October
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0791. Friday, 7 October 1994. From: Mitchell J. Brown <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 5 Oct 1994 08:04:00 CDT Subject: Shakespeare in Yiddish I recently finished reading John Gross' SHYLOCK which gives a very thorough analysis of the way that character has been regarded and played over the centuries. One of the more intriguing passages for me concerned the presentations of MERCHANT OF VENICE, (among other Shakespeare plays), in the Yiddish Theaters of New York in the earlier part of this century. Apparently, HAMLET and KING LEAR were repertory favorites. Could anyone advise me where I might find these Yiddish translations? Thanks, Mitchell Brown CHICAGO
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0790. Friday, 7 October 1994. (1) From: Don Rowan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 05 Oct 94 09:45:46 -0300 Subj: Buying the farm (2) From: Tom E. Hodges <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 6 Oct 1994 11:17:20 GMT-6 Subj: Re: 5.0767 Buying the farm (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Don Rowan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 05 Oct 94 09:45:46 -0300 Subject: Buying the farm I served in the Army Air Corps during the second world war and heard "buying the farm" many times, often in poker games when you lost a big pot. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom E. Hodges <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 6 Oct 1994 11:17:20 GMT-6 Subject: Re: 5.0767 Buying the farm Listen up, Godshalk W L, I can't point you to a print source, but I have heard WWII vets refer to "buying the farm", meaning specifically cashing in the $10000 life insurance policy required of troops after they began drawing combat pay. Speak, old soldiers. Regards, Tom Hodges
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0789. Friday, 7 October 1994. (1) From: Terence Hawkes <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 5 Oct 94 16:41 BST Subj: RE: SHK 5.0782 Re: Innogen (2) From: Thomas G. Bishop <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 5 Oct 1994 11:18:09 -0400 Subj: Re: SHK 5.0782 Re: Innogen (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Terence Hawkes <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 5 Oct 94 16:41 BST Subject: 5.0782 Re: Innogen Comment: RE: SHK 5.0782 Re: Innogen Dear Thomas Hall, The fact that Innogen has no lines certainly does not mean that she does nothing. The irony of her silent presence on the stage is intense, for instance in scenes which contain exchanges such as Don Pedro: ...I think this is your daughter Leonato: Her mother hath many times told me so. Ask yourself: what does Innogen (she is the mother directly referred to by Leonato, her husband, here) do at this moment? All eyes must be on her. For any competent performer the gestural, kinesic posibilities are considerable --and this in a play in which one of the central issues is the silence traditionally urged on married women. Think about it. By the way, I'm by no means the first to make these observations, nor are others who make them Cultural Materialists, revolutionaries, or otherwise obviously undesirable. Perhaps you need a better edition of the play. T. Hawkes (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thomas G. Bishop <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 5 Oct 1994 11:18:09 -0400 Subject: 5.0782 Re: Innogen Comment: Re: SHK 5.0782 Re: Innogen At the risk of stirring a soundly-sleeping dog, I remind SHAKSPER readers that John Drakakis and I went ten rounds over the question of Innogen's status a couple of years ago. Whether or not the discussion was exhaustive, it was at least exhausting, and those interested in the question may trace its ins and outs in the SHAKSPER archive. I have no idea what the number of the back-volume would be, though Hardy Cook could perhaps say. Cheers, Tom Bishop Editor's Note: In response to the above, I sent the following toThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. : // Database Search DD=Rules //Rules DD * Search Innogen in SHAKSPER Index // This is what I go back: > Search Innogen in SHAKSPER --> Database SHAKSPER, 16 hits. > Index Item # Date Time Recs Subject ------ ---- ---- ---- ------- 000759 92/10/29 08:02 47 SHK 3.0278 Re: Hero's Mother 000764 92/10/29 22:29 100 SHK 3.0280 Rs: Hero's Mother 000765 92/10/30 17:46 89 SHK 3.0285 Re: Hero's Mother 000768 92/10/31 10:18 85 SHK 3.0287 Re: Hero's MotherCURRENT 000770 92/11/01 09:49 36 SHK 3.0289 Qs: ASTR-L; Hero's Mother 000771 92/11/01 20:08 72 SHK 3.0290 Much Ado About . . . (Was Hero's Mother) 000772 92/11/01 20:21 42 SHK 3.0291 Rs: ASTR-L Address; Innogen Pun, Plus a+ 000775 92/11/02 14:21 100 SHK 3.0294 More on Hero's Mother 000776 92/11/02 14:25 24 SHK 3.0295 R: Doubling Claudius and Ghost 000781 92/11/03 20:43 86 SHK 3.0300 Hero's Mother Again 000786 92/11/06 17:46 59 SHK 3.0305 Rs to Doubling Issues 002609 94/09/19 12:12 67 SHK 5.0741 Re: Universals; Character; *Ado* 002620 94/09/26 12:34 99 SHK 5.0751 Re: Women and Outsiders: Ado 002628 94/09/28 13:31 58 SHK 5.0759 Re: Innogen 002632 94/10/01 09:57 120 SHK 5.0762 Re: MND Video; Character; Innogen; Habi+ 002649 94/10/04 23:25 45 SHK 5.0782 Re: Innogen --Hardy
