2014

All in Order at Last

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 25.429  Friday, 17 October 2014

 

From:        Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         Friday, October 17, 2014

Subject:    All in Order at Last

 

Dear Subscribers,

 

Thank you for your patience. Ron and I have worked out all of the problems I have had with mailing Newsletters since the end of July. In addition, I have upgraded my service with Google to commercial status and will be paying so that all of the Newsletters I send out on one day will get delivered that day and delivered more expeditiously than previously.

 

As you can imagine I have many, many submissions to catch up with because I have not been able to mail since the end of September. Rather than sending one enormous Newsletter I have decided to send several smaller ones over the next few days.

 

On the up side, the down time came as I was having another extensive operation on the nerves in my leg, foot, and ankle from which I continue to recover. 

 

By way of explanation, I am sending this out by itself and will begin clearing my inbox mailing Newsletters beginning tomorrow or Sunday. So this message will act as a clarification and a final test to insure all is indeed in order.

 

Thank you again for your patience,

Hardy Cook

Editor of SHAKSPER

 

Freedom, Freetown and Fernie’s Fiery Feast

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 25.059  Friday, 31 January 2014

 

From:        Jeannette Webber <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         January 30, 2014 at 9:14:38 AM EST

Subject:    Freedom, Freetown and Fernie’s Fiery Feast

 

[Editor’s Note: The following appeared in the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust’s Blogging Shakespeare site. The author is Annie Martirosyan, a SHAKSPER Member. –Hardy] 

 

You do not expect a critic of Shakespeare, Nietzsche, Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard and other geniuses of human depth and intellect to be as good as Shakespeare, Nietzsche, Dostoevsky or Kierkegaard. Fair enough. But not when the critic’s name is Ewan Fernie. I had never before heard the author of what I consider to be one of the most terrific books ever written, live. So his inaugural lecture entitled “Freetown! Shakespeare and Social Flourishing” at the Barber Institute of the University of Birmingham on 27 January was something to look forward to.

 

Fernie started his talk with a rhetorically powerful interpretation of the concept of Freetown in Romeo and Juliet. From a more immediate expression of Freetown in the “fair assembly” in Capulet’s household ball towards a broader prospect of freedom and liberty, Fernie invited us to ruminate about the double-edgedness of these concepts: how the universal as well as social understanding of freedom can stem from an individual’s excessive possession of it. Fernie implied that by amplifying the youthful love of Romeo and Juliet into an “oceanic feeling”, Shakespeare reveals, breaks through and redefines the boundaries of a single person’s human capacities as “a teenage girl’s amorous enthusiasm becomes universal”.

 

“Romeo and Juliet attain their tragedy”… “We pity them but they make it that far.”

 

Following up on the idea of an individual’s ability to embrace universal and social freedom, Fernie moved from Shakespeare’s characters to Shakespeare enthusiasts and ultimately to Shakespeare as a universal incentive for freedom and reform on individual, emotional, social, political, historical and cultural levels. Fernie expanded on the unprecedented effect that David Garrick’s initiation of the Stratford Jubilee had on our conception, perception and observation of Shakespeare as “Garrick took Shakespeare out of the institutions literally to the streets”. The phenomenon of global and local Shakespeares is not as new as we think: the binarity of Shakespeare’s Britishness and universality dates back to 1769… for as Garrick’s own song line goes:

 

“the lad of all lads was a Warwickshire lad”.

 

Fernie showed that Shakespeare’s influence on individual fighters for freedom has not always been necessarily straightforward or even exactly positive. From Boswell’s costume of a Corsican chief at the Stratford Jubilee to Booth’s almost aesthetic assassination of Lincoln from the stage, the infective mind of the Elizabeth playwright reached far and beyond to interfere with the American struggle for independence, Garibaldi’s (ad)ventures and Wilkes’ radical acts for liberty.

