December
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 15.2078 Friday, 10 December 2004 From: Janet Costa <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, 9 Dec 2004 15:34:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Merry Wives of Windsor, Texas? As a New Yorker, I follow the theatre scene closely, but I read this review out of a habit I acquired at the Shakespeare Institute Library: reading anything in a newspaper that has "Shakespeare" in the title. I almost choked when I read that Michael Bogdanov, whom I have admired since his 1979 Shrew at the RSC, "contributed" to this production. Has anyone seen this production who can shed some light on what seems to me to be a bizarre choice for the Wives? From the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/09/theater/reviews/09lone.html?ex=1103607867&ei=1&en=e6b81bd55cbd197d Theater Review 'Lone Star Love': Shakespeare Doesn't Need All That There Fancy Talk December 9, 2004 By CHARLES ISHERWOOD Howdy, partner, and get outta my seat! Patrons at "Lone Star Love," a new musical adaptation of "The Merry Wives of Windsor" set deep in the heart of you know where, may need to assert themselves to settle in at the John Houseman Theater. But if you do enter to find a Stetson-wearing cast member jawing away with neighbors, blocking access to your assigned place, you can always mosey on down to the stage for a spell, where a down-home barbecue feast has been arrayed: hot dogs and chili, potato salad and corn muffins, lemonade and beer. But it would be wise not to overindulge in starchy foods, since the musical that follows this folksy welcoming ritual is not without its own soporific effects. Corn and sugar also turn out to be essential ingredients in this sweet-tempered, cheerfully hokey production. Shakespeare's fat knight, here known as Sgt. John Falstaff (Jay O. Sanders), arrives in Windsor, Tex., having fled west after the collapse of the Confederate Army. In short order he's embroiled with Aggie Ford (Beth Leavel) and Margaret Anne Page (Stacia Fernandez), the sassy wives of a pair of cattle ranchers. Thump! Into the laundry basket he goes. Plop! Into the river. Meanwhile, Miss Anne Page (Julie Tolivar) encounters her own troubles on the merry road to romance. Daddy wants to lasso the sheriff's dimwitted nephew to march his daughter down the aisle, but Mama is inclined toward the local doctor, a mustachioed Frenchman (Drew McVety). Will Miss Anne evade their designs long enough to get hitched to the handsome stranger in town, a "yodeling cowboy" called Fenton (Clarke Thorell)? John L. Haber, who conceived and adapted the show, has set Shakespeare's comedy in the Wild West in cute but hardly revelatory fashion, making the occasional coy or corny allusion to the original. ("How dost thou?" asks Fenton of Harriett D. Foy's Miss Quickly, who has a feather duster in hand. Tee-hee.) The founder of a children's theater in North Carolina, Mr. Haber has pitched most of the comedy at a tween-friendly level, with that sissy Frenchman sporting a mighty silly accent, for instance. This play is not among Shakespeare's most prized comedies. (It was reportedly whipped up on commission as a favor to Queen Elizabeth I, who couldn't get enough of naughty old Falstaff.) But it has proved oddly seductive to composers, most famously Verdi, who refashioned it for his own sublime purposes. Although it's hardly fair to draw comparisons between "Lone Star Love" and the celebrated "Falstaff," it is worth noting that Verdi didn't merely plaster standard-format arias across the play's surface; he created a true musical comedy. "Lone Star Love" boasts a tangy country-and-blues score by Jack Herrick, artistic director of the Red Clay Ramblers, who is joined onstage by his fellow Ramblers Clay Buckner and Chris Frank. Together they play Falstaff's famous sidekicks. But as melodious as Mr. Herrick's songs are - "Count on My Love," a lilting duet for Fenton and Miss Page, is a real honey - they essentially adorn or interrupt the action rather than propel it forward. With the musical's score and its book proceeding on parallel tracks, the show tends to dawdle when it should sprint. The cast certainly can't be faulted for a lack of energy. With accents as broad as the Rio Grande, they romp, stomp, sashay, sneer or snarl with an exuberance that skirts caricature or embraces it, depending on their characters' comic purposes. Ms. Leavel and Ms. Fernandez are fine singers, their contrasting voices blending harmoniously in a duet denouncing the foolish ways of men. Mr. Sanders makes a jolly victim of their feminine wiles, although Falstaff is not a dominant presence here. As Fenton, the laid-back Mr. Thorell, with a sweet, light tenor, pleases particularly by trying less hard to please. And the Red Clay Ramblers, taking part in the drama in their thin dramatic guise or simply supplying expert fiddling and picking from the side of the stage, are always a pleasure to hear. Staged with care by Michael Bogdanov, on Derek McLane's airy set dominated by a big barn door that slides open to reveal cloudy expanses of sky, "Lone Star Love" is the kind of pleasant, competent, thoroughly innocuous show that somehow leaves you with an itch for the offensively bad. 