2009

Heroes

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 20.0080  Wednesday, 25 February 2009

[1]  From:   JD Markel <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Date:   Friday, 20 Feb 2009 19:33:29 -0800 (PST)
      Subj:   Re: SHK 20.0074 Heroes

[2]  From:   John W Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Date:   Friday, 20 Feb 2009 22:52:32 -0500
      Subj:   Re: SHK 20.0074 Heroes

[3]  From:   Conrad Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Date:   Sunday, 22 Feb 2009 03:02:39 -0500
      Subj:   Heroes


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:      JD Markel <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:      Friday, 20 Feb 2009 19:33:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 20.0074 Heroes
Comment:   Re: SHK 20.0074 Heroes

"A 357 magnum is not a deadly weapon if you load it with blanks instead 
of live rounds."

Unfortunately, untrue. Actors Brandon Lee and John Erik Hexum could 
attest to that, had they lived. A prop weapon, like any weapon, should 
always be pointed in a safe direction, whatever one imagines about its 
safety or lack of dangerousness.

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:      John W Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:      Friday, 20 Feb 2009 22:52:32 -0500
Subject: 20.0074 Heroes
Comment:   Re: SHK 20.0074 Heroes

Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

 >Claudius is the king of Denmark, but in fact he is a
 >murderer and usurper, which renders his rule illegal.
 >
 >Oh, was that the Viking law? Indeed, was it English law
 >(if so, does it apply to Henry VII and his successors)?

Henry VII did not poison Richard III by stealth.

Donald Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

 >>Conrad Cook writes: "Well, let's be accurate. Fencing foils are not
 >>deadly weapons, provided that the bate has not been removed or
 >>poison applied.
 >>
 >>Not wanting to quibble, but the "provided" in that sentence makes my
 >>point.
 >
 >A 357 magnum is not a deadly weapon if you load it with blanks
 >instead of live rounds.

This is, strictly speaking, off-topic, but . . . oh yes it bloody well 
is. A paper wad moving at more than the speed of sound will smash right 
through bone.

 >But if someone should sneak in a real one --

Or just do it by plain dumb-assery.

 >I still get cold chills about that.

I have a young friend who was one of the several people whose 
unmalicious, but undisciplined actions led to the Wild West City 
incident a few years ago. I suspect he'll be having nightmares for fifty 
years to come.

[3]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:      Conrad Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:      Sunday, 22 Feb 2009 03:02:39 -0500
Subject:   Heroes

Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>wrote:

 >Claudius is the king of Denmark, but in fact he is a
 >murderer and usurper, which renders his rule illegal.
 >
 >Oh, was that the Viking law? Indeed, was it English law (if so, does it
 >apply to Henry VII and his successors)?

You may be right, although I doubt that a nation would fully accept a 
king who had too openly committed treason against his predecessor, open 
rebellion aside. But Shakespeare is more interested in drama than 
technical accuracy (as we also find elsewhere), and Claudius makes clear 
he fears scandal and he fears his secret murder becoming known: he dares 
not put the strong law on Hamlet; he frets disproportionately about 
Ophelia's mad talk breeding scandal; he flees the Mousetrap.

 >Laertes was chosen by the people to be king, but he
 >forfeited that kingship in return for Claudius's promise
 >of revenge.
 >
 >It was not a democracy.

But Laertes, like Claudius, has entered the world of what one can get 
away with. And his insurrection is successful. He does not claim the 
kingship because he is not ambitious, and because his goal is purely 
revenge.

 >Hamlet is the hereditary king, but has had trouble in
 >claiming the throne.
 >
 >Nor was it hereditary. As Shakespeare knew, and said in the play two or
 >three times, the Danish crown was elective, with the choice falling on
 >an assembly of nobles.

Yeah, that's interesting. Hamlet says that Claudius popped in between 
the election and his hopes: it may be that, by marrying Gertrude, 
Claudius short-circuited the electoral process. King by marriage. -- By 
a shady, not-entirely-legitimate marriage, by Hamlet's account. And he's 
not exactly a sovereign king, either: he names Gertrude "jointress," 
which implies they share authority equally.

