Marlowe's Reputation


The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 24.0186  Wednesday, 17 April 2013


From:        William Sutton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         April 17, 2013 8:19:32 AM EDT

Subject:     Re: SHAKSPER: Marlowe


Hi All,


Reprobate is in hindsight perhaps a better word. My apologies for my potty mouth in regards to your candidate, Ros, and to anyone else offended by my phrasing.


Respectfully I want to ask if the appearance of the book closing this subject might not ignite it or rather fan the flames? 


Obviously not on this list.  


Ever yours,

William S.


Douche and Fat Dick


The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 24.0185  Wednesday, 17 April 2013


From:        Duncan Salkeld <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         April 16, 2013 7:20:13 PM EDT

Subject:     RE: SHAKSPER: Douche and Fat Dick


Someone who clearly was a ‘douche’ was the woman living in Bedlam, to whom ‘Fat Dick’ sought to procure visitors. You can read about it at The Dutch Courtesan website set up by Michael Cordner and Ollie Jones, under the ‘Research Essays’ tab. Or try the following link. Oh, and there’s Burbage’s robbery too, not mentioned in his ODNB entry (Nungezer, p. 69. Not much got past him.).




Duncan Salkeld


Shakespearean London Theatres (ShaLT)

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 24.0183  Wednesday, 17 April 2013

From:        Gabriel Egan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         April 16, 2013 3:41:32 PM EDT

Subject:     Shakespearean London Theatres (ShaLT)


A two-year Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) funded project called Shakespearean London Theatres (ShaLT) comes to fruition with a launch on 23 April 2013 at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London.


The project aims to get people walking around and learning about the London sites where there were theatres 400 years ago. Many people are aware of the plays of William Shakespeare and his famous playhouse, the Globe on London’s Bankside. The ShaLT project tells the full story behind the vast theatrical scene that thrilled London for over fifty years during the reigns of Elizabeth I, James I and Charles I.


The ShaLT website is a repository of writings and pictures about the playhouses, entrepreneurs, audiences, actors and dramatists that made up this foundational theatre industry. It uses a zoomable map of modern London overlaid with the sites of interest: if you click on these you get extensive text and pictures for each one. A free printed Walking Map (available at tourist outlets across the capital and downloadable from the website) gives the precise locations of all of the London theatres (backed by the latest archaeological discoveries) and offers five suggested walks that take in the original London sites, all within a two mile radius of St Paul’s Cathedral.


There is also a 48-page colour Guide that includes the map, copious illustrations, and the full chronological narrative history of theatre in this period. For those who prefer to be paperless, there’s a smartphone app (Apple and Android) that will guide you on the walks and provide all the textual and pictorial information that’s in the printed versions.


The texts and pictures of the project are supported by a series of short filmed documentaries that are illustrated with freshly acted excerpts from particular plays, including Kyd’s The Spanish Tragedy, Lyly’s Endymion, and Marston, Chapman and Jonson’s Eastward Ho! The documentaries were produced by John Wyver and his company Illuminations TV (you may know them from their films of Royal Shakespeare Company productions) and the dramatic scenes were directed by James Wallace.


Over the summer, ShaLT will be running fortnightly public talks at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London given by leading experts: Andrew Gurr, Peter Womack, Julie Sanders, Tiffany Stern, Joanne Tompkins, Jean E. Howard, Ralph A. Cohen, Farah Karim-Cooper, Martin White, Gary Taylor and Martin Butler. The first of these is Andrew Gurr’s talk “Why was the Globe round?” at 3pm on the launch day, 23 April 2013.


We do hope you can join us for the public talks. Tickets are available from the Victoria and Albert Museum online shop at http://www.vam.ac.uk/whatson/event/2411.


If you’re interested but can’t make the launch or the other public talks, why not go to our website and take from it what you want? Everything we have created is offered to you under a Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike licence (CC BY-SA) so you can reuse it in your own research or teaching, put copies of it on your own website (commercial or non-commercial) or even put it all on a DVD and try to sell it. Regarding the licencing of the materials we have made, we take the same approach as Woody Guthrie did with his music:


“This song is Copyrighted in the U.S., under Seal of Copyright #154085, for a period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin’ it without our permission will be mighty good friends of ourn, ‘cause we don’t give a dern. Publish it. Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that’s all we wanted to do.”


The ShaLT team would like to thank the AHRC not only for the money to do all this, but for supporting the project’s give-it-all-away Open Access policy. Those in the UK struggling with recent government edicts in favour of Gold Open Access might, it is hoped, see in this project some of the benefits of the Green Open Access approach.


Our project site is http://shalt.org.uk but while we’re putting all the bits in place for the launch on 23 April you might need to go to our development site at http://shalt.web1.rkh.co.uk


Anyone able to yodel any of our materials will be admitted to the launch event without a ticket.


