========================================================================= Date: Mon, 2 Jan 1995 10:06:54 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0001 Re: Shakespeare on CD; Books; Multimedia Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0001. Monday, 2 January, 1995. (1) From: Michael E. Cohen Date: Friday, 30 Dec 1994 13:12:32 |-0800 Subj: Re: SHK 5.1031 Shakespeare on CD-ROM (2) From: W. L. Godshalk Date: Saturday, 31 Dec 1994 20:57:39 -0500 (EST) Subj: Books (3) From: Charles Adler Date: Sunday, 01 Jan 1995 17:53:12 -0500 (EST) Subj: [Multimedia] (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael E. Cohen Date: Friday, 30 Dec 1994 13:12:32 |-0800 Subject: Re: SHK 5.1031 Shakespeare on CD-ROM Christine Mack Gordon asks concerning the highly priced full-text database of Shakespeare adaptations: >I don't suppose there's anyway the 500 of us >could contribute $10 each and make it accessible on-line is there? This no >doubt violates all sorts of copyright, but then my anarchist heart thrills to >that possibility. It does indeed violate all sorts of copyright, and could both get you thrown in jail and this list banned from the net. I think, given the expertise on this list, it would be better use of anarchic impulses to pool the resources we have at our disposal and develop our own set of freely available on-line resources. The C-H collection does not necessarily represent the last word in scholarship, in any case, and it is very over-priced. Michael E. Cohen a.k.a. lymond@netcom.com (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: W. L. Godshalk Date: Saturday, 31 Dec 1994 20:57:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: Books This is the best general answer I got; it's from Ray Siemens. Bradley Berens actually found the book for me! Yours, Bill >Hi Bill, >Hope your holidays are going well. I've just returned and seen your post >regarding online books searches and, having just encountered a similar >problem some weeks ago, thought I would forward the following note to you. >Moe's will also search their large selection for you. >Best, >RS >>From: moe@moesbooks.com >>Date: Tue, 20 Dec 94 16:35:25 PST >>Subject: RE: John Donne title >>To: "Raymond G. Siemens" >> >>Hello, >> >>Sorry we didn't have the Donne title. You might try posting a message >>to rec.arts.books.marketplace.usenet@decwrl.dec.com -- a lot of dealers >>post there and we've some luck.... >> >>Good luck! >> >>Robt. >>Moe's Books, Berkeley 12/20/94 >>FTP Site: moesbooks.com 16:35:25 >>WWW Site: http://moesbooks.com/moe.html (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Charles Adler Date: Sunday, 01 Jan 1995 17:53:12 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Multimedia] I am not sure if this is "multi-media" but I would very much like to see a full text of a play with the abilty to "click on" or otherwise move directly from a portion of the text to explanatory notes and, upon a further "click" to a selection of literary criticism and historical context. Perhaps even a bibliograpy or list of audio or video productions. In other words, context sensitive offerings which broaden or illuminate the text. Also, how about being able to search the cannon for WS's treatment of, e.g. death or love or jealousy etc. In other words, search by concept. I'll buy it. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 2 Jan 1995 10:31:33 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0001 Re: Dreams; Dumb Show; Education; Revenge Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0002. Monday, 2 January, 1995. (1) From: Richard J Kennedy Date: Saturday, 31 Dec 1994 12:18:31 -0800 Subj: re: dreams (2) From: Kathleen Kendrick Date: Sunday, 1 Jan 1995 16:09:34 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 5.1019 Re: Dreams (3) From: Scott Shepherd Date: Saturday, 31 Dec 1994 17:04:16 -0500 Subj: Re: *Hamlet*: Dumb Show (4) From: W. L. Godshalk Date: Saturday, 31 Dec 1994 20:39:25 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 5.1032 Q: Elizabethan Education (5) From: Kathleen Kendrick Date: Sunday, 1 Jan 1995 16:24:32 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 5.1026 Revenge (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard J Kennedy Date: Saturday, 31 Dec 1994 12:18:31 -0800 Subject: re: dreams Of his bones are coral made, those are pearls that were his eyes. The most obvious explanation is that this is poetry, and is not to be ruled by our conception of language. I'm reminded of Winston Churchill being told that you should not end a sentence with a preposition. He said, "That is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put." The correct "uninverted" English might well be "Coral is made of his bones," and so forth, but who would care or remember? We should not hope, now or ever, for an explanation of poetry by way of syntax. Throw away your grammar book when you come to poetry, and come with wonder to find such bones and pearls, rich and strange, and fathoms deeper than all academic soundings. Kennedy (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Kendrick Date: Sunday, 1 Jan 1995 16:09:34 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 5.1019 Re: Dreams It looks to me like quibbling over typos (on vs. of) -- more importantly, what is meant. I think "it *is* the stuff that dreams are made of." Thanks for letting me put in my $.02. Kitty Kendrick (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Shepherd Date: Saturday, 31 Dec 1994 17:04:16 -0500 Subject: Re: *Hamlet*: Dumb Show >Season's greetings to everyone. I would like to know what list members make >of the dumb show in *Hamlet*. My main query is, why does it take Claudius so >long to react? Wouldn't he recognize the accusation as it appears in the dumb >show? I realize this is a fairly old question, but I'd like to hear what list >members have to say on the subject. If anyone can suggest any published >material on this subject, I would be interested in hearing about that as well. > >Wes Folkerth I like Harold Jenkins' characteristically thorough notes on this issue in the Arden edition. Of course the king's reaction is nonimmediate for purposes of suspense! While he watches the crime reenacted before him in public, Hamlet and we the audience are riveted to his face, the expectation is extremely high, and we get nothing from him. He's keeping his cool, the plan is failing! Can there be any question about the dramatic desirability of this? Isn't that the tension of the scene? Is he going to blench or not? Imagine the two of them, Hamlet's heart sinking as the king maintains perfect composure, not a hint of disturbance. Meanwhile the play continues... Suspense! What a mistake to invent some hokey business that makes the king inattentive or confused during the dumbshow! What a complete misunderstanding of the scene! To discard THE pinnacle confrontation between hero and villain! David Evett is right to associate this weak idea with that other one (do they all come from Dover Wilson?) about Hamlet detecting his eavesdroppers in the nunnery episode, where again the "problem" being arbitrarily explained away (Hamlet's abuse of Ophelia) is in fact an exquisite and mysterious kernel of the action. (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: W. L. Godshalk Date: Saturday, 31 Dec 1994 20:39:25 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 5.1032 Q: Elizabethan Education In partial reply to Richard Kennedy's questions, let me recommend R. A. Houston, LITERARCY IN EARLY MODERN EUROPE: CULTURE AND EDUCATION (1500-1800), London: Longman, 1988; Chapter 7, Profiles of literacy, has a subsection on Men and Women. See Houston's bibliography for works by Cressy and Cipolla. You may also wish to look at Jean Brink's PRIVILEGING GENDER IN EARLY MODERN ENGLAND (1993), Mary Ellen Lamb's essay in ELR 22 (1992):347ff., as well as books by Joan Kelly, Linda Nicholson, Sherrin Marshall, Mary Beth Rose, et al. One theory is that women often learned to read, but were not taught to write. So if you use the "writing criterion," women who could and did read must be considered "illiterate." So before you start, you have to determine on a definition of literary. Yours, Bill (5)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Kendrick Date: Sunday, 1 Jan 1995 16:24:32 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 5.1026 Revenge It seems to me that the "feminine value of revenge" is certainly alive and well and only more circuitious than the males'. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 08:55:54 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0003 Q: The Cost of a Horse Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0003. Wednesday, 4 January, 1995. From: Charles Ross Date: Sunday, 1 Jan 95 16:57:23 -0500 Subject: [Horse Cost] Can anyone tell me the average cost for a horse in Shakespeare's time? Reply: rosscs@mace.cc.purdue.edu ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 09:05:43 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0004 Re: C-H CD-ROM; Books; Dreams Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0004. Wednesday, 4 January, 1995. (1) From: Douglas M Lanier Date: Monday, 2 Jan 1995 15:48:26 -0500 (EST) Subj: Shakespeare on CD-ROM (2) From: Paul Stanwood Date: Monday, 2 Jan 1995 16:31:28 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 5.1031 Re: Books (3) From: E. L. Epstein Date: Monday, 02 Jan 1995 20:49:14 EDT Subj: RE: SHK 6.0001 Re: Dreams (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Douglas M Lanier Date: Monday, 2 Jan 1995 15:48:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: Shakespeare on CD-ROM I too was intrigued by Chadwyck-Healey's CD-ROM Shakespeare collection, and also wondered why it was so very expensive. Certainly at a whopping $4000 for one disk only a handful of institutions could afford it. Might we SHAKSPERians initiate a writing campaign to encourage CH to reconsider their prices, at least to individuals? We are, after all, the natural market for this product. The address I received with their flyer is: Chadwyck-Healey, Inc. 1101 King Street, Suite 380 Alexandria, VA 22314-9455 E-mail can be sent to mktg@chadwyck.com. I'm not hopeful, but it's worth a shot. Cheers, Douglas Lanier dml3@christa.unh.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul Stanwood Date: Monday, 2 Jan 1995 16:31:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 5.1031 Re: Books Re: OP Books -- Try Moe's Books in Berkeley, CA Their e-mail address is If they don't have the book you want in stock, they will advertise for it. There is a nominal charge. Paul Stanwood English, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. L. Epstein Date: Monday, 02 Jan 1995 20:49:14 EDT Subject: RE: SHK 6.0001 Re: Dreams Regarding poetic language--English poetry is written in English, and is bound by the complete rules of English. Rather than say that poetry is a kind of *word stew* with a lot of nouns and verbs and adjectives floating around in a fuzzy sauce called POETRY, it would make a lot more sense, and correspond more to the realities of poetic creation, if we realized that poetry uses all of the resources of the language, much more than prose or other forms do. A poet is someone in whom the language is so internalized that it leaps to the poet's command on an occasion when something has excited the poet. We can, in fact must, analyze poetry if we are to understand language at all, since poetry is language at its full stretch. Are we to say that we love Shakespeare but we couldn't be bothered with what he meant? I think not. It is very tempting to take a vacation from sense, and unbuckle your mind and competence to speak and understand English when reading poetry, but this is only lukewarm and indolent Romanticism, with which the real Romantics would hav no traffic. It is not too much to say that a great poet is someone who knows how to use the little words that are the backbone of the English language, not someone who picks out a few lexical rhinestone and puts them in a plastic bath. Therefore it *does* make a difference how Shakespeare used *of* and *on*! E.L.Epstein ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 09:20:09 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0005 Re: Tragic "Flaw" -- Hamartia; Elizabethan Education Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0005. Wednesday, 4 January, 1995. (1) From: Piers Lewis Date: Tuesday, 03 Jan 1995 15:47:42 -0600 Subj: Tragic Hamartia (2) From: Sean Lawrence Date: Tuesday, 3 Jan 1995 19:44:16 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 5.1028 Re: Tragic Flaw I (3) From: David Joseph Kathman Date: Tuesday, 3 Jan 1995 18:46:36 -0600 Subj: Elizabethan Education (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Piers Lewis Date: Tuesday, 03 Jan 1995 15:47:42 -0600 Subject: Tragic Hamartia I think I agree with those who argue that 'hamartia' misses the mark (pardon the pun) as an account or explanation of tragic experience. To blame tragedy on the flaws, deficiencies, failings (or what not) of the hero is to diminish its power. _Romeo & Juliet_ and _Oedipus The King_ are cases in point. It strikes me as odd that Aristotle should have had nothing to say about the obviously intentional ironies of the latter play. 'Irony' is a rhetorical term; did he therefore consider it philosophically irrelevant? Or was there something about tragic irony that made it philosophically unacceptable to him? What deficiencies or failings account for the hideous cosmic joke that is played on Oedipus? Pride, you say? His pride is what makes him great. He possesses 'greatness of soul' in Aristotle's terms. He is a great man who is doomed whatever he does. His best qualities destroy him. He is determined -- heroically -- to uncover the truth about the murder of King Laius and the truth that he is ironically doomed to uncover is that he is--in all innocence--the shameful source of the pollution for which the people of Thebes are suffering. There is no rational solution to the 'riddle' or moral paradox that Oedipus ironically embodies--how can the same man be a hero and an abomination? both loved and hated by the gods?--and the play ends in the only way it can: with the exposure of the shameful truth of his life and the warning (Yeats' translation) "Call no man fortunate that is not dead. The dead are free from pain." Irony entails the simultaneous juxtaposition of opposed, conflicting or contradictory meanings. Moral conflict or paradox of the kind that Sophocles shows us (i.e. necessary, insoluble, grounded irremediably in the order of things) is not allowed for or even recognized in the philosophies of either Plato or Aristotle (or, it seems to me, in the philosophical tradition they initiated). Which is why I at least find Aristotle's discussion of tragedy unsatisfying and unusable. The misfortunes of Romeo and Juliet are obviously on an altogether different scale; contingency -- bad luck -- is a factor in this play as it is not in _Oedipus_ but their fate is equally grounded in necessity. Here too 'hamartia' misses the mark: Romeo and Juliet are not 'flawed' characters in any sense -- unless you happen to see them, as Auden does, from the point of view of christian righteousness; all they are 'guilty' of is thinking in all innocence that they they can alter the conditions of their lives by shucking off their names -- as if that were as easy as taking off one's clothes. "What's in a name?" asks Juliet innocently. Lots; little does she know . . . We too would like to think that names don't matter -- look at the way her question has come to be used, rhetorically, in the language of ordinary, everyday life. Names do matter and we know it yet we can't stop wishing they didn't; or imagining -- like Coriolanus -- that when life pinches and all our choices look equally bad, we can take to the open road, find a world elsewhere where no one knows who or what we are and start over. Most of us stay at home, safely, and don't act out our fantasies of escape; Romeo and Juliet, too young and innocent to know better, make their great and courageous bid for freedom and almost get away with it. Piers Lewis Metropolitan State University (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sean Lawrence Date: Tuesday, 3 Jan 1995 19:44:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 5.1028 Re: Tragic Flaw I Hi. I'm just catching up with two weeks of e-mail, and have read the whole "tragic hero" debate with interest. I'm surprised, though, that no-one seems to be discussing medieval tragedy. I mean, the characters of the "Monk's Tale" seem pretty much attacked by fate. On the other hand, Lancelot in Malory seems to be brought down by flaws of his own rather than an indifferent wheel of fortune. I can't help but think that it would be more productive to concentrate on what sort of "tragic heroes" were available to Shakespeare than to notice once again the obvious fact that many of our conceptions have been received through a filter of more recent history. Cheerio, and happy new year everyone, Sean. (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Joseph Kathman Date: Tuesday, 3 Jan 1995 18:46:36 -0600 Subject: Elizabethan Education Regarding Richard Kennedy's query on Elizabethan education, especially of girls: two books you should definitely look at if you haven't already are David Cressy's *Education in Tudor and Stuart England* (1975) and the same author's *Literacy and the Social Order: Reading and Writing in Tudor and Stuart England* (1980). By the way, the statement that both of Shakespeare's daughters were illiterate is not quite accurate. Judith signed with a mark, and there is no particular reason to believe that she could read or write. But Susanna could certainly sign her name, which would indicate that she was literate. It's not completely impossible that she was illiterate except for the ability to sign her own name, but I'd call