December
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.1274 Wednesday, 9 December 1998. From: Richard A Burt <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 13:24:54 -0500 (EST) Subject: Hidden Shakespeare in Gay Porn In a perfectly preposterous gay porn epic called WARLORDS, 1989 (A Tylor Von Film)--"They ravish the land and leave no man standing in a time of sexual decadence"-starring mostly stringy and very swishy English boys, the warlord commands his two slaves to bring in the cutie he sees wandering the countryside in his magic mirror. The dialogue is of the "You can fuck him but don't bruise him" variety, but at this point one of the slaves cites one of Macbeth's lines, saying, "If it were done when 'tis done it were well it were done quickly."
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.1273 Wednesday, 9 December 1998. [1] From: Robert Neblett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 08:40:06 -0600 Subj: Re: SHK 9.1266 Re: TV Tempest [2] From: Janet MacLellan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 09:57:52 -0500 (EST) Subj: Rhetoric and Acting [3] From: Robin Hamilton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 16:46:27 -0000 Subj: Re: SHK 9.1265 Re: Branagh's LLL PLUS [4] From: Karen E Peterson-Kranz <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 9 Dec 1998 10:35:01 +1000 (GMT+1000) Subj: Re: SHK 9.1237 Re: Shakespeare and Pop Culture [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Robert Neblett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 08:40:06 -0600 Subject: 9.1266 Re: TV Tempest Comment: Re: SHK 9.1266 Re: TV Tempest On 12-8-98 Hugh Davis wrote: "Having seen a screener of this TV movie, I think my basic reaction is somewhat similar to Ms. Barton's. While the film is visually splendid, and both Fonda and John Glover present excellent performances, the transformation is, in the end, flawed by some inconsistencies and an anxiousness to create a heroic Prospero for today's politically correct age. I'll reserve full comments until it airs-lest I spoil NBC's tricks of adaptation for anyone planning on watching it-but I'm anxious to see what other list members think." Is portraying Prospero as a heroic figure a gesture of political correctness? I always thought he was the hero of the piece. Now, portraying Caliban as a hero could possibly be construed as a postcolonial attempt at reconciliation with the past through revisionism, I think. [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Janet MacLellan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 09:57:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: Rhetoric and Acting To Brooke Brod: An understanding of classical rhetoric can be invaluable to the modern Shakespearean actor in a number of ways. (Apologies in advance if any of the following reiterates what you already know.) 1) It helps one recognize and interpret Shakespeare's verbal patterning. Elocutio, or style, is probably the aspect of classical rhetoric most modern actors first encounter. Learning a few of the hundreds of rhetorical figures studied as a matter of course by Renaissance schoolboys can alert an actor to their presence-and potential functions-in Shakespeare's plays. For an introduction to this subject, I second the recommendation of Vickers's "Shakespeare's Use of Rhetoric" in _A New Companion to Shakespeare Studies_. For a model of how to use this awareness in reading Shakespeare's text, see the first few chapters of Bertram Joseph's _Acting Shakespeare_. (For a more recent, but very brief discussion of the value of Shakespeare's rhetorical devices for the modern actor, see Kristin Linklater's Freeing Shakespeare's Voice.) For a more extensive analysis of the "rhetorical structure" of speeches in Shakespeare, see Brian Vickers, The Artistry of Shakespeare's Prose. A note on terminology: Because most rhetorical figures have Latin as well as Greek names, learning them can be a bit confusing. I wouldn't let that stop you from familiarizing yourself with certain key figures such as anaphora, antithesis, antimetabole, polyptoton, and so on. It is, of course, possible to spot verbal patterns without learning their names, but after saying "Hey! This line begins with the same word that ended the one before it," a few dozen times, you're likely to find that knowing the word "anadiplosis" actually makes your life easier. Richard Lanham's A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms is a useful guide: it lists figures alphabetically as well as by function, and cross-references Greek and Latin (and even Puttenham's whimsical English) names of figures. 