CFP MAPACA

 

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 23.185  Thursday, 10 May 2012

 

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

Date:         May 9, 2012 8:28:24 AM EDT

Subject:     CFP MAPACA

 

Call for Papers MAPACA 2012

November 3-5, 2012

Pittsburgh, PA

The wealth of material found in the Middle Ages and Renaissance continues to attract modern audiences in the form of with new creative works in areas such as fiction, film, and computer games, which make use of medieval and/or early modern themes, characters, or plots. This is a call for papers or panels dealing with any aspect of medieval or Renaissance representation in popular culture. Topics for this area include, but are not limited to the following:

-Modern portrayals of any aspect of Arthurian legends or Shakespeare

-Modern versions or adaptations of any other Medieval or Renaissance writer

-Modern investigations of historical figures such as Eleanor of Aquitaine, The Richards, Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, Mary Queen of Scotts

-Teaching medieval and renaissance texts to modern students

-Medieval or Renaissance links to fantasy fiction, gaming, comics, video games, etc.

 

Medieval or Renaissance Dramas

-The Middle Ages or Renaissance on the Internet

-Renaissance fairs

 

Panel and Workshop proposals are also welcome.

Submit a 250 word proposal including A/V requests along with a CV or brief bio by June 15, 2012 to:

Diana Vecchio
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

or

 

Mary Behrman

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

 

Chesapeake Shakespeare Company News

 

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 23.184  Thursday, 10 May 2012

 

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

Date:         May 7, 2012 8:01:49 PM EDT

Subject:    Big News from Chesapeake Shakespeare

 

CHESAPEAKE SHAKESPEARE COMPANY EXPANDS INTO DOWNTOWN BALTIMORE

Classical theater acquires second home in historic Mercantile Building to host indoor performances

 

BALTIMORE (May 7, 2012) — Howard County–based Chesapeake Shakespeare Company today announces the acquisition of the historic Mercantile Trust and Deposit Company building in downtown Baltimore, which will serve as its second home and establish a new cultural center for live performances of Shakespeare and other classics just two blocks from the city’s celebrated Inner Harbor. 

 

Located at 200 East Redwood Street, the Mercantile Trust and Deposit Company building was constructed in 1885 and is one of Baltimore’s more notable architectural landmarks. Chesapeake Shakespeare Company has plans to convert the building’s interior into an intimate 250-seat theater for indoor performances, educational programs, and community events.

 

“Chesapeake Shakespeare Company is in its 10th season serving almost 12,000 people every year,” says Ian Gallanar, founding artistic director. “We are thrilled about our expansion into the thriving Baltimore theater scene. While we will continue to serve our current patrons with outdoor performances at our home stage in Howard County, this second location will broaden our reach and help foster a new community of classical theater enthusiasts.”

 

The Mercantile Trust and Deposit Company building was purchased for the sole use of Chesapeake Shakespeare Company by the Helm Foundation, an organization directed by Scott Helm, one of the trustees of the Chesapeake Shakespeare Company. The total cost of the project, including the building’s purchase and renovation, is estimated to be around $6 million. 

 

Cho Benn Holback + Associates, Inc.—the architecture firm responsible for the Everyman Theatre, the James Rouse Center in the Visionary Arts Museum and the Creative Alliance at The Patterson Theater—is working with Chesapeake Shakespeare Company on design plans that model the new indoor theater after Shakespeare’s famous Globe Theatre in London. The design combines the intimacy of a traditional Elizabethan playhouse with a contemporary sense of design and convenience. Renovations will begin in early 2013, with the expectation of opening in 2014. 

 

“The building’s substantial mezzanine, elaborate and colorful carved ceiling, and Corinthian columns all echo elements of Elizabethan theaters,” says Lesley Malin, managing director of the Chesapeake Shakespeare Company. “We are enthusiastic about working with Cho Benn Holback to incorporate these beautiful architectural features into a modern-day Globe in downtown Baltimore.” 

 

The acquisition of the Mercantile Building will be key in Chesapeake Shakespeare Company’s effort to create a downtown “theater triangle” that will connect the new Inner Harbor theater with the Hippodrome and the Everyman Theatre on the West Side, and Mount Vernon’s CenterStage.

 

“I am very excited that the Chesapeake Shakespeare Company is choosing Baltimore for its indoor home,” Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake says.  “This is a welcome cultural asset that strengthens downtown as a growing and vibrant neighborhood.  I look forward to seeing the first show.”