that pretty unlikely, especially given that she was described in her epitaph as "witty above her sexe", i.e., pretty smart "for a woman". James Cooke, who had known Susanna's husband John Hall, describes in his edition of Hall's medical notebooks how he called on Susanna at New Place after Hall's death, and she brought out some notebooks that she said had belonged to one of her husband's fellow physicians. Cooke told her that one or two of them were in fact in Hall 's handwriting, but she denied that they were. This leads Schoenbaum in his *Documentary Life* to wonder whether Susanna could in fact read and write, but I don't see this as reason to doubt that she could; she could certainly sign her name (unusual enough for a woman, especially outside London), and in the context of the times (see Cressy) this is pretty strong evidence that she was literate. Dave Kathman djk1@midway.uchicago.edu ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 17:01:49 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0006 *MV* and Anti-Semiticism (w/ DATABASE Instructions) Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0006. Thursday, 5 January, 1995. (1) From: Aaron Tornberg Date: Wednesday, 4 Jan 1995 11:38:26 -0500 Subj: Re: Merchant of Venice (2) From: Hardy M. Cook Date: Thursday, January 5, 1994 Subj: Past Discussions of Anti-Semiticism (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Aaron Tornberg Date: Wednesday, 4 Jan 1995 11:38:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Merchant of Venice I am a student in a Shakespeare course at York University and have been having discussions with a variety of people about my problems with "The Merchant of Venice." I have heard many defenses of Shakespeare's seemingly anti-Semitic portrayal of Shylock. In relation to "The Jew of Malta" Shakespeare seems tame, but I have trouble dismissing the fact that Shylock's daughter shuns her father too easily and the fact the obviously harassing Christians win in the end. Should we simply forgive Shakespeare because he was writing at a time when it was popular to hate Jews and hated them less than Marlowe? Should we further forgive Shakespeare's misquotation through Shylock of the story of Uncle Laban's sheep? Jacob cheated Laban only AFTER Jacob was himself cheated BY Laban. Shakespeare fails to mention this fact within the play. Shakespeare's portrayal of Shylock seems inaccurate. Aaron Tornberg, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada yku02829@cawc.yorku.ca (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hardy M. Cook Date: Thursday, January 5, 1994 Subject: Past Discussions of Anti-Semiticism Dear Aaron Tornberg: Anti-semiticism in Shakespeare in general and Shylock and *The Merchant of Venice* in particular has been discussed in great length on SHAKSPER in the past. To locate and retreive those discussions, I suggest that you try the DATABASE function. First, send an e-mail message like the following to the LISTSERV address, LISTSERV@UTORONTO.BITNET: // Database Search DD=Rules //Rules DD * Search anti-semitic OR antisemiticism in SHAKSPER Index /* You may use other Boolean operators too. You will then get back two things: an e-mail message that tells how the job went and the output file called DATABASE OUTPUT. You'll see how many hits there were in a list, a sort of index. Select those digests that interest you from the DATABASE OUTPUT and then send // Database Search DD=Rules //Rules DD * Search anti-semitic OR anti-semiticism in SHAKSPER Print all of [Item numbers] /* In [Item numbers] include the numbers from the DATABASE OUTPUT file or order all (warning this will be a very large file) by having the line read: Print all If you wish, you can limit your search by dates: // Database Search DD=Rules //Rules DD Search anti-semitic OR antisemiticism from 93/1/1 to 93/12/31 in SHAKSPER Index /* OR // Database Search DD=Rules //Rules DD Search anti-semitic OR anti-semiticism since 94/1/1 in SHAKSPER Index /* Happy hunting! ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 17:19:22 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0007 Re: Education; Dreams (Prepositions) Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0007. Thursday, 5 January, 1995. (1) From: Roger D. Gross Date: Wednesday, 4 Jan 1995 16:01:02 -0600 (CST) Subj: female education (2) From: Richard J Kennedy Date: Wednesday, 4 Jan 1995 18:52:27 -0800 Subj: Elizabethan Education (3) From: Richard J Kennedy Date: Wednesday, 4 Jan 1995 21:25:33 -0800 Subj: re:dreams (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Roger D. Gross Date: Wednesday, 4 Jan 1995 16:01:02 -0600 (CST) Subject: female education Richard Kennedy should find something of use (re. literacy among Eliz. women) in Antonia Fraser's THE WEAKER VESSEL, NY: Knopf, 1984. Roger Gross U. of Arkansas (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard J Kennedy Date: Wednesday, 4 Jan 1995 18:52:27 -0800 Subject: Elizabethan Education All of William Shakspere's blood relatives through three generations were illiterate. His oldest daughter, Susanna, could sign her name. This alone indicates that she was literate, but Schoenbaum doubts it. "Susanna Hall could sign her name to legal documents, but, although lauded as witty beyond her sex, she could not identify her husband's distinctive handwriting." As to Shakspere's other daughter, Judith, she "presumably had less wit than her sister, for she never learned to sign her name." It's hard to explain, given that Shakspere was a gentleman, and wealthy, and could afford schooling for his daughters. It is more strange in that a woman's education seemed dear to his heart. Toward the education of your daughters, I here bestow a simple instrument... Taming of the Shrew. ii,1,99 I have those hopes of her good that her education promises... All's well. i,1,46 My father charged you in his will to give me a good education... As you like it. i,1,22 She in beauty, education, blood, holds hands with any princess. King John. ii,1,493 ...Hath gain'd of education all the grace which makes her both the heart and place of general wonder. Pericles, iv,Gower 9 And so the question remains--why did Shakspere not get his daughters some schooling? Because Susanna was called "witty" is no test of literacy, I think. You might as well reason that a "musical" person can read notation, or that a "calculating" person can do long division. Kennedy (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard J Kennedy Date: Wednesday, 4 Jan 1995 21:25:33 -0800 Subject: re:dreams OF vs.ON. Oh, I suppose you might say that it makes a difference whether coral grows ON bones, or that coral is made OF bones, let the marine biologist decide it. Certainly there's a reason that a poet uses a certain word rather than another, but we're not going to know anything about it. Here's another OF/ON example from the Tempest: "You taught me language; and my profit on't is, I know how to curse." (i,2,363) Perhaps there is profit in/of/for/on/with/to the study of these wee words in searching the soul of poetry, but that beast Caliban is roaming about the island, and I've no time to quibble over prepositions. Kennedy ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 17:30:46 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0008 Re: Tragic Flaw -- Hamartia Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0008. Thursday, 5 January, 1995. (1) From: Daniel M Larner Date: Wednesday, 4 Jan 1995 18:31:02 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0005 Re: Tragic "Flaw" -- Hamartia (2) From: Michael Yogev Date: Thursday, 05 Jan 95 13:43:53 IST Subj: Re: SHK 5.1028 Re: Tragic Flaw I (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Daniel M Larner Date: Wednesday, 4 Jan 1995 18:31:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0005 Re: Tragic "Flaw" -- Hamartia Thanks to Piers Lewis for his clear and illuminating discussion of irony in Oedipus, and the equally lucid comparison with RJ. Daniel Larner Fairhaven College Western Washington University larner@hanson.cc.wwu.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Yogev Date: Thursday, 05 Jan 95 13:43:53 IST Subject: Re: SHK 5.1028 Re: Tragic Flaw I All the notes on harmartia and its meaning have piqued my interest. I agree with those who doubt that Aristotle had any sort of psychologically-based character flaw in mind, for "missing the mark" seems more an affective notion-- which makes sense when we recall that Aristotle is addressing drama. I am reminded of the meaning of one term in Hebrew for "sin", which is "chet", based on the Hebrew verb "l'hachtee" or "to miss the mark". Once again, the ancients remind us that psychological views of character are often wide of the mark when pressed too far back into the past. Michael Yogev ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 12:36:29 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0009 Re: *MV* and Anti-Semitism Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0009. Friday, 6 January, 1995. (1) From: John Owens Date: Thursday, 5 Jan 1995 17:51:48 -0800 Subj: RE: SHK 6.0006 *MV* and Anti-Semitism (2) From: E. L. Epstein Date: Friday, 06 Jan 1995 00:00:36 EDT Subj: RE: SHK 6.0006 *MV* and Anti-Semitism (3) From: Takako Nagumo Date: FriDAY, 06 Jan 95 01:09 PST Subj: Re: Merchant of Venice (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Owens Date: Thursday, 5 Jan 1995 17:51:48 -0800 Subject: RE: SHK 6.0006 *MV* and Anti-Semitism I am aware that a large body of discussion already exists on this subject, but there are a few points in Mr. Tornberg's post I wanted to address directly. While I agree that Shakespeare definitely displays anti-Semitism in MV, I disagree about the source of the offense. The Christian characters clearly deride and insult Shylock, but the offensive element is Shakespeare's engineering of Shylock's character so that he is presumed to merit contempt. He quite clearly seeks to ruin Antonio financially and personally for primarily commercial reasons. In his speeches to the Christian characters he assumes a tone of self-righteousness that has misled many well-meaning critics to the conclusion that he is sincerely out for justified revenge against personal injuries - but in his soliloquy in the Bargain Scene, he clearly subordinates this motive to that of removing a business rival, and the soliloquy must take precedence (regard also Antonio's corroborating testimony that Shylock has sought his life for rescuing the moneylenders "victims"). Thus, the offending element is not that are expected to joy in the destruction of a victimized human being, but that the author uses a repellent and untrue stereotype to reinforce his supposed villainy. John Owen (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. L. Epstein Date: Friday, 06 Jan 1995 00:00:36 EDT Subject: RE: SHK 6.0006 *MV* and Anti-Semitism I also, as a Jew, have trouble approving of MV. However, for what it is worth I find that I must conscientiously dissaprove of MV, rather than hating it immediately like poison. I have had, for a number of years, a sneaking suspicion that Shylock has not made anti-Semites out of people who were not already anti-Semites. If anything, I suspect that MV may have tempered the anti-Semitism of viewers of the play, since a real person appears on the stage. Or at least, so my suspicions go. One of these days I must write something about Shylock, Fagin, and Chaucer's Prioresse, which would also include a comparison between Pound's flailing abuse of Jews, which I find less dangerous than Hilaire Belloc's cold hatred, and even Eliot's systematic anti-Semitism bolstered with political hatred. This is a long excursion on a vital topic, and I do not know how much help it is to Mr Tornberg. As I say, all that I have now are suspicions, which could certainly be blown away by a few facts. E.L.Epstein (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Takako Nagumo Date: FriDAY, 06 Jan 95 01:09 PST Subject: Re: Merchant of Venice I had the opportunity to play Shylock's daughter, Jessica, this past summer in a student production. I knew that I had problems in reconciling her running away with Lorenzo with her father's money and her conversion to Christianity, which is supposed to be a "good" thing. As an actor, I felt that I could not play a character with whom I could not sympathize, and so I looked for a perspective from which I could see her sympathetically. One key article I read that helped me shape my portrayal of Jessica was "In Defense of Jessica: The Runaway Daughter in _The Merchant of Venice_," by Camille Slights. It appeared in _Shakespeare Quarterly_ (I can't find the original date of publication). You could probably tell what position Slights takes, but she also cites articles which she refutes, which you might be interested in for the sake of balance. Takako Nagumo From: epstein@QCVAXA.BITNET ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 12:48:24 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0010 Re: Tragic Flaw; Dreams (Prep.); Elizabethan Literacy Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0010. Friday, 6 January, 1995. (1) From: Patricia Gourlay Date: Thursday, 05 Jan 1995 17:39:35 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0005 Re: Tragic "Flaw" -- Hamartia (2) From: E. L. Epstein Date: Friday, 06 Jan 1995 00:03:13 EDT Subj: RE: SHK 6.0007 Re: Education; Dreams (Prepositions) (3) From: Terence Hawkes Date: Friday, 6 Jan 1995 10:47:05 GMT Subj: Re: Elizabethan literacy (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Patricia Gourlay Date: Thursday, 05 Jan 1995 17:39:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0005 Re: Tragic "Flaw" -- Hamartia All this discussion of fate and hamartia gets tangled in the usual Aristotelian flypaper, except for Piers Lewis' very sensible look at real tragedies for guidance. For a good discussion of the way Aristotle and Greek tragedy both have been misrepresented, see Richmond Lattimore's essay in the Tulane Review back in '53 and Brian Vickers'TOWARDS GREEK TRAGEDY. Whatever Aristotle meant by hamartia, it does derive from the verb "hamartano" (to fall short ofthe target) and refers to an action rather than a moral quality. Aristotle never uses the word "hubris"; it means "an outrageous act of violence" (such as rape, or the destruction of a conquered city) and never in classical Greek to a moral flaw. Aristotle doesn't talk about fate or irony or nemesis either, because he is interested in tragedy's action and its effect, not its meaning. "Irony" in Aristotle refers only to a pretense of ignorance as used by Socrates. What critical vocabulary he had was his own invention. It's good to remember that all the Greek tragedies we have were written before Aristotle and that Shakespeare's acquaintance with him would have been minimal, even if he were inclined to follow anybody's model. A great deal of nonsense about Greek tragedy (Butcher, Kitto, Frye, Sewell) gets passed on because Greek study is out of fashion, and scholars are humbled by their inability to read the original. But there are good translations out there now, and this is a good occasion to urge everybody to take a fresh look at all the extant Greek tragedies. LIke Shakespeare's, they resist any simple formulas. Every one is different. As for fate, there are different terms (Moira for "share", Anangke for "necessity) in Greek but they all refer to what is beyond human control. In Greek tragedy, they provide the context in which the protagonists make their choices. The terms are in general descriptive rather than causative. Romantic and unclassical as they are, Romeo and Juliet are still closer to Greek tragedy than to medieval or Roman in this respect. As Piers Lewis suggests, they act within the given context of a world inimical to youth, to love, etc. where the jaws of darkness do devour it up. They go for it anyway. The consequence invites from the audience not necessarily the response "Tsk,tsk" but for some at least "What a way to go!" (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. L. Epstein Date: Friday, 06 Jan 1995 00:03:13 EDT Subject: RE: SHK 6.0007 Re: Education; Dreams (Prepositions) In regard to quibbling over prepositions--I can only say again, can we claim to love Shakespeare, if we do not care what he said? E.L.Epstein (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Terence Hawkes Date: Friday, 6 Jan 1995 10:47:05 GMT Subject: Re: Elizabethan literacy Dave Kathman makes a number of good points, but the term 'illiterate' drags in too many of the prejudices of a highly literate late 20th century culture. How about 'nonliterate'? How about 'pre-literate'? Cf. the work of Walter Ong (he of the Numinous Prose). T. Hawkes ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 18:16:28 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0011 Apologies Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 011. Wednesday, 11 January, 1995. From: Hardy M. Cook Date: Wednesday, January 11, 1995 Subject: Apologies SHAKSPEReans, I decided to take the weekend off from editing the SHAKSPER digests only to discover on Monday that the Academic Computing staff was doing the between the semester maintenance and no one told me. I'll get to the backlog after a hour or so of babysitting. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 21:38:51 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0015 Qs: Shakespeare as Actor; Rape/Incest; E-Mail Collaboration Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 015. Wednesday, 11 January, 1995. (1) From: Frances Reed Date: Friday, 6 Jan 1995 20:40:14 -0500 (EST) Subj: Shakspeare as actor (2) From: Carey Cummings Date: Sunday, 08 Jan 1995 16:27:56 -0500 (EST) Subj: Help about rape\incest (3) From: David Loeb Date: Friday, 6 Jan 1995 17:33:31 -0500 Subj: [E-mail Collaboration] (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Frances Reed Date: Friday, 6 Jan 1995 20:40:14 -0500 (EST) Subject: Shakspeare as actor After reading that Shakspeare often acted a small role in his plays, my high school students are curious as to what role he may have played in Macbeth, which we are currently studying. If anyone can tell us, please feel free to send the answer directly to me. We would also like any other information about his acting. Thanks, Frances Reed freed@sacam.oren.ortn.