March
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.0331 Monday 1 March 1999. [1] From: Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 09:11:19 -0800 Subj: Re: SHK 10.0322 Re: Othello [2] From: Brian Haylett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Saturday, 27 Feb 1999 15:19:50 -0000 Subj: Re: SHK 10.0322 Re: Othello [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 09:11:19 -0800 Subject: 10.0322 Re: Othello Comment: Re: SHK 10.0322 Re: Othello Peter Hadorn writes: >I disagree. I think Othello is very good at wooing young women. >Consider the stories he tells to Desdemona. They make him look like a >hero and victim; i.e., someone to be admired and pitied. Just something >a foolish young girl would fall for. Yes, though she had to ask him to woo her. This isn't the work of one of nature's pick-up artists. Are we really expected to believe "that he saw the monsters that he says he saw?" Why not? Elizabethan travel narratives were littered with such things. I don't think we should expect that a fictional character would be constructed based on what we now know. In other words, he's very >good at telling stories, particularly ones that serve his purpose. >Consider what he says about the handkerchief. He claims it has all >these magical powers, but later admits that it was just some >handkerchief his father had given to his mother (5.2.223-34). Why couldn't his father give his mother a handkerchief with magical powers? >I'm reminded, too, of the wooing scene between Henry V and Katherine. >He says to her that he is a soldier and not a lover, and that he is not >good at speaking. But if that play demonstrates anything it >demonstrates that Harry is a master of words. With Katherine, he claims >that he is inept at speaking like a lover. Yet his "ineptness" is >endearing and is meant, I think, to woo us as much as Katherine. Keep in mind that his ineptness is elicited by Katherine. Every time he gets off on a courtly tangent, comparing her to an angel or a goddess, she drags him back forcefully. In other words, Shakespeare's effective lovers and leaders may manipulate language, but never very consciously. There's an excessive "saying", Levinas would say, an address and a surplus of the interpersonal, that undergirds and undermines their manipulation of the "said". Cheers, Se
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.0330 Monday 1 March 1999. [1] From: Eric W Beato <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 10:40:59 -0500 Subj: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age [2] From: John Savage <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 10:49:06 -0500 Subj: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age [3] From: Jack Lynch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 11:34:14 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age [4] From: Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 08:58:46 -0800 Subj: Re: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age [5] From: Tom Mueller <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 12:05:01 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age [6] From: Catherine Loomis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 11:27:33 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age [7] From: Jack Hettinger <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 13:48:25 -0500 Subj: RE: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age [8] From: Cora Lee Wolfe <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 12:36:29 -0700 Subj: Re: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age [9] From: Gabriel Egan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 16:19:32 -0000 Subj: Re: Hamlet's Age [10] From: AsamiNakayama <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Saturday, 27 Feb 199 13:53:43 +0900 Subj: Re: Hamlet's Age [11] From: Nora Kreimer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Saturday, 27 Feb 1999 09:06:08 -0300 Subj: Re: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age [12] From: Steve Sohmer <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Saturday, 27 Feb 1999 10:34:59 EST Subj: Re: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age [13] From: Peter Groves <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Monday, 01 Mar 1999 11:14:42 +1100 Subj: Re: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eric W Beato <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 10:40:59 -0500 Subject: Q: Hamlet's Age Comment: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age Regarding Hamlet's age, the first gravedigger clearly states that the skull of Yorick 'hath lien in the ground these three and twenty year.' In the process of introducing Horatio to the former King's jester, Hamlet discusses how clearly he remembers Yorick. I have always assumed that the possibility existed that Yorick, expected to entertain the adults at dinner, might very well have been expected to entertain the young prince at other times of the day. In today's terms-was Yorick the part-time babysitter of Hamlet? No wonder his 'gorge rises' as he looks into the eye cavities of the skull. But the math suggests an age of 30, does it not? I remember little clearly of my first five or six years. If Hamlet remembers the lips he used to kiss, he must have been older than a babe at the death of Yorick. Rick Beato Lisle Senior High School, Illinois [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Savage <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 10:49:06 -0500 Subject: Q: Hamlet's Age Comment: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age >I have a burning question. How old is Hamlet anyway? I've just >finished teaching the play and it seems to be a main concern with my >students. The question is easily answered. Hamlet is a teenager in the early part of the play and he's 30 at the time of the graveyard scene. >> The reason