2) It alerts one to the strategies and structures of argumentation in the plays. Absorbing as the study of style can be, in classical rhetorical theory it forms only one stage in a larger process. Classical rhetoric advocates a five-part method of composition: invention of arguments, arrangement of one's material, apt expression of that material (i.e. style), memorization, and delivery. The standard introduction to this method for students is Edward Corbett's Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student, but if you'd like to start with something shorter, try "The Processes of Rhetoric" in Brian Vickers's Classical Rhetoric in English Poetry. What use is all this to the actor or director? Get to know what an enthymeme is (invention), and you'll find it much easier to follow a character's reasoning and/or thought processes, and to spot strengths or weaknesses in both. Get acquainted with the standard forms of the set speech, and you'll develop a much better appreciation of the variations Shakespeare spins on them. [Feel free to contact me off-list if you'd like examples of some articles that do this.] 3) It offers one valuable insight into Shakespeare's cultural context, as well as into the habit of mind implied by his dramaturgy. A number of scholars have published thought-provoking cultural readings of early modern rhetoric, in relation to Shakespeare and otherwise (e.g. Rebhorn's The Emperor of Men's Minds, recommended earlier in this thread). The book I would most recommend to the director or dramaturge as a starting point would be Joel Altman's The Tudor Play of Mind, which asks the question, "what happens to a mind conditioned to argue _in utramque partem_--on both sides of the question-as Renaissance students were trained to do?" What a mind like Shakespeare's can gain from such an educational system we see in his plays: the quality that has been referred to as his "two-eyedness" and is now often celebrated as his "dialogism" has much to do with this essential aspect of rhetorical culture. Investigation of any or all of these aspects of classical rhetoric yields very "playable" insights into Shakespeare's dramaturgy. I encourage you to explore the subject further-I think you would find it very rewarding. Janet MacLellan University of TorontoThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. [3]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Robin Hamilton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 16:46:27 -0000 Subject: 9.1265 Re: Branagh's LLL PLUS Comment: Re: SHK 9.1265 Re: Branagh's LLL PLUS >>What was the pronunciation question? > >It was about the name which appears in the 1598 quarto as "Longauill" - >I have no idea what the British stage pronunciation of this might be, >having seen only U.S. actors in the play. I think the British pronunciation would be Long-ga-vill-but more importantly, for the rhythm, the exact pronunciation is less important than the stress pattern, which demands / X X. Robin Hamilton [4]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Karen E Peterson-Kranz <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 9 Dec 1998 10:35:01 +1000 (GMT+1000) Subject: 9.1237 Re: Shakespeare and Pop Culture Comment: Re: SHK 9.1237 Re: Shakespeare and Pop Culture Barbara Hume mentioned the many Star Trek Shakespeare references...one episode from the original series actually featured an interplanetary group of Shakespearean players. I can't recall the episode title offhand, but the story line revolved around the troupe's founder, a colonial dictator convicted in absentia of genocide before he took a new identity as an actor. Also, on the pop culture/Star Trek connection, don't forget the Star Trek VI movie, "The Undiscovered Country," with marvelous Shakespearean quotes delivered by Christopher Plummer as a Klingon commander (he does a terrific "cry havoc..."). Also: "You can't appreciate Shakespeare unless you experience it in the original Klingon." What I won't do to avoid grading undergraduate essays. Karen Peterson-Kranz Department of English & Applied Linguistics University of Guam
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.1272 Wednesday, 9 December 1998. [1] From: Helen Ostovich <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 12:17:07 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 9.1261 Two questions [2] From: Takashi Kozuka <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 15:00:55 PST Subj: Re: SHK 9.1261 Two questions [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Helen Ostovich <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 12:17:07 -0500 Subject: 9.1261 Two questions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1261 Two questions Re #1, on "dead men's fingers" = testiculus canis, dogstones or dog's testicles; also called dog's cods, fool's ballocks, etc. Re #2: on urinals: see 1H4 2.1, in which visitors at the inn complain about having to take a leak in the fireplace, because no other facility was available inside. The result, aside from the stench, was abundant insect life. Falstaff, however, has a famous entrance line in 2H4 calling for a "jordan" or urinal, so some inns kept them available for customers. Helen Ostovich Editor, EARLY THEATRE / Dept of English CNH-321 McMaster University [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Takashi Kozuka <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 15:00:55 PST Subject: 9.1261 Two questions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1261 Two questions According to The Norton Shakespeare, '[a]mong the recorded names for the purple orchis are "priest's-pintle" (penis), "dog's cullions" (testicles), "goat's cullions", and "fool's ballochs"' (p. 1740). The 4th edition of David Bevington's The Complete Works of Shakespeare explains that these names have their origins in the tubers of the orchis which resemble testicles. Takashi Kozuka PhD Student Centre for the Study of the Renaissance University of Warwick (UK)
