May
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0888 Friday, 9 May 2003 [1] From: Rainbow Saari <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 9 May 2003 08:10:59 +1200 Subj: "ill May Day" rhetoric [2] From: Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 08 May 2003 21:46:07 -0300 Subj: Re: SHK 14.0862 "Ill May Day" Rhetoric [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rainbow Saari <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 9 May 2003 08:10:59 +1200 Subject: "ill May Day" rhetoric Al Margary puzzles; 'Some phrasing in John Lincoln's rhetoric in Hall I find most mysterious. I have not been able to get a handle on it through OED2, Brewer's Phrase & Fable, and other references, or Google. Here's part of his complaint (addressed to Dr. Beal):' "And besyde this, they growe into suche a multitude that it is to be looked vpon, for I sawe on a Sondaye this Lent .vi.C. straungers shotyng at the Popyngaye with Crosbowes, and they kepe suche assemblies and fraternities together, & make suche a gathering to their common boxe, that euery botcher wil holde plee with the citie of London." Here's my farthing's worth on the following; --Common box? It's not common boxwood or common box turtle, so what is it? --Botcher (if not butcher) is a mender, patcher, repairer, or perhaps specifically tailor who mends, or a cobbler. --Hold plea means to try actions at law, to have jurisdiction; to try an action. Why would a mender or cobbler take some legal action? I suspect Lincoln's language is slang for something to the effect of 'they so monopolise the whores that every ( English ) fornicator ( or flesh-monger/ pander) wants to sue them ( take action against them-a punning reference to the sexual action the frustrated Londoners wish they were having more of ? ). or; 'the strangers keep so much to their own whores that every flesh-monger/pander is losing business and they ( the botchers/ butchers / flesh-mongers) will soon have to complain to their Guild (the Livery Companies of the City of London controlled trade practices)' Thus, the gist of LIncoln's complaint, as expressed in these lines, comes across as somewhat humorous xenophobia. The EMEDD offers in support of this interpretation, Palsgrave (Palsgrave 1530 @ 72443) Boxe for medicyns/ or to put any other thyng in Florio (Florio 1598 @ 16401845) Custo dia, charge, keeping, custodie. Also a cace or boxe to keepe any thing in. Florio (Florio 1598 @ 17291123) Grippia, a case or boxe wherein a mason doth put his chisels or tooles 'their common boxe' ( 'boxe' is plural here ) is slang for 'their whores' because a box is a place where 'things' and 'tools', both euphemisms for a man's penis, may be put, and a 'comon boxe' is one that everyone may use. Besides the meanings you have correctly identified for 'botcher', the term botcher/ butcher was slang for "fornicator; bugger. Flesh-monger: 16th c., butcher, pander...Botchour: obs. sp. of 'butcher'. (Frankie Rubinstein, A Dictionary of Shakespeare's Sexual Puns and their Significance, 30( NY,1989) Hope you find this helpful, Al. Rainbow Saari [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 08 May 2003 21:46:07 -0300 Subject: 14.0862 "Ill May Day" Rhetoric Comment: Re: SHK 14.0862 "Ill May Day" Rhetoric Hi Al, >Now, the Popinjay was possibly a tavern with an adjacent archery range >or else simply a figure of a parrot on a pole as a target. So the >foreign merchants and craftsmen amuse themselves by shooting arrows on a >Sunday--not exactly something to stir the London apprentices. But the >foreigners "make suche a gathering to their common boxe, that euery >botcher wil holde plee with the citie of London." Their gathering together in a large body to practice military skills would be bound to appear threatening, if you're threatened by foreigners generally. I'm interested in the Popinjay, however. If it's a term for a target, then this gives a whole new meaning to Hotspur's insult towards his interlocutor in 1 Henry 4. Yours, Sean. _______________________________________________________________ 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0887 Friday, 9 May 2003 [1] From: Bill Arnold <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 8 May 2003 09:11:48 -0700 (PDT) Subj: Re: SHK 14.0873 Re: Hamlet and Belleforest's Histoires Tragiques (1576) [2] From: Don Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 8 May 2003 13:15:12 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 14.0873 Re: Hamlet and Belleforest's Histoires Tragiques (1576) [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bill Arnold <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 8 May 2003 09:11:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 14.0873 Re: Hamlet and Belleforest's Histoires Comment: Re: SHK 14.0873 Re: Hamlet and Belleforest's Histoires Tragiques (1576) Claude Casper writes, " This seems very Greek, but not Shakespeare. You have had 'established' in your mind a program that is congenial because it claims to resolve