 

When formally introducing Ewan Fernie to the audience, Michael Dobson joked about Fernie “writing The Demonic and growing a beard to match”. The grain of truth in this humorous metaphorical parallel is in fact transparent. With looks that would make him an ideal cover photo for a Roman Gods’ magazine, Fernie’s protruding individuality and phenomenal intellectual depth threaten to smash our outworn stereotypes of a thinker, academic, writer, lecturer, orator and author and make him a new blueprint for a socially and academically productive intellectual. He sang, he shouted, he used rhetoric and put on accents – it was an inaugural lecture that forever set the spirits of at least one audience member on fire…!

 

If you could not get enough of Fernie or missed his inaugural lecture, you should be looking forward to his plenary talk “Lighten our Darkness” at British Graduate Shakespeare Conference 2014.

 

You can view the whole of Ewan’s inaugural lecture clicking here.

 

Author: Annie Martirosyan has recently completed her Ph.D. in Philology at Yerevan State Linguistic University after V. Brusov in Armenia and is currently doing M.A. in Shakespeare Studies at the Shakespeare Institute, University of Birmingham. Annie has contributed to various linguistic/literary magazines and also writes at the Huffington Post UK. She credits Professor David Crystal as a life-long inspiration for all her linguistic, philological and Shakespearean interests. 

 

Scanning Shakespeare's Verse

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 25.058  Thursday, 30 January 2014

 

[1] From:        Ros Barber < This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

     Date:         January 29, 2014

     Subject:    Scanning Shakespeare's Verse 

 

[2] From:        Sidney Lubow <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

     Date:         January 29, 2014 at 10:49:42 PM EST

     Subject:    Re: SHAKSPER: Scansion 

 

 

[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------

From:        Ros Barber < This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         January 29, 2014

Subject:    Scanning Shakespeare's Verse

 

Peter Groves: one’s reason for teaching the simpler, less accurate (traditional) scansion over a complex, more accurate system (yours) will depend upon on one’s reasons for teaching scansion at all.  Perhaps your system is very useful for those who wish to perform metrical poetry; the point I was making is that has no practical value to someone who is learning scansion in order to write metrical poetry.  You infer (but I did not intend to imply) that I made the ‘grave error’ of supposing rhythm has nothing to do with meaning; as a professional poet I understand innately that the two knit together. I was simply pointing out that we poets do not write for rhythm alone, and if we were to attempt to write with an eye to complex Grovesian scansion I suspect the poetry would be dead on arrival; technical analysis can be applied after the fact by readers, but is not conducive to the process of writing.

 

The question we were discussing, I believe, is whether Shakespeare wrote with intentional variation in the iambic line (such as the occasional anapaest) or whether all such variation can be read as flagging up a corrupt text.  If this something your more complex system of scansion can resolve, then go ahead and engage with Gerald Downs on the subject; I shall watch with interest.

 

Gerald Downs: I’m not an ‘F Trouper’. (Why do folk on this list so enjoy over-simplifying the position of others?). We have no knowledge of the transmission/reliability of any of the texts, Q or F. I just don’t agree with you that a text is proven corrupt by variability in the iambic line.  As to continuation, yes, time is consuming is; why help it along? You clearly have some considerable portion of it on your hands but I have rather a lot of work to be getting on with. You’re welcome to your perspective and I’ll stay with mine.

 

My de-lurking on this list has only confirmed me in my reasons for not participating in the first place.  I shall now re-don the cloak of invisibility. Pretend I wasn't here.

 

Ros Barber

 

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------

From:        Sidney Lubow <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         January 29, 2014 at 10:49:42 PM EST

Subject:    Re: SHAKSPER: Scansion

 

Is Tony Burton so stressed and now looking to cut down the Forest for the TRochEEs—with a power saw?