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.1271 Wednesday, 9 December 1998. [1] From: Cary M. Mazer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 08:37:20 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 9.1262 Re: Introductions [2] From: Jamie Brough <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 10:06:58 EST Subj: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions [3] From: Janet Maclellan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 10:26:58 -0500 (EST) Subj: Introductions [4] From: David Evett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 10:28:41 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions [5] From: Tim Perfect <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 08:12:40 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 9.1262 Introductions [6] From: Pervez Rizvi <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 17:16:56 -0000 Subj: RE: SHK 9.1262 Re: Introductions [7] From: Ed Pixley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 14:34:11 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions [8] From: Ed Pixley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 14:38:06 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions [9] From: Robert A. Haas <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 16:48:19 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cary M. Mazer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 08:37:20 -0500 Subject: 9.1262 Re: Introductions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1262 Re: Introductions Entrance introductions might be more useful-perhaps even *necessary*--in plays written for a standing company of actors, in a theatre in which there is a lot of doubling. If spectators are familiar with each of the actors from one play to the next, then they will recognize the identity of the actor before they figure out what character that actor is playing in this particular play. And, in the case of plays with a lot of doubling, they will recognize the identity of the actor before they figure out which character that actor is playing in this particular scene. There are moments when the identity of the character is left ambiguous (I'd like to think intentionally so), while the identity of the actor would be self-evident. For example, when Oliver arrives in Arden late in As You Like It, introduces himself to Ganymede and Aliena, and narrates Oliver's encounter with Orlando and the lioness, spectators would certainly recognize the actor who had been playing Oliver; but they may be none to certain whether the actor was playing Oliver or some new character altogether-the third-person narrative would suggest the latter-and would therefore be as surprised as Aliena when he shifts to the first person and reveals himself to be Oliver, converted by his experience. I wonder whether Bottom, reentering with the ass's head, would be immediately be recognized as Bottom translated, or would instead be seen as some magical creature, where it not for they way his friends talk to him. Cary [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jamie Brough <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 10:06:58 EST Subject: 9.1260 Introductions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions I suspect it has much to do with the view afforded the less well-off patrons of the Globe. Also, as many roles would have been shared, with Ophelia played by a young male actor, such clarification would seem prudent. However, both the examples you cited contain valuable observations of character (together with identity!). 'Here comes Brabantio and the valiant Moor [Senator]', for example, is followed immediately by the Duke's welcome of 'Valiant Othello'. This repetition establishes the Moor's worth in our minds prior to Brabantio's charge against him to the council and adds to the irony of Othello's fall from grace. I have just read H. Hill's reply after writing this-and he does more for this idea. Although I should mention that in Othello the observations of the Duke and Senator are made ironic by the play's later circumstances-they truly believe in O.'s worth when they address him as 'valiant'. Jamie Brough [3]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Janet Maclellan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 10:26:58 -0500 (EST) Subject: Introductions On a pragmatic note, a one- or two-line introduction from an onstage character gives the actor who is just entering some time to get down- or centre-stage before speaking. Janet MacLellan University of TorontoThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. [4]------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Evett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 10:28:41 -0500 Subject: 9.1260 Introductions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions In re Jacob Baltuch's question about the theatrical purpose of having one character "introduce" another who is just entering: among other things, it helps in the process of attaching name to face in a dramaturgy that more often identifies personages by role. Dave Evett [5]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Perfect <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 08:12:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: 9.1262 