 

Chesapeake Shakespeare Company will add an eight-month season of shows at the downtown location and provide after-school and weekend programs for the students of Baltimore. The company has plans to run additional special events including an international theater festival that will bring classical theater companies from around the world to Baltimore.

 

“We couldn’t be more excited about Chesapeake Shakespeare’s arrival into Downtown Baltimore,” says Kirby Fowler, President of the Downtown Partnership of Baltimore.  “Their plans for adaptive reuse are perfect for this building, one of Downtown’s greatest historic structures.  After 130 years, it’s as if this building is finally becoming what it was meant to be.  The new theater will be located in the heart of the City’s fastest growing neighborhood, where it will quickly become a cultural destination for our many residents, employees, and visitors.”  

 

Chesapeake Shakespeare Company:

Chesapeake Shakespeare Company, the Baltimore area’s third largest theater company, was founded in 2002 with a mission to create innovative performance and education programs that bring the works of William Shakespeare and other classics to life.  It is a member of the Theatre Communications Group, the organization for professional theaters in the United States and the Shakespeare Theatre Association, the international organization for professional Shakespeare theaters.  Chesapeake Shakespeare Company is committed to making the arts more accessible to the community by intensifying the connection between audiences and artists and some of the greatest works of theater ever written. 

 

The Mercantile Trust and Deposit Company Building:

The Mercantile Trust and Deposit Company building is on the National Register of Historic Places; it was built in 1885, was one of only a few buildings to survive the Great Fire of 1904, and served as a bank until 1993. It is considered a major architectural landmark and Baltimore's paramount example of Romanesque Revival architecture featuring rust-colored brick walls, slate roof, and massive Roman arches constructed of locally quarried stone, much of which is finely carved. In 2001, it went through a $2.2 million renovation and since then has been occupied by a number of night clubs. The current tenant, Club Dubai, will remain until the end of its lease at the end of 2012.

 

[Editor’s Note: There was recently a story about the move in the Baltimore Sun: http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/arts/bs-ae-chesapeake-shakespeare-20120507,0,3699959.story --Hardy]

 

Pedestrians Crossing Cairncross

 

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 23.183  Monday, 7 May 2012

 

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

     Date:         April 27, 2012 4:07:24 PM EDT

     Subject:     Re: Pedestrians Crossing Cairncross

 

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

     Date:         April 28, 2012 8:34:52 AM EDT

     Subject:     Pedestrians Crossing Cairncross

 

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

     Date:         May 6, 2012 11:17:55 AM EDT

     Subject:     Woodstock vs 1 Richard II

 

 

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

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

Date:         April 27, 2012 4:07:24 PM EDT

Subject:     Re: Pedestrians Crossing Cairncross

 

Gerald E. Downs offers a defence of Andrew S. Cairncross’s bibliographical scholarship regarding Q and F 2 Henry 6 that I am sorry to say I don’t fully understand. One bit I can respond to:

 

>The bibliographical fact is, Q influenced F.

 

Indeed, although useful works on the problem are omitted in Downs’s account. William Montgomery’s 1985 Oxford D. Phil.  thesis (which shaped his editing of the play in the 1986 Oxford Complete Works) is important for how it handles the ‘spots’ of fairly clear Q contamination of F. I’d also point Downs to my essay on the problem called “Foucault’s epistemic shift and verbatim repetition in Shakespeare” that appeared in Richard Meek, Jane Rickard, and Richard Wilson’s book Shakespeare’s Book (Manchester UP, 2008): 123-39.

 

> More important, Knowles notes that "much of Cairncross's

> case for the contamination of F rested on the category of

> agreement in error. Believing that a few demonstrable

> instances of contamination indicated large-scale corruption,

> Cairncross confounded inductive and deductive approaches

> and duly discovered a large number of instances only a

> few of which were discovered by other editors" (134).

>

> As I recall, Gabriel Egan's new /Struggle/ also faults

> Cairncross, not for relying on agreement in error (which

> Egan OK's), but for taking  general Q and F agreement as

> evidence of Q influence, thereby violating some bibliographic

> principle.

 

Knowles is here misread/misrepresented by Downs. Read in context, Knowles is not condemning Cairncross for using agreement in error as evidence of Q contaminating F but just the opposite: he’s asserting that Cairncross was right to do so. The problem is, according to Knowles, that Cairncross also used agreements in correct readings as though they were evidence of Q contaminating F, which as Knowles rightly points out is illogical: two printings may agree on a correct reading simply because each got it from its good copy, not because one got it from the other.