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Carey Cummings Date: Sunday, 08 Jan 1995 16:27:56 -0500 (EST) Subject: Help about rape\incest I know that this is somewhat out of the area of this list but my lurking about has uncovered the fact that there is an immense amount of arcane and out of area knowledge out there. I have a friend who is doing as a dissertation a hypertext edition of Anne Killegrew's poems. In one of the poems Killegrew has a speaker comment on the "late laws against rape and incest." I have been unable to track down anything specific on rape/incest laws in the mid to late 1600s. Does anyone know of any specific laws in the 1650s, 60s, or 70s? Does anyone have an idea where to look? Perhaps it would be best to answer directly to me rather than to clutter the list with information not germane to the general topic of discussion, viz. Shakespeare. I would greatly appreciate any information, comments or suggestions. Thanks very much. Carey Cummings CARCUM@DELPHI.COM (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Loeb Date: Friday, 6 Jan 1995 17:33:31 -0500 Subject: [E-mail Collaboration] I'm looking for a secondary teacher who'd like to investigate the possibility of collaborating on an e-mail partner approach to studying either the comedies, individual comedies, Hamlet, or perhaps even Romeo & Juliet. I teach at Choate and I've recently worked on a hypertext multimedia Hamlet with some success. Right now, I've got my freshmen going with text, vocab, and questions for Midsummer Night's Dream on disks. Has anyone done stuff like this, and do you have pointers for me? Finally, I'm planning on showing the Central Park film, with William Hurt as Oberon. That's my favorite, ahead of the ponderous BBC and the silly old B&W with Mickey Rooney as Puck and Cagney as Bottom. Are there any other good ones out there? Thanks. Dave ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 20:51:09 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0013 Re: *MV* and Anti-Semitism Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 013. Wednesday, 11 January, 1995. (1) From: Thomas Ellis Date: Friday, 06 Jan 1995 20:10:55 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0009 Re: *MV* and Anti-Semitism (2) From: Shirley Kagan Date: Friday, 6 Jan 1995 23:17:39 -1000 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0009 Re: *MV* and Anti-Semitism (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thomas Ellis Date: Friday, 06 Jan 1995 20:10:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0009 Re: *MV* and Anti-Semitism Regarding M of V, I teach Shakespeare classes at Hampton University, an entirely African American institution, so I consistently teach three of Shakespeare's most problematic plays concerned with culture contact and prejudice: M of V, Othello, and the Tempest. Needless to say, my students instantly identify with the victimized "other" in all three plays: Shylock, Othello, and Caliban. But few if any of them consider Shakespeare himself to be the perpetrator of prejudice or bigotry. Rather, as we explore these plays together, (despite their differences), Shakespeare's modus operandi becomes reasonably clear--at least to us. Here is a general summary of our many discussions on this topic, as regards M of V: (1) There is no denying the historical fact that Shakespeare was capitalizing on popular antisemitism--whether related to Roderigo Lopez or not--in portraying a stereotyped Jewish miser as antagonist. To that extent, Shakespeare is as "guilty" as his local culture of antisemitism (although I am always wary of the self-satisfied political correctness which is willing to pass judgment, by present standards, on past civilizations). (2) However, given that complicity, coupled with the need, imposed by the comic logic of the story, to present Shylock as the stereotyped miser who is duly humiliated by the "good" Christians, Shakespeare spares no pains in rubbing his audience's nose in their own antisemitism by humanizing the "stage Jew" whenever possible--giving him a plausible motive for despising Antonio, allowing him to comment at length on the moral hypocrisy of the Christians and on the inhumanity of antisemitism ("Hath not a Jew hands..."). (3) The classic instance of Shakespeare's modus operandi is the exchange with Tubal about Jessica's extravagance. On one hand, Shakespeare plays to the hilt the low-comic potential in Shylock's raving about his daughter's wanton spending (which we expect of the miser as an alazonic figure), with Tubal acting as straight man-- but no sooner is the audience laughing at the miser's rage than Tubal caps the exchange with the turquoise ring, whereupon Shylock, hitherto a raving miser, elicits a poignant sympathy from the audience by connecting the ring--not with lost wealth, but with his past relationship with his wife Leah: "I would not have traded it for a wilderness of monkeys..." At that moment, the audience, which has been laughing at his misery, suddenly finds itself sharing it--and probably feeling very awkward about having laughed. The point is, none of these features--Shylock's motives, his eloquent condemnation of hypocrisy and prejudice, and his pathos--was necessary to the fulfillment of his anticomic role in the play. The effect of their presence is simply to complicate--to problematize--the comedy. To this extent, M of V is not simply an antisemitic play (like Marlowe's Jew of Malta) but *also* a play about antisemitism--a play that exposes the very antisemitism that it relies upon in its conception. Thomas Ellis Hampton University Hampton, VA 23668 (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shirley Kagan Date: Friday, 6 Jan 1995 23:17:39 -1000 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0009 Re: *MV* and Anti-Semitism In response to Mr. Tornberg's problematic question I have a couple of thoughts: First, surely the situation Shakespeare has set up, at least from one dramatic point of view, villifies the Christians no less than it does Shylock. Shylock may be a rotten individual in many ways but his bloodthirsty desire for "justice" does not compare to Portia's bloodcurdling version of "mercy". It doesn't matter that Shylock is not nice, he is human and the way in which he is treated by the Christians is inhuman. This is unfair and I think Shakespeare goes to some length to show us this if we want to see it that way. Secondly, I had the opportunity to play Jessica a while ago and found it a difficult character to reconcile myself to. One point that helped is the ring sideplot. Jessica steals the ring Shylock had given Leah (Jessica's mother) and sells it on the Rialto for a trifle. Shylock finds out about this and is crushed. Rather than a wicked and callous move I decided Jessica had to get rid of the ring because of the guilt she carried with her. Once I began to interpret Jessica as guilt ridden and ill at ease because of her elopement, a lot of her lines later in the play made a lot of sense. Shirley Kagan ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 21:05:29 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0014 Re: Elizabethan Education; Dreams (Prep.); Dumb Show Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 014. Wednesday, 11 January, 1995. (1) From: Edward T Bonahue Date: Friday, 06 Jan 95 15:42 EST Subj: Re: SHK 5.1032 Q: Elizabethan Education (2) From: David Evett Date: Friday, 6 Jan 95 16:10:12 EST Subj: [Dreams (Prepositions and More)] (3) From: Joe Nathan Date: Sunday, 8 Jan 95 15:31:13 PST Subj: Re: *Hamlet* Dumb Show (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Edward T Bonahue Date: Friday, 06 Jan 95 15:42 EST Subject: Re: SHK 5.1032 Q: Elizabethan Education To Richard Kennedy's question about Shakespearean education. One of the most interesting and enlightening reads is Ascham's _The Schoolmaster_, where he sets forth much education philosophy considered orthodox in the late sixteenth century. All of it meant for nice boys of course, and of a certain class..... Ed Bonahue University of North Carolina (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Evett Date: Friday, 6 Jan 95 16:10:12 EST Subject: [Dreams (Prepositions and More)] E. L. Epstein's notion that there is some single, stable, coherent set of rules for "English" must be contradicted by her own experience, to say nothing of the theory and practice of formal linguistics. In a normal academic day I encounter at least three distinct grammars, none of which, including that of my professorial colleagues, is entirely fixed--some of us, for instance, are much more scrupulous than others about not splitting infinitives--, and two of which (those spoken and sometimes written by most of my Caucasian and most of my African-American students) are markedly unstable in many ways. (Have others in the list noted a recent marked propensity of student writers to use any old preposition as the particle in phrases such as "made. . . of/on"?) World-wide, there are dozens of more-or-less distinct communities of English speakers each of which has its characteristic set of linguistic rules, all in a state of constant change. It is, I believe, an axiom of historical linguistics that the English of Shakespeare's time was at least as various and unstable as ours--Manfred Gorlach observes that "EModE could indeed be taken as a typical example to illustrate the fact that language systems are neither homogeneous nor stable" ( [1991], 8). But in any case the problems Epstein perceives in the two lines from do not have to be solved either historically or on grounds that they are "poetic" (whatever that means) and therefore freed from conventional grammatical inhibitions. The problem in the first one--"Of his bones are coral made"--is not what Epstein says it is; it has nothing to do with the "of" but with the apparent lack of subject-verb agreement between "are" and "coral." For this there are at least three plausible explanations: (1) that the text originally read "corals" but the "s" got dropped in typesetting; (2) that some member or members of the composite being we call Shakespeare (an author, but also the transcribers and editors and typesetters who handled the text on its way to publication) allowed the number of "are" to be attracted toward the nearest preceding noun rather than the actual subject (my students do this all the time), suggested by Stephen Orgel in his recent edition, citing G. L. Brook's "The Language of Shakespeare"; (3) that there was an early modern English usage, not documented by OED and perhaps not represented in any of the surviving texts, in which "coral" was an unmarked plural, like "sheep". Take your pick. As for "We are such stuff as dreams are made on", we can treat it as G. L. Brook does, by observing simply that Sh. often exchanges "of" and "on," especially at the end of a line (, 246). I would add, however, that the phrase exploits familiar properties of its constituent terms: read "we [people]" as the the basis, the pattern, the platform, the stage, which dreams, like the plays and masques Prospero has just been discussing and of which he and Ferdinand have just seen an example, are produced. Poetically, Dave Evett (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe Nathan Date: Sunday, 8 Jan 95 15:31:13 PST Subject: Re: *Hamlet* Dumb Show Just saw the Peter Hall production of *Hamlet* at the Gielgud Theatre in London. He obviously agrees with Scott Shepherd/Harold Jenkins approach to the dumb show. In the production, Michael Pennington as Claudius shows a calculated straight-faced reaction and Stephen Dillane as Hamlet challenges him with a look, and then shows his frustration. Both parts are remarkably well-played and the desired result scores effectively. BTW if in London, don't miss the production. It is first rate. (While there I went to the Globe reconstruction. Would be glad to report on it if anyone is interested). Joe Nathan - Retiree. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 20:42:38 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0012 Re: Hamartia -- Tragic Flaw Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 012. Wednesday, 11 January, 1995. (1) From: Robert Miola Date: Friday, 06 Jan 1995 15:26:44 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0010 Re: Tragic Flaw (2) From: Michael Hancher Date: Friday, 6 Jan 95 15:58:46 CST Subj: Tragic Flaw (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Robert Miola Date: Friday, 06 Jan 1995 15:26:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0010 Re: Tragic Flaw Thanks to Clayton and Gourlay and others for the discussion of hamartia, which clearly does not equate to the "tragic flaw" of so many mistranslations. Some other related points and queries: 1) Aristotle does talk of eironeia elsewhere (NE 1127B), where self-deprecation is the deficiency opposed to alazoneia, the excess. 2) Isn't it a bit harsh to say that Butcher, Kitto, Frye, and Sewell wrote nonsense about Greek tragedy? 3) On hubris: See Demosthenes, Against Meidias 21.180 where it seems to mean treating free men like slaves; and his Against Konon 54.7ff., where the term applies to the arrogance of one who, not content with merely beating his enemy, crowed like a triumphant cock over him. Ref. The World of Athens, 114-6. 4) Yes there are lots of Greek words for fate, necessity and the like; but the presence of individual gods, ex- or implicit (Apollo in OT, Aphrodite in Hippolytus) changes the dynamics so profoundly as to render comparisons with later works, like Romeo and Juliet, hard to sustain. Or do I need to hear more arguments and rethink the matter? Bob Miola (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Hancher Date: Friday, 6 Jan 95 15:58:46 CST Subject: Tragic Flaw Lane Cooper may have been (as the new _OED_ suggests) the first critic to use the _term_ "tragic flaw," but the _concept_ was an old one, as his casual use of the term indicates. In _Aristotle on the Art of Poetry: An Amplified Version with Supplementary Illustrations for Students of English_ (Boston: Ginn, 1913), Cooper translates the _hamartia_ passage in _Poetics_ 13 as follows: There remains . . . the case of the man intermediate between these extremes: a man not superlatively good and just, nor yet one whose misfortune comes about through vice and depravity; but a man who is brought low through some error of judgment or shortcoming . . . . (40) The term "tragic flaw" appears not in the translation but in Cooper's commentary, as an offhand synonym for the terms he used to translate _hamartia_: For many, the tragic flaw of the hero, described as an 'error of judgment', or a 'shortcoming', needs immediate illustration. The single Greek word, _hamartia_, lays the emphasis upon the want of insight within the man, but is elastic enough to mean also the outward fault resulting from it. . . . (40-41) Cooper goes on to identify the specific flaws of various heroes, for example: 'the wrath of Achilles' in the _Iliad;_ the overweening curiosity and presumption of Odysseus in the encounter with the Cyclops; 'Man's first disobedience' in _Paradise Lost;_ the jealousy of Othello; the ambition of Macbeth; the rashness of Lear. (41) A precedent for Cooper's use of the term "tragic flaw" was the collocating of the phrases "great flaw of character" and "the tragic hero" by Joel Elias Spingarn, a compatriot of Cooper's, in _A History of Literary Criticism in the Renaissance_ (New York: Columbia UP, 1899), 82 (at first paraphrasing Aristotle): . . . the misfortune which falls upon him is the result of some great flaw of character or fatal error of conduct. This conception of the tragic hero was the subject of considerable discussion in the Renaissance . . . . Though the term "tragic flaw" arrives relatively late, the concept is very old. According to J. M. Bremer's excellent monograph _Hamartia: Tragic Error in the "Poetics" of Aristotle and in Greek Tragedy_ (Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1969), 67-68, Lorenzo Valla's translation of the _Poetics_ (1498) rendered the _hamartia_ phrase as "per flagitium et scelus"--that is, "through crime and wickedness." As Bremer remarks, "this rings a bell which will sound for a very long time indeed." Bremer goes on to trace the consolidation of the moralistic interpretation of _hamartia_ in seventeenth-century theatrical practice and criticism in France and England. He finds some subtlety in Dryden's formula, "allays of frailty" (85), but apparently prefers the less moralistic (if less graceful) account of Samuel Butler: For none but such for Tragedy are fitted, that have been ruined only to be pittied; and only those held proper to deter wh'have had th'ill luck against their wills to err.