January
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.0262 Wednesday, 30 January 2002 [1] From: Stuart Manger <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 23:30:28 +0000 Subj: SHK 13.0239 Rushes on the Indoor Stage [2] From: Rita Lamb <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 30 Jan 2002 00:02:44 -0000 Subj: Re: SHK 13.0239 Rushes on the Indoor Stage [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stuart Manger <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 23:30:28 +0000 Subject: Rushes on the Indoor Stage Comment: SHK 13.0239 Rushes on the Indoor Stage See 'Duchess of Malfi' Act V: Cardinal talks of fights in the rushes. My text is in class - very sorry, can't give you the exact reference. [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rita Lamb <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 30 Jan 2002 00:02:44 -0000 Subject: 13.0239 Rushes on the Indoor Stage Comment: Re: SHK 13.0239 Rushes on the Indoor Stage There's a reference to rushes in Nashe's 'Summer's Last Will and Testament'. The play was registered for publication on 28 October 1600, but internal evidence suggests it was privately staged in the Great Hall of Croydon Palace before Archbishop Whitgift and his household in early October 1592. In it there's a character called Back-winter, who has a number of unbalanced and furious speeches. After he leaves, another character speaks directly to the prompter: '...you might haue writ in the margent of your play-booke, Let there be a fewe rushes laide in the place where Back-winter shall tumble, for feare of raying his cloathes: or set downe, Enter Back-winter, with his boy bringing a brush after him, to take off the dust if need require. But you will ne're haue any ward-robe wit while you liue.' So apparently the actor playing Back-winter threw himself down and raved on the floor during his scene. As he plays the son of a royal counsellor, perhaps his costume was rich and expensive, and should have been protected from contact with the floor? Earlier in the play a hobby-horse dancer is told 'You, friend with the Hobby-horse, goe not too fast, for feare of wearing out my Lords tyle-stones with your hob-nayles'. Taken with the first comment this perhaps suggests there were no rushes laid for this performance. RLamb _______________________________________________________________ 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 Webpage <http://ws.bowiestate.edu> 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.0261 Wednesday, 30 January 2002 [1] From: Kevin De Ornellas <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 21:35:01 +0000 Subj: Re: SHK 13.0234 Re: Campbell and Quinn [2] From: Takashi Kozuka <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 22:58:51 +0000 (GMT) Subj: Re: Campbell and Quinn: The Reader's Encyclopedia of Shakespeare [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kevin De Ornellas <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 21:35:01 +0000 Subject: 13.0234 Re: Campbell and Quinn Comment: Re: SHK 13.0234 Re: Campbell and Quinn >Does anyone have a copy of THE COMPANION TO THE PLAYHOUSE with its great >description of Garrick's acting? Published in London in 1764. > >Harry Hill We have the 1812 edition in our library here. Why do you ask? Kevin De Ornellas Queen's University, Belfast [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Takashi Kozuka <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 22:58:51 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: Campbell and Quinn: The Reader's Encyclopedia of Shakespeare Tom Dale Keever <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > says, > A couple of other recent collections of background > articles deserve attention. > > "A New History of Early Modern Drama," edited by > James D. Cox and David Scott Kastan, with an > introduction by Stephen Greenblatt (New York: > Columbia U.P., 1997)... > > "A Companion to Shakespeare," edited by David Scott > Kastan (Oxford, UK and Malden, MA: Blackwell, > 1999)... And the NEW Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare (2001), which looks significantly different from the 1934 edition and the other two Companions mentioned on SHAKSPER so far. I also like the Bedford Companion to Shakespeare (1996; 2nd edn, 2001), which I use in my Shakespeare seminars. (Speaking of teaching, why is the new job at Reading University starting from April? I wanted to apply, but it's starting too early for me -- I need a job from September!) Are we going to have another companion (eg, the SHAKSPER Companion to Shakespeare)? :-) Best wishes, Takashi Kozuka _______________________________________________________________ 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 Webpage <http://ws.bowiestate.edu> 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.0260 Wednesday, 30 January 2002 From: Don Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 15:22:16 -0600 Subject: 13.0235 Re: "He's very clean; isn't he." Comment: Re: SHK 13.0235 Re: "He's very clean; isn't he." Re Brambell: 1) Us Yanks and others may not know the open secret about Wilfrid's predilections. Don't mean to be nosy, but as it got brought up, I can't help feeling curious. 