Introductions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1262 Introductions This is what makes performing Shakespeare so wonderful for an actor. Everything an actor needs is in the language, from the characters and setting: "Tranio, since for the great desire I had To see fair Padua, nursery of arts, I am arrived for fruitful Lombardy, The pleasant garden of great Italy.." to the thoughts and desires of the characters. That is why you don't need extensive sets, props, or costumes, and that is why the works of Shakespeare have lasted to the present day. Because in the simple interaction of actor, word and audience, the language of Shakespeare can bring to life the tranquility of a mountain brook, or the rage of a battle, with a reality that modern stage machinery cannot begin to achieve. That is why the works of Shakespeare are in complete contrast to the works of Ibsen or Chekhov. Chekhov is a master of subtext. Shakespeare's characters speak their subtext. As Edward Payson Call, protege of Sir Tyrone Guthrie once told me, "Love the words." How simple, and how true. Tim Perfect Cleveland Shakespeare FestivalThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. [6]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pervez Rizvi <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 17:16:56 -0000 Subject: 9.1262 Re: Introductions Comment: RE: SHK 9.1262 Re: Introductions The other use for "introductions" is to let the audience know where the action is set. Two examples that come to mind: "Before Angiers, well met brave Austria!" from King John, and "Once again, well met at Cyprus" from Othello. [7]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Pixley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 14:34:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: 9.1260 Introductions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions This is probably going to be too quick an answer, since I have a lot of papers to grade, but off the top of my head it has to do with the way we direct focus on the stage. The entrance of a new set of characters requires a readjustment on the part of everybody on stage, a transition from the thoughts and feelings which had been dominating their attention to a new set of thoughts and feelings affected by a new presence. As audience, it is not enough for us to be aware that these people have entered; we must also be conscious of any adjustments being made to that entrance by those already on stage. With Brabantio and Othello's entrance, I believe several people are involved, with several different possible adjustments they could be making. With Hamlet, having just completed the "To be . . ." speech, we must be at least as interested in his adjustment as we are in her entrance. That announcement gives us that moment to notice it. But it could, in some productions, also give us a chance to notice the adjustment of those people hiding behind the arras, because they are, after all, also still on stage. In film, such lines are gratuitous, because the camera can pan or jump to all those reactions and focus for us. A film director might justifiably cut them, but most playwrights, not just Shakespeare, are very conscious of creating lines that in fact guide the visual progression of the stage focus. Ed Pixley SUNY-Oneonta [8]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Pixley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 14:38:06 -0400 (EDT) Subject: 9.1260 Introductions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions > I have one simple question about the very widespread stage convention . . . One more note, Mr. Baltuch. Thanks for asking what I think to be an extremely important question, and for giving me an opportunity to share a stage director's perspective on play structure which rarely gets talked about among those whose background is dominantly literary. I hope I was helpful. Ed Pixley SUNY-Oneonta [9]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Robert A. Haas <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 16:48:19 -0500 (EST) Subject: 9.1260 Introductions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions Well, it is one way of identifying just which character has entered, a valuable practice in the days before programs. Bob Haas Department of English University of North Carolina at Greensboro
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.1270 Wednesday, 9 December 1998. [1] From: Tiffany Rasovic <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 09:25:11 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 9.1253 Re: Plagiarism [2] From: Mike Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 08:39:02 -0800 Subj: SHK 9.1253 Re: Plagiarism [3] From: Michael Friedman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 12:05:38 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Re: SHK 9.1253 Re: Plagiarism [4] From: Peter Hillyar-Russ <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 17:40:34 -0000 Subj: RE: Plagiarism [5] From: Karen E Peterson-Kranz <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 9 Dec 1998 10:59:29 +1000 (GMT+1000) Subj: Re: SHK 9.1242 Re: Plagiarism [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tiffany Rasovic <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 09:25:11 -0500 Subject: 