'Lone Star Love, or the Merry Wives of Windsor, Texas' Through Jan. 9 [ . . . ] _______________________________________________________________ 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 15.2077 Thursday, 9 December 2004 From: Hardy M. Cook <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Thursday, December 09, 2004 Subject: Seeking Shakespeare Mentor in Maryland Suburbs of Washington, DC Dear SHAKSPEReans: My daughter Rebecca is seeking a Shakespeare mentor for her sixth-grade project. Here is a description of the mentor's role in that project: The sixth graders at Friends Community School (FCS) complete an interdisciplinary, inquiry-based project during the second semester. Each student chooses an inquiry topic of interest and pursues a course of learning around that topic that incorporates science, math, art, writing, social studies, and community service. This is an opportunity for our students to complete an in-depth exploration of a topic of interest and integrate the skills that they learned throughout their years at FCS. Each student is expected to work with a mentor throughout completion of this project. A mentor is an adult that has some expertise in the student's inquiry topic, or expertise related to the inquiry topic. A mentor guides the student in their exploration. A mentor's role may include: * guiding a student in narrowing or focusing a topic as the inquiry evolves * direct instruction related to a student's topic * helping a student find community service related to the topic * facilitate finding materials and information * facilitate the design and completion of each component of the project * supervise the overall scope and sequence of the project * developing a new, more mature relationship with the student around a common interest The amount of time that a mentor spends with student is dependent on the nature of the project and the design of the individual components within the project. The mentor and student agree upon when and how often they will need to meet during the course of the project. A detailed overview of the project can be found at the teacher's website: http://www.eclass.wthole.com/parentletter6thproj03.htm We live in College Park, Maryland, and the mentor would obviously have to be someone living reasonably close. Further, Rebecca's weeknights, including Fridays, are pretty much accounted for with five dance classes, and flute/recorder and piano lessons. If anyone is interested, please contact me. Hardy M. Cook _______________________________________________________________ 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 15.2076 Thursday, 9 December 2004 From: Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 08 Dec 2004 14:07:58 -0500 Subject: 15.2068 Jewish Shakespeare Comment: Re: SHK 15.2068 Jewish Shakespeare Mr. Basch's interpretation is a classic case of "seek and ye shall find." He starts out with an overwhelming psychological need to prove that Shakespeare was philosemitic or even (God save the mark) an actual Jew, and then looks as closely as he could to find what he calls "evidence." His speculations are not evidence. They aren't even suggestive or suspicious. Basch would have us believe that WS deliberately hid the true theme of his play in layers of code running counter to what the text says and buried it so deep that no one over a 400+ year history even noticed it until Mr. Basch came along. For example: >Antonio, the Merchant, is himself an apostate Jew. This is at once risible and touchingly pathetic. If there is anyone on the List (save Florence Amit) who finds merit in this suggestion, I would be happy to address it. Otherwise, I shan't waste the bandwidth. >Weiss protests too much since he reads things into the action just >as I do. I read the situation that Shylock is trying to really throw a >scare into the merchant, wanting to see him crack. I read the words of the play and imagine action and motivations consistent with them. Basch finds that they mean the opposite of what they say. Of course, there is such a thing as irony; but not here. Basch cannot quote a passage that suggests Shylock's benignity, even ironically. "None that you have wit to make" just doesn't do it. >>His life and all his property was forfeit; yet he was allowed >>to live and enjoy half his estate for life (conditioned only >>on the totally unreasonable condition that he make his daughter >>[via her husband] his heir). In the minds of the audience, >>he was also granted the mercy of salvation > >Here Weiss misunderstands the terms. Shylock loses all his wealth. Half >goes to Antonio and half to the state. Antonio is allowed to keep his >half and to treat the state's half as a fine. On this, Antonio's "mercy" >leads him to take his half outright and the other half, the state's >half, to also use and then deed that over after Shylock's death to "the >gentleman that lately stole his daughter." Shylock was stripped of all >his money. I agree that the passage is unclear to any but an Elizabethan common lawyer. A "fine" was not a monetary penalty, but a settlement to "end" (hence "fine") a dispute. See Black's Law Dictionary. Shylock's penalty was "quit"; i.e., remitted. So, Shylock kept half his estate for life, albeit in use for Antonio. Whether the use was to yield Antonio the income or just give him a say over its inter vivos disposition (to prevent spoliation) is not clear. But what is clear is that the property remained with Shylock for life, otherwise it makes no sense for Shylock's death to the the determining condition of a trust held by Antonio. >I have noted in my book the Talmud's advice in Pirke Avoth "not to say >things that should not be said because you think that it will eventually >become understood properly"- advice which Shylock ignored. In other words, the Talmud advises speaking in riddles so as to conceal one's real meaning? According to Basch, Shylock followed that advice to a tee. >If you believe that a banker would cut up a person to be paid a debt, >then you believe in the outlandish. Actually, there is older authority than the Talmud for this. In the Twelve Tables -- which I believe were better known to educated Elizabethans than the Talmud -- a procedure called "legis actio per manes iniectionem" provided that a debtor who, after notice and adjudication, failed to pay his debts may be torn to shreds in the marketplace by his creditors. Interestingly, the legislators avoided the kind of pettifogging Portia used (would