 

Sid Lubow

 

Terry Hawkes

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 25.057  Thursday, 30 January 2014

 

[1] From:        Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

     Date:         Thursday, January 30, 2014

     Subject:    Terry Hawkes: An Appreciation 

 

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

     Date:         January 29, 2014 at 1:24:48 PM EST

     Subject:    Re: SHAKSPER: Terry Hawkes 

 

[3] From:        Arthur Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

     Date:         January 29, 2014 at 3:29:33 PM EST

     Subject:    Re: SHAKSPER: Terry Hawkes 

 

[4] From:        Hugh Grady <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

     Date:         January 29, 2014 at 4:34:04 PM EST

     Subject:    Re: SHAKSPER: Terry Hawkes 

 

 

[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------

From:        Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         Thursday, January 30, 2014

Subject:    Terry Hawkes: An Appreciation

 

Terry Hawkes: An Appreciation

 

Terry Hawkes was one of my professional Shakespearean heroes, if not the foremost among the pantheon of them. 

 

As a baby boomer undergraduate, I was initially taught by New Critics, from whom I intuited that making one’s mark in criticism was to explain the universal of a poetic work better than anyone had done before.

 

As a graduate student in the early 1970s, I was first introduced to Structuralist theory and then to Post-Structuralist theory, Feminist Criticism, Deconstruction, and so on. My knowledge of theory at first was through teaching film. 

 

An opening at my university enabled me to teach Shakespeare. As a white male at an historically black university, I certainly did not want to put Shakespeare on a pedestal as the foremost of all dead European white male writers. Here my knowledge of theory intersected with Shakespeare and thanks to Alternative Shakespeares and That Shakespearian Rag: Essays on a Critical Process I was able to see that there was not one universal but ways of reading from theoretical perspectives. I can sincerely say that Alternative Shakespeares is the single most influential theoretical work I have ever read. That Shakespearian Rag and Alternative Shakespeares brought together the two sides of Terry Hawkes’ legacy to Shakespeareans—his own often-humorous musings and his mentoring and directing of theoretical thinking through collections of essays he edited and promoted. 

 

I was thrilled when Terry Hawkes joined SHAKSPER and participated in the debates. My response to his posting was almost always to laugh out loud when I first read them, before I distributed them to the conference. I have written in many places of the humor and stimulating gadfly ways he contributed to the discussion. For example, the following paragraph from this year’s first posting:

 

Thousands of topics have been discussed throughout SHAKSPER’s first-quarter century. Members surely will differ about the ones they consider most memorable, but I will never forget Terence Hawkes’s response to the announcement of the As You Like It Hike performed by Equity actors at various locations throughout a forest: “We may have to abandon our annual ‘King Lear’ Cakewalk. Persuading the audience to jump off the cliff was always difficult. However, guests will continue to be welcome at the Titus Andronicus Lunch (no substitutions).” I will also not soon forget the disagreements about the appropriateness of postings about Shakespeare-related pornography, the extended discussion of A Funeral Elegy, the first mentions of “Presentism,” or the question of whether Hamlet and Ophelia had sexual relations and the responses: Louis Scheeder’s “Only in the Chicago company” and Terry Hawkes’s “The theory shared by a number of MY colleagues is that Hamlet and Ophelia had textual relations.”

 

Through some nearly miraculous circumstance, I was invited to participate in the 1998 International Shakespeare Conference at the Shakespeare Institute in Stratford. At the opening reception on Sunday evening, Terry was the host. In his opening remarks, he welcomed ME to the conference. I am sure that the majority of the more traditionally established scholars in presence were utterly confused about whom he was speaking.  

 

Somewhere, although I searched my computer and could not find it, I have a picture of Terry and me talking at the ISC Tea Party in garden at Halls Croft. I don’t remember which of the conferences this was, but the image is emblazoned in my mind. This was one of my proudest moments. When Terry’s health began to decline and he did not come to the ISC, I sorely missed him. But this is not the Terry Hawkes I will remember: I will remember the gracious man who would take time to speak with me in Halls Croft.

 

Thank you, Terry.