(85) Butler's account--ill luck, erring against one's will--is indeed close to Bremer's own: . . . it is justified to define _hamartia_ in _Poetics_ 1453 a 10/15 as _'tragic error'_, i.e. a wrong action committed in ignorance of its nature, effect etc., which is the starting point of a causally connected train of events ending in disaster. _Hamartia_ is not _'tragic flaw'_, i.e. a moral weakness, a defect of character which enlarges itself in its successive stages till it issues in crime; nor is _hamartia_ equivalent to _'tragic guilt'_, i.e. the state brought about by sinning, an inner attitude which stems from the wicked action, and a kind of burden from which one is relieved only by adequate punishment. (63) _Pace_ Cooper, the "tragic error" reading of _hamartia_ better fits _Oedipus_ or _Lear_ (if not _Macbeth_ or _Othello_) than does the more popular "tragic flaw" reading, which Bremer persuasively rejects. The popularity of the latter has a lot to do with the history of Christian moralism--and with the moralism of Plato, which Aristotle tried to repress in _Poetics_ 13, awkwardly, and with incomplete success. Michael Hancher Professor of English University of Minnesota ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 16:57:42 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0016 Qs: Teaching Materials; Grant Money; E-Text Sources; Tours Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0016. Thursday, 12 January, 1995. (1) From: Martin Zacks Date: Monday, 9 Jan 1995 12:14:55 -0800 (PST) Subj: Teaching Materials for 6th graders (2) From: Robert Lloyd Neblett Date: Sunday, 8 Jan 1995 21:21:15 -0600 (CST) Subj: Grant Money (MERCHANT) (3) From: David L. Gants Date: Monday, 9 Jan 1995 19:15:14 -0500 Subj: Print sources for etext Shakespeares (4) From: Peter Novak Date: Monday, 09 Jan 1995 17:29:31 -0800 (PST) Subj: School Tours (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Martin Zacks Date: Monday, 9 Jan 1995 12:14:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Teaching Materials for 6th graders A friend of mine has asked me for help in finding a lesson plan or materials for teaching Shakespeare to her 6th grade class. If you know of such material please contact me directly at my email address. Martin Zacks lalalib@class.org (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Robert Lloyd Neblett Date: Sunday, 8 Jan 1995 21:21:15 -0600 (CST) Subject: Grant Money (MERCHANT) I will be directing a free-to-the-public outdoor production of THE MERCHANT OF VENICE this June at Abilene Christian University in Abilene, Texas, and have just found out from the Theatre department Chair that we do not have the usual funds for this production. If anybody knows of any grants for Shakespearean production for which I might eligibly apply, please forward them to me. Please feel free to use my personal e-mail address as well. I realize that it is rather late to be applying for a grant for this summer, but we are desperate. Thank you in advance. Robert L. Neblett rlneblet@artsci.wustl.edu (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David L. Gants Date: Monday, 9 Jan 1995 19:15:14 -0500 Subject: Print sources for etext Shakespeares I've recently downloaded two public domain etexts of Shakespeare's works, the "Moby Shakespeare" found at most gopher and WWW sites, and the Shakespeare available through Project Gutenberg. I'd like to work with these texts, but as with so much of the material circulating on the Net, neither contain any clues as to the print source from which they were taken. Can anyone who has worked with these texts offer information as to their source? In a related matter, I'd like to get ahold of an etext Shakespeare that derives from the old Globe Shakespeare edition. Has anyone in the group come across or used such a text? Thanks in advance, and to save bandwidth, respond personally to: David Gants, dlg8x@virginia.edu. (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Peter Novak Date: Monday, 09 Jan 1995 17:29:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: School Tours Some of my students expressed the desire to put together a 50-minute to 75-minute touring show that would educate junior high and high school students about Shakespeare. I told them that I would ask y'all to see if you had any recommendations for them as to what to include. Our university would pay for the event, so English and Drama teachers would not need to have funds for it. So, I ask...if you had a group of enthusiastic university students who wanted to talk about Shakespeare in your classes, what areas would you want them to cover for you? Do any of you have experience that would help us avoid some pitfalls? We would be most appreciative of your comments. Peter Novak PNOVAK@SCUACC.SCU.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 17:06:42 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0017 Re: *MV and Anti-Semitism Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0017. Thursday, 12 January, 1995. (1) From: Richard J Kennedy Date: Wednesday, 11 Jan 1995 14:19:54 -0800 Subj: Religion (2) From: Thomas Hall Date: Tuesday, 10 Jan 1995 16:34:33 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0006 *MV* and Anti-Semitism (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard J Kennedy Date: Wednesday, 11 Jan 1995 14:19:54 -0800 Subject: Religion Shakespeare didn't have any good to say of Jews. Aside from MV, when characters in the other plays speak of them at all, it is to curse them or take out a mild oath on Jewry: "If I do not love her, I am a Jew." (Much Ado ii,3,272) Which reminds me of Goering: "If they bomb Berlin, you can call me Meyer." But that comment by Benedick is mild. Shakespeare says worse than that, and not to condemn usury merely, but speaks badly toward Jews just because they are Jews, and not Christians. In those times, to be anti-Semitic was common and thoughtless. You might say that Shakespeare himself was not this way, and lay the blame entirely on his characters, but a playwright's characters often speak speak his own mind, and Shakespeare's comments on Jews is often gratuitous. So was Shakespeare anti-Semitic or not, aside from the feelings of his characters? And here's another religious question. Was Shakespeare Church of England, Catholic, or Puritan? Schoenbaum reports that Davies wrote "He died a Papist." But Davies is an unreliable source, and Shoenbaum ventures no opinion, and leaves Shakespeare's faith an open question. Sidney Lee says of the Bard's religious opinions that we have "niether the means nor the warrent for discussing." The "means" seem to be plenty, all the poems and plays. But "warrent" is a strange thing to say. Lee seems to mean that we haven't any business asking the question in the first place. A man's faith is an important part of himself, and are there clues to his belief in what he writes? How might it be, if we may deduce from the works? Was Shakespeare Church of England, Catholic, or--God help us--a Puritan? Kennedy (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thomas Hall Date: Tuesday, 10 Jan 1995 16:34:33 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0006 *MV* and Anti-Semitism Aaron: I spent some time working on Merchant last semester. I even wrote a paper sympathizing with the plight of Shylock. It isn't hard to come up with reasons with all the anti-semitic comments made. However about two thirds of the way through the course I had a revelation. Shylock is not a sympathetic character, he's a bad man and a greedy man to whom money holds more importance than his daughter. What if you took out all of the offensive Jew comments and inserted something like "Crack head" or "Loan shark." Then you get a different picture of Shylock. Shakespeare didn't create a portrait of a Jew in Shylock, he created a comic blocking character to be laughed at. Making him a Jew made the character seem exotic to a heterogenous Elizabethan audience. Merchant is a troubling play in many ways. Don't dwell on it too much I'm sure he meant no offence to you. Thomas Hall ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 17:26:07 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0018 Re: *Rom*/*Oedipus*; *Ado* Reactions; Education; Horses Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0018. Thursday, 12 January, 1995. (1) From: Steve Urkowitz Date: Tuesday, 10 Jan 95 21:23:18 EST Subj: Oedipus and R&J (2) From: Kirk Hendershott-Kraetzer Date: Monday, 9 Jan 1995 23:48:21 -0500 Subj: Young Men and Much Ado (3) From: David Joseph Kathman Date: Monday, 9 Jan 1995 19:25:03 -0600 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0007 Re: Education (4) From: E. H. Pearlman Date: Thursday, 12 Jan 1995 13:12:09 -0600 (MDT) Subj: [Re: Cost of Horses] (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Urkowitz Date: Tuesday, 10 Jan 95 21:23:18 EST Subject: Oedipus and R&J I've been reading the R&J and Fate pieces in very odd orders, in part 'cause I accidentally zapped a great pile of e-mail (O, ye gods of e-missives, what message may be considered happy until its final e-rasure!). Some odd thoughts to share, though: If you want to think about culpability and Shakespeare's take on tragedy, you might glance at how he shaped and reshaped Friar Laurence in Q1 and Q2. That was a role Don Foster thinks he played (or rather, that's a role that Foster's rare-word machinery detects as being the font for a disproportionate number of rare words that show up in later plays). Repeatedly at moment after moment Friar Laurence makes worse blunders in the Q2 text than in Q1, is more cowardly, more self-exculpating, more at fault. M'gosh, he's rather like the Duke of Albany in LEAR (another role Foster's engine ascribes to Shakespeare). Which brings me to thinking about Oedipus as a "good" or "Great" man. Hunh? This schmuck solves a riddle and wins the post and bed of the old king. How though did he get to Thebes? Well, walking along the road he bumps into a group of nasty folk who get pushy so he kills them, all but one. Wow! So then later on he pushes to learn the truth about his own background, along the way cursing an old blind prophet, coming close to arresting his brother-in-law for treason, and declaring that he must rule no-matter-what. So he learns the truth. What does he do? Puts out his eyes. How come? So he won't have to look his poppa in the face when he meets him in the underworld. He's a nasty intellectual warrior who cannot face up to the viciousness of his bravado. Sorry, guys, but I grew up in that schoolyard with Oedipus and I pity and fear him. Friar Laurence leaves that teenage girl who he brought to a crypt, leaves her to kill herself, leaves her because he is afraid to stand up face to face to the "watch." Seems to me that Sophocles ain't really worried that much about the gods; rather he holds up for examination the intellectual thuggery of powerful men unconstrained by wisdom or humility. Seems like Shakespeare similarly holds up for examination the same humiliation-fear driven characters in Verona. Seems like Aristotle is playing some other game, avoiding critical looks at warriors. Tragic flaws? Yeah, they sprout into the language around the time we're tooling up for everybody's favorite -agon-, World War I. Map the drive for "truth-at-any- cost" vision of Oedipus onto the movers and shakers of trench-warfare strategies. Like Oedipus, those guys never realized that the bloodied stumps they left on the battlefields belonged to their own poppas and brothers and sons. G'night, Gracie. As ever, Steve Oediperquisites (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kirk Hendershott-Kraetzer Date: Monday, 9 Jan 1995 23:48:21 -0500 Subject: Young Men and Much Ado I, too, read the post about the young mens' reaction to *Ado* (5.1017) with some concern, being a man myself, and a teacher too. This is a reaction I hadn't noticed, at least when I saw Branagh's film. I've seen it in three venues: Chicago, a night show, the Arts Theatre; East Lansing, MI, late afternoon at the Cineplex Odeon (the local art house); and Jackson, MI, afternoon, at one of the local multiscreen wonders. Granted Branagh lightens the text, but the "naming" scene certainly isn't played for laughs (if you can ignore Pat Doyle's intrusive score). All three audiences seemed to find it genuinely upsetting. These audiences were older. In the case of Chicago and East Lansing, the latter a Big-10 University town, I suppose I could argue that the audiences were more sophisticated, probably about film and perhaps about Shakespeare, than was that in Jackson. I wonder whether the cheering relates to the youth of the males in question, or to their inexperience with Shakespeare. Our culture seems to have programmed a response into some young men that violence against women is acceptable or deserved in some situations, sexual infidelity being one of the primary circumstances; as Chris Gordon notes in 5.1027, certainly it has told these young men that violence in general is acceptable entertainment, and that violence against women is common, and may even be acceptable entertainment itself (witness Sega-Genesis, Nintendo, slasher films, sadie-max or highly aggressive pornography). If the young men aren't sure why Hero is being attacked but have the notion that Claudio's ire is sexual in its basis, they might fall back on this programmed reaction, since it has served them well in the past. It could also be that they're jerks, but the above, I hope, is more the case, as it might go some way toward explaining though not excusing their behavior. Kirk Hendershott-Kraetzer kirkhk@aol.com (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Joseph Kathman Date: Monday, 9 Jan 1995 19:25:03 -0600 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0007 Re: Education A few more words on the literacy of the Shakespeares: Given the necessarily fragmentary nature of the evidence we have, a lot of what anybody says about literacy in Elizabethan England is based on intelligent guesswork. John Shakespeare, William's father, made his mark rather than signing his name on legal documents. This provides no positive evidence of his literacy, and it allows us to assume that he probably couldn't sign his name, which in turn allows us to assume that he probably couldn't read or write. However, none of this *proves* anything; literate men, such as John's neighbor Adrian Quiney, sometimes signed with a mark, and contemporary documents make it clear that it was not uncommon for people to be able to read but not write. On balance, I'd say that John Shakespeare *probably* couldn't write, and I'd say less confidently that he probably couldn't read, but there have certainly been scholars who have believed that he was literate to some degree, and it is not unreasonable to think so. Susanna Shakespeare-Hall could sign her name, which allows us to assume she was literate. The only potential evidence against this conclusion is the posthumous story about her supposedly not recognizing her husband's handwriting, which is a little puzzling in any case. On balance, I'd say that it is most likely that Susanna could read and write, but that it is *possible* that she was only able to sign her name. (By the way, "witty" in the 17th century meant "intelligent" rather than "able to toss off clever remarks at dinner parties.") Susanna's sister Judith signed with a mark; this provides no positive evidence that she was literate, and given the very low priority given to women's education, the most natural assumption is that she was illiterate. So, Shakespeare's father was probably illiterate but possibly not; his one daughter was probably literate but possibly not; his other daughter was very probably illiterate. His only son, Hamnet, died at the age of 11, and we have no way of assessing his literacy, though the default assumption is that he would have attended the Stratford grammar school. A flat statement that all of William Shakespeare's blood relatives were illiterate through three generations seems to me not to be a very fair statement of the situation, and at best an oversimplification. And in any case, as Terence Hawkes pointed out, we're talking about the late 16th century here, not the late 20th. The upwardly mobile middle class, of which Shakespeare was a member, was much better educated than their parents' generation, but even so, education was seen as something for boys; educating girls was seen as a waste of precious resources. Shakespeare was, believe it or not, a product of his times, and however tempting it may be to infer his personal opinions from what he has the characters in his plays say, there is nothing surprising about what we know of his family's literacy. I'm glad we've been able to keep this thread civil, and hope we can continue to do so. Dave Kathman djk1@midway.uchicago.edu (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. H. Pearlman Date: Thursday, 12 Jan 1995 13:12:09 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [Re: Cost of Horses] My apologies if this is no longer relevant; my U changed from one computer to another and many days of messages were accidentally obliterated. When I was last connected, there was a query about the price of horses. Today I encountered the following in Giles Dawson's manual of Elizabethan Handwriting p.107: from the market Bosworth fair in 1623: William Alport bought at stoned whyte horse (i.e. a stallion, I presume) for 14 shllings.... Thomas Bannester sould a graye Colte for 3 lb 15 s 8d.... Richard Ridgeway sould a blacke mare for 18 shillings.... Hugh Marshall sould a Bay Colt stoned 2 yeares old for 3 lb 3 s 4d... John Slater sould a whyte mare for 35s 8d... But if I were really serious about the price of horses, I would look in the multi-volume Agrarian History of England. There are also farm accounts published in various places; I recall once reading Robert Loder's, whichI believe is the most complete. Incidentally, I hope any of my intermittent correspondents along the Shaksperline will now address me at my new address: ehpearlman@ castle.cudenver.edu E. Pearlman ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 08:43:17 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0019 CFP et al.: *Early Modern Literary Studies* Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0019. Saturday, 14 January, 1995. From: R. G. Siemens, Editor, EMLS Date: Tuesday, 10 Jan 95 12:03:30 PST Subject: EMLS: Call for materials *********************************************************** * CALL FOR MATERIALS: PAPERS, REVIEWS, AND INTERNET LINKS * *********************************************************** [This message will be cross-posted; please excuse duplication] EARLY MODERN LITERARY STUDIES: A JOURNAL OF SIXTEENTH- AND SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY ENGLISH LITERATURE EMLS: General Information Early Modern Literary Studies (ISSN 1201-2459), a new refereed journal in electronic form, intends to serve both as a formal arena for scholarly discussion and as an academic resource for researchers in the area. Articles in EMLS will examine English literature, literary culture, and language during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries from a variety of perspectives; well-considered responses to published papers will also be published as part of a Readers' Forum. Reviews in EMLS will evaluate recent work in the area as well as academic tools of interest to scholars in the field. Our Internet site will also gather and maintain links to useful on-line resources. EMLS will be available free of charge in hypertextual format on the World Wide Web at http://unixg.ubc.ca:7001/0/e-sources/emls/emlshome.html This site is now accessible for browsing, and our first issue will appear in Spring 1995. A version will also be available via GOPHER. EMLS will be published three times a year for the on-line academic community by the University of British Columbia's English Department, with the support of the University's Library and Arts Computing Centre. CALL FOR PAPERS EMLS invites contributions of critical essays on literary topics and of interdisciplinary studies which centre on literature and literary culture in English during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. A wide range of approaches is encouraged. CALL FOR REVIEWS EMLS invites reviews of recent scholarly works -- critical editions, commentaries, and theoretical, historical, literary, or interdisciplinary criticism which centres on sixteenth- or seventeenth-century English or related literary culture. We also encourage reports of all resources which are relevant to literary studies of the period, including those available exclusively in the electronic medium. Our aim is to publish reviews of a consistently high standard, which are both engaging and critically fair, written by a broad range of people at different stages of their academic careers with varied disciplinary backgrounds. CALL FOR LINKS The Electronic Editors at EMLS wish to provide links from the EMLS On-line Resources Page to WWW-accessible resources of interest to scholars in English, particularly scholars of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. We have a growing number of sites and services in mind, but the dispersed and evolving nature of the Internet makes it likely that we will not catalog them all. If you know of a resource that would be a useful addition to those resources already available through the EMLS On-line Resources Page, please let us know by sending a short description of the site or service along with its URL (Universal Resource Locator). SUBMISSION PROCEDURE Contributions, including critical essays and studies, bibliographies, notices, letters to the Editor, and other materials, may be submitted to the Editor by electronic mail at EMLS@arts.ubc.ca or by regular mail at Early Modern Literary Studies, Department of English, University of British Columbia, #397 - 1873 East Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V6T 1Z1; reviews and materials for review may be sent to the Review Editor at Review_Editor_EMLS@arts.ubc.ca or by regular mail at the same address, above. Suggestions for links and other electronic materials may be sent to the Electronic Editors at Webmaster_EMLS@arts.ubc.ca Brief hard-copy correspondence may be sent by fax to (604) 822-6906. Electronic mail submissions are accepted in ASCII format. Regular mail submissions of material on-disk are accepted in ASCII, Wordperfect, or Microsoft Word format; hard-copy submissions must be accompanied by electronic copies, either on-disk or via electronic mail, and will not be returned. All submissions must follow the current Modern Language Association Handbook, in addition to the following conventions used by EMLS for ASCII text: *bolded text* is denoted by asterisks, %italicized text% by percent signs, _underlined text_ with the underscore, ^superscript^ is denoted with the caret and is used for note numbers in the text, and notes themselves appear at the end of the document. A document outlining the representation of non-ASCII characters is available on demand. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION For more information, or to join our mailing list, send a message to Ed_Asst_EMLS@arts.ubc.ca Raymond G. Siemens Editor, Early Modern Literary Studies, Department of English, University of British Columbia. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 08:52:16 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0020 Re: *MV* and Anti-Semitism Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0020. Saturday, 14 January, 1995. (1) From: David Evett Date: Friday, 13 Jan 95 12:11:19 EST Subj: *MV* and Anti-Semitism (2) From: Ben Schneider Date: Friday, 13 Jan 1995 12:19:29 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0017 Re: *MV and Anti-Semitism (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Evett Date: Friday, 13 Jan 95 12:11:19 EST Subject: *MV* and Anti-Semitism SHAKSPEReans engaged by the ethnic relations aspects of can profit from the video production directed by Jonathan Miller, with Laurence Olivier as Shylock, Jeremy Brett as Bassanio, and Joan Plowright as a distinctly middle-aged and plain Portia. The production takes its tone from Antonio's initial melancholy; Brett is the gloomiest Bassanio anybody ever saw, Plowright somewhat livelier but still mostly grave, Lancelot cut down to a callow youth. Only in richly comic presentations of Morocco and Aragon (immensely old--a delicious invention) are the late Victorian inhibitions of the production's settings relaxed. Olivier (another bravura interpretation, in line with his Othello and Richard III), in impeccable turn-of-the-century business clothes, with nothing visibly Jewish about him except his yarmulke, gives Shylock a good deal of predatory ferocity--literally, bared fangs--but mostly under wraps; he's about equally sinned against and sinning. The last thing we hear from him, after his exit following a choked, "I am content," is an animal howl of anguish; the last thing we hear in the performance, over a shot of the alienated and excluded Jessica left alone even by her husband on the neo-classical porch of Portia's house, are the strains of the Kol Nidre. It's all very well-bred, veddy British--as though produced for Masterpiece Theatre-- (all the settings and costumes and voices are beautiful), and probably more resonant for British than American viewers, with their rather different history of Christian-Jewish relations. But at times strikingly, even shockingly moving. Melancholically, Dave Evett (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ben Schneider Date: Friday, 13 Jan 1995 12:19:29 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0017 Re: *MV and Anti-Semitism As Hardy pointed out at the beinning, this topic has been much discussed already here, and (I think) with somewhat more rigor. Joan Ozark Holmer in fall 1993 published a very nitty gritty article on anti-money-lending literature in Shakespeare's time, showing it to be a considerable threat to English life (Shakespeare Studies 21). I deposited an article on the moral issues in MV which has now appeared in Restoration 17(fall 1993). Both argue that Shylock looked a lot different in his own time from the way he does now. Yours ever BEN SCHNEIDER Lawrence U, Wisconsin ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 09:03:49 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0021 Re: Globe Restoration; *Ado* Reaction; Boy Actors Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0021. Saturday, 14 January, 1995. (1) From: Ann Watts Date: Thursday, 12 Jan 95 23:33:38 EST Subj: Re: SHK 6.0014 Re: Dumb Show (2) From: John Boni Date: Friday, 13 Jan 1995 09:22:21 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0018 Re: *Ado* Reactions (3) From: Duke Pesta Date: Friday, 13 Jan 95 20:59:38 EST Subj: Boys--Again--But Why? (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ann Watts Date: Thursday, 12 Jan 95 23:33:38 EST Subject: Re: SHK 6.0014 Re: Dumb Show Please, Joe Nathan, do indeed report on the Globe restoration as you recently observed it in London. Ann Watts (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Boni Date: Friday, 13 Jan 1995 09:22:21 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0018 Re: *Ado* Reactions Kirk Hendershott-Kraetzer continues the issue of the treatment of Hero (and, by implication, of women) in MAAN. Though this issue as raised on SHAKSPER recently focused upon the behavior of young men at a screening, I would like to continue it in the form of the equity of the treatment of Claudio and Don Pedro in relation to what they have apparently caused. It appears that Hero is dead, as a result of the attacks by Claudio and Don Pedro (Leonato's reaction is no help, either). Yet, except for the graveside mourning scene, and Claudio's subsequent willingness to marry on faith once the truth is revealed, little is done to balance out the acts of the two males. Oh, yes, there are some comments about that awful Don John. Certainly, Betrice's "Kill Claudio" injunction to Benedick must be given weight. It strikes me, in addition, that the mourning scene and the marriage on faith decision both need to be played up heavily on stage to balance what has been done. In this aspect, Branagh's film fell short. Given the violence of the disrupted wedding, the brief (though rather pretty) mourning scene and the conventionally pleasant resumed wedding did not balance. Claudio, though grateful at his good fortune, is perhaps too nicely treated; Don Pedro seems to escape altogether any real blame. And this seems a case where Shakespeare turns to ritual or symbolic means to untangle a problem he has created. Though the attacks were literal enough, the solutions (a wedding on faith, a ritual mourning) are not. MAAN, despite the liveliness of B&B, has for a long time left me less than satisfied. As with so many of the other of the "defamed woman" plays, it continues to attract my interest. Other views? John M. Boni, Dean ujboni@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu College of Arts & Sciences phone 312-794-6130 Northeastern Illinois University FAX 312-794-6689 Chicago, Il 60625 (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Duke Pesta Date: Friday, 13 Jan 95 20:59:38 EST Subject: Boys--Again--But Why? Boys--Again--But Why? After following this discussion for several weeks before Christmas, it seems that the evidence tipped in favor of boy actors. If this is so, then what does it say about the theater? I am wondering if the participants in the discussion--on both sides of the debate--would take their line of inquiry one step further and talk about the significance of this issue. What I have in mind is that Stephen Orgel says boy actors make for a homoerotic theater. Boys playing the parts of women creates a "transvestite theater" which, he seems to argue, is fully interchangeable with the idea of a homoerotic theater. The reason, in part, is that: "Homosexuality in this culture appears to have been less threatening than heterosexuality...." What I am looking for is clear evidence (on either side of the issue) that might point to a more definitive answer. It seems to me that Orgel sometimes finesses the evidence to bring it in line with his own conclusions. If he is right, then a lot of things we have been saying about Renaissance drama are wrong. In this connection, I am surprised at how quiet more traditional scholars are on this issue. Is this something that has lain undiscovered for 400 years, is there perhaps some kind of conspiracy that has kept it a secret, or, on the other hand, are the arguments of Orgel more the result of selective evidence taken to be the whole story? What, if anything, is the Renaissance view of this issue? Orgel does a lot with the Puritan writings--what did the humanists have to say about the subject? Are there historical and literary counterexamples to Orgel's argument? More examples in favor of his argument? Why *did* the English stage take boys for women? Any help that anyone could give on this issue would be most appreciated. Respond to me through SHAKSPER or write to me directly. Duke Pesta ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 09:13:49 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0022 Occidental College Symposium Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0022. Saturday, 14 January, 1995. From: Renee Pigeon Date: Friday, 13 Jan 1995 11:52:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Symposium at Occidental College Symposium announcement (please cross-list) Third Annual Teaching the Renaissance Symposium Sponsored by The Renaissance Conference of Southern California and Occidental College Occidental College, Los Angeles Saturday, February 4, 1995 The Renaissance Conference of Southern California invites you to attend the Third Annual Symposium on Teaching the Renaissance, which will feature the following sessions: a workshop on using performance exercises in Shakespeare courses, led by Caroline McManus (CSU Los Angeles) and Edward L. Rocklin (Cal Poly Pomona); a roundtable discussion on the traditional canon and multiculturalism; a workshop (to be held in Occidental College's rare book room) on introducing students to Renaissance texts; a panel on producing instructional videos; and a colloquium on designing the Shakespeare course. To register for the Symposium, please provide the information below. Additional information, including the program and directions to Occidental College, will be mailed to registrants. Registration deadline: January 27 Name: Academic Affiliation: Address: Telephone Number: E-mail address: Symposium registration fees (includes coffee and luncheon) Regular: $28 ___ Graduate Student: $22 ___ (please include a photocopy of your current student I.D.) Make checks payable to: The Renaissance Conference of Southern California Mail to: Renee Pigeon, RCSC President, Dept. of English, CSU San Bernardino, San Bernardino, CA 92407 for receipt by January 27th. Registration will be available "at the door" on the day of the Symposium, but please telephone or e-mail and reserve by January 27th to enable us to provide luncheon. Telephone: (909) 880-5896; e-mail rpigeon@wiley.csusb.edu. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 09:19:17 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0023 Q: Brewer's Thatre Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0023. Saturday, 14 January, 1995. From: Avrid Sponderg Date: Friday, 13 Jan 1995 17:35:16 -0600 (CST) Subject: Brewer's Theatre I am looking for information and opinion about Brewer's Theatre and its author, Mr. Brewer. Any help would be appreciated. Please accept my apologies if this was a duplicate message. ASponberg ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 09:22:47 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0024 Keanu's Review Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0024. Saturday, 14 January, 1995. From: Tom Loughlin Date: Friday, 13 Jan 95 20:37:28 EST Subject: Keanu's Review SHAKSPEReans may be interested to know that the production of *Hamlet* starring Keanu Reeves at the Manitoba Theatre Centre in Winnipeg opened last night. I heard one report on the Canadian Broadcasting Company radio program "Morningside," hosted by Peter Gzowski, and the CBC reporter he talked to gave the review a positive notice, although from the various vocal inflections and other sorts of non-verbal clues in her voice I did not sense a security in that notice. I sensed she liked the show, but she didn't quite know why she did, as if she hadn't seen enough Shakespearean productions to really have a frame of reference from which to judge the work. She also reported that the reviewer from the London *Times* "gushed" over it, while the Manchester *Guardian* critic was less than enthusiastic. She also reported that the general reviews seemed to be mixed; Reeves got high marks for the physicality of the role but poor marks for the "dramatic" sections. No sense of how well he played the language. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 08:17:08 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0025 Re: Miller *MV* Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0025. Monday, 15 January, 1995. (1) From: Daniel M Larner Date: Saturday, 14 Jan 1995 08:57:01 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0020 Re: *MV* and Anti-Semitism (2) From: Tom Dale Keever Date: Sunday, 15 Jan 95 22:32:18 EST Subj: The Miller/Olivier Merchant (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Daniel M Larner Date: Saturday, 14 Jan 1995 08:57:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0020 Re: *MV* and Anti-Semitism Thanks to David Evett for his posting on the video of the Jonathan Miller MV with Olivier and Plowright. I saw this production in London when it first appeared (1971?) and was deeply moved by the way it puts the moral pinch on Jessica, and leaves us with the bitter pill to swallow that no one here--not just Shylock, Jessica, Bassanio and Antonio, but also Portia and whole crew--are living over a barely covered swamp of deadly hatred. Daniel Larner Fairhaven College Western Washington University (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Dale Keever Date: Sunday, 15 Jan 95 22:32:18 EST Subject: The Miller/Olivier Merchant Yes, Jonathan Miller's 1973 MERCHANT OF VENICE is a tour de force. Miller discussed the production in an interview I saw once. He said Olivier was determined to use a panoply of facial prosthetics to make himself look more "Jewish." Miller let him play with his false nose, his distorted upper lip, and his other artificial deformities in rehearsal but then gently stripped them away one by one as he convinced him, using himself as an example, that Jews didn't really look that much different from other people. The performance he helped Jeremy Brett shape in the role of Bassanio is also unique. Miller's MERCHANT is availabe on VHS videocassette for $19.98 from The Writing Company. Call 1-800-421-4246 to order or get on their mailing list. Their new 1995 catalog has also added, at the same price, Welles' OTHELLO and Branagh's MUCH ADO. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 08:52:05 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0026 Re: Dreams (Prepositions); Greek Tragedy Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0026. Monday, 15 January, 1995. (1) From: E. L. Epstein Date: Saturday, 14 Jan 1995 12:33:19 EDT Subj: RE: SHK 6.0014 Re: Dreams (Prep.) (2) From: E. L. Epstein Date: Saturday, 14 Jan 1995 12:44:14 EDT Subj: RE: SHK 6.0018 Re: *Rom*/*Oedipus* (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. L. Epstein Date: Saturday, 14 Jan 1995 12:33:19 EDT Subject: RE: SHK 6.0014 Re: Dreams (Prep.) I would like to thank Mr. Evett for his thoughtful reply to my comments. He is right about varieties of English, but they are not different languages. They are different *registers* and *dialects* of English, each with its own rules, which are followed within each register and within each dialect. We can tell when these rules are broken; we get an uneasy or ironic effect at that point. As for the difficulty in agreement for Coral and Are, see Abbott(/) on Shakespearean grammar; he points out that Shakespeare frequently makes verbs agree with the *nearest* noun, whether or not that is appropriate, which makes for difficulty in heavily inverted constructions. Which still leaves us with the problem of *of* in the Tempest line. (I think the name of the author of Shakespeare's Grammar is Abbott.) E. L. Epstein (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. L. Epstein Date: Saturday, 14 Jan 1995 12:44:14 EDT Subject: RE: SHK 6.0018 Re: *Rom*/*Oedipus* I once had an odd thought in re Greek (ie Athenian) tragedy. It seemed to me that the Athenians attitude toward tragedy has a rather gloating element about it. "Sure, the king of Thebes killed his father and married his mother! What else would you expect from such a place!" I think that the Athenian attitude toward Thebes, and Argos, and other such places is that none of them are good old Athens, where such things don't happen, with the unfortunate exception of the doing to death of Hippolytus, which was just too bad. This would also shed some light on hamartia, which could bear the nuance "the stupid things that non-Athenians do." I see the Athenian attitude towards Thebes as something like the Bostonian/ New York attitude towards Dallas. How about comment? Sorry, Dallas guys--just reporting. E.L.Epstein ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 08:54:46 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0027 Q: Copyright and Commentary Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0027. Monday, 15 January, 1995. From: Stan Beeler Date: Saturday, 14 Jan 1995 13:44:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Copyright and Commentary I am developing a wais/http server that will include an indexed version of the works of Shakespeare. At the moment I have most of Shakespeare's poetry indexed so that you can search for single words or perform true boolean searches with "and," "or" and "not." The search returns hypertext links to entire sonnets or the stanzas of longer poems that include the target material. If you follow the links to the stanzas you are given a link to the entire poem so that you can read the material in context. I would like to expand the hypertext links to include more traditional secondary material on the works of Shakespeare. Unfortunately, I cannot find anything already on the Internet so I believe that I will have to provide it myself. I would like to know what the copyright issues are concerning the presentation of material like Johnson's ``Preface to Shakespeare.'' It has been suggested that if I find old editions of these commentaries I can legally scan them in with OCR software and include them in my project. If you have any thoughts on this subject or suggestions for material to include could you please send them along. For those of you who have web browsers my http server address is: http://andreae.unbc.edu Stan Beeler ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 09:03:47 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0028 Conference on New Globe Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0028. Monday, 15 January, 1995. From: Andrew Gurr Date: Monday, 16 Jan 1995 10:18:06 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Conference on New Globe There is to be a conference on what to do with the new Globe in Southwark, what theatre experiments should be conducted there, what kinds of costume and what kind of acting might work best there. Dates 18 - 20 April, place the Globe, Southwark, London. Title of conference "Within this wooden O". If you are interested in attending, or in giving a paper, please contact Alastair Tallon, Globe Education, Bear Gardens, LONDON SE1 9EB, UK. Fax number 0171 928 7968/928 6330. Andrew Gurr. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 09:06:21 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0029 CTI Workshops 1995 Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0029. Monday, 15 January, 1995. From: Stuart Lee Date: Monday, 16 Jan 1995 11:00:02 +0000 Subject: CTI Workshops: Reminder Computers in Teaching Initiative (CTI) Centre for Textual Studies Oxford University Computing Services 1995 Workshops Throughout the early part of 1995, the Computers in Teaching Initiative (CTI) Centre for Textual Studies, based at Oxford University Computing Services, will be running a series of workshops aimed at introducing some of the latest developments in humanities computing. Details, dates, and the cost of each workshop are listed below. Please contact the CTI Centre for Textual Studies for more information, noting which workshop(s) you are interested in. **************************************************************************** Stuart Lee or Michael Popham CTI Centre for Textual Studies Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 6NN Tel:0865-273221 Fax:0865-273221 E-mail: CTITEXT@vax.ox.ac.uk Http://www.ox.ac.uk/depts/humanities/ **************************************************************************** UW=Unwaged or not in full-time employment; AR=Academic rate; CR=Commercial rate. All prices are in pounds sterling. Costs include registration, lunch, and coffee only. A list of accommodation will be made available by the CTI Centre but it is up to individuals to make their own arrangements. **************************************************************************** WORKSHOP 1: Introduction to the World-Wide-Web and HTML Date: 15th February 1995; Venue: Oxford University Computing Services; Cost: UW=25.00, AR=50.00, CR=100.00 This workshop will set out to introduce the basics of the World-Wide-Web and the markup language HTML. A provisional programme for this workshop is as follows: * An Introduction to the WWW * Hands-on Browsing of the WWW * An Introduction to HTML Mark-up * HTML Mark-up (Practical) * HTML Tools * Publishing on the WWW * The WWW of the Future **************************************************************************** WORKSHOP 2: The Poetry Shell and the Creation of Hypermedia Editions for Teaching. Date: 17th March 1995; Venue: Oxford University Computing Services; Cost: UW=25.00, AR=50.00, CR=100.00 The Poetry Shell has been developed as part of the Oxford University Hypermedia in Literary and Linguistic Subjects Project which was funded under the ITTI. The Shell is written in Asymetrix ToolBook and allows academics to prepare teaching editions of poems, in particular those written in languages other than Modern English. It allows the incorporation of translations, critical essays, grammatical information, glossary, notes, and even images. The workshop will introduce participants to the principles of electronic teaching editions in the Shell by first of all giving access to a poem already prepared. They will then be taken step-by-step through the process of creating their own edition. A short poetic text and supporting materials will be provided. *************************************************************************** WORKSHOP 3: The Electronic Text (1) Date: 30th March 1995; Venue: Oxford University Computing Services; Cost: UW=25.00, AR=50.00, CR=100.00. This workshop will set out to introduce some of the basic issues of using electronic texts. Areas covered will include a discussion of the nature of the elctronic text and the advantages of its use in teaching and research. This will then be followed by a discussion of some of the sources of electronic texts (predominantly literary in nature) including commercial suppliers, electronic archives, and the stages of creating your own (e.g. scanning and mark-up). The day will end with some demonstrations of the various projects mentioned in the talks. Familiarity with the contents of this course is a pre-requisite for 'The Electronic Text (2)'. *************************************************************************** WORKSHOP 4: The Electronic Text (2) Date: 31st March 1995; Venue: Oxford University Computing Services; Cost: UW=25.00, AR=50.00, CR=100.00. This workshop will consist of two half-day sessions. The first will include an introduction to the principles of text analysis, an overview of some of the key tools, and an opportunity to gain some hands-on experience with the text analysis package TACT. The second session will focus on the use of the Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML), provide delegates with the chance to try out some SGML-aware tools for creating and browsing texts, and look at the Guidelines produced by the Text Encoding Initiative. All delegates should either have attended the workshop "The Electronic Text (1)" or be familiar with its subject matter. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 09:02:54 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0030 Re: Greek (Athenian) Tragedy Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 030. Wednesday, 18 January, 1995. (1) From: Victor Gallerano Date: Monday, 16 Jan 1995 10:34:23 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0026 Concerning Oedipus at Dealy Plaza (2) From: Sharon Beth Cinnamon Date: Wednesday, 18 Jan 1995 01:31:51 -0500 (EST) Subj: Greek Tragedy (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Victor Gallerano Date: Monday, 16 Jan 1995 10:34:23 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0026 Concerning Oedipus at Dealy Plaza Dear E.L. Epstein, I'm not sure that any of us can establish the "athenian attitude" toward the cowboys down at Thebes...perhaps we should take a poll. What we do know is that, in his last play, Sophocles sets the apotheosis of Oedipus near Athens before a chorus of Athenians and that Oedipus (or at least the memory of him) is said to be a blessing on that city. For all the purported "tragic" aspects of the Kennedy assasination -- and its occurring out in the "provinces" -- I think none is more salient than how quickly it followed upon Jack Kennedy's own elimination of President Diem in South Vietnam coupled with Malcom X's (then scandalous) remark that the shooting in Dallas was a case of "chickens coming home to roost." (I "pitched" this view of the "Caesarian" - and, therefore, tragic - presidency in hollywood, but the "veeps" there said the public would never go for a black Tiresias. Spike wanted to stage it in the hood, but he didn't have the money back then.) This is not, of course, a conspiracy theory, but an observation of facts that, if focused in words and staged, offer enough dramatic irony (prophetic hindsight?) on the Dallas shooting to implicate all the "best and the brightest" no matter what their "attitude" toward the "Dallas guys." That of course is why we keep reading these "tragedies." We think we see a pattern. And, since it is impossible to see the mote in our own eye, we smuggly stage it in Thebes where the grotesque is safely common. Sophocles knew that to speak the wisdom of Pogo, one must become a "realist of distances," or as Flannery O'Connor said, "For the hard-of-hearing you shout, for the nearly blind you draw large startling pictures." So go on, villify Dallas. It's neccessary for the full terror, pity, tragedy (accompanied by the rising voice of Frank Zappa singing, "It can't happen here!" Provincially yours...or as we say down home _via con Dios_ Vic Gallerano (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sharon Beth Cinnamon Date: Wednesday, 18 Jan 1995 01:31:51 -0500 (EST) Subject: Greek Tragedy Poking fun at and slandering foreigners was a good way for the Athenian playwrights to score points with the judges. Especially since the plays were meant for local festivals instead of widespread marketing, good old fashioned patriotism was wise. The guy in the white hat who saves the day is usually Athenian, if not Olympian. It's like a city rooting for the home team to win and a James Bond movie with the Big Bad Russians. Or it's like Shakespeare's treatment of the French and English in 2HenryVI: the French witch is hardly a saint. --New York Yankee and Boston Red Sox Fan, Sharon Cinnamon ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 09:08:59 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0031 Re: Hamartia; Keanu's Hamlet Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 031. Wednesday, 18 January, 1995. (1) From: Piers Lewis Date: Monday, 16 Jan 1995 15:16:09 -0600 (CST) Subj: Hamartia (2) From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Monday, 16 Jan 95 15:43:23 -0500 Subj: SHAKSPER 0024: Keanu's Hamlet (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Piers Lewis Date: Monday, 16 Jan 1995 15:16:09 -0600 (CST) Subject: Hamartia I want to thank Thomas Clayton and Michael Hancher for the work they have done in clarifying for the rest of us the relevant history of the term 'hamartia.' What interests me in this story is the way this term has been used to serve the interests of a reductive moralism-- most notably Christian as Michael Hancher remarks. As we have seen, however, moralism can take many forms and serve many interests. The phrase 'tragic flaw' is only the most obvious instance of the way this ancient and somewhat mysterious idea has been simplified and put to moralistic uses. I was struck by Michael Hancher's remark that even Aristotle could not entirely avoid the temptation to give 'hamartia' a moral spin. That fact should humble us all. It is a great temptation to blame the victim for her fate--to say, smugly, well you must have deserved it--and of course we see the political consequences that that leads to all the time. My students are always falling into this trap: when disaster overtakes a character in a story, they want to see it as a comeuppance. I want to say, no one deserves his fate, good OR bad but I'm not sure how far one should push that; the problem of responsibility puzzles the will, so to speak. Terms like 'praise' and 'blame' do have a use in human languages. It is clear that we are responsible for our actions--but what is an action? When does a series of actions add up to a life? A fate? When it's over? (Call no man happy until he's dead . . .) The action of a tragedy consists of a series of smaller actions each of which is understood to have been (in some sense) chosen. Each choice could have gone the other way. Yet, when the final disaster has occurred and the action of play is complete, we walk out feeling it couldn't and shouldn't have ended in any other way. Macbeth and his wife are not evil at the beginning; just a couple of worldlings and opportunists such as any society can readily supply, with an extraordinary itch for sovereign sway and masterdom. When it's all over we realize that something horrifying has been brought to light in the character of Macbeth. Was it lying there, coiled, right from the beginning or has he, somehow, been creating his character, step by step, inventing it as he goes along? Does Macbeth deserve his fate? It is his fate, it seems, to become a monster; is that what he deserves? Heraclitus said, "A man's character is his fate." A frightening thought. A tragic thought. It says, we are not in control of our lives; no one deserves his character or his fate, good or bad. Isn't that the great discovery of Greek tragedy--and of tragic drama ever since? Sophocles seems to have been working out the logic of Heraclitus' equation in _Oedipus_ and thereby succeeded in turning it into a riddle that defies rational analysis. Oedipus' character is certainly instrumental in bringing on his fate but there is no rational connection between the one and the other. No rational ethics explains or justifies the action of this play--or of any other tragedy. Tragedy is a perpetual affront to rationalists, moralists and theologians. And it seems to have been a problem for Aristotle as well: is it possible that his theory of 'hamartia' is an attempt to loosen the fatalistic grip of Heraclitus' formulation? (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Monday, 16 Jan 95 15:43:23 -0500 Subject: SHAKSPER 0024: Keanu's Hamlet Hello, fellow Shakespeareans! Thanks to Tom Loughlin for his summary of Keanu Reeves's *Hamlet.