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0788. Tuesday, 4 October 1994. From: Stephen Ferguson <0629212%This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Mondaaaay, 3 Oct 1994 14:16:07 EDT Subject: PUL Fellowships PLEASE CROSS-POST TO OTHER INTERESTED LISTS! VISITING FELLOWSHIPS 1995-1996 Princeton University Library The Friends of the Princeton University Library are sponsoring several short-term Visiting Fellowships in order to promote scholarly use of the research collections of the Library. The Department of Rare Books and Special Collections, housed in the Harvey S. Firestone Library, has substantial holdings of materials pertaining to the western world and the Middle East from antiquity to the present. The Rare Book Division is especially strong in classical Latin texts, American history and literature, English history and literature, and French, German, and Latin American literature. The Manuscript Division holds Medieval and Renaissance manuscripts and codices, and American and English literary and historical manuscripts. The Visual Materials Division services the Graphic Arts Collection, the Collection of Historic Maps, the Theatre Collection, and the Numismatic Collection. The Seeley G. Mudd Manuscript Library holds the Public Policy Papers and the University Archives. The Marquand Library of Art and Archaeology and the Gest Oriental Library and East Asian Collections are also located on the University campus. The Fellowships, which have a value of $1500 each, are meant to help defray expenses in traveling to and from Princeton and residing in Princeton during the tenure of the Fellowship. The length of the Fellowship will depend on the applicant's research proposal, but is normally one month. Fellowships are tenable from May 1995 to April 1996. There is no special application form. Applicants are asked to submit a rsum and a brief research proposal to Fellowship Committee, Princeton University Library, One Washington Road, Princeton, NJ 08544. The proposal should address specifically the relevance of the Princeton University Library Collections to the proposed research. The applicant should also arrange for two confidential letters of recommendation to be sent to the Committee. The deadline for applications is 31 January 1995. This announcement contains all the information necessary to complete the application process.
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0787. Tuesday, 4 October 1994. (1) From: Naomi Liebler <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 3 Oct 94 23:58:00 EST Subj: RE: SHK 5.0770 Re: Character (2) From: Michael Field <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 4 Oct 1994 09:08:44 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Palestinian R&J (3) From: Dave Collins <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 4 Oct 1994 9:54:00 -0500 (CDT) Subj: Re: SHK 5.0769 Re: 1000 Acres (4) From: Bradley S. Berens <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 4 Oct 1994 10:10:30 -0700 (PDT) Subj: Re: SHK 5.0771 Videos: ACT *Shrew* and *MND* (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Naomi Liebler <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 3 Oct 94 23:58:00 EST Subject: 5.0770 Re: Character Comment: RE: SHK 5.0770 Re: Character To ELEpstein who wonders whether anyone has "seen Macbeth as a "tender lover": if by "seen" you mean "in performance, check out (literally, from your neighborhood video store) the 1989 (+ or -) film adaptation, *Men of Respect,* whose director's name I can never remember, but someone on this list will surely do so. If memory serves, the lead was played by John Turturro. For my (rental) money, it's a terrific adaptation. And this Macbeth is completely, credibly, in love with his wife. But ELEpstein's posting piques more curiosity: "a bored Inuit wanderer"? As the query about *Macbeth* says, "Source here, if possible." Did you make that up to make a point, or is there a specific narrative to which you refer? --Naomi C. Liebler (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Field <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 4 Oct 1994 09:08:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Palestinian R&J Dear Kate Egerton, The Washington Post ran a lengthy article with pictures about the joint Israeli-Palestinian production of R&J several months back. I was directing R&J at the time and so xeroxed the article and distributed it to the cast. I would be happy to send you a copy if you wish. In terms of production, what we found most useful was the observation of the Palestinian Lady Montague that, for her and her compatriots, the emotional peak of the play occurs just after