Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2009 :: May ::
Gary Taylor's Cardenio
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 20.0207  Saturday, 2 May 2009

[1] From:   Kevin De Ornellas <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
     Date:   Thursday, 30 Apr 2009 16:27:35 +0100
     Subj:   RE: SHK 20.0200 Gary Taylor's Cardenio

[2] From:   Arnie Perlstein <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
     Date:   Thursday, 30 Apr 2009 13:24:46 -0400
     Subj:   Cardenio

[3] From:   John Cox <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
     Date:   Thursday, 30 Apr 2009 19:12:33 -0400
     Subj:   Re: SHK 20.0200 Gary Taylor's Cardenio

[4] From:   Bill Lloyd <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
     Date:   Friday, 1 May 2009 00:25:58 EDT
     Subj:   Re: SHK 20.0200 Gary Taylor's Cardenio


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:       Kevin De Ornellas <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:       Thursday, 30 Apr 2009 16:27:35 +0100
Subject: 20.0200 Gary Taylor's Cardenio
Comment:    RE: SHK 20.0200 Gary Taylor's Cardenio

I appreciate that Hardy's conference can function as a sort of scholarly 
middle man, but if I was seeking information about something Gary Taylor 
did, I would simply write to him myself.

Kevin De Ornellas
University of Ulster

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:       Arnie Perlstein <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:       Thursday, 30 Apr 2009 13:24:46 -0400
Subject:    Cardenio

"What is the definition of a 'creative reconstruction'? Did he try to 
edit out Theobald's parts? Did he use the 1612 Shelton translation of 
Don Quixote? And is Taylor's version meant to tell us something about 
the original Shakespeare and Fletcher Cardenio, or is it supposed to 
serve a different purpose?"

I just browsed the link you  provided, Stefanie, and was disappointed, 
but not surprised, that among the various abstracts provided, there is 
not a single word mentioned regarding Hamilton's claims that The Second 
Maiden's Tragedy (TSMT) is the missing Cardenio. I have looked very 
closely at Hamilton's claims, I've read  TSMT, Theobald's Double 
Falshood, and the Maid's Tragedy, and considered all of them in relation 
to Cervantes, on the one hand, and Shakespeare and Fletcher, on the 
other hand, and, all things considered, I think that Hamilton's claim is 
still the most plausible one out there. I have not seen a single 
convincing refutation of his claims.

Arnie

[3]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:       John Cox <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:       Thursday, 30 Apr 2009 19:12:33 -0400
Subject: 20.0200 Gary Taylor's Cardenio
Comment:    Re: SHK 20.0200 Gary Taylor's Cardenio

I don't know what Gary Taylor has done, but Stephen Greenblatt rewrote 
Cardenio with playwright Arthur Mee. Stephen has a very entertaining 
talk about the play, including the witty line, "Mee and I . . . ."

John Cox
Hope College

[4]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:       Bill Lloyd <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:       Friday, 1 May 2009 00:25:58 EDT
Subject: 20.0200 Gary Taylor's Cardenio
Comment:    Re: SHK 20.0200 Gary Taylor's Cardenio

I saw a Staged Reading of Gary Taylor's Cardenio at the Shakespeare 
Theatre in Washington DC on April 23 2007. I understand there were 
staged readings given elsewhere around this time.

 >What is the definition of a 'creative reconstruction'? Did he try to
 >edit out Theobald's parts? Did he use the 1612 Shelton translation of
 >Don Quixote? And is Taylor's version meant to tell us something about
 >the original Shakespeare and Fletcher Cardenio, or is it supposed to
 >serve a different purpose?

 From Taylor's notes in the program to this Staged Reading:
"I tackled the difficult problem of... Cardenio first by studying how 
Theobald and other writers adapted Renaissance plays for 18c audiences, 
and then by unadapting Theobald's adaption...
Theobald [had] also adapted Shakespeare's Richard II and John Webster's 
Duchess of Malfi...
the goal has been to create, from the bits and pieces that have 
survived, a more Shakespearian, more Fletcherian, more complex and 
Quixotic play."

So, yes he attempted to edit out Theobald's parts and he did (as he told 
the audience before the reading) use Shelton's 1612 Quixote translation 
to re-Quixotify his version.

For me it was a qualified success. It was interesting and enjoyable, 
though the actor-readers were a bit rough, having had only one 
rehearsal. The reconstructed play was a bit more farcical that I had 
expected. I was thinking it would have the feel of, say, Two Noble 
Kinsmen; but with the addition of Quixote himself (absent from 
Theobald's adaptation) the mood created was more similar to Merry Wives 
or Much Ado.

Is Taylor's version meant to tell us something, serve a purpose?  I 
suggest it's more meant to raise questions than "tell". We'll have to 
wait for the book that will probably result from the Cardenio 
Colloquium. (If only New Zealand were closer to me!)  No reconstruction 
can really recreate the Shakespeare/Fletcher original, but from what 
I've seen Taylor's version makes useful suggestions as to what it 
*might* have been like.

Bill Lloyd

_______________________________________________________________
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.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.