all questions, though for some it does this only be ignoring what does not compute. We see the contours of a human mind in your comments, but it is Grebanier's, not Shakespeare's...Let's simply take Hamlet as our example! Reason? Isn't he also, rash, hypocritical, irresponsible, selfish, cruel, irrational, as well, at times? When or where, exactly, is he pure Reason? He is a walking contradiction." Let's back up a bit. I began this thread with Shakespeare's indebtedness to Belleforest's Histoires Tragiques (1576). I got this awareness from Grebanier. In reaction to posts about Hamlet, the play and the character, I stated simplistically, but correctly, that Hamlet epitomized Reason, certainly in opposition to the Madness of Ophelia. You really should read Grebanier. He wrote a book, which I cannot nor will not compress for this list. Of course Hamlet is complex, as a play, and as a character, but he IS Reason in contrast to the Madness of Ophelia. You deny that at your intellectual peril and grossly misunderstand the character. Grebanier takes on ALL the critics up until his time. And I might add, he took on all the critics for all times. His interpretation is not wanting! His book is too complex for me to simplify. But his presentation is crystal clear and cuts to the heart of the matter, the heart of Hamlet, the character. It appears too many SHAKSPEReans have not read him, and well they should. However, I find it insulting to the intelligence of Shakespeare to read gross misinterpretations of his plays, in particular Hamlet. Grebanier has it right, in my reading. None have done Hamlet justice but him, again in my opinion, and if you can find a "fatal flaw" in Grebanier's book, let's have it! Labeling him an Aristotelian does not do his book justice. Have you read it? His analysis is thorough, and his exegeses are equally as thorough. He is far from simplistic. Mainly, he is right on, in as far as the best interpretation of the play Hamlet and the character Hamlet which is out there in scholarship. Grebanier's Hamlet: The Play Shakespeare Wrote needs to be read. Bill Arnold http://www.cwru.edu/affil/edis/scholars/arnold.htm [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Don Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 8 May 2003 13:15:12 -0500 Subject: 14.0873 Re: Hamlet and Belleforest's Histoires Comment: Re: SHK 14.0873 Re: Hamlet and Belleforest's Histoires Tragiques (1576) Much is troubling in Mr. Caspar's response, but I have other fish to fry. This, however, I cannot let pass: >But, alas, real emotions, modern >emotions like the ones we experience everyday, are never discreet, are >always mixed, compounded, confused. Alas indeed. When did emotions become confused and thus modern and real? The 3rd Century b.c.? The 11th Century a.d. The 16th? The 20th? 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 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0886 Friday, 9 May 2003 [1] From: Al Magary <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 9 May 2003 03:23:52 -0700 Subj: Monkeys surrender, can't do Hamlet [2] From: David Nicol <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 09 May 2003 14:39:43 +0000 Subj: Infinite Monkeys Experiment [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Al Magary <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 9 May 2003 03:23:52 -0700 Subject: Monkeys surrender, can't do Hamlet May 09, 2003 Much ado, but monkeys fail Shakespeare test By Sam Lister Times Online, May 9, 2003 http://search.thetimes.co.uk/cgi-bin/ezk2srch?-aSTART# AN EXPERIMENT to test the theory that a group of monkeys armed with typewriters will eventually produce the works of Shakespeare has been abandoned after the primates failed to write even one recognisable word. Lecturers and students from Plymouth University, who received ?2,000 of Arts Council sponsorship for the project, installed a computer in a zoo enclosure to monitor the literary output of six monkeys. But after a month the Sulawesi crested macaques succeeded only in partially destroying the machine, using it as a lavatory, and filling five pages of text, primarily with the letter S. The students, from the MediaLab Arts course, concluded that their subjects at Paignton Zoo, in Devon, would never achieve literary greatness. Geoff Cox, the lecturer who devised the experiment, said: "The aim of the project was to show that animals cannot be reduced to the level of random processes, or, indeed, to the level of a computer. The joke, if there is one, is not on the monkeys, but on the theory itself." The conceit that monkeys might type Shakespeare, often cited in arguments about evolution, is thought to have been coined by Thomas Huxley, the foremost scientific supporter of Charles Darwin's theories. The participants at Paignton Zoo have done little to help Huxley's cause, however. Having first tried to destroy the computer by chewing the cover, the macaques eventually produced a little text. Their output improved slightly towards the