the brawl, when Tybalt and Mercutio lie dead, and Romeo is banished by the Prince. Mike FieldThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dave Collins <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 4 Oct 1994 9:54:00 -0500 (CDT) Subject: 5.0769 Re: 1000 Acres Comment: Re: SHK 5.0769 Re: 1000 Acres I'd like to take a moment to respond to Stephen Buhler's request for a word or two from people who had used 1000 Acres in class. I taught the novel in a course called "Visions and Revisions" in which we looked at pairs of texts drawn (usually) from widely separated times and cultures to see how the "same" story could/would be remade to reflect contemporary cultural conditions. Other pairs we read were Beowulf/Grendel, The Scarlet Letter/S (Updike), Dracula/The Vampire Lestat, The Return of Martin Geurre (text was the Harvard UP version by Davis)/French film of the same name/Somersby. But back to 1000 Acres. The Lear/1000 Acres combination may well have been the most successful pairing of the semester. I've read 1000 Acres four or five times now and I don't think I will ever read Lear again in quite the same way. Of course, Shakespeare's play is still Shakespeare's play and Smiley's novel is still Smiley's novel. But the latter work does cause one to re-envision the former. As I prepared the course I went back to look for critical essays that defended Goneril and Regan, essays of the sort I had read years ago but dismissed as "fringe" material. It's harder to do that now. I discovered this time through that there is and has been a thriving critical literature on Lear that delves into the incest theme, on occasion tracing it all the way back to the fairy tale roots of the story. Of that I wasn't aware. That alone has changed the picture. But perhaps the most significant thing for my students (and myself) was the opportunity to see things, however confusedly, through Ginny/Goneril's eyes. I don't for a minute trust Ginny as a narrator. She's too defensive, too anxious to make excuses for herself. In the opening pages, for example, she recounts her jealousy of Rose's children and claims blandly "Well, I felt it and I set it aside." Trouble is, her actions later demonstrate that she doesn't. She has her own "sense of the right order of things" and works, perhaps unconsciously or half-consciously, to implement that order. She claims to want no more than peace in the family circle, and perhaps she genuinely does, but to attain that peace she makes some very hurtful compromises and hides truths about her own attitudes (toward Rose, Caroline, her father) even from herself. After the family spat about dividing the farm, for example, she has a perfect opportunity to bring about a reconciliation. All she has to do is to call Caroline. But she keeps "forgetting," she keeps postponing, and the call never gets made. It's not her fault--it just "happens." And so it goes through the entire novel. The upshot is that I'm not sure Smiley's Ginny is any more innocent of what happens than is Shakespeare's Goneril. What shifts is the perspective from which we see her. Realizing that she doesn't have the strength to "come out" and fight for what she wants (and it is not altogether admirable, what she wants), we may not approve of what she does, but we are more prone to sympathize with the human weakness that is all too familiar to us from the smaller (sometimes) failures in our own lives. I think you and your students will both enjoy and learn a lot from the comparison of the two works. As my younger friends might say, "Go for it!" --Dave Collins (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bradley S. Berens <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 4 Oct 1994 10:10:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 5.0771 Videos: ACT *Shrew* and *MND* Comment: Re: SHK 5.0771 Videos: ACT *Shrew* and *MND* Regarding a video of the Brook MND, the answer to your question about a commercially available video is a resounding "No." The RSC, of course, has an extensive video archive, but that's pretty much the only way to get it. Also, a number of years ago (mid-late 80s) there was a BBC video series called "Hands Off The Classics" which had an episode dedicated to the Brook MND, with lots of neat footage. Finally, anyone interested in that production should read David Selbourne's "The Making of A Midsummer Night's Dream: An Eye-Witness Account of Peter Brook's Production From First Rehearsal to First Night" (London: Methuen, 1982). A nice account, although it doesn't address the question regarding whether what Brook and Co. were trying to achieve is the same thing as what the audience liked about the show. If I'm wrong about the video, will someone please TELL ME and I'll not only eat a healthy dinner of crow, but be first on the phone to order the thing. I'm sadly confident, however, that the thing isn't available. Regards, Brad Berens Dept. of English UC BerkeleyThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.