The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 15.1297 Thursday, 17 June 2004
[1] From: Gabriel Egan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 16 Jun 2004 17:28:06 +0100
Subj: Re: SHK 15.1283 Digital Shakespeare
[2] From: John Briggs <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 16 Jun 2004 21:54:27 +0100
Subj: Re: SHK 15.1283 Digital Shakespeare
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gabriel Egan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 16 Jun 2004 17:28:06 +0100
Subject: 15.1283 Digital Shakespeare
Comment: Re: SHK 15.1283 Digital Shakespeare
Although I was tentative ("Hall might be implying . . ."), Graham Hall
minds me misunderstanding him, and says of me:
>>He should kindly re-read my posting in its context.
Well there was just so little go on, chum. Here, between the
double-chevrons, is the whole of the posting that I misread:
<<
From: Graham Hall <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 11 Jun 2004 12:21:50 +0000
Subject: Shaksper - Doubt me not
15.1243
[...]we all applaud the new digital Shakespeare[...]
Do we?
Best,
G
>>>>
It sometimes happens that postings get messed up between being sent to
Hardy and appearing on the list, so who knows who's to blame, but the
above has a number of problems. The subject line is misleading (should
include 'Digital Shakespeare'), the quotation from Louis Thompson's
posting (SHK 15.1243, 11 June) is unattributed, and the sum of Hall's
contribution is just two words. Taken literally, Hall's question calls
for cries of 'I do' and 'I don't', but I credited him with having
something rather more pointed to contribute than that. Still, I'm
prepared, upon re-reading, to lower my estimation of his contribution in
the name of accuracy.
On the wider point about etexts . . .
The shortcomings of Project Gutenberg are plain for all to see. But the
bitter complaints about them should be familiar to those who've read
early printed books. Their shortcomings were widely bemoaned at the time
and, over many decades, the practices that led to their improvement were
developed. Meanwhile, anyone who insisted that they only trusted their
scribal copies was, I submit, missing the boat.
Gabriel Egan
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Briggs <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 16 Jun 2004 21:54:27 +0100
Subject: 15.1283 Digital Shakespeare
Comment: Re: SHK 15.1283 Digital Shakespeare
My current favourite Project Gutenberg work is "The Roman Pronunciation
of Latin" by Frances E. Lord, which ends in mid-sentence!
John Briggs
_______________________________________________________________
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.