In contrast, Hamlet begins by openly defying Claudius, only to obey his 
mother. It becomes, therefore, open to question whether he has obeyed 
Claudius after all, and thereby acknowledged his authority -- Claudius 
claims he has. Throughout the play, Hamlet puts on the royal "we" more 
and more conspicuously, until at the end he is swapping authentic orders 
from an illegitimate king with forged orders from the legitimate heir.

People have a tendency, when confronted with an ambiguous situation, to 
simplify it too quickly. But Claudius's claim on kingship is *deeply* 
ambiguous, because it is suitable to Shakespeare's dramatic purposes to 
cast the legitimacy of Claudius's rule into doubt.

Certainly, I think I have grounds to stand by my earlier claim, that all 
three members of the three-way duel are kings who fall short of kingship.

Donald Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>wrote:

 >Conrad Cook writes: "Well, let's be accurate. Fencing foils are not
 >deadly weapons, provided that the bate has not been removed or poison
 >applied.
 >
 >Not wanting to quibble, but the "provided" in that sentence makes my 
point.
 >
 >A 357 magnum is not a deadly weapon if you load it with blanks instead
 >of live rounds. But if someone should sneak in a real one --
 >
 >I still get cold chills about that.

My understanding was that you found fault with Hamlet's decision to 
accept a duel with Laertes using deadly weapons. And there are good 
grounds to fault him that decision. My point is that fencing foils are 
really very safe. Tampering with them in this fashion is not like 
putting a live round in a gun which ought to have blanks, but rather 
like cutting the brake lines on a car.

Conrad

[Editor's Note: I think it is about time for this thread to end. -HMC]

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Shakespeare by Heart

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 20.0078  Wednesday, 25 February 2009

[1]  From:   Ellen Joy Letostak <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Date:   Saturday, 21 Feb 2009 16:29:17 -0500
      Subj:   Re: SHK 20.0071 Shakespeare by Heart

[2]  From:   Julia Griffin <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Date:   Sunday, 22 Feb 2009 15:22:50 -0500
      Subj:   Re: SHK 20.0071 Shakespeare by Heart


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:      Ellen Joy Letostak <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:      Saturday, 21 Feb 2009 16:29:17 -0500
Subject: 20.0071 Shakespeare by Heart
Comment:   Re: SHK 20.0071 Shakespeare by Heart

I was very fortunate to see William Sutton perform years ago at the 
Shakespeare Institute, and he is phenomenal. He is also, I believe, a 
member of SHAKSPER -- or at least he has previously posted here. It 
would be great to hear his take on this question. Will?

Ellen Joy Letostak
University of Florida

[Editor's Note: At the Fringe Festival in Edinburgh in 2002, I too have 
had the privilege of seeing William perform his one-man show "Why Love 
Shakespeare?". I shared my remarks about the performance on SHAKSPER 
(see http://www.shaksper.net/archives/2002/1772.html). A search of the 
SHAKSPER archives with the terms "Sutton Why Love Shakespeare?" locates 
several other reviews of the show. -Hardy]

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:      Julia Griffin <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:      Sunday, 22 Feb 2009 15:22:50 -0500
Subject: 20.0071 Shakespeare by Heart
Comment:   Re: SHK 20.0071 Shakespeare by Heart

Harold Bloom can do it -- at least, I heard him say so on NPR . . . Of 
course, he's not sixteen.

Julia Griffin

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Titus Andronicus

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 20.0077  Wednesday, 25 February 2009

From:      William Proctor Williams <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:      Friday, 20 Feb 2009 21:19:22 -0500
Subject: 20.0070 Titus Andronicus
Comment:   Re: SHK 20.0070 Titus Andronicus

Jack Heller is quite right about the punk band Titus Andronicus. Words 
fail me, and that doesn't happen often.

