January
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0069 Thursday, 13 January 2005 From: Alberto Cacicedo <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Jan 2005 15:26:56 -0500 Subject: 16.0059 Why is the Prince of Darkness a Gentleman? Comment: Re: SHK 16.0059 Why is the Prince of Darkness a Gentleman? Not exactly an answer, but there's a Spanish aphorism that goes "M
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0068 Thursday, 13 January 2005 From: Rolland Banker <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Jan 2005 19:52:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: The Twilight Zone I, too, have been stuck in this twilight zone. Whitt Brantley's request for info on the particular episode that may have included Shakespeare may hopefully help to release me from my suffering. I think I saw it! As for the radio series, I have no knowledge. But I did see an old episode of The Twilight Zone about a year ago that may have simply dropped in from the stratosphere, I live in Japan, so anything can happen on television. Here's what I recall: Shakespeare was physically a towering guy in period dress that had been somehow channeled and beamed down by a sitcom writer-who coaxed Will to write The Tragic Cycle, or somesuch, that was naturally the sensational hit of the season. Later, Will is even introduced to the sitcom actors as they rehearse, by now they are tiring of this classic type stuff-Tennessee Williams is all the rage and Streetcar, etc, etc,---- And then, this is my favorite part, a very young, surprisingly smaller in stature, but virile Burt Reynolds tells dear Will that he is not a hepcat and not with it, not cool. Will floors him with one punch. Ecstasy in the Twilight Zone. It goes on, but I am swooning at this point not sure if what I saw happened or not. I hope it helps. I feel better anyway. _______________________________________________________________ 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 16.0067 Thursday, 13 January 2005 [Editor's Note: I have not had the chance to prepare my responses to this thread, and today I have an eye examination and am very sensitive to eye drops, so I probably will not be able to before next week. Eric too is preparing a response to the technical issues that have been raised. All this said, I feel that I must make a brief statement now. I appreciate all of the messages that have been sent and the expressions of support for my work with this list. Yes, I do pay a considerable amount of money for the software license and commercial Internet fees, which of course I use as a tax deduction. I am gratified by all of the offers of financial support, but my understanding is that I cannot legally accept money unless I incorporate SHAKSPER as a not-for-profit corporation, something that is far too much trouble for me to bother with. I am comfortable paying what I pay and my recompense is the gratitude of the members.] [1] From: Louis W. Thompson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Jan 2005 15:39:20 EST Subj: Re: SHK 16.0066 It's Time for Another Meta-Discussion [2] From: William Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Jan 2005 16:34:09 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 16.0066 It's Time for Another Meta-Discussion [3] From: John W. Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Jan 2005 19:45:16 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 16.0066 It's Time for Another Meta-Discussion [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Louis W. Thompson <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Jan 2005 15:39:20 EST Subject: 16.0066 It's Time for Another Meta-Discussion Comment: Re: SHK 16.0066 It's Time for Another Meta-Discussion Hardy...you have to realize that you have a beautiful, high-maintenance mistress who gives pleasure to your friends - even acquaintances - as well. As one of your acquaintances, I want to thank you for the pleasure she gives me regularly. She's good, good, good...yes, Jesus...but none of us would be able to afford her without you. So thanks, Louis W. Thompson [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: William Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Jan 2005 16:34:09 -0500 Subject: 16.0066 It's Time for Another Meta-Discussion Comment: Re: SHK 16.0066 It's Time for Another Meta-Discussion Let's thank Al Magary for the information and for these two suggestions: >1. A few Hardy Boys could be recruited to help run SHAKSPER; there could >even be a monthly rotation among a few hardies when the real one has to >write a paper, teach a class, or fix a roof. > >2. An annual but non-annoying annual pledge drive might generate more >than a few hundred dollars to pay for the necessary technology, with a >special drive to pay transition costs. I'd like to ask Hardy if these are feasible, and to register my vote for the present format. I wouldn't mind contributing, say, $10 or $20 a month for SHAKSPER. And, yes, I know that it's worth more than that. Bill Godshalk [3]------------------------------------------------------------- From: John W. Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Jan 2005 19:45:16 -0500 Subject: 16.0066 It's Time for Another Meta-Discussion Comment: Re: SHK 16.0066 It's Time for Another Meta-Discussion Al Magary <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > >I didn't really know how RSS (Really Simple Syndication) worked until a >couple weeks ago when I switched from Outlook Express to Thunderbird, an >email program that is also an RSS reader. By the old technique of RYFM >(uh, reading the manual--about one page), I set up a few subscriptions >inside 15 minutes. Same here. It's quite simple to set up the feed, too, if you already have a website; I've added an RSS feed to my personal website (and to another one that I maintain, as well), so now the teeming hordes of fans of "Double Falshood" (and now, William Dunlap's 1798 "Andr