Basch call it a "pilpil"?) by explicitly providing that if any creditor took more or less than his aliquot share it would not be a wrong. Modern instances also show that Shylock's techniques are not "outlandish." His modern descendants, illegal usurers who call themselves "shylocks," do not stick at violence to collect their debts. >in the Hebrew, PRT (PoRTia) is contained in the Hebrew word for >lead, OPRT (OPheReT) -- the Hebrew P is the same letter as the F-which >means that when Portia tells Bassanio, "I am locked in one of these" she >is telling him the secret of the caskets, that it is the lead one since >PRT is contained in OPRT. Naturally this is a hidden message not meant >for the ordinary audience to grasp. Evidently it was meant for an audience of one or two twenty-first century crackpots. >those who want to know the mind of the great poet-not their own >minds, which are light years beneath the poet's level-they will seek the >richness conveyed by the play I agree, of course; but parochial arcana that can be seen by no one other than Hebraists who are looking for it detracts from the richness of the play. It is a drama, not a cryptogram. Mr. Basch may be superb at explaining the mysterious ways of Jahveh. But when it comes to a real person like Shakespeare, he would do well to leave the comments to those with the wit to make them. _______________________________________________________________ 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 15.2075 Thursday, 9 December 2004 From: David Basch <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 08 Dec 2004 19:25:39 -0500 Subject: Hamlet - SHK 15.2066 Comment: Re: Greenblatt's Hamlet - SHK 15.2066 Re: Horatio's Mission Michael Luskin wishes to ascertain WHAT IS HORATIO BEING CALLED ON TO TELL THE WORLD. I hold that it is not the details of how Hamlet, Claudius, and the others came to have been killed in the last bloody scene the play. The details of how that happened would have already been evident to the royal court that witnessed the events of the mousetrap play and the dueling contest at the end of the play. But in responding to Michael Luskin's comments on credibility of Hamlet's justification for action against Claudius, perhaps I did not do justice in presenting the case since he finds it not convincing. Luskin believes that the dead Hamlet would have needed an explanation of the justification of his action if he were not to be written off in history as a flake that killed the king. My view is that Horatio's mission is not that at all, but is to reveal how character flaws can bring even a good man to an early death, which is what happened to Hamlet. Let me go over my argument again for another round, hopefully better explained. To begin with, the "mouse trap" play was staged for the purpose of confirming Hamlet's suspicions about Claudius. Hamlet is satisfied that Claudius was guilty by observing the reaction of Claudius along with Horatio who agreed with him. Had Hamlet acted on that basis, he would have had a good case and been persuasive in the Danish court with Horatio to back him up, not to mention any others in the audience of the play to confirm that the king really looked disturbed by the play, strongly suggesting his guilt. Hamlet is a rightful avenger and would have been in line to ascend the throne-powerful positions that would have worked for him in a trial. In fact, the great problem of the play has been the question of why Hamlet did not act on this basis but allowed himself to spare the king, enabling the king to turn the tables on him. Michael Luskin also asks, Who watched the events of the final scene? The entire court did. The coutiers watched Claudius offer the drink, in which he publicly put a pearl, and which drink later turns out to have contained the poison that kills the queen. Laertes before the royal court is a dying witness that Claudius was behind the plots. When this is recognized, our thoughts must face the real message of the play, which concerns the nature of proper human character David Basch _______________________________________________________________ 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 15.2074 Thursday, 9 December 2004 From: Eric M. Johnson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 7 Dec 2004 22:47:03 -0500 Subject: 15.2056 Shakespeare Behind Bars Documentary Comment: Re: SHK 15.2056 Shakespeare Behind Bars Documentary This reminds me of the "Saturday Night Live" short film called "Prose and Cons," with Eddie Murphy as a prison poet. An excerpt (wait for the Shakespeare payoff at the end): http://snltranscripts.jt.org/81/81apros.phtml (Rolling Stone Managing Editor) Terry McDonell: I think that most of today's writers are coming from the straining, compacted bowels of that beast we call the American penal system... Narrator: Each year, Rockland sponsors a poetry festival. [Camera trucks up and forward to reveal the occupant of the maximum security cell: Tyrone Green, psychotic young African-American male.] Narrator: Tyrone Greene is this year's winner. Tyrone Greene: [angrily intense, directly into camera] Images by Tyrone Greene ... Dark and lonely on the summer night. Kill my landlord, kill my landlord. Watchdog barking - Do he bite? Kill my landlord, kill my landlord. Slip in his window, Break his neck! Then his house I start to wreck! Got no reason -- What the heck! Kill my landlord, kill my landlord. C-I-L-L ... My land - lord ... Def! [Handel's Hornpipe plays again as prisoners are cuffed and led away.] Narrator: Dostoyevsky said, "The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons." As someone else said, "If Shakespeare were alive today, he'd be doing time." [Credits roll over images of prison bars: A NORMAN MAILER FILM _______________________________________________________________ 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.