May
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0255 Friday, 2 May 2008 [1] From: Hannibal Hamlin <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 01 May 2008 11:23:09 -0400 Subj: Re: SHK 19.0249 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 [2] From: John Briggs <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 1 May 2008 16:39:39 +0100 Subj: Re: SHK 19.0249 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hannibal Hamlin <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 01 May 2008 11:23:09 -0400 Subject: 19.0249 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 Comment: Re: SHK 19.0249 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 This is all very useful. Thanks. No doubt, although John Briggs's letter will not be published, there will be other responses on the TLS letters page (nothing seems more controversial than matters of Shakespeare and attribution!). I'm wondering, however, whether there is a consensus on the validity of Vickers's methodology in making these arguments for reattribution? Hannibal Hamlin Department of English The Ohio State University [2]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Briggs <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 1 May 2008 16:39:39 +0100 Subject: 19.0249 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 Comment: Re: SHK 19.0249 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 William Proctor Williams wrote: >Henslowe's "ne" does not necessarily mean "new." It can mean a range >of things from newly licensed, to newly modified, to new in the >repertory, to actually new, and, perhaps, at Newington Butts. Well, to dispose of the last possibility, when the Admiral's Men and the Chamberlain's Men both performed at Newington Butts from 3 June 1594 to 13 June 1594, there was only one "ne"[w] play: "Bellendon" [Bellin Dunn]. Yes, 'Henslowe's "ne" does not necessarily mean "new" ' - but it almost certainly does, and to pretend otherwise is probably irresponsible, as it leads to people like Bob Grumman thinking that they have "read that it merely meant (or could have merely meant) new for Henslowe's theatre." It would be far better if we could all agree on the general message that "ne" means "new", and leave the appropriate caveats in the footnotes. Diana Price incautiously proposes "an alternative solution - that "ne" marks a performance at which twice the usual admission fee was charged at the doors, whether that performance was - or was not - the premiere." She also proposes "that Henslowe's papers contain evidence to suggest that "ne" signifies his shorthand for "twice" the usual entry fee, and that this theory can be tested by examining certain revenues collected at the Rose playhouse." As the first performance of "harey the vj" [1 Henry 6] ("ne") on 3 March 1592 collected ?3 16s 8d, and the second performance on 7 March 1592 (not "ne") collected ?3, this theory has an uphill struggle. John Briggs _______________________________________________________________ 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 19.0254 Friday, 2 May 2008 From: Jack Heller <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 1 May 2008 14:12:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: A Problem of Access Colleagues: I am researching some imagery from JULIUS CAESAR, I have run into an odd problem. My institution does not subscribe to Project Muse, so I am unable to obtain several articles I have requested from the interlibrary loan service. Apparently, an individual also cannot subscribe to Project Muse. I'd welcome some good, immediate suggestions for how to resolve this. Jack Heller [Editor's Note: I thought that I remembered being able to access articles from Project Muse, but when I tried the other day I could not. So I e-mailed the Dean of the Library, and I learned that I must have had a glitch because my University has not subscribed to the articles, a service that costs $25,000 per year. -Hardy] _______________________________________________________________ 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 19.0253 Friday, 2 May 2008 From: Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, May 02, 2008 Subject: Staging Cardenio http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0502/p13s03-almp.html Behind this month's staging of a 'lost' Shakespeare play csmonitor.com 'Cardenio,' a seldom-staged work attributed by some to the Bard Opens May 10 in Cambridge, Mass. By Iris Fanger Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor From the May 2, 2008 edition Playwright Charles L. Mee remembers the phone call. A Harvard scholar, Stephen Greenblatt, had been awarded a $1.5 million grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and wanted to use the funds to explore how a dramatist crafts a play. Professor Greenblatt had chosen to observe Mr. Mee at work, noting that Mee's cut-and-paste methods of "resituating and appropriating" materials reminded him of William Shakespeare's manner of writing. "I'm the biggest thief," says Mee, who was honored this past year with the staging of an entire season of his plays at New York's Signature Theatre. He recalls telling Greenblatt that the project wouldn't be fun unless the pair wrote a play together - and then asking Greenblatt if he knew of any lost plays by Shakespeare. "His answer?" says Mee, " 'Oh yes: 'Cardenio.' " The duo's take on that play - a reconstruction of a work attributed by some to William Shakespeare and John Fletcher - opens May 10 at the American Repertory Theatre, in Cambridge, Mass. "Cardenio" was performed only twice during Shakespeare's lifetime but never printed. Little is known about the play beyond its title. An 18th-century version, produced at London's Drury Lane Theater, was said to be based on Shakespeare's text, but the theater and its records - including, perhaps, the original - burned in the early 19th century. "Cardenio" almost certainly came from Cervantes's novel, "Don Quixote," says