The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0593 Sunday, 12 October 2008
[1] From: John W Kennedy <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 07 Oct 2008 16:38:18 -0400
Subt: Re: SHK 19.0586 A Fragment of Style
[2] From: Peter Groves <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 08 Oct 2008 12:03:29 +1100
Subt: Re: SHK 19.0586 A Fragment of Style
[3] From: Felix de Villiers <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 8 Oct 2008 07:22:16 +0200
Subt: A Fragment of Style
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: John W Kennedy <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 07 Oct 2008 16:38:18 -0400
Subject: 19.0586 A Fragment of Style
Comment: Re: SHK 19.0586 A Fragment of Style
From: Robert Projansky
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>4. "sufficient" is either pronounced suf-FISH-ee-ENT or, if that
>sounds too weird, pronounced suf-FISH-ent and followed by a
>one- beat pause.
>
>Lod.
>Is this the noble Moore, whom our full Senate
>Call all in all sufficient? Is this the noble nature,
>Whom passion could not shake? Whose solid virtue,
>The shot of accident nor dart of chance
>Could neither graze, nor pierce?
Hardly "sufFISHiENT" -- that would make the line an outright fourteener -- and
a feminine one at that! Even when it is pronounced with only three syllables,
it takes synelepha to reduce the line to a (feminine) alexandrine, which is
still a foot too many, but believable.
[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Peter Groves <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 08 Oct 2008 12:03:29 +1100
Subject: 19.0586 A Fragment of Style
Comment: Re: SHK 19.0586 A Fragment of Style
>Robert Projansky writes: " I beg to differ about the metrical scheme of
>the Othello scene fragment that Felix de Villiers cites. The verse
>therein is quite regular,
>without even a trochee to vary the iambic pentameter.", later
>suggesting that including reversals or 'trochees' would constitute
>"undoing the meter", making it "like prose".
>
>I in turn beg to differ: in fact this passage, like other passages of
>agitated speech in Shakespeare, has several phonologically obligatory
>reversals (indicated by < and >) and many optional ones (indicated by <
>and |). To ignore all the optional reversals would merely be wooden; to
>ignore the obligatory ones ("veRY") would be to abandon the English
>language.
>
> <Ay, you| did wish that I would make her turn:
> <Sir she| can turn, and turn, and yet go on,
> And turn again, <and she| can weep sir, weep;
> <And she's| obedient, as you say, obedient;
> <Very>obedient. Proceed you in your tears,
> Concerning this sir: O well painted passion:
> <I am| commanded here: --- <get you>away,
> I'll send for you anon: --- <Sir, I>obey the mandate
> <And will| return to Venice: ---hence, avaunt!
> Exit Desdemona
> <Cassio>shall have my place; and sir to night
> <I do| intreat that we may sup together,
> You are welcome sir to Cypres, ---goates and monkies.
> Exit.
> Lod.
> Is this the noble Moore, <whom our| full Senate
> Call all in all sufficient? Is this the noble nature,
> Whom passion could not shake? Whose solid virtue,
> The shot of accident nor dart of chance
> Could neither graze, nor pierce?
>
>Here's another passage of agitated speech:
>
>Lear. <Let it>be so, thy truth then be thy dowre:
><For by| the sacred radience of the Sunne,
>The mis[t]eries of Heccat and the night:
>By all the operation of the Orbes,
>>From whom we do exist, and cease to be,
><Heere I>disclaime <all my>Paternall care,
>Propinquity and property of blood,
><[And] as| a stranger to my heart and me,
><Hold thee| from this for ever. The barbarous Scythian,
>Or he that makes his generation messes
>To gorge his appetite, <shall to| my bosome
><Be as| well neighbour'd, pitied, and releev'd,
>As thou my somtime Daughter.
>Kent. Good my Liege.
It is a mistake to suppose that metrical variation kills the pentameter; on the
contrary, so long as it stays within the rules (e.g. no successive reversals) it
gives it life.
Peter Groves
School of English etc.
Monash University
[3]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Felix de Villiers <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 8 Oct 2008 07:22:16 +0200
Subject: A Fragment of Style
I appreciated Robert Projansky's reply and am glad I provoked him to write. He
makes very interesting points. I have already written that I'm on the site to
learn. I'll save his letter for special study.
At the same time, I think he misunderstood me. When I was writing that piece I
paid little attention to the regular or irregular meter. I took the iambic
pentameter for granted. What I find jagged in Othello's speech is the short
phrasing and his mind flying in different directions, which, I think, does have
a disturbing effect on the meter. By texture, I certainly don't mean the meter,
but of course, the sound pattern and that I feel the repetitions biting into this.
Yours,
Felix
_______________________________________________________________
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.
|