end, with the letters A, J, L and M also being employed, but the monkeys failed to come up with anything remotely resembling a word. "We weren't particularly surprised that the monkeys didn't write a great deal," Dr Vicky Melfi, a research associate, said. "They are extremely intelligent, but have evolved to a completely different niche where they don't need Shakespeare. "To be honest, they weren't very interested in the computer at all. They spent most of the time sitting on it, or jumping up and down. "It was also used quite a lot as a toilet, which was fairly disgusting when we dismantled the equipment." The results of the experiment, part of a larger project developed by i-DAT, the Institute of Digital Arts and Technology at the university, are available in a limited edition book entitled Notes Towards The Complete Works of Shakespeare. The five-page edition duly credits its authors: Elmo, Gum, Heather, Holly, Mistletoe and Rowan. [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Nicol <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Friday, 09 May 2003 14:39:43 +0000 Subject: Infinite Monkeys Experiment From the BBC's online news service: NO WORDS TO DESCRIBE MONKEYS' PLAY A bizarre experiment by a group of students has found monkeys cannot write Shakespeare. Lecturers and students from the University of Plymouth wanted to test the claim that an infinite number of monkeys given typewriters would create the works of The Bard. A single computer was placed in a monkey enclosure at Paignton Zoo to monitor the literary output of six primates. But after a month, the Sulawesi crested macaques had only succeeded in partially destroying the machine, using it as a lavatory, and mostly typing the letter "s". The project, by students from the university's MediaLab Arts course, received ?2,000 from the Arts Council. Director of the university's Institute of Digital Arts and Technology (i-DAT), Mike Phillips, denied the project was a disaster and said they had learned "an awful lot". He also denied it had been a waste of money. He said the ?2,000 was spent on purchasing the hardware to set up a radio link so the activities in the enclosure could be watched live on a website. "Compared to the cost of reality TV, this was a tiny pinch of money," he said. "It provided very stimulating and fascinating viewing." The six monkeys - Elmo, Gum, Heather, Holly, Mistletoe and Rowan - produced five pages of text which consisted mainly of the letter "s". But towards the end of the experiment, their output slightly improved, with the letters A, J, L and M also appearing. However, they failed to come up with anything that remotely resembled a word. Paignton Zoo scientific officer Dr Amy Plowman said: "The work was interesting but had little scientific value, except to show that the 'infinite monkey' theory is flawed." The results of the experiment formed part of a larger project developed by i-DAT. They have been published in a limited edition book entitled Notes Towards The Complete Works of Shakespeare. _______________________________________________________________ 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0885 Friday, 9 May 2003 From: John F. Andrews <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 8 May 2003 23:11:30 -0700 Subject: May 19 Gielgud Award Ceremony in Honor of Lynn Redgrave THE 2003 GIELGUD AWARD GALA A Tribute to Lynn Redgrave Members of the SHAKSPER community are cordially invited to take part in -- and enjoy an 8% discount on prices for -- a festive salute to one of the most popular and versatile dramatic artists of our time. Lynn Redgrave is probably best known for her signature role in Georgy Girl, for which she won a 1966 Golden Globe trophy and an Academy Award nomination. In the late 1990s she garnered plaudits for her performances in Shine, a film that brought home an Oscar and earned Lynn a BAFTA nomination, and in Gods and Monsters, for which she obtained another Golden Globe, a London Film Critics Circle Award, and a second nomination for an Oscar. For her varied work on stage and on television, she has twice been nominated for Emmy and Tony accolades, most notably for Shakespeare for my Father, the one-woman show she scripted about the legendary Redgrave tradition and eventually took from Broadway to London's Theatre Royal Haymarket. She's currently receiving enthusiastic reviews for her delightful role as Miss Fozzard in the Minetta Lane Theatre production of Alan Bennett's Talking Heads. Monday Evening, May 19 RECEPTION 6:30 ELEGANT DINNER 7:30 CEREMONY 8:15 National Arts Club 15 GRAMERCY PARK SOUTH NEW YORK, NY 10003 Black Tie Preferred SELECT SEATING $125 ($115 with SHAKSPER discount) PRIME SEATING $250 ($230 with SHAKSPER discount) Thanks to generous assistance from Virgin Atlantic, this gathering will provide attendees a chance to meet the three heirs to one of the most vibrant legacies in the annals of English theatre. Lynn Redgrave will be joined by her sister Vanessa, who has just opened to ecstatic notices for