* I have copies of two reviews, one from the Ottawa Citizen and one from the Toronto (?) Globe and Mail if anyone would like to see them. I'll be going to the performance with a busload of students, colleagues, and friends the weekend of Jan 26-29, and will give my personal impressions after I return. Chris Gordon University of Minnesota ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 09:18:43 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0032 Contest; ACTER Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 032. Wednesday, 18 January, 1995. (1) From: Bernice W. Kliman Date: Monday, 16 Jan 1995 15:08:51 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Contest that may interest some SHAKSPERians (2) From: Cynthia Dessen Date: Wednesday, 18 Jan 1995 08:07:24 -0500 (EST) Subj: ACTER tour Spring 1996 (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bernice W. Kliman Date: Monday, 16 Jan 1995 15:08:51 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Contest that may interest some SHAKSPERians [Originally posted on SHARP-L@IUBVM.UCS.INDIANA.EDU: Society for the History of Authorship, Reading & Publishing] Subject: Jo Ann Boydston Essay Prize The Association for Documentary Editing seeks nominations for the first biennial Jo Ann Boydston Essay Prize. The prize, in the amount of $250, will be awarded in October 1995 for the best review or review essay that deals with the scholarly editing of works or documents. To be eligible, the review must have been published between June 1, 1993, and May 30, 1995. Submissions should include three copies of the published review with the source clearly identified, and the name, address, and phone number of the author, and should be sent to G. Thomas Tanselle, Vice-President, The Guggenheim Foundation, 90 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016, by June 1, 1995. This announcement has been posted on the following lists: Exlibris, S-edit, Archives, Society of Early Americanists, US Civil War, Diplomatic History, US Political History, History of Rhetoric and Communications, Women's History, Humanists, US Presidential History, Public History, and History of Authorship, Reading. Please pass it on to any other appropriate lists. Thank you. Elizabeth Marshall (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cynthia Dessen Date: Wednesday, 18 Jan 1995 08:07:24 -0500 (EST) Subject: ACTER tour Spring 1996 ACTER, the program housed at UNC-CH which schedules tours of British Shakespearean actors in full length minimalist productions, combined with a week long teaching residency, to campuses around the country, is now looking to fill the Spring 1996 Macbeth tour. We are especially seeking warm weather sites for the chilly months of February and March. Please respond off list if you are interested in receiving more information or would like to book a residency on your campus. Thank you! Cynthia Dessen, General Manager - csdessen@email.unc.edu or 919-967-4265. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 06:13:50 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies and Miller's Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0033. Thursday, 19 January, 1995. (1) From: Aaron Tornberg Date: Wednesday, 18 Jan 1995 10:56:24 -0500 Subj: Re: MV and inconsistencies (2) From: John Owen Date: Wednesday, 18 Jan 1995 12:06:54 -0800 Subj: RE: SHK 6.0025 Re: Miller *MV* (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Aaron Tornberg Date: Wednesday, 18 Jan 1995 10:56:24 -0500 Subject: Re: MV and inconsistencies Okay, So I put the "Merchant of Venice" topic out there (again for most of you) and received some very interesting responses. I then retrieved the database and read all I could from discussions 93-. Now here's what I still haven't found regarding my original post. Looking through MV I.iii.(71-95) there is a speech by Shylock about Jacob and Laban and the sheep. From what I know of Rennaissance England, The Bible had great importance. If this is the case, then why does Shakespeare quote half the story withing MV? The only conclusion I can arrive at is that the whole story would have taken away from the anti-Semitic characterization of Shylock. If Shakespeare is so textually incorrect with the Bible, then how can we trust that his views are at all reliable when dealing with studies of Elizabethan England? After all, Riverside often indicates his misquotation of Holinshed or at least misunderstanding. This bothers me because it is a blatant disregard for any kind of accurate research. This is from a man whose use of drama and language is almost revered. For those interested in responding, the Biblical passage in its entirety can be found in Genesis 29 and continues for a number of chapters after. I am interested in continuing this discussion either on the question of accuracy in general or withing MV with which I am particularly interested. Aaron Tornberg, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada yku02829@cawc.yorku.ca (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Owen Date: Wednesday, 18 Jan 1995 12:06:54 -0800 Subject: RE: SHK 6.0025 Re: Miller *MV* The isolation of Jessica at the end of Miller's MV is unsettling (good) but hardly in keeping with the play's tone (bad). How can we possibly follow the charming duet between Lorenzo and Jessica, wherein they tease and joke in the most loving and familiar manner, with the unwarranted implication of a rejection of Jessica? They just don't match up. To all appearances, Jessica is happily paired at the end of the play, and there is no reason to assume otherwise. I remember seeing photographs of an Old Vic MV from the early 50's with Paul Rogers as Shylock and Claire Bloom as Jessica, where the end staging was much more effective. All the couples were paired off, and only Antonio was left alone - he, indeed, is alone at the play's end, like Shylock (though not ruined) and if a note of sadness must be added to Act V, it should be given to the ever-melancholy title character. The practice of revolving the production around Shylock, as if he were the central character, is unfortunate. Since Henry Irving's scenery-chewing 19th century performance, there has been a tendency to play Shylock up. Act V has always meant trouble for this line of thinking, and some directors have actually chosen to omit the final act altogether!! Miller's decision is the next best thing - keep him present in spirit, to haunt the consciences of the evil -- well everyone else, right? Are there other ways to handle Act V? John Owen ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 06:19:44 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0034 Re: Greek (Athenian) Tragedy Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0034. Thursday, 19 January, 1995. From: Date: Wednesday, 18 Jan 1995 16:05:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0030 Re: Greek (Athenian) Tragedy This Athenians vs. Barbarians idea has lots of possibilities, but it won't work for everybody, especially Euripides. Note his "Ion," which has its fun with the Athenian royal line as well as with Apollo. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 06:23:04 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0035 D.C. Performance Studies Meeting Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0035. Thursday, 19 January, 1995. From: Cynthia Wimmer (cm74) Date: Monday, 09 Jan 95 14:12 EST Subject: D.C.Meeting [Please forward the announcement below to any lists which discuss the fields mentioned. Thank you. Hope many folks will be able participate in this gathering!] Attend a Mid-Atlantic Discussion about PERFORMANCE STUDIES the field that draws from anthropology, ritual studies, art, theatre, dance, music, speech communications, philosophy, & literary theory. Saturday, February 18, 1995, 11 am - 4 pm Anne Arundel Hall, U of Maryland, College Park With Bruce McConachie, Editor _Theatre Annual_, Gay Gibson Cima, Georgetown U., and Representatives from NEA and NEH Sponsored by the Performance Studies Focus Group (PSFG) of The Association for Theatre in Higher Education (ATHE) To reserve your space at this meeting, contact Cynthia Wimmer, Executive Committee of PSFG, at (301) 649-7585, or cm74@umail.umd.edu, by FEBRUARY 1, 1995. No registration fee will be charged for this meeting. For information on overnight accomodations at U of MD's Inn and Conference Center, call (800) 727-8622. Cynthia Wimmer cm74@umail.umd.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 08:28:35 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0037 Re: *MV*, Especially Act V Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0037. Friday, 20 January, 1995. (1) From: Suba Subbaro Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 95 07:55:46 EST Subj: MV Spinoffs (2) From: Stephen Schultz Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 95 11:27:25 EST Subj: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies and Miller's (3) From: Jean Peterson Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 11:51:34 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies (4) From: Helen Ostovich Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 13:14:51 +0001 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies and Miller's (5) From: Louis Scheeder Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 14:44:37 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies and Miller's (6) From: Daniel M Larner Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 17:24:43 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies and Miller's (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Suba Subbaro Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 95 07:55:46 EST Subject: MV Spinoffs Pardon me if these questions have been asked before--I am a relative newcomer to this list. Is Arnold Wesker's "Merchant" a MV spinoff? Also, I've heard that the cult movie, "My Own Private Idaho" is loosely based on MV. Is it? (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stephen Schultz Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 95 11:27:25 EST Subject: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies and Miller's On ways to handle Act V of _MofV_: One of Irving's biographers says that Sir Henry regularly cut the fifth act as anticlimactic. When some critic had the temerity to attack this excision, Irving restored the act in a spirit of experiment. But he excised it again upon discovering that it (added onto the pauses for scene changes at the Lyceum) made the play so long that audience members couldn't catch public transportation after the show. (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jean Peterson Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 11:51:34 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies John Owen has a point--yet one of my favorite idiosyncrasies of Act 5 is that the "charming duet" between Jessica and Lorenzo that begins the act invokes famous examples of romantic disasters...Troilus and Cressida, Pyramus and Thisbe, Dido and Aneas...and finally, Medea and Jason! That the Medea reference is used to segue into Jessica and Lorenzo's tale is maybe telling--another betrayal of a father, rejection of home and "nation," infatuated elopement, ending in romantic treachery, rejection, loss, bitterness, and grief... I am teaching this play for the first time next week--so this discussion is proving both provocative and timely! Jean Peterson Bucknell University (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Helen Ostovich Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 13:14:51 +0001 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies and Miller's Re John Owen's remarks on the "happy ending" of Jessica's romance: why is it inconceivable that Jessica might be happy with her Lorenzo, and that she might at the same time register the fact that no one else (except for Launcelot) finds her worth talking to? Wouldn't that muddy the happiness of her marriage, to find that marriage to a Christian doesn't make her acceptable to other Christians, and that perhaps revange on her father is not as sweet as she thought it might be, when only she was the revenger? The kind of revenge that the others are enjoying might simply remind her of her own Jewishness, her own otherness, and might well make her as melancholy as Antonio. Helen Ostovich McMaster University (5)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Louis Scheeder Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 14:44:37 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies and Miller's Re: John Owen's comment that in the final act of MV, wherein Jessica and Lorenzo "tease and joke in a familiar way", I would suggest that such a way is not the only way the scene can be played. It can also be played for great conflict - as a real fight. He has married her for the money, and now the money's gone. They seem to be living on Portia's largess, and the servants don't seem to much like Jessica. Life is not what they thought it might be. Louis Scheeder scheedrl@acf2.nyu.edu (6)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Daniel M Larner Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 17:24:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies and Miller's I think John Owen misses the point of the isolated Jessica at the end of Jonathan Miller's MV. She has stopped, on her way to bed with Lorenzo (with whom she has just been flirting and teasing), seeing in her hand the judgment on Shylock awarding her his forfeit properties. The irony and pain of this moment, and of her discovery that she will prosper on the back of her father's loss, is intensified by (not inconsistent with) the teasing scene with Lorenzo. I found this a brilliant directorial move, and a terribly moving movement which pierced the smug self-satisfaction of the play's ending in a way that seemed appropriate and contained within it. When I saw it at the Old Vic, the intensity of the experience was doubled because Olivier was ill and had announced his retirement. This was one of his last performances, and everyone was hoping for him, praying for him, as if (who knew?) there were a real chance he might die in the middle of the performance. His manic energy as Shylock, coupled with his apparent (and rumored) decrepitude, made his performance look like something of a miracle, which his very alive appearance for many curtain calls confirmed. Daniel Larner Fairhaven College Western Washington University ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 09:57:23 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0038 Sh Yearbook; Cahiers Elisabethains; Ben Jonson Journal Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0038. Friday, 20 January, 1995. (1) From: Holger Klein Date: Saturday, 14 Jan 1995 17:11:00 +0100 Subj: [Shakespeare Yearbook] (2) From: Luc Borot Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 95 17:25:21 +0100 Subj: Cahiers Elisabethains (3) From: David Phillips Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 12:27:59 -0800 (PST) Subj: Ben Jonson Journal (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Holger Klein Date: Saturday, 14 Jan 1995 17:11:00 +0100 Subject: [Shakespeare Yearbook] "Beginning with Vol. 4 (1993), the Shakespeare Yearbook has been edited by Holger Klein (Salzburg), with Nicholas Radel (Furman) as Reviews Editor.Members of the Editorial Board are: Dimiter Daphinoff (Fribourg), Peter Davidazi (Budapest), James Harner (Texas A&M), Joan Hartwig (Lexington), Andre Lorant (Paris), Peter Milward (Tokyo), Simon Williams (Santa Barbara)and Rowland Wymer (Hull). In an attempt to complement the emphases of other journals, the Shakespeare Yearbook concentrates on four aspects: theatre-oriented studies,interdisciplinary studies, comparative studies, and the reception of Shakespeare in a specific country or region. Contributions (up to 25 pages, MLA style, MS-DOS Word for Windows 6 for IBM, plus hard copy)are double-read. Contributions are being invited to Vol. 6 (1995) "SHAKESPEARE AND HISTORY". This was originally entitled: Shakespeare, the Tudor Myth, and Modern Historiography, but it has turned out that interesting articles were also forthcoming for comedies, hence the co-editor, Rowland Wymer and the editor decided to widen the volume's scope. Articles may cover any aspect of the relationship between Shakespeare plays and historical events, circumstances, personages, contemporary or modern historical writing, etc. The deadline for contributions is June 1995. Please send offers as soon as possible to Professor H.M. Klein, Institut fuer Anglistik und Amerikanistik, Universitaet Salzburg, Akademiestr. 