William Proctor Williams

_______________________________________________________________
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.

A Petition to Appoint a Secretary of the Arts

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 20.0079  Wednesday, 25 February 2009

[1]  From:   John W Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Date:   Friday, 20 Feb 2009 22:35:03 -0500
      Subj:   SHK 20.0073 A Petition to Appoint a Secretary of the Arts

[2]  From:   Cheryl Newton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
      Date:   Friday, 20 Feb 2009 23:00:56 -0500
      Subj:   SHK 20.0073 A Petition to Appoint a Secretary of the Arts


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:      John W Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:      Friday, 20 Feb 2009 22:35:03 -0500
Subject: 20.0073 A Petition to Appoint a Secretary of the Arts
Comment:   Re: SHK 20.0073 A Petition to Appoint a Secretary of the Arts

Ina Centaur <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

 >I heartily agree that the arts/humanities are especially underserved
 >in the US. However, whom would you suggest as a candidate for this
 >position - and what would they do (what could they do, given the
 >constraints of the recession) - and could anything in this
 >department help the inter/national financial crisis?

Wasn't this, in fact, the plot of an early Shirley Temple movie?

Apart from running the National Endowment (which is already an 
independent agency), exactly what would a Department of the Arts do? And 
if the answer is, "Nothing," would the promotion of the Chairman to the 
Cabinet really accomplish anything? Or would a campaign to have the 
NEA's budget raised by Congress actually be more profitable?

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:      Cheryl Newton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:      Friday, 20 Feb 2009 23:00:56 -0500
Subject: 20.0073 A Petition to Appoint a Secretary of the Arts
Comment:   Re: SHK 20.0073 A Petition to Appoint a Secretary of the Arts

Ina Centaur writes,

 >I heartily agree that the arts/humanities are especially underserved
 >in the US. However, whom would you suggest as a candidate for this
 >position - and what would they do (what could they do, given the
 >constraints of the recession) -- and could anything in this department
 >help the inter/national financial crisis?

Public funding for Chautauqua type events: community theater, county 
orchestras, public lectures. Money could go into the infrastructure of 
building or renovating sites, paying directors, conductors, 
choreographers or visiting lecturers, budgeting for costumes & sets. 
Local actors, musicians, dancers etc could volunteer their time as they 
do now in community theater. By the feds subsidizing some costs, ticket 
prices could be lower for adults, and appropriate programs for children 
could offer kids free admission. This is something that would be 
inexpensive by government standards while giving a small boost to local 
economy, encouraging community service, and promoting educational 
opportunities.

On a larger scale, undertake something similar to the BBC's production 
of all of Shakespeare's plays. Choose 2 or 3 dz "best of" American plays 
using professional actors (maybe at union scale as their contribution to 
the project) and create a touring company, again at modest ticket 
prices, & in addition create a film version for sale. It would be 
interesting to briefly discuss candidates for the "best of" list, if 
Hardy doesn't mind us straying off course temporarily. (hmm - Maybe a US 
50 list.).

~Cheryl Newton

[Editor's Note: I believe a discussion of the 50 best American plays 
would be an appropriate thread for the list if members express interest 
in the topic.

PS: Since I am striving to be more active as moderator, I want it known 
that I am ignoring without comment submissions I deem offensive. I am 
under no obligation to "publish" every post submitted to me. And I will 
not let arguments that I am not being fair or balanced sway me to 
distribute incendiary, reactionary, or racist remarks from anyone trying 
to use SHAKSPER as a battlefield in the culture wars. -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.

SL Shakespeare Company's Twelfth Night,

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 20.0076  Wednesday, 25 February 2009

From:      Ina Centaur <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:      Tuesday, 24 Feb 2009 17:32:47 +0000 (GMT)
Subject:   SL Shakespeare Company's Twelfth Night, Act 1: The Open-Ended 
Run on vShakespeare

vShakespeare
The Virtual Shakespeare Consortium
Ina Centaur
	
Ina Centaur has invited you to the event 'SL Shakespeare Company's 
Twelfth Night, Act 1: The Open-Ended Run' on vShakespeare!

New season premiering March 1 @ 1 PM. Performances to occur subsequently 
every Sundays @ 1 PM and Tuesdays @ 6 PM PST. We'll also go wild and try 
all-female Shakespearean productions and more!

