| Pale Fire |
|
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 24.0041 Friday, 1 February 2013
[1] From: Harry Berger Jr < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it > Date: January 31, 2013 12:01:32 PM EST Subject: Re: SHAKSPER: Pale Fire
[2] From: Charles Weinstein < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it > Date: February 1, 2013 7:39:46 AM EST Subject: FW: Pale Fire
[1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Harry Berger Jr < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it > Date: January 31, 2013 12:01:32 PM EST Subject: Re: SHAKSPER: Pale Fire
It would be nice if we could move on past the Weinstein issue. The comments are getting nitty and not really worth anyone’s attention.
[2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Charles Weinstein < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it > Date: February 1, 2013 7:39:46 AM EST Subject: FW: Pale Fire
1. In fact, before Timon, I hadn’t seen Beale perform for nearly a decade. I long ago stopped seeing him in the theater. Timon was a filmed play; it was shown at a local cinema; and the tickets were modestly-priced. As Peter Holland notes, one doesn’t get the chance to see Timon all that often. Moreover, since Beale has been a chronically contemptuous actor, I thought that he might have a special affinity with the role. (He did, but it wasn’t enough). In short, the idea that I constantly subject myself to Beale’s performances is untrue. So yes, Peter Holland is missing something, and quite a lot if he thinks that Beale is a “superb actor.”
2. I am happy to include Gabriel Egan among my readers, although we may disagree about permissible usage. I am aware of Egan’s long-standing effort to stave off the barbarians (see SHK 9.0247), but they are harder to identify than he thinks.
--Charles Weinstein |