Prof Gabriel Egan (ShaLT Principal Investigator) on behalf of the ShaLT team comprising himself and:


Prof Andrew Gurr (Co-Investigator)

Dr Maurice Hindle (Project Manager)

Dr Peter Sillitoe (Post-Doctoral Research Associate)

Ms Meena Toor (Promotion Coordinator)


R&J and Much Ado Too

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 24.0184  Wednesday, 17 April 2013

From:        Al Magary <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         April 16, 2013 5:04:09 PM EDT

Subject:     R&J and Much Ado Too


I watched the trailer for the new Romeo and Juliet (to be released in the UK in October) and it looks hotter, moister, and flashier than the Franco Zefferelli version of 1968, also more darkly lit but lusher in its location filming in Verona, Mantua, and Rome.  More swordplay too.  http://shaksper.net/archive-news/url/urlid-2791/mailid-367/subid-581?no_html=1


Juliet is played by 16-year-old American actress Hailee Steinfeld, memorable as Mattie Ross in the 2010 True Grit; and Romeo by Douglas Booth, 20, English, seen recently as Pip in the 2011 Great Expectations TV miniseries.  The estimable Damian Lewis is Lord Capulet, Paul Giamatti is Friar Laurence.  Screenplay is by Julian Fellowes of Downton Abbey.


Coming sooner than R&J is a modernized b&w version of Much Ado about Nothing, the poster and tagline (“Shakespeare knew how to throw a party”) for which explain its intended audience:





BTW the Hollywood Reporter writer led his story on these two films with a bit of parody: “Two film adaptations, both alike in writer in the world of cinema where we lay our scene, from silent movies to colourful modernised versions, where poor performances make Shakespeare’s words unclean. From forth the respected pen of Julian Fellowes and Joss Whedon, a pair of Shakespeare adaptations hit the screen.”  



Al Magary


[Editor’s Note:  The Joss Whedon Much Ado was screened at the SAA in Toronto, and I enjoyed it very much. There is no doubt that its target audience is far younger than I. –Hardy]


Shakespeare the Grain-Dealing Tax Evader


The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 24.0182  Tuesday, 16 April 2013


[1] From:        Thomas Davis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

     Date:         April 15, 2013 5:02:50 PM EDT

     Subject:     Re: SHAKSPER: Businessman 


[2] From:        John Drakakis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

     Date:         April 16, 2013 6:43:43 AM EDT

     Subject:     RE: SHAKSPER: Businessman 




From:        Thomas Davis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         April 15, 2013 5:02:50 PM EDT

Subject:     Re: SHAKSPER: Businessman


Another example comes to mind that might be off-topic but is, at least, about a writer with a claim to the same exalted level of respect.


In a recent biography of James Joyce (another of my literary heroes), the most frequently-occurring word seems to be “evicted.” Mostly what Joyce wrote, besides his literary works, were letters to his long-suffering friends and sponsors, asking for more money—which he immediately went out and spent on booze (or extravagantly-priced hotels).


Being a writer of great, humane, insightful, and moving works of literature in no way requires that you be a great, humane, insightful, and compassionate person. Many people at the top of their profession are not nice people. 


I have no problem seeing Shakespeare as an ungentle man, to paraphrase Katherine Duncan-Jones. The only question in my mind is, why is this news?


Tad Davis



From:        John Drakakis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

Date:         April 16, 2013 6:43:43 AM EDT

Subject:     RE: SHAKSPER: Businessman


I really have gored Michael Egan’s ox, though let me assure him that that was not my intention. I also think that Harry Berger’s timely admonishment is perfectly in order, and is an invitation to think a little more seriously about this issue.


In his most recent posting, I think I now see where Egan is coming from, and I have to say that he is confused. As far as I am aware nobody has said that art was not a serious business, and nobody is impugning those writers of some integrity for whom it has come close to being a matter of life or death. The issue is what WE make of a writer like Shakespeare and how we connect the ‘life’ to the writing. I hasten to add (for the benefit of Hardy’s sanity) that this has nothing to do with the ‘authorship’ question whatsoever. Michael Egan needs to realise that WE impose meanings on Shakespeare’s writings, and that we frequently project onto them our own political, personal, and cultural aspirations. This is something that Terence Hawkes in an excellent book, ‘Meaning by Shakespeare’ analysed in detail some 20 years ago, and his championing of the cause of ‘Presentism’ since has extended further. Once Egan manages to disentangle his own commitments from those of a late sixteenth / early seventeenth century writer in the way that only the best literary criticism does, then we can avoid the kind of misunderstanding that allows him to display and trail his conscience.


If we say that Shakespeare was a ‘businessman’ this does NOT mean that he was a businessman in the modern sense. He was a sharer in a successful company, but he was also, as far as we can tell, an actor in the same company. This is not the model of business management that is familiar to us. That he was interested in money is not in doubt, but the claim that he was a ‘capitalist’ is ludicrously anachronistic and is rebutted by what we can speculate about his working relationships with his fellow workers. That he evidently aspired to the status of ‘gentleman’ is hardly surprising, but that we should then proceed to make of him some kind of quasi-Reaganite or quasi-Thatcherite (Ding Dong the witch is dead!) aspirant to neo-liberal bourgeois individualism (with or without a tinge of methodist asceticism) capable of uttering the occasional bon mot is to demean what is a much more complicated and a much more interesting phenomenon.



John Drakakis


Subscribe to Our Feeds


Make a Gift to SHAKSPER

Consider making a gift to support SHAKSPER.