2009

Those That Live by the

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 20.0578  Monday, 30 November 2009

From:        Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:        Monday, November 30, 2009
Subject:     Those That Live by the

I owe subscribers an explanation.

After a fight with the flu, I upgrading my desktop, the computer I use to 
edit SHAKSPER to Windows 7, a generally less troublesome OS than Vista, I 
was tweaking more than I should have and crashed it. Then my hubris and 
OCD sent me into a week or longer attempt to recover when I should have 
just reformatted my hard drive and reinstalled all of my programs, not my 
favorite leisure-time activity.

After countless failed attempts and much lost sleep, I finally admitted 
last evening that I was beat and did what I should have done right away, I 
gave up and did a clean install and began reinstalling my programs. This 
is a task that usually lasts two or three days, but as soon as I get to a 
convenient spot I will turn to the undoubtedly thousands of e-mails and 
SPAMs in my SHAKSPER inbox and get back to work.

Apologies,
Your editor

_______________________________________________________________
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 for children?

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 20.0577  Wednesday, 18 November 2009

[1] From:   Chris Jacobs <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
     Date:   Thursday, 12 Nov 2009 08:31:22 +0800
     Subj:   Re: SHK 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?

[2] From:   Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
     Date:   Wednesday, 11 Nov 2009 20:17:42 -0500
     Subj:   Re: SHK 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?

[3] From:   David J. Wardell <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
     Date:   Thursday, 12 Nov 2009 09:35:41 -0500
     Subj:   RE: SHK 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?

[4] From:   Justin Alexander <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
     Date:   Thursday, 12 Nov 2009 12:20:50 -0600
     Subj:   Re: SHK 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:       Chris Jacobs <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:       Thursday, 12 Nov 2009 08:31:22 +0800
Subject: 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?
Comment:    Re: SHK 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?

 >Even more attentive reader may have noted that this is not the first
 >time that Terence Hawkes has posed his "Why on earth" or variations
 >thereof question.

Mr Hawkes does seem to have a propensity of playing devil's advocate by 
posting such emotive statements. I enjoy the inevitable responses that 
they evoke. Long may they continue.

Apropos 'Shakespeare for Children'; I have just completed conducting an 
enrichment programme for young teenagers at a school in SE Asia entitled 
"Shakespeare ala Manga", which sought to introduce the Bard's life and 
works in a manner immediately accessible to children of non-English 
speaking cultures. Whilst the attrition rate of participating children 
approached 50%, the remaining group, of 32, emerged with a new found 
excitement, not just in the discovery of the wonders and relevance of 
Shakespeare's language, but also in the joy of creating theatre for 
themselves, and bringing those immortal words to life.

These Children are already talking about next year's programme.

Kindly
Chris Jacobs

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:       Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:       Wednesday, 11 Nov 2009 20:17:42 -0500
Subject: 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?
Comment:    Re: SHK 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?

Because otherwise they will have to pick it up in the street.

[3]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:       David J. Wardell <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:       Thursday, 12 Nov 2009 09:35:41 -0500
Subject: 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?
Comment:    RE: SHK 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?

My children went with me to countless performances in Ashland, Oregon, 
and also London. The secret for me was getting seats on or near the 
front row -- so seeing and hearing wasn't an issue. Their questions and 
comments were more insightful than many adults.

Children's versions weren't necessary -- just good seats.

Come to think of it, my first copy of Shakespeare's works (bought with 
my own money, and which I still have) was probably acquired around age 8-10.

Best regards,
David Wardell

[4]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:       Justin Alexander <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:       Thursday, 12 Nov 2009 12:20:50 -0600
Subject: 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?
Comment:    Re: SHK 20.0566 Shakespeare for children?

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

 >Why on earth would anyone want to expose eight-year-old children to 
Shakespeare?

When I was a wee lad, my mother used to wander around the house quoting 
Shakespeare while doing the chores. Around the time that I was 8 (in the 
2nd grade), I pulled the Folger edition of Henry IV Part 1 off the shelf 
and muscled my way through it. The facing-page notes of the Folger 
edition were quite helpful, but did I fully understand it? Of course not.

(On the other hand, does anyone ever FULLY understand Shakespeare's 
work? Isn't part of the joy of the Bard the fact that we never seem to 
stop finding new layers to peel off the fruit of his mind?)

But was I able to get some pleasure out of it? Yes. And even more 
pleasure out of Branagh's Henry V (which I saw when I was 10)? Yes. And 
even more out of the Guthrie Theater productions of Richard II and Henry 
V (which I saw when I was 12)? Yes.

I think it literally impossible to give a child something which is too 
intellectually challenging to them. Are there challenges which they may 
fail at? Or fail in part? Yes. But such failures are the stuff of 
learning. Such failures are the hurdles which we grow and rise to meet.