Long Day's Journey into Night, and by her brother Corin, who is co-starring (with Dame Eileen Atkins) in Honour at London's Royal National Theatre. Having all three of the offspring of Rachel Kempson and Sir Michael Redgrave in one place at the same time is a rarity, we're told, and should make for an evening to cherish. Attendees will include a camera crew from CBS's Sunday Morning show. Also on hand for the festivities will be award-winning actors Philip Bosco and Richard Easton, director and screenwriter Bill Condon (who collected an Academy Award for Gods and Monsters and was nominated for another Oscar for Chicago), producer Elizabeth McCann (who oversees the Tony Awards and who has treated us to such Broadway triumphs as Amadeus, Copenhagen, The Goat, and Home), and other luminaries. Established in 1994, the Gielgud Award for Excellence in the Dramatic Arts was created to preserve Sir John's heritage with "golden quill" (Sonnet 85) and perpetuate his exacting standards. It has been bestowed in such prestigious locations as Washington's Folger Shakespeare Library, Broadway's Ethel Barrymore Theatre, London's storied Middle Temple Hall, and Lincoln Center's Alice Tully Hall. This year's presentation will occur in an architectural jewel with exquisite decor and a proud history of support for the cultural life of our society. Among other things, the National Arts Club was the original home of the Shakespeare Association of America (whose board in the early 1920s included John Barrymore and Julia Marlowe) and of the Bulletin that evolved into Shakespeare Quarterly. It stands adjacent to the Players Club (which had been the home of Edwin Booth), and it is currently playing host to Speaking of Shakespeare, a Shakespeare Guild series that has focused the spotlight on such figures as F. Murray Abraham, Simon Russell Beale, Henry Goodman, Margot Harley, Bill Irwin, and Roger Rees. Previous Golden Quill laureates Kenneth Branagh (2000), Zoe Caldwell (1998), Dame Judi Dench (1999), Sir Derek Jacobi (1997), Kevin Kline (2002), and Sir Ian McKellen (1996) will be sending messages to this year's honoree, and those remarks will be shared with the audience. To request more information, and to reserve spaces for this sprightly revel, please contact John F. Andrews, President THE SHAKESPEARE GUILD 2141 Wyoming Avenue NW, 41 Washington, DC 20008-3916 Phone 202 483 8646 or 202 234 4602 Fax 202 483 7824 or 202 234 4639 E-MailThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. orThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. _______________________________________________________________ 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.
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0884 Friday, 9 May 2003 From: Jan Pick <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 8 May 2003 17:57:06 +0100 Subject: Re: Top Tens! As the BBC compiles its never-ending lists of greatest (ie most popular) men, women, books, poems ad nauseum for ever and ever it seemed to me timely to compile my own lists. First the top ten Shakespeare productions I wished I had been around to see and the defining productions of my own theatre-going over the years since 1968 when as a young teenager I saw Troilus and Cressida, directed by John Barton. Perhaps others would like to nominate theirs....? Productions I wish I had been able to see - not in any real order: Garrick as Hamlet Irving's 'Macbeth' - with all the singing and dancing witches - sigh! and Ellen Terry as Lady M Frank Benson's 'Macbeth' at Leamington Spa, which has been described beautifully by Sprague and sounds a hoot! Peggy Ashcroft and Michael Redgrave in Antony and Cleopatra John Philip Kemble's Coriolanus Edmund Kean as Shylock Olivier as Titus Andronicus The Merchant of Venice directed by Komisarjevsky in 1932 - described in terms of glowing approbation by my father in law who did see it! Orson Welles voodoo Macbeth The 1964 Wars of the Roses My defining Shakespeare productions - not in order: Troilus and Cressida - John Barton and RSC 1968/9 A Midsummer Night's Dream - yup, the Brook, 1970 A Midsummer Night's Dream/Boyd/RSC 1999 The Tempest/Sam Mendes 1993 Coriolanus/Hands/Howard 1977 Henry VI trilogy/Hands/1977 Comedy of Errors/1976 - & 2001! Measure for Measure/John Barton/Ian Richardson Antony and Cleopatra/Brook/1978 Henry V/Hands/1975 The Taming of the Shrew/Doran/2003 - best Shrew I've seen in years! The Midland-centric nature of the list is because I live in the Midlands and tend to use Stratford as my local Rep! I am prepared to acknowledge that there must be many other wonderful productions elsewhere at home and abroad, but this is a personal list and involves my own benchmarks. Since 1990 I have had the joy of introducing my own children to Shakespeare in the theatre and watching them - particularly my daughter become hooked on the Bard. Life's a wonderful thing! Jan _______________________________________________________________ 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.