The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 24.0215  Monday, 6 May 2013

From:        Helen M. Ostovich < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Date:         May 6, 2013 1:06:25 PM EDT

Subject:     Early Theatre 16.1 (June 2013)

EARLY THEATRE 16.1 (2013) Contents

  http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/earlytheatre/

Articles

The Will of Simon Jewell and the Queen’s Men Tours in 1592

            Chiaki Hanabusa

‘This place was made for pleasure not for death’: Performativity, Language, and Action in The Spanish Tragedy

            Alexandra S. Ferretti

Shared Borders: The Puppet in Ben Jonson’s Bartholomew Fair

            Kristina E. Caton

‘Bound up and clasped together’: Bookbinding as Metaphor for Marriage in Richard Brome’s The Love-Sick Court

            Eleanor Lowe

Accidents Happen: Roger Barnes’s 1612 Edition of Marlowe’s Edward II

            Mathew R. Martin

Old Testament Adaptation in The Stonyhurst Pageants

            J. Case Tompkins

Note

Hornpipes and Disordered Dancing in The Late LancashireWitches: A Reel Crux?

            Brett D. Hirsch

Review Essay

Defining Tudor Drama

            Kent Cartwright

Book Reviews

John H. Astington. Actors and Acting in Shakespeare’s Time: The Art of Stage Playing. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 2010.

            Reviewed by Eleanor Lowe

Janette Dillon. Shakespeare and the Staging of English History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.

            Reviewed by Patrick J. Murray

Christina M. Fitzgerald and John T. Sebastian (eds). The Broadview Anthology of Medieval Drama. Peterborough, ON: Broadview, 2013.

            Reviewed by Chester N. Scoville

Charles R. Forker (ed.). The Troublesome Reign of John, King of England. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2011.

            Reviewed by Karen Oberer

Katherine R. Larson. Early Modern Women in Conversation. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.

            Reviewed by Sarah Johnson

Christopher Marsh. Music and Society in Early Modern England.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

            Reviewed by Katherine Hunt

Kathryn M. Moncrieff and Kathryn R. McPherson. Performing Pedagogy in Early Modern England: Gender, Instruction, and Performance. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2011.

            Reviewed by Yvonne Bruce

Helen Smith. Grossly Material Things: Women and Book Production in Early Modern England. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.

            Reviewed by Christina Luckyj

Ayanna Thompson. Passing Strange: Shakespeare, Race and Contemporary America. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.

            Reviewed by Jami Rogers

Alden T. & Virginia Mason Vaughan. Shakespeare in America. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.

            Reviewed by Alan Andrews

Martin Wiggins, in association with Catherine Richardson. British Drama 1533–1642: A Catalogue. Volume I: 1533–1566. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.

            Reviewed by Peter Happé

Helen M Ostovich  < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Editor, Early Theatre <http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/earlytheatre/>

Professor, English and Cultural Studies

McMaster University

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 24.0214  Monday, 6 May 2013

From:        Neema Parvini < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Date:         April 27, 2013 7:24:46 AM EDT

Subject:     Podcasts: Shakespeare and Contemporary Theory

Recently I have been conducting a series of podcast interviews with various literary theorists and Shakespeare scholars on some of the topics above for a series of podcasts which aim to gain an understanding of the current state of play as regards both theory and practice in Shakespeare studies.

The first 12 episodes can be found at the links below (the next will be an interview with H. Aram Veeser):

http://www.uniofsurreyblogs.org.uk/shakespeare/

iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/shakespeare-contemporary-theory/id583690701

I have interviewed and am in the process of interviewing people who speak from a variety of different perspectives, including Jonathan Dollimore, Hugh Grady, John Drakakis, Lisa Hopkins, Gabriel Egan, Steven Mullaney, and others. 

Neema Parvini

Lecturer in English Literature

School of English and Languages

University of Surrey

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 24.0213  Monday, 6 May 2013

From:        Don Weingust < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Date:         May 5, 2013 1:48:04 PM EDT

Subject:     CFP: The Shakespearean Performance Research Group
 

Call For Papers, Deadline: Monday, June 3rd, 2013

The Shakespearean Performance Research Group

of the American Society for Theatre Research (ASTR)

American Society for Theatre Research / Theatre Library Association 2013 Conference

Dallas, Texas

November 7 – 10, 2013

The Fairmont Dallas Hotel

The Shakespearean Performance Research Group of the American Society for Theatre Research (ASTR) provides an ongoing home for the study of Shakespearean performance within ASTR.

In the spirit of the open-themed Dallas ASTR conference, this year’s Shakespearean Performance Research Group (SPRG) seeks to maintain a focus limited only by Shakespearean performance.  For the 2013 meeting, the SPRG invites papers that broadly interrogate what is meant by Shakespearean performance. For example, this questioning might involve the interplay between early and late modern performance in some dimension, the cultural work that Shakespearean drama and performance continue to do, the ways in which relationships between the “literary” and the “performative” have been construed over more than 400 years of performance, the theories and legacies of Shakespearean performance across performance media, how Shakespeare performance constructs and is constructed by specific communities. Papers accepted to previous sessions have tended to address questions of practical theatre, specific issues in history and historiography, and theoretical concerns, but we are looking for a wide range of engagements with Shakespeare and performance.

