September
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.1815 Thursday, 18 September 2003 [1] From: Bill Arnold <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 17 Sep 2003 07:39:51 -0700 (PDT) Subj: Re: SHK 14.1804 "My crown ... and my queen" - Gertrude's Adultery [2] From: Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 17 Sep 2003 11:01:27 -0400 Subj: Re: SHK 14.1804 "My crown ... and my queen" - Gertrude's Adultery [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bill Arnold <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 17 Sep 2003 07:39:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 14.1804 "My crown ... and my queen" - Gertrude's Comment: Re: SHK 14.1804 "My crown ... and my queen" - Gertrude's Adultery Robin Hamilton writes, "Impressed as I am by the scholarly citation of the Leviticus/Deuteronomy texts, I think that this is essentially a marginal issue. I'd be even more impressed if the KJV, not published till 1611 and thus too late to provide material for either Henry's divorce or the writing of /Hamlet/, wasn't cited by default. "Which Bible?" isn't exactly a transparent issue, either with regard to the period between 1450 and 1611 generally, or Shakespeare in particular." Actually, it is quite transparent. I cited the KJV, inasmuch as the text cited was not even close to the actual Bible often quoted by Will S: the Geneva Bible, the Puritan or common Bible of the English commoner as opposed to the Anglican Bishops Bible during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. The Geneva Bible was also referred to as the Breeches Bible, so you may read of scholars who acknowledge it as Will S's Bible of choice for the vast literary allusions by our playwright in his myriad referential usages. Shakespeare showed in his plays his incredible and erudite knowledge of the Bible. Shakespearean scholar Richmond Noble in his book *Shakespeare's Biblical Knowledge* documents circa 1300 Biblical referents in the plays of Will Shakespeare and cites circa 130 from Psalms and circa 40 from Job. Also, Shakespearean scholar Naseeb Shaheen in three volumes of Biblical references in Shakespeare documented that Will S made use in his writings via allusions and citations to many Bibles, the Geneva, the Great, the Bishops, the Matthew, the Coverdale and others, as well as *Cramer's Psalter* which had variant Psalms and hymns known throughout England. Will S demonstrated by his usage of these many different Bibles and Cramer's *Book of Common Prayer* that he had an extensive knowledge and familiarity with variant Biblical texts. However, scholarship does acknowledge that the KJV on our library shelves, as a spin-off of the *Breeches,* is a ready reference to Will S's Biblical references--and does *just* fine. Bill Arnold http://www.cwru.edu/affil/edis/scholars/arnold.htm [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 17 Sep 2003 11:01:27 -0400 Subject: 14.1804 "My crown ... and my queen" - Gertrude's Comment: Re: SHK 14.1804 "My crown ... and my queen" - Gertrude's Adultery "Common law" may be defined with some accuracy as "the body of legal principles of general applicability throughout an English speaking jurisdiction which derives from judicial precedent rather than legislative enactment." However, the term takes its precise meaning in context from the body of rules with which it is being contrasted (explicitly or by implication); for example: Common law as opposed to: local law custom statutory law civil law (i.e., the law of continental and other countries which do not recognize precedent as having the force of law) ecclesiastical law international law admiralty equity There are others. _______________________________________________________________ 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 14.1814 Thursday, 18 September 2003 From: Ilona Goldmane <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 17 Sep 2003 20:22:03 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Hamlet Conferences Dear Colleagues, May I kindly ask you to help me with one very important (for me) issue? I am a doctorate student working on the theses entitled 'Hamlet on Screen'. I desperately need some info on the forthcoming conferences around the world relevant to my theme. Could you recommend me any sources where it is possible to get such info? Sincerely yours, Ilona Goldmane MA, University of Latvia _______________________________________________________________ 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 14.1813 Thursday, 18 September 2003 [1] From: Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 17 Sep 2003 09:50:04 -0700 Subj: RE: SHK 14.1802 Determined to Be a Villain [2] From: Marcus Dahl <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 18 Sep 2003 09:26:02 +0100 Subj: RE: SHK 14.1802 Determined to Be a Villain [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 17 Sep 2003 09:50:04 -0700 Subject: 14.1802 Determined to Be a Villain Comment: RE: SHK 14.1802 Determined to Be a Villain I enjoyed Clifford Stetner's