December
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.1264 Tuesday, 8 December 1998. [1] From: John Robinson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Monday, 7 Dec 1998 16:02:30 EST Subj: Re: SHK 9.1242 Re: Plagiarism [2] From: Jerry Bangham <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Monday, 7 Dec 1998 18:29:20 -0600 Subj: Plagiarism [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Robinson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Monday, 7 Dec 1998 16:02:30 EST Subject: 9.1242 Re: Plagiarism Comment: Re: SHK 9.1242 Re: Plagiarism << Since we regularly ask students to write, for an Introduction to Theatre course, on the subject of the Renaissance, I would greatly appreciate it if we could start sharing lists of web sites where these papers can be bought. I've already received several papers that were suspiciously well-crafted, and hesitated to call the students on it because I didn't have the time to check their work more fully. There are other means of testing them in our class, the essay is one small portion, so for this semester I let it pass. Next semester, however, I hope to be prepared. Thanks in advance for any more tips, Andy White >> If you suspect that someone has given you phony work simply invite them to your office and ask them a few probing questions on the papers thesis and content. Someone who did their own work will be able to answer the questions. Someone who is dirty-generally, but not always-probably can't answer simple questions about the work. John Robinson [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jerry Bangham <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Monday, 7 Dec 1998 18:29:20 -0600 Subject: Plagiarism In light of the recent discussion, I thought that the message below, from the Communication Research and Theory Network discussion group might be of interest. ------------------------------------------------------------------- On-line plagiarism resource I think this may be off the current topic of this thread, but it goes back to what started this whole discussion-plagiarism from the internet. Julie Ryan has an excellent article on on-line plagiarism and how instructors can use the internet to combat it in the December 1998 issue of ASEE Prism magazine (American Society for Engineering Education). It is available on line at http://www.asee.org/prism/. Norah E Dunbar Department of Communication University of ArizonaThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. http://www.u.arizona.edu/~ndunbar Jerry Bangham http:/www.win.net/~kudzu
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.1263 Tuesday, 8 December 1998. From: Gabriel Egan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Monday, 7 Dec 1998 16:36:22 -0500 Subject: iEMLS Archive of SHAKSPER Updated Dear SHAKSPERians The web-based archive of the SHAKSPER discussion list maintained by Interactive Early Modern Literary Studies (iEMLS) has just been updated. We now have all the materials available directly from the listserv, hopefully in a form which some will find more convenient. The biographies of subscribers have been combined into an A-Z listing and, as previously announced, the full-text logs of the discussions have been 'bound' into yearly volumes. I'd like to thank all those who supplied their own copies of missing digests to fill gaps in the listserv holdings. The URL for the archive is: http://www.humanities.ualberta.ca/emls/iemls/shaksper/shak-L.html or alternatively go to EMLS homepage: http://www.humanities.ualberta.ca/emls/emlshome.html and follow the links for iEMLS RESOURCES and SHAKSPER DISCUSSION LIST ARCHIVE. Gabriel Egan Associate Editor, iEMLS
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.1262 Tuesday, 8 December 1998. [1] From: Harry Hill <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Monday, 07 Dec 1998 20:22:23 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions [2] From: Simon Malloch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 10:06:48 +0800 Subj: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions [3] From: Sara Vandenberg <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Monday, 7 Dec 1998 23:35:28 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Harry Hill <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Monday, 07 Dec 1998 20:22:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: 9.1260 Introductions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions Jacob Baltuch enquires about the convention of introduction, citing "Here comes.....the valiant Moor" and "Soft you now, the fair Ophelia." In these two easy instances, we know first that the speaker either believes in Othello's valour or is being ironic about it, and second that Hamlet is of the present opinion that his beloved is fair; in each case the description is useful to us in a way that "Here comes the Moor" and "Soft you now-Ophelia" cannot be. So far, then, we can see that they are introductions of perceptions as well as arrivals. The convention itself dictates, as Una Ellis-Fermor pointed out in the forties, that such indications of the textures of consciousness are essential in the non-narrative form of the stage, where attitudes must be shown to be explained. For the actor, such presentations of their views of incoming persons are excellent opportunities to create more 'character' in the role. Not all playwrights are as adept at providing smaller roles with these fleshings out. And in poetic drama, particularly with Shakespeare's work in which (in Northrop Frye's words) the action really happens in "a natural perspective" as opposed to the limiting and merely physical world of bodily action, we are given inscapes of minds immeasurable in facial expression and manual gesture. The "introductions", then, strike one as more examples of an artist's fullness. Harry Hill Montreal [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Simon Malloch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 10:06:48 +0800 Subject: 9.1260 Introductions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions > I have one simple question about the very widespread stage convention > which consists in having one character "introduce" another that's just > walked in (or just before he does?) [...] > The actors are have just entered, what's the purpose of pointing it out > when it's obvious to everyone? I could be off the mark here as I am no expert in theatrical matters, but in terms of an Elizabethan audience, watching a play staged for the first time without the benefit of the Arden Shakespeare in their pocket, the identity of a character walking onto the stage may not "obvious". The convention might have just been a convenient way to introduce characters. It is less useful in that regard nowadays when we have the opportunity to know the play in the print beforehand; but, still, for fans of the theatre who are unlikely to read the plays (I won't say "or the undergraduate")it may be helpful. Simon Malloch. [3]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sara Vandenberg <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Monday, 7 Dec 1998 23:35:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: 9.1260 Introductions Comment: Re: SHK 9.1260 Introductions It may be the easiest way to let the audience know the name of the character. This kind of introduction usually occurs only the first time we see a character. Sara van den Berg
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.1261 Monday, 7 December 1998. From: Armando Guerra <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 1 Dec 1998 18:08:23 -5000 Subject: Two questions Hello, I have two questions for the list: 1. In Hamlet, Act IV; Sc 7, Gertrude comes in and informs Laertes of his sister's death: There with fantastic garlands did she come Of crow-flowers, nettles, daisies, and long purples, That liberal shephers give a grosser name, But our cold maids do dead men's fingers call them: I wonder if anyone could help me find the "grosser names" that Gertrude avoids. My annotated version explains "long purples", but does not go beyond "the old <>Herbals<> give more than one "grosser name" for the flower" as an explanation for "grosser name." 2. In a book on the history of European theater I have read that in Elizabethan theaters because of "abundant drinking there was need to place in the corners of the facility improvised devices whose content was dumped in a pit usually around the building" (my own translation from Spanish). The authors go further to describe the smell in the place, the need sometimes to burn aromatic wood, etc. Now after consulting other books, I have not been able to corroborate this info, so if someone could recommend sources or add comments I would be thankful. With best regards, Armando Guerra School of Foreign Languages University of Havana e-mail:This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.1260 Monday, 7 December 1998. From: Jacob Baltuch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Sunday, 6 Dec 1998 22:50:31 +0100 (MET) Subject: Introductions I have one simple question about the very widespread stage convention which consists in having one character "introduce" another that's just walked in (or just before he does?) Examples are innumerable but just to avoid any misunderstanding: "Here comes Brabantio and the valiant Moor!", "Soft you, now, the fair Ophelia!", etc. etc. The question is: What is (theatrically) the value of such a convention? The actors are have just entered, what's the purpose of pointing it out when it's obvious to everyone? Does it have anything to do with the specific Elizabethan staging conditions?