2) GE's short quote had me convulsed. I could hear Old Steptoe say it even after all these years. Is there more of his precis of Richard III? 3) To get back to accents. GE characterizes Steptoe's as West London working class. How would it differ from Cockney? Or is it a sub-accent of that? Where is "West London"? (I gather it's some farther west than Mayfair.) How many working class accents are there? Do the toffs (torfs?) really say "orf"? Cheers, don _______________________________________________________________ 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 Webpage <http://ws.bowiestate.edu> 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.0259 Wednesday, 30 January 2002 From: Jimmy Jung <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 16:17:43 -0500 Subject: 13.0237 Re: Critical Principles Comment: RE: SHK 13.0237 Re: Critical Principles Normally I avoid things like this when the get this serious, but some of this conversation caught my eye. I didn't know Ian McKellen was gay, but if I did, I'm not sure it is entirely irrelevant. There a zillion examples of gay actors straight performances and vice versa and it is in the performance where they will fail or succeed. But there are things outside the performance that circumstances may demand an actor work harder to overcome. The fact that my wife considers Tom Cruise one of the three most attractive men alive makes it very difficult for me to find him believable as ugly guy, regardless of prosthetics in Vanilla Sky. (Me and one of those guys from thirtysomething are the other two). Ellen DeGeneres, is very funny, but not a great actress, and I found her unconvincing as the straight-Ellen before she came out on her old show. On the other hand, The Shakespeare Theater, here in Washington, cast a woman as both Falstaff and as Jonson's Volpone - quite a hurdle, but accomplished quite deftly. OJ Simpson's performance didn't change, but the "Naked Gun" movies just aren't as funny anymore. jimmy _______________________________________________________________ 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 Webpage <http://ws.bowiestate.edu> 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.0258 Wednesday, 30 January 2002 [Editor's Note: This thread has passed its useful life. If anyone wishes to continue with it, please do so off-list. -Hardy] [1] From: Mike Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 12:58:34 -0800 Subj: Re: SHK 13.0238 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance [2] From: Karen Peterson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 13:52:15 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 13.0238 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance [3] From: Mike Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 13:58:15 -0800 Subj: Re: SHK 13.0238 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance [4] From: Charles Weinstein <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 19:18:00 -0500 Subj: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 12:58:34 -0800 Subject: 13.0238 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance Comment: Re: SHK 13.0238 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance I asked: > >I'm curious. Does anybody besides, possibly, Mr. Weinstein, consider > >the above to be examples of reasoned argument? R. A. Cantrell replied: >Yes How? Please enlighten me? Mike Jensen [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Karen Peterson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 13:52:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: 13.0238 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance Comment: Re: SHK 13.0238 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance Ok, everybody stand up. All standing? Good. Now, remain standing if you have never done something you later regretted deeply, never done something you know now was wrong, never done something you'd give practically anything not to have done. Anyone still standing? Right -- there, the guy in the corner, you with the holes in your hands...oh, never mind. Anyone ELSE? I didn't think so. I think it took a lot of guts to make the admission that Mike Jensen did yesterday. I'm not sure I would have had it in me to do what he did. Had it been me, I would have been sorely tempted to just go into "lurk" mode for a while, rather than admit a serious, embarrassing mistake and apologize for it in a forum which includes many people whom I know and whose work I respect. That would have been the easy way out, but Mike did not take it. Well done, MJ. Karen E. Peterson University of Wales, Lampeter [3]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 13:58:15 -0800 Subject: 13.0238 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance Comment: Re: SHK 13.0238 Re: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance I begin with two words nobody wants to use: My cardiologist tells me that if I have a sudden increase in chest pain when reading or responding to messages from Mr. Weinstein, then I should stop reading and responding to them. This bothers me because Mr. Weinstein succeeded in getting the emphasis off his own behavior, and that has not been redressed. My good wife, however, reminds me that I have responsibilities closer to home, and I should follow my doctor's orders. I long ago came to realize that she is always right. I am pleased that others are debating one of Mr. Weinstein's tactics on another thread, though I fear nothing will come of it. Mike Jensen [4]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Charles Weinstein <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002 19:18:00 -0500 Subject: Postmodern Shakespearean Performance Mr. Jensen here produces his whimsical excuse about the "click-send" button for the first time. I reserve judgment as to its veracity. He did send me an "apology" for his thuggish behavior in which he stated: "I descended to your level." I found that to be back-handed, craven and contemptible. Finally, and tiresomely, he has been sending me insulting e-mails this week while stating that he will not read my replies. In the hope that he will read this one, let me tell him unequivocally that he is never to write to me again. I don't know about everyone else, but I'm looking forward to the week off. --Charles Weinstein _______________________________________________________________ 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 Webpage <http://ws.bowiestate.edu> 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.