 

-Hardy

 

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:         January 29, 2014 at 1:24:48 PM EST

Subject:    Re: SHAKSPER: Terry Hawkes

 

T. Hawkes’ caustic wit enlivened our discussions here for many years.  He and they will be much missed.

 

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------

From:        Arthur Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         January 29, 2014 at 3:29:33 PM EST

Subject:    Re: SHAKSPER: Terry Hawkes

 

So sorry to hear about Terry. I was at a one-day seminar at the Birthplace Trust a couple of months ago in his—and Stanley Wells’—honour. He was too ill to attend. He was a great and endlessly useful critic.

 

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------

From:        Hugh Grady <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         January 29, 2014 at 4:34:04 PM EST

Subject:    Re: SHAKSPER: Terry Hawkes

 

I just want to express my sadness at the passing of Terence Hawkes and repeat in this Forum some words which were read in a tribute to him and Stanley Wells last fall at the British Shakespeare Assn. It’s a great loss to us all.

 

I’d want to convey my congratulations to both well deserved recipients and give special thanks to Terry for the encouragement and mentorship he offered me over the years. Terry was a pioneer in so many ways and at different eras—one of the first to bring structuralism to English studies (“Structuralism was my machine gun,” he once said, echoing the American jazz great Artie Shaw), then a very early recognizer of key poststructuralist ideas in his milestone essay on Hamlet, “Telmah.” In more recent times, he pioneered the critical, self-aware, and artful approach to approach to Shakespeare studies he has called “Presentism,” taking a term I had used casually in 1996, and exemplifying it like no one else in a series of brilliant studies. There is no one like him, and there won’t be another.

 

Sincerely,

Hugh Grady

 

British Council Literature Seminar Webcast

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 25.056  Thursday, 30 January 2014

 

From:        Julia Crockett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         January 30, 2014 at 6:31:57 AM EST

Subject:    British Council Literature Seminar Webcast

 

‘Shakespeare Our Contemporary?’ 

http://www.britishcouncil.de/webcast

 

“Shakespeare – Our Contemporary?” 30 January to 1 February 2014

Watch our live webcast from the British Council Literature Seminar in Berlin.

 

Live readings and discussions with authors Naomi Alderman, A S Byatt, Howard Jacobson, Tom McCarthy, Alice Oswald, Mark Ravenhill and Polly Stenham to celebrate the 450th anniversary of the birth of William Shakespeare. Chair of the seminar is Professor John Mullan (Guardian Book Club).

 

Webcast schedule

Thursday, 30 January 2014

from 19.30 CET: Welcome speeches by Dr Helen Müller (Bertelsmann) and John Whitehead (Director British Council Germany); Keynote: Dame Gail Rebuck, CBE (Chair Penguin Random House UK Board); Graham Sheffield (Director Arts British Council)

- followed by Howard Jacobson reading and discussion with John Mullan

Friday, 31 January 2014

- 10.00 – 11.15 CET: Alice Oswald, reading and discussion with John Mullan; followed by a Q&A session

- 11.45 – 13.00 CET: Polly Stenham, reading and discussion with John Mullan; followed by a Q&A session

- 14.30 – 15.45 CET: Panel discussion with Naomi Alderman, A S Byatt, Howard Jacobson, Alice Oswald, Mark Ravenhill, and Polly Stenham, Chaired by John Mullan

- 20.00 – 21.30 CET: A S Byatt, reading and discussion with Tobias Döring (Chairman of Germany’s Shakespeare Society)

Saturday, 1 February 2014

- 10.00 – 11.15 CET: Naomi Alderman, reading and discussion with Tobias Döring; followed by a Q&A session

- 11.45 – 13.00 CET: Tom McCarthy, reading and discussion with John Mullan; followed by a Q&A session

- 16.15 – 17.30 CET: Mark Ravenhill, reading/ talk and discussion with John Mullan; followed by a Q&A session

- 17.30 – 18.00 CET: closing speeches by John Whitehead (Director British Council Germany), Cortina Butler (Director Literature British Council); John Mullan (chairman of the seminar)

 

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.