note on how existential and deterministic readings of Richard's character occasionally run together. The following, though, suggests a response: It would be interesting to know, incidentally, why "to be determined" and "to be resolved" are used as passive verbs when "to determine" and "to resolve" are available. The obvious answer, IMHO, is that the passive form sounds better because it scans better. Yours, Sean. [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marcus Dahl <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 18 Sep 2003 09:26:02 +0100 Subject: 14.1802 Determined to Be a Villain Comment: RE: SHK 14.1802 Determined to Be a Villain Dear All, Just a quick note on what is a side issue to this thread - Clifford rightly points out the textual and philosophical connection between 3HVI and Richard III and the way in which the character of Richard III is developed, however his comment that: Henry VI is, of course, the later play. is a blase way of side stepping the chronological debates about the textual histories of both plays. To me it is important that Shakespearean scholars if they wish to use textual history as a part of a larger aesthetic / philosophical or historical argument / debate should be careful over their known textual 'facts'. That is, there is NO clear evidence that I know of which indicates that 3HVI is a later play than Richard III. If there is I would like to know where it is to be found. (And until it is brought forward we could remove any *of courses* from the argument). All the best, Marcus 'Nashe didn't write 1HVI and I can prove it' Dahl _______________________________________________________________ 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 14.1812 Thursday, 18 September 2003 From: David Cohen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 17 Sep 2003 10:40:31 -0500 Subject: 14.1807 Richard III: Good Man Comment: Re: SHK 14.1807 Richard III: Good Man I'm wondering about ambiguous word meanings that seem both fraudulent in the sense of being half truths, and traps to snare a victim. It's something like what Macbeth experiences when, confident that he need not fear any man not of woman born, faces his nemesis Macduff who reveals that he is such a man, "from his mother's womb untimely ripped," i.e., born in the caesarian manner. It seems fraudulent to define such a man as not of woman born when what is really true is that he was "not of woman born, naturally or in the usual way. (Otherwise what is Macbeth's mother (any such mother) if not a woman, i.e., what is such a mother, chopped liver?) Macbeth, feeling the fraudulence-just as we often feel it in advertising when the fine print reveals that we are not getting what we thought we were getting-cries out about fiends (witches) who "palter with us in a double sense, that keep the word of promise to the ear, and break it to our hope." Given all that, can someone resolve some questions I have about an ambiguity in the "pound of flesh" demanded of Shylock for forfeiture of the 3,000-ducat bond. Portia (Balthazar) says the law requires Shylock to take exactly a pound of flesh, but no blood. Four questions: First, why such exactitude regarding measurement (pound) here and not elsewhere in society, e.g., markets? This seems a fraudulent ad hoc requirement merely to trap the Jew. Second, and ignoring the first, if Portia's requirement that no blood be shed is valid-that an alien shedding the blood of a Christian is illegal-wasn't the contract allowing for a pound of flesh (which would have to be bloody) invalid, which would mean Shylock has no valid contract and therefore no case, i.e., the court should not even hear the case? Third, and ignoring the second, if Shylock has no case-if his contract is invalid-how can the court legally condemn him, even as an "alien" seeking the life of a "citizen"-shouldn't it go after the Christian who drew up the invalid contract? Finally, is there not irony in Portia urging the Jew to be merciful (speaking about the quality of mercy being not strained) yet being cruelly merciless in undoing him by a legalese traps which I am questioning. David Cohen _______________________________________________________________ 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 14.1811 Thursday, 18 September 2003 From: Alan Somerset <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 17 Sep 2003 09:51:34 -0400 Subject: Harley Granville-Barker A colleague who is working on the Collected Works of Northrop Frye sent me the following question. The problem is, what is the source of Frye's reference, in Granville-Barker's writings, or has Frye perhaps mistaken him for another writer? I've drawn a blank, and I wonder if anyone can help? Many thanks! In a 1942 essay on "Music in Poetry,"Frye wrote airily of Shakespeare that 'his musical accompaniments and imagery have been dealt with, notably by Granville Barker and Wilson Knight.'" Alan Somerset _______________________________________________________________ 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.