Selected papers will be assigned to subgroups by the group’s conveners, Catherine Burriss, Franklin J. Hildy, Robert Ormsby, Don Weingust and W. B. Worthen, and the conveners will organize on-line communication of subgroup members before the conference. At the conference session, papers will be discussed first within subgroups, after which the subgroups will come together to exchange ideas.

This past year, the Shakespearean Performance Research Group began a relationship with The Journal of the Wooden O, which is publishing select papers from the 2012 Research Group gathering in Nashville. Select contributions to the 2013 Dallas Research Group meeting will be considered for publication in the following summer’s edition.

Please submit a 200-word abstract and 50-word academic biographical statement, including current affiliations, if any, by Monday, June 3 2013, to  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . Proposals also can be mailed to Don Weingust, Center for Shakespeare Studies, Southern Utah University / Utah Shakespeare Festival, 351 University Boulevard, South Hall 101A, Cedar City, UT 84720).

More information about ASTR and the Dallas conference is available at http://www.astr.org.

Don Weingust

Director of Shakespeare Studies

Associate Professor of Theatre Arts

Center for Shakespeare Studies

Southern Utah University / Utah Shakespeare Festival

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

http://suu.edu/shakespeare

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 24.0212  Saturday, 4 May 2013

[Editor’s Note: The “Shakespeare the Grain-Dealing Tax Evader” (Businessman) Thread has taken off into several directions, some of which seem to me not to be useful to pursue. I will allow another round or two of the Businessman portion. However, if you wish to continue discussing any of the other topics (such as “Coal-Fog-Smog”) that have been included under this rubric, please do so by submitting them with a Subject that describes accurately that topic. –Hardy]

[1] From:        John Briggs < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

     Date:         April 26, 2013 9:40:31 AM EDT

     Subject:     Re: SHAKSPER: Businessman 

[2] From:        Clark J. Holloway < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

     Date:         April 26, 2013 1:02:48 PM EDT

     Subject:     Re: SHAKSPER: Businessman 

[3] From:        Larry Weiss < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

     Date:         April 26, 2013 2:43:24 PM EDT

     Subject:     Re: SHAKSPER: Businessman 

[4] From:        Tony Burton < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

     Date:         April 27, 2013 11:27:13 AM EDT

     Subject:     Re: SHAKSPER:  Businessman 

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

From:        John Briggs < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Date:         April 26, 2013 9:40:31 AM EDT

Subject:     Re: SHAKSPER: Businessman

Larry Weiss wrote:

> Wasn’t the reviewer Eric Sams, who provided both the forward 

> and an essay published in your treatise?

I’m sure Michael Egan will say that you’ve got that backwards . . . 

John Briggs

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

From:        Clark J. Holloway < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Date:         April 26, 2013 1:02:48 PM EDT

Subject:     Re: SHAKSPER: Businessman

PS: Regarding an aside in my last post:

>(though I did find a site that gave a Catalan definition of “caliban” 

>as “moon”)

I recalled after firing off my last missive that a number of the moons orbiting the planet Uranus have been named after Shakespearean characters, so I checked and find that indeed, one of the lesser moons of Uranus has been named Caliban, which explains the rather abbreviated “definition” I found above. 

Which, BTW, makes me think that if Mr. Roe did find some European dialect where the word “caliban” means “outcast” or “pariah,” that the word probably derived from the Shakespearean usage, and not the other way around. If you look up “caliban” in an English dictionary you’ll find that one of the definitions is “a brutal or brutalized man” and that the term is taken from the name of Shakespeare’s character.

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

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

Date:         April 26, 2013 2:43:24 PM EDT

Subject:     Re: SHAKSPER: Businessman

>“Upon the foggie air . . . ” describes the pollution in vivid imagery. 

How is this? Fog and smog are entirely different phenomena. Fog is a natural phenomenon, occurring over coastal areas whenever air and water temperatures and wind speed and direction are right. The burning of fossil fuels neither produces nor inhibits fog. There would be fog over the Thames estuary even if there were no city there.

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

From:        Tony Burton < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Date:         April 27, 2013 11:27:13 AM EDT

Subject:     Re: SHAKSPER:  Businessman

In pointing out the business realities underlying Shakespeare’s investment/gamble in purchasing/hoarding corn, Larry Weiss has said something with which I can at last agree wholeheartedly. Along with the grasshopper and ant to which Larry refers, I think of Joseph interpreting Pharaoh’s dream of seven fat and seven lean kine, as it led to wise preparation for times of dearth and won him royal favor for a valuable service.  

Why can we not put Shakespeare in this context, rather than picturing him as the market-cornering villain suggested by the apparent fact that he violated an anti-hoarding law—one that may well have been misguided, misapplied, or corruptly diverted for the benefit of royal favorites—by planning ahead? Do we know that he actually profiteered from excessively high prices when the time came for him to sell? I’d like to know.  

Further, might he not even have distributed his grain at a charitably modest price, acting like Pharaoh as the guardian of his community’s welfare? A good many lawbreakers are also culture heroes, though I don’t think Shakespeare was a Robin Hood. Yet he had an admirable reputation in London for a sort of easy gentility, of a nature that makes the image of a market-cornering profiteer in Stratford notably incongruent. The devil is once again lurking in the details, and that is where the exorcists should direct their searching.

Fiat lux,

Tony Burton