SL Shakespeare Company's Twelfth Night, Act 1: The Open-Ended Run 	
Time: March 1, 2009 at 1pm to March 31, 2009 at 2pm
Location: SL Globe Theatre
Organized By: Ina Centaur

Event Description:
SL Shakespeare Company's Twelfth Night, Act 1: The Open-Ended Run

Shakespeare, Second Life: The virtual world's performance of Twelfth 
Night, Act 1 unabridged, live and direct from the first folio returns 
and will play on indefinitely -- as you will it! The SL Shakespeare 
Company's long-awaited open-ended run premiers Sunday, March 1 at 1 PM 
PST, and will continue indefinitely every Sunday at 1 PM PST and every 
Tuesday at 6 PM PST at the SL Globe Theatre.

Artistic Director Ina Centaur is directing this play with a new cast and 
a rare vision in Shakespearean productions, "This production attempts to 
be as true and pure to the play as possible. . . This is the only one of 
the Bard's plays that is not under suspicion from various bad quartos 
editions, so there might be some insights to be divined if we try to 
dramatize it based on a close reading -- independent of the shackles of 
any era interpretation."

Although the play is rich with references to Elizabethan England, 
Centaur has chosen to let more intrinsic elements define the visuals, 
"Avoiding the extraneous notions of modernity, the play looks like it's 
from the 'generic past' . . . The visual elements aren't bound to a 
particular era or interpretation -- but serve to help embellish the 
intrinsic elements of the play."

Starting in April, the troupe will be trying several possible 
"Variations," including an all-female production, a switched-genders 
production, and several more. Artistic Director Ina Centaur explains 
that despite the changes, the "Variations" will be related by a certain 
"unmoving pivot," "Twelfth Night, Act 1 is about the formation of love 
triangles . . .  There's a salient love triangle that evolves through 
the act, connecting Viola, Olivia and Orsino, and a subtle relationship 
triangle that forms between Maria, Andrew, and Toby in Scene 3. That's 
like the unmoving pivot that connects the 'Variations.' Our goal is to 
be able to vibrantly convey these archetypal relationships in both our 
main 'traditional' production as well as our 'Variations.'"

When asked why the troupe is performing just a single act, Centaur 
asserts, "We're doing it in obsessive detail step-by-step, since we plan 
to perform the play unabridged in a way that's not only worth your time 
to see, but may also delight and even enlighten you. It's a bite-sized 
chunk of goodness each time. Come see Act 1 to get a glimpse of the SL 
Shakespeare Company magic before we move onto Act 2 this summer!"

The play stars Caliban Jigsaw, Ixmal Supermarine, Kerry Takashi, KeyKey 
Underwood, Mokey Mokusei, and Sensuality Cordeaux.

Premiering March 1, the performances will be held Sundays at 1 PM SLT 
(GMT-8) and Tuesdays at 6 PM SLT (GMT-8) at the SL Globe Theatre, in the 
virtual world of Second Life, accessible anywhere in the world with an 
Internet-ready computer. http://visit.SLshakespeare.com

Subtitles will be provided in English, French, German, Spanish, and 
Mandarin Chinese.

For Visuals, please see:
http://playbills.SLshakespeare.com for our 2009 playbills (and 
http://playbills2008.SLshakespeare.com for our 2008 playbills)
http://programmes.SLshakespeare.com
http://blog.SLshakespeare.com

See more details and RSVP on vShakespeare:
http://vshakespeare.ning.com/events/event/show?id=2058941%3AEvent%3A2424&xgi=f0OWCNV
About vShakespeare
A consortium of individuals and organizations dedicated to bringing 
Shakespeare and his culture to the Internet and beyond. The Virtual 
Shakespeare Initiative challenges participants to bring Shakespeare to 
virtual worlds.
vShakespeare 	75 members
163 photos
9 discussions
9 events
8 blog posts

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Gift to SHAKSPER

Consider making a gift to support SHAKSPER.