 

Egan too is not faulting Cairncross for “relying on agreement in error” (of course not, that’s how you show dependence of one text upon another) but for mostly failing to confine himself to that kind of evidence and instead using agreement in good readings (which of course tell us nothing). What Downs vaguely calls “some bibliographic principle” is not a vagueness in my book: the principle is simple logic and I report that Cairncross was rightly criticized for not using it.

 

Gabriel Egan

 

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

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

Date:         April 28, 2012 8:34:52 AM EDT

Subject:     Pedestrians Crossing Cairncross

 

A quick reply to Gerald Downs on memorial reconstructions and poor misrepresented Cairncross:  

 

Indeed, I am likely dead wrong about whether or not stage directions printed in bad quartos may have been then used to set the later Folio equivalents.  Mea culpa.  (Yegads, I smudged my copybook!)

 

My essays try instead to get people to see how the early printed versions work differently on stage and are not compendiums of stupidity.  I was writing in the 1980s, those dim years when nobody knew nuthin' and I hoped my little candles of insight might get others to look at those early texts as interesting products of exploratory minds at work.

 

As I said earlier in this exchange with Gerald Downs, I encourage readers to look at my whole text. You may learn something nice.  Like, for example, watch how the two texts deal with the ACTION surrounding York’s long listing of his ancestry. Both versions work elegantly, and you will see that the control through speech-commands over physical movement on the stage can be precise and elegantly manipulable.  

 

If you get an awareness of that manipulability into your students’ critical toolboxes then you've helped them to de-code one of the fascinating potentialities of written drama.   

 

So were memorial reconstructors at work there?  I doubt it, but if they were we really have to develop the field of Shakespearean Piracy Studies, since they were darned good playwrights (and pretty good scholars too in they ways they managed to “correct” some of Shakespeare's blunders, pulling their texts back closer to the chronicle sources.)

 

There’s everything to be gained by looking at those scripts as lively dramatic documents rather than as risible instances of Bardic desecration. 

 

Steven Urquartowitz

 

(I know that I shouldn’t play so much with this goofy name-changing trope; it may sound like I’m disrespecting the grown-ups in the field.  But hey! I’m from the Bronx, and respect was a radically fluctuating commodity in our schoolyards.  Laughter, though, always maintained its value.)

 

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

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

Date:         May 6, 2012 11:17:55 AM EDT

Subject:     Woodstock vs 1 Richard II

 

I note that on April 22 Gerald Downs lightly and inaccurately dismissed my case against memorial reconstruction (along with Steve Urkowitz’s more substantial work on the subject), and referred incorrectly to my book Woodstock. It’s actually Richard II, Part One, the title Woodstock having been imposed by FS Boas and his friends in 1923 precisely to blur the play’s relationship to Shakespeare.

 

Hebrew Verbs

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 23.182  Monday, 7 May 2012

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

Date:         May 6, 2012 7:11:37 PM EDT

Subject:     Re:  Hebrew Verbs 

 

Hannibal Hamlin writes:

 

>Others on the list with Hebrew less rudimentary than mine will no doubt 

>be able to answer with more precision, but, yes, it is my understanding 

>that Hebrew does not have tense in the same way European languages 

>do. Hebrew verbs have forms designating complete or incomplete action. 

>In terms of Exodus 3:14, the result is that while the Geneva translation is 

>correct, it is also reductive, since one might translate equally accurately 

>using different English tenses—I am be what I will be, etc. One implication 

>is that God’s self-description—not really one, let alone a name—includes 

>eternal immutability—was, is, will be.

>

>My point in the Blackwell’s “Shakespeare and the Bible” piece was that 

>Iago’s “I am not what I am” is a demonic parody of Exod. 3:14, an 

>expression of utter vacuity in contrast to God’s eternal plenitude.

>

>If I’ve erred or muddled, expert Hebraists please clarify.

 

For those who can’t get enough of Harold Bloom, here’s 44 minutes more of Bloomie on Shakespeare. About ten minutes into his talk, he discusses the ‘true’ meaning of EXODUS 3:14.

 

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TzzWi5kPnA

 

Enjoy!

Joe Egert

 

1 Richard II

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 23.181  Monday, 7 May 2012

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

Date:         May 4, 2012 8:41:54 PM EDT

Subject:     1 Richard II

 

Readers might be interested in this recent assessment of the case for Shakespeare's authorship of 1 Richard II: 

 

http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/40913

 

Michael Egan

 

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.