Those who treat children as if they were dullards are, in my experience, 
responsible for rearing those who will be dullards as adults.

Justin Alexander

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Othello's Pronouns and Double Time

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 20.0575  Wednesday, 18 November 2009

From:       Jim Fess <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:       Thursday, 12 Nov 2009 15:28:48 +0800
Subject:    Othello's Pronouns and Double Time

Editors of Othello often change two pronouns to smooth the play, but the 
changes destroy two settings: Desdemona's misbehavior towards Cassio, 
and Iago's sexual desire for Othello.

1. From *he* (in 1623 Folio) to *you*

IAG: Did Michael Cassio when *he* wooed my Lady, know of your love?
OTH: He did, from first to last: Why dost thou ask?
IAG: But for a satisfaction of my Thought, no further harm.
OTH: Why of thy thought, Iago?
IAG: I did not think he had been acquainted with her.
OTH: O yes, and went between us very oft.

The original *he* means Cassio pursued Desdemona the same time as 
Othello, who won the lady and possibly promoted Cassio for exchange. The 
*he* is printed as *you* in 1622 Quarto and 1632 Folio, a change 
unlikely a print error.

2. From *she* to *he*

Iago suspected Othello slept with his wife and said:
[1623 Folio] I hate the Moor,
And it is thought abroad, that 'twixt my sheets
*She ha's* done my Office.

This can be translated as: I hate the feeling of being abandoned, and my 
wild thought tells me that my wife has done my work in bed with Othello. 
(I should be the one in bed with him, not my wife.)  Iago never said he 
hated Othello but only hated the Moor, a wild open land. Other two versions:

[1622 Quarto] And it is thought abroad, that 'twixt my sheets
*Ha's* done my office;

[1632 Folio] And it is thought abroad, that twixt my sheets
*He ha's* done my Office.

Iago's sexual desire was the motive for him to drug Othello and hurt 
people close to Othello except Othello himself. The drug was the cause 
of the so called double time scheme.

Othello acted and spoke as if he stayed in Cyprus only two days, but 
others weeks already. Some consider this a flaw. On the contrary, "Womb 
of Time" is the play's major topic, a writing experiment that the author 
interacted with his characters, and asked readers to solve this riddle 
"by wit."

Answer hides in judging metaphors. When Iago said, "the Moor already 
changes with my poison," he really drugged Othello. Iago emphasized this 
with "my medicine works" and drugs like poppy, drowsy syrups that he 
used to ruin some "chaste dames." Poison made Othello lose his sense of 
time, and a wise general in Venice become a rogue in Cyprus.

Hints for this time riddle in the script:

*Horologe a double Set*: the double clock trick.

*There are many Events in the Womb of Time, which will be delivered*: a 
hint that _time machine_ will be the issue in this play.

*set the Watch*: to announce the start of double time in Cyprus, strange 
timing happened after this command.

*work by Wit, and not by Witchcraft*: a hint to solve this riddle by 
logic only. In other plays, riddles may be solved by supernatural 
events, like Hamlet (ghost) and Macbeth (witch). Othello and King Lear 
have no witchcraft.

*Wit depends on dilatory time . . . make the hours seem short*: a hint 
for slow (dilatory) and fast (short) clock.

With the poison in mind, Othello may have a different reading 
experience, more intriguing and logical.

Your comments are appreciated.

Jim

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Anagrams

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 20.0576  Wednesday, 18 November 2009

From:       Steve Sohmer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:       Wednesday, 11 Nov 2009 21:51:23 EST
Subject: 20.0547 Anagrams
Comment:    Re: SHK 20.0547 Anagrams

Dear Friends,

Sorry to be late responding; have been away.

It's really a pleasure to read comments from John Briggs, whose range of 
knowledge (and sophistication) is an example to us all. And I don't 
quibble with what he says about the Council of Nicaea's activities, 
which was correct. But, perhaps, have we overlooked the anomalous way 
Christopher Clavius, the Vapians, the late Lilus and other 
mathematicians incorporated those decrees into what we know as the 
Gregorian calendar reform? Which is, after all, what Toby, Andrew and 
Feste were trying to discuss while in their cups on the prior night.

By the mid-16th century everyone knew the solar tropical year was 
365.2422 days long (or thereabout). And there were various notions of 
how to correct for this (including no leap years in centennial years 
unless divisible by 400, the tactic suggested by Pietro Pitati 
[Veronese, fl. ca. 1550] which we now employ).

The great question confronting mathematicians and churchmen reformers 
was this: should the calendar be corrected to the radix at the time of 
the birth of Christ ... which in 1582  required the excision of 13 days 
... or should it be corrected to the radix at A.D. 325 when the Council 
of Nicaea set 21 March as the "official" date of the Vernal Equinox ... 
which would require the excision of 10 days?