it bothered my students... << It has bothered many more than your students. [3]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack Lynch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 11:34:14 -0500 (EST) Subject: 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age Comment: Re: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age Laura Blankenship writes: I have a burning question. How old is Hamlet anyway? I've just finished teaching the play and it seems to be a main concern with my students. The graveyard scene indicates he's in his late 20s or early 30s. Do we trust this? The reason it bothered my students was that they thought his behavior often wasn't in line with his supposed age. Not so much an authoritative answer as a parallel: G. B. Hill notes in his edition of Johnson's Rasselas, "That Shakespeare makes Hamlet thirty years old often raises wonder. It is more surprising that Rasselas should be represented as thirty-two." [4]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 08:58:46 -0800 Subject: 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age Comment: Re: SHK 10.0325 Q: Hamlet's Age But that's just it. He's hanging around as an heir when he's easily old enough to take his place as an adult in his own right. It places him in a position that no-one is really very comfortable with-Laertes says that he lacks the power to make good on promises to Ophelia, Polonius claims that he has so much power he can just ignore them. In either case, neither can really fit him into a received social role. Incidentally, there are at least two parallels one might find interesting: 1. As I understand it, there wasn't much that heirs could do in Elizabethan times except hang around waiting for their dads to pass on, and get themselves into trouble. This is a subject of some anxiety not only in, say, King Lear, but also, as I understand it, in court records where young men are committing an over representative percentage of minor crime. Lower on the social scale, we could think of how apprentices became masters and bachelors became husbands later and later in life as social conditions deteriorated. 2. Heirs apparent even now. It's not just Prince Charles who's trying to define some sort of job for himself. We might also think of how American vice-presidents always have an uncomfortable position. I recall George Bush mentioning everyone's surprise on discovering that he was over six feet tall. His role was such that everyone assumed he was shorter. Cheers, Se
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.0329 Monday 1 March 1999. From: John Savage <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 10:28:45 -0500 Subject: Trivia Question Another trivia question. If I tell you Juliet was married, would you believe me? (Because she was.) If I tell you Juliet was pregnant, would you believe me? (Because she was.) Explain.
The Shakespeare Conference: Monday 1 March 1999. [1] From: Pat Dolan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 11:54:00 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 10.0323 Re: High School Shakespeare [2] From: John Savage <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 10:27:54 -0500 Subj: SHK 10.0314 Re: High School Shakespeare [3] From: Helen Ostovich <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 14:02:34 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 10.0323 Re: High School Shakespeare [4] From: Abigail Quart <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Sunday, 28 Feb 1999 12:56:19 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 10.0323 Re: High School Shakespeare [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pat Dolan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 11:54:00 -0600 (CST) Subject: 10.0323 Re: High School Shakespeare Comment: Re: SHK 10.0323 Re: High School Shakespeare I'd question movies as evidence for the "universal" quality of Shakespeare-any Shakespeare movie will almost by definition be made by a person educated in a system that represents Shakespeare as central to the traditions and culture it transmits and positions knowledge of him a validation of one's abilities within that culture. The current spate of filmed Shakespeare strikes me more as the industry's response to a variety of critiques-often right-wing, but not always-which suggest that the industry (a crude term, I know, but the best I can do before my meeting this afternoon) is culturally pernicious and illiterate (not non-literate). I suspect that they too want credit for their Shakespearean knowledge. More cynically, I think they want to dispense that credit for cash. Speaking of which, is it true that Les Liasons Dangereuses has been set in high-school? Now that would be cool. Pat [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Savage <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 10:27:54 -0500 Subject: Re: High School Shakespeare Comment: SHK 10.0314 Re: High School Shakespeare >Baz Luhrmann's R & J reduced the >adult characters, Paris, and Mercutio to caricatures in order to reserve >the audience's sympathy for Romeo and Juliet. Yes, that film was basically a cartoon for teenagers. [3]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Helen Ostovich <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 14:02:34 -0500 (EST) Subject: 10.0323 Re: High School Shakespeare Comment: Re: SHK 10.0323 Re: High School Shakespeare I have no problem with teen-directed versions of Shakespeare. What I want to see now is senior citizen Shakespeare: how about a King Lear whose place is either in the streets or in an old folks' home, but not in your home? How about an age-reversed Romeo and Juliet as octogenarians in love, but separated by warring factions of children? Just how much older than Desdemona IS Othello-and just how old is she? _All's Well That Ends Well_ may be the perfect senior citizen play: who wants a return to marriageable youth when Bertram is the available husband? More suggestions welcome. Helen [4]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Abigail Quart <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Sunday, 28 Feb 1999 12:56:19 -0500 Subject: 10.0323 Re: High School Shakespeare Comment: Re: SHK 10.0323 Re: High School Shakespeare Are we talking about DiCaprio's R&J? Of course it's "eye candy." Film is a visual language. Any film of a Shakespeare play is being read/seen IN TRANSLATION. Branagh translated a long scene in Henry V to one gesture with a glove. It took my breath away. But it made me go back and read the original. Americans today are bilingual in English and film without even realizing it. Make your students sensitive to that.