Greenblatt, author of the bestseller "Will in the World," a comprehensive study of Shakespeare's methods of transforming his life and milieu into the stuff of his plays. "What's fascinating and bizarre is when Shakespeare and Fletcher sat down to read the Cervantes novel, they weren't interested in the character, Don Quixote, but [in] the tragicomedy romance of Cardenio folded within the work," he says. "The story is one that Shakespeare had been trying to tell all his life: the relationship between two men and one love object. I'm very interested in these larger patterns in Shakespeare's career." The framing plot of Greenblatt and Mee's "Cardenio," set in modern times, concerns two young men, Will and Anselmo, on Anselmo's wedding day. Doubting his bride's devotion, he asks Will to try to seduce her. Just then, Anselmo's parents, a pair of traveling actors, arrive with a lost Shakespearean play that they intend to produce as part of the wedding festivities. The cast will be drawn from among the guests. [ . . . ] Greenblatt doubts that a true lost Shakespearean play will ever surface. "We're not talking about the sands of Egypt. We're talking about the climate of northern Europe where even good vellum lasts maybe 500 years. But if you happen to hear of someone who's found something...." _______________________________________________________________ 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 19.0252 Friday, 2 May 2008 From: Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, May 02, 2008 Subject: Southampton Portrait Discovered http://www.artinfo.com/news/story/27495/portrait-of-shakespeare-patron-discovered-in-london/ Portrait of Shakespeare Patron Discovered in London - ARTINFO.com May 2, 2008 Portrait of Shakespeare Patron Discovered in London By Oliver Basciano Published: May 1, 2008 LONDON-Students from the University of Bristol curating an exhibition for the National Portrait Gallery in London have discovered a portrait of William Shakespeare's only known patron, Henry Wriothesley, 3rd Earl of Southampton, by an unknown artist. The depiction in oil on panel has remained hidden until now, having been painted over with a portrait of Southampton's wife, Elizabeth Vernon. It was discovered during a routine X-ray prior to the installation of a show of portraits of Tudor women, which opened on April 29 at Montacute House in Somerset. Southampton was a friend of both Queen Elizabeth I and Shakespeare, who dedicated Venus and Adonis (1593) to him. Historians at the London gallery compared the newly discovered likeness to previous depictions of Southampton in the collection, such as Daniel Mytens's lively oil painting on canvas from circa 1618. The sitter was "known at court for his flamboyant appearance, particularly his auburn hair, which he wore long," claims the gallery. [Editor's Note: Follow the link above to look at the original portrait and the X-Ray revealing Southampton. -Hardy] _______________________________________________________________ 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 19.0251 Friday, 2 May 2008 From: Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, May 02, 2008 Subject: Meta-Comment on Intentions Roundtable John Drakakis concludes his thoughtful contribution to the SHAKSPER Roundtable: Shakespeare's Intentions with the following paragraph: I have taxed patient readers with too long an introduction, but may I make one request: the previous "Roundtable" strands have petered off into obscurity simply because particular contributors used the opportunity to parade thoughtless prejudice. Perhaps on this occasion, we might pause to think about how we might take the debate forward without getting bogged down in entrenched positions. We have enough material within the Shakespeare oeuvre to provide us with a variety of examples that we can profitably discuss, and that may, I think, lead us to conclusions that we might not have expected when we started to think about this topic. As SHAKSPER's editor/moderator, I am moved to comment here. I developed the concept of the Roundtable format as a means of re-capturing some of the excitement of SHAKSPER's early days. At that time, virtually all of the members of SHAKSPER were academics for the simple reasons that in the early 1990s, for the most part, the majority of those who had access to the Internet were members of the military or members of the academy -- AOL, HOTMAIL, GMAIL, EARTHLINK, and such did not exist. During these early years, members of SHAKSPER were pioneers, adventurous spirits from the academy, who were creating an electronic alternative to Shakespeare Association of America seminars and departmental lounges, a place where the likeminded discussed their scholarship and ideas, shaping in the process the very medium used for that discourse. The Internet brought together academics from around the world: a Shakespearean in Malta no longer felt isolated from her colleagues in Europe or in the United States; scholars from small colleges in rural Kansas could exchange ideas with their colleagues from major research universities on the coasts or across "the pond"; graduate students and tenure-track assistant professors could hone their academic eye-teeth debating with eminent scholars; while those eminent scholars could test their latest theoretical creations, getting reactions from a broad spectrum of potential buyers of their next scholarly tome. Now, that I have waxed nostalgic, let me return to the matter at hand. I share John Drakakis's hope that in Roundtable 2 we will have profitable discussions of the topic rather than our being diverted into endless repetitions of the same-old, same-old culture wars confrontations that have characterized some of our efforts in the past to examine subjects of a theoretical nature. Hardy M. Cook Editor-Moderator of SHAKSPER Professor of English _______________________________________________________________ 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.