9.1253 Re: Plagiarism Comment: Re: SHK 9.1253 Re: Plagiarism Heard on the Boston news this morning, 12/8/98: Boston University's law suit against several purveyors of internet term papers was thrown out of court...the grounds were not explicitly described, but I imagine that this means that business has one set of rules and academia another. They also mentioned that only one student had been found "guilty" of using an on-line paper for a BU class. [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 08:39:02 -0800 Subject: Re: Plagiarism Comment: SHK 9.1253 Re: Plagiarism > Most of what gets plagiarized is general ideas. And the most common > source of plagiarism still is the old stand-by Cliff's Notes. (I met > Cliff Hillegas at a conference once and told him what I thought of him. > It wasn't pretty!) He probably cried all the way to the bank. In a previous (and much unhappier) life I was a bookseller. I shall never forget the student who came in and asked, "Do you have MACBETH by Cliff Snotes?" Cheers, Mike Jensen [3]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Friedman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 08 Dec 1998 12:05:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: 9.1253 Re: Plagiarism Comment: Re: SHK 9.1253 Re: Plagiarism After reading some of the recent postings on plagiarism, I thought I would share my own experience from this semester. In response to some discussion questions on Julius Caesar, one of my students turned in her assignment, but the writing style differed markedly from her previous work, and the responses didn't really answer the questions. So, I turned to the first place I look in such instances, Cliff's Notes, and sure enough, the assignment matched that source word-for-word. When I later confronted the student with the evidence, she swore vehemently that she had never seen the Cliff's Notes. To excuse herself, she insisted, "I downloaded it all from the Internet!" Michael Friedman University of Scranton [4]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Peter Hillyar-Russ <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 8 Dec 1998 17:40:34 -0000 Subject: RE: Plagiarism My father told me that when he was at an English "Public" school in the 1930's the teachers worked on the principle that "To copy from one book was plagiarism and merited a beating, to copy from two was research and merited a beta. You had to add your own ideas to get an alpha." Peter Hillyar-RussThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. [5]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Karen E Peterson-Kranz <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 9 Dec 1998 10:59:29 +1000 (GMT+1000) Subject: 9.1242 Re: Plagiarism Comment: Re: SHK 9.1242 Re: Plagiarism Thanks to Gabriel Egan for sharing his "Racism in Othello" purchased paper. No, I would certainly not give it above a "C". Nevertheless, I am disturbed...my own personal anti-plagiarism antenna would not have been raised by that paper simply because it was so very bad. It really did read like a typical, clumsy, unthoughtful student paper. Usually, I can spot plagiarized work easily simply because it is suspiciously good. Do you think the electronic purveyors of such papers have figured this out, and are intentionally making the work they have available more realistically "student-like"? While I wouldn't give the Othello paper more than a C, I know some faculty members who would give it an "A" simply because the spelling was OK and it was more or less grammatical. Perhaps I am just becoming over-paranoid. One person asked teachers what percentage of papers they suspect are plagiarized. My answer: a lot. With my students, however, I suspect that many of them plagiarize from ignorance rather than from larcenous intent. A great number of them, especially freshman, simply don't understand the difference between paraphrasing some source and copying it. There are those who, obviously, turn something in which is a conscious attempt to cheat: these are pretty easily spotted because they are: a) papers done by past students of mine, who don't know that I change the assignments every year; b) papers that are printed out of someone's CD-ROM encyclopedia...sometimes the student doesn't even bother to remove the copyright mark at the bottom; c) odd mixtures of incomprehensible student writing and brilliant, unattributed, plagiarized material which quite often I can identify from style or content. Beyond using drafts, distinctive assignments, and the other ideas that have been contributed to the list, here's one more: For every single course I teach, I require the students to write a one page, in-class essay on the first day of the course. I tell them this is to help me get to know them and their writing better. And it is. But it is mostly for my reference. I keep these essays until the end of the term, and if I get any suspicious work, I compare it with the in-class product. When I confront students, I call them in, hold up their first in-class effort, and say "This is what you wrote on the first day of class." Meaningful silence. "And this is what you turned in last week." More meaningful silence. So far, they have always confessed on the spot and begged forgiveness. For what it's worth... Karen Peterson-Kranz University of Guam