catholic ritual. All Anglicans, from the monarch down are free to choose their preferred 'brand'. I suspect EII favours a moderate form of worship and practice - neither too High nor too Low, but she is quite free to adopt Anglo-Catholic practices should she so wish. Cheers, Judi Crane Australian National University [2]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Donald Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Mar 2008 07:58:07 -0500 Subject: 19.0165 EMLS 13.3 Now Available Comment: RE: SHK 19.0165 EMLS 13.3 Now Available Not wanting to be fussy, but when Nicole Coonradt calls Charles I "the last Catholically-aligned monarch in English history," she seems to be ignoring his sons, one of whom reputedly remained a secret catholic all his life and the other of whom lost his crown (though not the head inside it) over his obstinacy. Cheers, don _______________________________________________________________ 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0170 Thursday, 13 March 2008 [1] From: David Frankel <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Mar 2008 16:24:52 -0400 Subj: RE: SHK 19.0163 A Pedagogical Question [2] From: V. Kerry Inman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Mar 2008 13:35:54 -0400 Subj: RE: SHK 19.0163 A Pedagogical Question [3] From: Joseph Egert <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Mar 2008 11:35:13 -0700 (PDT) Subj: Re: SHK 19.0163 A Pedagogical Question [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Frankel <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Mar 2008 16:24:52 -0400 Subject: 19.0163 A Pedagogical Question Comment: RE: SHK 19.0163 A Pedagogical Question One thing that you might do, as it focuses on the possibilities inherent in a play, is to show the St. Crispin's Day speech from Olivier's and Branagh's films and have the students discuss the similarities and differences. Then, to further push the point that the choices actors and directors make create meanings beyond, parallel, or against the literal meaning of the words, show the brief scene from the movie Renaissance Man in which one of the trainee soldiers recites part of the speech. C. David Frankel Assistant Director of Theatre School of Theatre and Dance University of South Florida [2]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: V. Kerry Inman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Mar 2008 13:35:54 -0400 Subject: 19.0163 A Pedagogical Question Comment: RE: SHK 19.0163 A Pedagogical Question How could you not include a discussion of Shakespeare's very right-wing views on the monarchy, justification for war, and governmental responsibility? Also his more liberal, perhaps, view on women's rights, vis a vis the contrast of women in monarchical successions in France and England. V. Kerry Inman [3]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joseph Egert <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Mar 2008 11:35:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 19.0163 A Pedagogical Question Comment: Re: SHK 19.0163 A Pedagogical Question Jack Heller asks: "What do you teach when you teach HENRY V in a survey of Shakespeare's plays?" ANSWER: The bloody self-serving sanctimony of elites, both rulers and wannabees, then and now. Joe Egert "Every Caesar has his Brutus without, and every Brutus his Caesar within." (Apostle of Darkness, 2008) _______________________________________________________________ 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0169 Thursday, 13 March 2008 From: Sam Small <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 13 Mar 2008 15:15:44 -0000 Subject: American and English Eyes As an Englishman who thinks of himself as culturally 100% American, I have tried to fathom the difference in social sensibilities between the two countries when considering the great plays of Shakespeare. America was founded on the sweat, blood and tears of the unlettered working classes of Europe. Later banks and other corporations exploited this amazing achievement. To this day there is fond deference to any working class origin when expressed by most middle or upper class Americans. In England it is the exact opposite. The Norman invasion, the foundation of the modern English state, murdered and exiled the rightful English ruling class. The English working classes were losers and were deeply ashamed of their rout. They have never recovered. In time the French aristocracy became the British gentry creating the industrial revolution and social disaster. To this day there is fond deference to any aristocratic origin when expressed by most working or middle classes from the UK. Given the surprising differences between the two histories are there distinctive American or English views of the plays? Is Othello, Richard III, Henry V or Macbeth viewed more sympathetically on one side of the pond or the other? Or any differences? Clearly there is the unfortunate "Archers syndrome" in most of Shakespeare plays. That is, royalty and the middle classes are often intelligent, chase love, are taller, often gullible with little humour. The working classes are often dim, chase sex, are shorter, often very cunning and given to much wise cracking. So how do Americans view this? Is it foreign to them? Or English quaint? Stars and Stripes forever SAM SMALL _______________________________________________________________ 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.