The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0131 Tuesday, 7 March 2006
Date: Monday, 06 Mar 2006 13:19:25 -0500
Subject: 17.0120 Authentication Article
Comment: Re: SHK 17.0120 Authentication Article
>The question of priority is old, vexed, subjective and subject to
>bias. If anyone were to "propose" a new opinion on SHK, would
>he have a scholarly claim, or must that honor always go to first
>mention in a peer-reviewed publication? To my mind the matter
>depends on two primary questions. First, the public nature of the
>Internet ensures that posts on the group are for all to search and
>are not private correspondence. Why should a novel opinion not
>be recognized? Second, an opinion without argument loses its force.
>After all, a correct solution may be offered for bad reasons. If one
>hopes his suggestion will be accepted, he should argue the case.
This is an important issue. I wonder if anyone has done a study of the
speed and breadth of transmission of a new idea broached for the first
time in an internet group.
For example, so far as I know, no one published an observation on the
relationship of the name "Polonius" to Poland or what that adds to the
audience's understanding of the character until I raised the subject
here a few years ago. At that time, a number of SHAKSPERians indicated
that they thought it was a new and interesting idea. These included Roy
Flanagan who was then working on a book on Shakespeare's names. But,
judging from the recent thread, it now appears that my novel suggestion
has become the old traditional notion which needs to be re-examined.
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
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.