Why was this an issue? It seems quite obvious to us that resetting the 
clock to the birth of Jesus was their logical (and Christian) duty. But 
Gregory et al took the low road and adjusted the calendar 10 days 
instead of 13 ,,, because to conform their new calendar (and 
martyrology) to A.D. 1 would have meant accepting Julius Caesar's old 
pagan Julian calendar as the foundation of the new Christian calendar. 
Caesar, of course, had imposed the Julian calendar on the Roman world on 
1 January 45 BC. But Caesar did not only decree a year of 365.25 days 
and a leap day every fourth year. He also adjusted the calendar 80 days 
(by making 46 BC 445 days long!) so that the Equinoxes and Solstices 
would fall on/about 25 March, 21 June, 21 September, 25 December ... 
which were pagan holy days. 25 March was the spring festival of the 
earth mother, Ceres. 25 December was the beginning of the Saturnalia, etc.

So using Caesar's calendar would only emphasize the fact that early 
Christians had borrowed Caesar's dates for the Equinoxes and Solstices 
for important Christian anniversaries, to wit: 25 March, the 
Annunciation and conception of Jesus by his mother; 21 June, the 
Birthday of John the Baptist; 21 September, the conception of John 
Baptist; 25 December, the birth of Jesus. After all, by the time the 
Gospels were written no one remembered Jesus's birthday. The dates on 
which Christianity observed the Annunciation, birth of Christ, etc. were 
false.

Gregory et al opted for the 10-day solution   --   the mathematically 
and historically wrong solution, but the religiously safe solution. So 
Toby and his pals are right to sing "O the 12th day of December" as 
Christmas day ... because 12 + 13 = 25. The 12 December was the 25 
December, according to no lesser authority than the Sun.

In so doing, Gregory had a precedent for ignoring a pagan antecedent and 
favoring a Christian one. Back in A.D. 525, a monk named Dominus Exiguus 
had cast aside the tradition of numbering of years from the founding of 
Rome (AUC)   --   a detestable pagan vestige, he thought   --   and 
substituted the numbering of years we call C.E., the Christian Era, 
beginning with the year he thought was A.D. 1, the year when Christ was 
born. Dom was off by something like 4 or 7 years (opinions vary), but 
who's counting? Anyhow ....

If all the above seems too persnickety and tedious to bear, please 
remember that it finally explains why Shakespeare called the play 
"Twelfth Night, or what you will"   --   since the cognoscenti knew that 
12 December was, in fact, the historical Christmas ... so the 5 or 6 
January could hardly be Twelfth Night ... which should have been 
celebrated on 24 December, which most people took to be Christmas Eve 
... and you can see how things were sufficient liable to confusion that 
Toby and Andrew couldn't follow the explanation, no matter how patiently 
Feste tried to explain, and couldn't tell Pont. Grigorius from 
Pigrogronitus.

Hope this helps.

Steve

_______________________________________________________________
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.

Actors From The London Stage

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 20.0574  Wednesday, 18 November 2009

From:       Actors From The London Stage <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:       Tuesday, 17 Nov 2009 16:24:47 -0500 (EST)
Subject:    Genuine. Dynamic. Shakespeare.

Five Professional British Actors

Five Days of Workshops & Performances

One Unforgettable Residency

NOW BOOKING THROUGH SPRING 2012

   A Midsummer Night's Dream - Fall 2010 (Sept -- Nov)

   As You Like It - Spring 2011 (Jan -- March)

   The Tempest - Fall 2011 (Sept -- Nov)

   Twelfth Night - Spring 2012 (Jan -- March)

Availability is extremely limited. Reserve your spot today.

To discuss rates and dates: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Founded by the renowned British actor Patrick Stewart in 1975, Actors 
 From The London Stage (AFTLS) is one of the world's oldest and most 
respected touring Shakespeare companies.

During a five-day residency of performances and in-class workshops, five 
actors - who hail from such prestigious companies as the Royal 
Shakespeare Company, the National Theatre of Great Britain, and 
Shakespeare's Globe Theatre - breathe new life into Shakespeare's works 
for your students and community.

The AFTLS residency experience is designed to serve not only theatre and 
English departments, but also the entire campus.  Our dynamic, hands-on 
approach appeals to professors and students from many disciplines. While 
our actors specialize in Shakespeare, they can energize any text. 
Business, law, communications, liberal studies, graduate, and university 
seminar students are enriched, enthralled and inspired by a visit from 
Actors From The London Stage.

Want to learn more? Visit AFTLS on the WEB: http://www.nd.edu/~aftls/


_______________________________________________________________
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 Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.