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0066 Wednesday, 12 January 2005 From: Al Magary <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Wednesday, 12 Jan 2005 04:10:51 -0800 Subject: 16.0024 It's Time for Another Meta-Discussion Comment: Re: SHK 16.0024 It's Time for Another Meta-Discussion SHAKSPER posts are one of the pleasures in my inbox and I wouldn't mind at all if the format stayed the same. I fear, however, that our conservatism as list subscribers--which looks like the consensus so far--is not helpful in resolving some of Hardy's concerns. 1. A change in technology could benefit all of us. Just as hardware advances have left RGB monitors and 300-baud modems back in the last century, the Internet user interface has undergone some remarkable changes. (Warning: techspeak bumps ahead.) a. Internet client programs are beginning to blend into one another. For example, at 3.5 million (!) websites, notably blogs, one can seek out the link to get an RSS feed--that is, get website updates sent to you. (At your favorite websites look for a little orange rectangle saying XML, or red/gray boxes that say Atom and RSS, or other signs that you can subscribe.) I didn't really know how RSS (Really Simple Syndication) worked until a couple weeks ago when I switched from Outlook Express to Thunderbird, an email program that is also an RSS reader. By the old technique of RYFM (uh, reading the manual--about one page), I set up a few subscriptions inside 15 minutes. What's the benefit? Well, by getting an RSS feed from, say, Penn's Online Books Page (http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/), I get updates on new e-books as soon as they are posted in a section above my inbox. That's how I learned that Arber's Stationers' Registers were coming online. RSS means you don't you have to repeatedly visit websites and tediously check pages for changes; the changes come to you. That's one way the web interacts with your email. Go to http://www.feedster.com/ for an index of those millions of RSS feeds. Newer web browsers like Firefox and newer email clients like Thunderbird have built-in readers. A program called Bloglines lets you look at all feeds in, apparently, any browser. You'll also find separate viewers (news aggregators) like NetNewsWire (for Mac) and Sharp Reader and Atom Feed Reader (for PC), or Radio UserLand (Mac, PC). BTW most things I've mentioned so far are free at http://www.download.com/ and elsewhere. I'm an enthusiastic convert to Mozilla's open-source software like Firefox: I can wave goodbye to Bill Gates without leaving Windows. b. Likewise, email-list discussion is now possible in a variety of formats at sites that facilitate instant updating of webpages--that is, web message boards and web blogs, or blogs. You don't have to have spiky hair or ride a skateboard to appreciate the flexibility of blogging technology. I'm sure that one of the blog formats would be congenial for Hardy and SHAKSPERians alike. For example, one format has message boards from which the blog owner can pluck good pieces and repost on his blog's home page--from which you can get an RSS feed. With such a design you wouldn't have to surf to SHAKSPER unless RSS sent an interesting item to your inbox. Furthermore, as every blog item has a link (like http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_01_09.php#004398) blog material is archivable and searchable. This seems like a requirement for a scholarly list like this. If you haven't visited a blog, find one at Google's own directory of blogs: http://directory.google.com/Top/Computers/Internet/On_the_Web/Weblogs/ Or just visit Peter Suber's blog about scholarship's Open Access movement: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.html (Of course, you can get an RSS feed from him, too.) -- 2. A few Hardy Boys could be recruited to help run SHAKSPER; there could even be a monthly rotation among a few hardies when the real one has to write a paper, teach a class, or fix a roof. 3. An annual but non-annoying annual pledge drive might generate more than a few hundred dollars to pay for the necessary technology, with a special drive to pay transition costs. Cheers, Al Magary _______________________________________________________________ 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 16.0065 Wednesday, 12 January 2005 [1] From: Kathy Dent <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Jan 2005 22:26:44 +0000 Subj: RE: SHK 16.0052 Macbeth Characters [2] From: John W. Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Jan 2005 22:15:19 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 16.0052 Macbeth Characters [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathy Dent <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Jan 2005 22:26:44 +0000 Subject: 16.0052 Macbeth Characters Comment: RE: SHK 16.0052 Macbeth Characters John Reed <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > >I have read Shakespeare's Speech-Headings now, and I want to thank the >two of you who recommended it. I especially liked the last essay, on >"What's the Bastard's Name?" Delighted to hear that John has got information and amusement from Randall McLeod. I would say that his work is always worth a read. On the subject of how parts were doubled in the Renaissance theatre: in the collection of essays _Textual Performances_ (eds. Erne & Kidnie, 2004), a chapter by Thompson & Taylor discusses doubling in Hamlet. They indicate the general background to doubling of roles and how this would have worked out in a company like the Kings Men. They also describe two schools of thought about doubling - the one that regards it as predominantly for practical purposes and the other that has proposed 'conceptual doubling', where the audience's awareness of doubling would be used to make connections between the roles doubled. Interestingly, they point out that, in the newer Arden editions, editors are being encouraged to supply casting charts. They also give examples of charts for the three Hamlets (Q1, Q2 & F) from the forthcoming new edition of Arden Hamlet(s). The notes from this chapter are a very useful summary of further sources of work in this field. Kathy Dent [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: John W. Kennedy <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > Date: Tuesday, 11 Jan 2005 22:15:19 -0500 Subject: 16.0052 Macbeth Characters Comment: Re: SHK 16.0052 Macbeth Characters John Reed <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. > >As an aside, before I render my attempt at homology, in the New >Cambridge Shakespeare Macbeth, edited by A.R. Braunmuller, there is the >note that historically Lady Macbeth had a real name, which was "Gruoch." > I wonder if that is a title, like Sauron (=Enemy). That is one ugly >name for a fiend-like queen. I also wonder if it is Scottish Gaelic, Presumably. It was Malcolm who introduced English as the court language. _______________________________________________________________ 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.