The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.0428  Thursday, 14 February 2002

From:           Sam Small <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 12 Feb 2002 15:00:44 -0800
Subject:        Re: Playboy 1970 Pictorial Called "The Girls of Julius Caesar"

Yes, of course I clicked on the link.  The sight of those 1970s lovelies
cheered up a gloomy English February Tuesday afternoon no end.  They
were a little stilted and self conscious, if I may criticise just a tad,
(a bit like the acting of Johnny Geilgud, if I remember) and seemed
mostly to want to show only their left breast - perhaps a Roman fashion
of the time - or a directorial reluctance to show us too much young
female flesh.  After all it is Shakespeare, chaps!  No, I was joking!
All of which brings to mind an absence of sexual discussion on this
list.  It is, after all, an obsession of our favourite writer - he
hardly stops talking about it (and doing it, if we are to believe the
sonnets).  Why the void?  Perhaps it is the presence of the teaching
hyper-enthusiasts who insist that a teenage without Shakespeare is a
teenage not worth living?  Or the well known American prudery?  Or some
entrenched right-wing Christianity?  Or too much Charles Lamb?  Does
Bowlder still live?  Shakespeare without sex is not Shakespeare at all,
don't you think?  Am I obsessed?


S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.

Subscribe to Our Feeds


Make a Gift to SHAKSPER

Consider making a gift to support SHAKSPER.