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.0327 Monday 1 March 1999. [1] From: John Savage <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 10:27:42 -0500 Subj: SHK 10.0317 Witches [2] From: John Amos <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Saturday, 27 Feb 1999 00:21:07 +0000 Subj: Re: SHK 10.0320 Re: Witches [3] From: Naomi Kirby <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Saturday, 27 Feb 1999 06:55:48 +1100 Subj: Re: SHK 10.0317 Witches [4] From: Timothy Peterson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 12:16:16 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 10.0317 Witches [5] From: Drew Alan Mason <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Sunday, 28 Feb 1999 10:57:41 +1300 Subj: Re: SHK 10.0317 Witches [6] From: John Velz <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Sunday, 28 Feb 1999 23:54:34 -0600 Subj: witches on stage [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Savage <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 10:27:42 -0500 Subject: Witches Comment: SHK 10.0317 Witches >I'm wondering if people who have would be willing to pass >along interesting stagings of the witches. I saw Ionesco's MACBETT (note spelling) in Paris some years ago. Toward the end of the play the witches turned before our eyes into glamorous bikini-clad bathing beauties, each capable of the Sports Illustrated annual edition. The *reason* for this metamorphosis I've never been able to figure out. [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Amos <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Saturday, 27 Feb 1999 00:21:07 +0000 Subject: 10.0320 Re: Witches Comment: Re: SHK 10.0320 Re: Witches Thanks so much for all the responses. They're very helpful. John A [3]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Naomi Kirby <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Saturday, 27 Feb 1999 06:55:48 +1100 Subject: 10.0317 Witches Comment: Re: SHK 10.0317 Witches One of the most intriguing staging decisions of the witches I've seen was in a production in Malmo (Sweden) in which the witches actually played the part of most of the other characters. Now, we couldn't actually understand the words, so we had no idea whether the text had been changed, but the action VERY clearly indicated that the witches were orchestrating everything - Lady Macbeth, Banquo - while Macbeth saw them as particular individuals, we saw them as incarnations created and played by the witches. (It was also interesting for English speakers to hear what must have been "Double, double, toil and trouble" rendered in Swedish - to the unfamiliar ear, VERY witch-like sounds!) Naomi KirbyThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. Melbourne, Australia [4]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Timothy Peterson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 26 Feb 1999 12:16:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: 10.0317 Witches Comment: Re: SHK 10.0317 Witches A couple years ago, the National Shakespeare Theater in DC staged Macbeth with an interesting approach to the witches. They were clad in black, skin-tight spandex-like material and looked very strong and athletic. The witches dropped down onto the stage with what looked like mountain climbing ropes and harnesses. In several scenes, they were perched above the stage in a tree watching the action below and laughing at Macbeth, as if they didn't believe their own prophecies and had made them up to fool Macbeth. They came across as very powerful and manipulative. The staging made the rest of the characters look a little less mature and more feeble minded. --T. [5]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Drew Alan Mason <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Sunday, 28 Feb 1999 10:57:41 +1300 Subject: 10.0317 Witches Comment: Re: SHK 10.0317 Witches I have found that the most interesting (and also terrifying) staging of the witches is done in Akira Kurasawa's film Throne of Blood. He has reduced the number to only one witch, but is altogether frightening. The film is also an absolutely wonderful adaptation of Macbeth as well. Lady Washizu herself is also quite spooky at times. Check it out, I know Blockbuster carries it in the foreign film section. [6]------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Velz <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Sunday, 28 Feb 1999 23:54:34 -0600 Subject: witches on stage John Amos asks about stage versions of the witches scenes in Mac.. In the production at the Ashland Shakespeare Festival in 1979, the witches were played by males. One of them was bare chested, and in the prophecy scene the images from the future were flashed off his/her chest as if it were a film screening. The other two witches stood beside him/her and moved him/her about to keep the images squarely on the bare chest. It seemed hokey to some of us in the audience, but we bore up under the staging. Cheers, and good luck with finding other stagings. Don't forget the staging in the "Japanese Macbeth", i.e., "Throne of Blood" but of course this is a film, not a theater production. John Velz