24, A-5020 Salzburg, Tel. +43-662-8044-4422; Fax +43-662-8044-613, E-Mail: kleinhol@edvz.sbg.ac.at. Contributions are also being invited to Vol. 7 (1996) entitled "SHAKESPEARE AND HUNGARY", which will embrace studies of translations, critical reception, creative reception - imitations, adaptations, parodies, travesties, transmedial adaptations, etc. - literary analogues, productions, school- viz. university curricula, theatrical production, or other forms and areas of impact. The co-editor is Peter Davidhazi. The deadline for submitting articles is January 1996, please send offers to Holger Klein at Salzburg (see above). Later volumes will deal with: Hamlet on Screen (No.8, 1997, co-editor Dimiter Daphinoff), Shakespeare and Japan (No. 9, 1998, co-editor Peter Milward) and Shakespeare and Italy (No.10, 1999, co-editor Michele Marrapodi)." Please edit this announcement as you see fit. I should be most grateful for its dissemination. Best wishes and regards, Yours sincerely, Holger Klein (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Luc Borot Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 95 17:25:21 +0100 Subject: Cahiers Elisabethains Dear all, Cahiers Elisabethains inform their collaborators and readers that they now have an e-mail address: cahiers@alor.univ-montp3.fr. An ftp server is being set up to speed up communication and exchanges between the editors and contributors. Access rights will be granted to contributors between the acceptance of their papers and the publication of the issue where they will appear. The e-mail address can be used for subscription request, to propose a paper, play-review, book-review, film-review, record-review or note. Mail will be retrieved by the Montpellier editors, Angela Maguin, not online yet, Jean-Marie Maguin (jmm@alor.univ-montp3.fr), Luc Borot (lb@alor.univ-montp3.fr), or Patricia Dorval, who also acts as business editor (pat@alor.univ-montp3.fr). A W3 server will be available this Spring, with access to the library's catalogue through a WAIS database. More of this when it is ready. Due to growing rampant illiteracy in the administrative spheres of French academe and ministeries, the Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches Elisabethaines has had to change its name to Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches sur la Renaissance Anglaise. Our contacts in decision-making agencies seemed more and more unable to understand the meaning of the adjective 'elisabethain'. We sometimes found it spelt 'Elisabeth Hun' or under other homophonic forms. It became more and more difficult to ask funds from local (or even national) boards in which no one knew what this word meant, so we (mournfully) decided that our 25th anniversary, which will soon be here, was the right occasion for a change of name. Our first concession (and hopefully the last) to militant technocratic ignorance. As some of our regular partners and friends are members of SHAKSPER, we take the liberty of using SHAKSPER to publish this piece of information. Cheers to all, For the C.E.R.R.A. (I'm not used to it yet), Luc Borot (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Phillips Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 12:27:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ben Jonson Journal ***************************************************************** ***************** _The Ben Jonson Journal_ ******************** ***************************************************************** Editors Richard Harp and Stanley Stewart are pleased to announce that the first issue of the _Ben Jonson Journal_ will be released this month. _The Ben Jonson Journal_ is devoted to the study of Jonson as well as all English Renaissance authors and their cultural, historical, and religious milieux. Published annually, each issue will be at least two hundred pages. Volume I features essays and reviews from our distinguised editorial board: David M. Bevington, Martin Butler, Thomas Clayton, Ian Donaldson, Robert C. Evans, M. Thomas Hester, Grace Ioppolo, William W. Kerrigan, Anthony Low, David C. McPherson, John Mulryan, Stephen Orgel, James A. Riddell, E.W. Tayler, Sara van den Berg, Susanne Woods, and R.V. Young. Volume II is nearly complete, and the editors are now accepting manuscripts for Volume III. Articles should be 20-30 double-spaced manuscript pages, notes up to 10 pages, style: Chicago. Three copies of the manuscript are required. The journal also reviews books, but book reviews are assigned. Manuscripts should be sent to: The Editors, Department of English, UNLV, Box 455069, 4505 Maryland Parkway, Las Vegas, NV 89154-5069. Rejected manuscripts will be returned with SASE. Subscriptions to the jounal are $15 for one year, $25 for two years. Subscribers may use the form provided below. For additional information, contact Richard Harp at harprlh@nevada.edu (702) 895- 0991 or Stan Stewart at snstewar@ucrvms.bitnet (909) 787-3674. ------------------------------------------------------------------ THE BEN JONSON JOURNAL UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA PRESS MAIL STOP 166 RENO, NV 89557-0076 SUBSCRIPTION _____ 1 year $15 _____ 2 years $25 Amount Enclosed $_____ Subscriptions outside the U.S. should add $3.00 per year for postage and handling. _____ Check enclosed _____ Mastercard _____ Visa _____ Discover Card Number ______________________________________________________ Expiration Date ___/___ Signature ________________________________________________________ SHIP TO: Name _____________________________________________________________ Address __________________________________________________________ City _____________________________________________________________ State/Zip Code ___________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 10:03:04 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0039 Re: Keanu's Hamlet Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0039. Friday, 20 January, 1995. (1) From: Matthew Henerson Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 11:13:12 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0031 Re: Keanu's Hamlet (2) From: Dave Collins Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 14:45:04 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0031 Re: Keanu's Hamlet (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Matthew Henerson Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 11:13:12 -0500 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0031 Re: Keanu's Hamlet Dear Chris Gordon, Please post the reviews of the Keanu Reeves' *Hamlet* as well as your own impressions. There's a doctoral thesis out there for somebody on the production and reception of film-and-television star-powered Shakespeare. If Reeves' experience with Hamlet is anything like Richard Chamberlain's with the same role in the early '70's, there will be some who condemn both his performance and his hubris out of hand because of the kinds of films with which he made his reputation, and there will be others whose admiration of his courage will completely color their assesment of his work. I live too far away to see Reeves, and I am curious not only about what he will do, but about how people will respond. On the subject of *Hamlet*, I am playing Horatio in a production at the San Diego Rep which runs from 1/28 - 2/19, and I'd like to post an inquiry on behalf of our Ophelia. Does anybody know of a book or article which talks about a clinical diagnosis of Ophelia's madness? Anybody with an answer can post to the list or to me personally. Thanks for the help, Matt Henerson (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dave Collins Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 14:45:04 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0031 Re: Keanu's Hamlet For Chris Gordon-- There's at least one soul out here who would like to see the reviews of Keanu Reeves's performance in *Hamlet.* And I'd like to hear your own review as well. Send them along! Thanks, Dave Collins Westminster College Fulton, MO ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 10:18:27 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0040 Re: Revenge; Globe; Boy Actors (Homoeroticism); Tragedy Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0040. Friday, 20 January, 1995. (1) From: Harry Keyishian Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 17:09:16 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 5.1026 Qs: Revenge (2) From: Joe Nathan Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 18:39:06 -0800 Subj: London Globe Theatre (3) From: Catherine Kozubei Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 21:57:42 -0500 (EST) Subj: Homoeroticism in Shakespeare (4) From: E. L. Epstein Date: Friday, 20 Jan 1995 00:09:55 EDT Subj: RE: SHK 6.0034 Re: Greek (Athenian) Tragedy (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Harry Keyishian Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 17:09:16 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 5.1026 Qs: Revenge I can't resist answering Bill Godshalk's query of 26 December about revenge by touting my book The Shapes of Revenge: Victimization, Vengeance, and Vindictiveness in Shakespeare, published this month by Humanities Press. It deals with the psychology of revenge, as derived from Renaissance books on the passions, and treats revenge as a reaction to victimization. Revenge is a species of punishment and serves the similar ends of retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation of offenders, though in different order of priority than punishments in criminal law. Revenge consists of a harmful act performed by an individual in response to a malicious injury. The "malicious" part is important: for the revenge to be authentic, the injury must be intentional and must do psychic as well as physical harm. Victims of malicious injury feel diminished, demeaned, violated; they retaliate to restore selfhood, vindicate justice, and deter further harm. Avengers act on behalf of victims, out of indignation, though they may, like Hamlet, develop their own cause for revenge in process. Shakespeare deals with the destructive effects of victimization: Ophelia and Lear go mad; the Duchess of Gloucester, unavenged, pines away and dies. Genuine revenge can regenerate the revenger, as it does Macduff and Edgar, who also vindicate justice and redeem the state. Their are many successful comic revengers, including the wives of Windsor (clearly revenge is not "gendered male.") Vindictiveness is the evil twin of revenge: subjectively, it feels the same--Richard III and Iago perceive themselves as aggrieved persons--but Shakespeare (and Webster and Chapman, et al.) invited us to see it as a personality flaw, based on envy and false pride, traits that endow characters with a grudge against all those who are more successful, happier, or fulfilled than they. The most interesting are the mixed cases: Hamlet and Othello, in differing ways, slide fatally into vindictiveness at crucial moments. As to whether revenge is tied to an ideology: certainly it reflects individualism, as the injured party assumes the rights of the sovereign to feel outrage, to judge, and to punish (cf. Foucault on punishment). The spectator is invited to follow the arc of action and become similarly empowered through sympathy with a just revenge. Harry Keyishian, Fairleigh Dickinson Univ. Madison NJ 07940 harry@alpha.fdu.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe Nathan Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 18:39:06 -0800 Subject: London Globe Theatre Several people asked me for more info on my recent visit to the restoration of the Globe Theatre in London. I did indeed prepare that info and tried to send it to SHAKSPER as an attachment. Evidently it didn't work, so here is another attempt. 1) Restoration progress: The restoration itself is well along. The stalls are up, the thatched roof is being completed. The "groundling area" is finished. The stage is blocked out, and may very well be under construction right now. The area above the stage (for lifting scenery, producing deus ex machina effects, etc.) is completed, and the area below the stage (for trap doors, rising ghosts, etc.) is pretty well finished also. All this is done using authentic clay brick, green English oak, thatch, and lime plaster. A real labor of love. They are planning on a grand opening in 1995 with the Queen attending! In addition, work is planned for restoring the surrounding area. There are several other period buildings and of course the Swan Theatre is not too far away. 2) Some interesting findings: They discovered a curving wooden chute which ran from well above the stage to well below, and it contained rounded boulders. They have deduced that rolling boulders from top to bottom produced sounds of thunder, cannon, etc. Clever. It was also determined that the "groundling area" which is shaped like a dish was also pitched in such a way that the outside perimiter was 8" higher than the center. This allowed water to drain to the center where there was a drain, and also helped the groundlings in the back look over the heads of those in front. 3) The visit: Highly recommended. The guides are excellent - knowledgeable, charming, and excited about the project. They have a video which is pretty good and shows the beginning of the concept with Sam Wannamaker. There are also booklets, brochures, etc. 4) For more info: Contact The Globe Tourism Office, Shakespeare's Globe, New Globe Walk, Bankside, London, SE1 9EB. Telephone is 071 928 6406. Fax is 071 928 7968. 5) Donations are welcomed. We became a "Friend of the Globe" and "bought" a brick while we were there for 10 pounds sterling. It is also possible to have your name included on one of the flagstones and you will receive a map showing where your flagstone is located. If interested in helping out here are the USA and Canadian offices: Shakespeare Globe Centre (USA)Inc., 20 No Michigan Ave, Suite 400, Chicago, IL 60602, and Shakespeare Globe Centre of Canada, 212 King St West, Sixth Floor, Toronto, Canada, M5H 1K5. If you do become a friend, you will receive mailings, and bulletins which will keep you up to date, and forms to write for tickets when they open. Hope this is helpful. Joseph Nathan joebabe@cerfnet.com (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Catherine Kozubei Date: Thursday, 19 Jan 1995 21:57:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: Homoeroticism in Shakespeare [Catherine Kozubei shared SHK 6.0021 Re: Boy Actors with Bruce Smith, who asked that his response be sent to the members. --HMC] Concerning boy actors and homoeroticism, you might want to pass along the title of my book, since it does take a middle position, suggesting that boy actors COULD play for homoerotic appeal in certain genres, in certain circumstances. I conservatively would limit those circumstances to comedy, and to situations in which the script specifically calls attention to the boy's body beneath the female costume--usually when a boy actor is disguised as a girl disguised as a boy. Anyhow, the book is called "Homosexual Desire in Shakespeare's England: A Cultural Poetics" and has just come out in paperback from University of Chicago Press. There is also a solid new book on the subject of cross-dressing by Michael Shapiro: "Gender in Play on the Shakespearean Stage," just out from University of Michigan Press. (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. L. Epstein Date: Friday, 20 Jan 1995 00:09:55 EDT Subject: RE: SHK 6.0034 Re: Greek (Athenian) Tragedy You are right about Euripides; he is the odd man out of the tragedians. He seems to have been unpopular with conservatives, who would rather that Athens got a good press from everybody! E.L.Epstein ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 09:28:37 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0041 Re: Yiddish *MV*s; Wilson's *Sh*; Inconsistencies; *Idaho* Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0041. Saturday, 21 January, 1995. (1) From: Bernice W. Kliman Date: Friday, 20 Jan 1995 10:32:26 -0400 (EDT) Subj: *MV* in the Yiddish Theater (2) From: Tad Davis Date: Friday, 20 Jan 1995 11:11:17 -0500 (EST) Subj: Ian Wilson: "Shakespeare: the Evidence" (3) From: Matthew Westcott Smith Date: Friday, 20 Jan 1995 22:19:31 GMTST Subj: Tornberg's Query (4) From: Anna Joell Goodman Date: Friday, 20 Jan 1995 23:56:11 -400 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0037 Re: *MV* Spinoffs (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bernice W. Kliman Date: Friday, 20 Jan 1995 10:32:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: *MV* in the Yiddish Theater My friend Tony Burton, who lives in Amherst, MA, the site of the YIVO archives, writes that YIVO has four Yiddish translations of *MV.* It would be fascinating to see what they make of the play. Tony Burton also points out that Leonard Prager wrote a long article with long appendix called "Shakespeare in Yiddish," SQ (spring 1968), which mentions a number of Yiddish versions of *MV*. I have not yet read that article but it seems an appropriate place to begin when considering the play's anti-Semitism: that is, what do these translators have to remove, what do they have to change, in order to make Shylock sympathetic? Yours, Bernice (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tad Davis Date: Friday, 20 Jan 1995 11:11:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: Ian Wilson: "Shakespeare: the Evidence" I just ran across a "new" book by Ian Wilson called "Shakespeare: the Evidence." In the mold of his book about Jesus, Wilson seems to have taken a kind of journalistic approach to writing a biography of Shakespeare: recognizing that he isn't an authority himself, he's interviewed a lot of people who are. The title might lead one to think he's wading into the authorship controversy, but apparently that's only a small part of the book. I call it a "new" book because it was copyright 1993, and was apparently published in Great Britain then -- only now being made available in the U.S. Has anyone seen or read this one? It appears to be pretty well up-to-date, especially on the subject of John Shakespeare. Wilson is an absorbing writer but not always reliable in his conclusions. Tad Davis davist@umis.upenn.edu (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Matthew Westcott Smith Date: Friday, 20 Jan 1995 22:19:31 GMTST Subject: Tornberg's Query Mr. Tornberg: You comments regarding Shakespeare's "blatant disregard for accurate research" are, to say the least, puzzling. Shakespeare--indeed any poet--is not a theologian nor a historian when writing poetry. This does not mean that omissions, restatements, and/or misrepresentations are not important and significant for understanding the Shakespearean corpus; of course they are. Indeed, it is precisely through the selection of certain necessarily limited aspects of human life and experience that the poet distinguishes himself from other thinkers. To my mind, this is especially the case with Hall and Holinshed in the History plays--which are just that *dramas* based on historical events. I think if one read them as particularly accessible or pleasant historical narratives simply, their penetrating insight to the nature of human (hence political) life is likely to be missed. I am not prepared to comment on Jacob and Laban matter at any length, but I would suggest that the way the dramatist distorts the relevant OT passages is just as significant as its presence in the first place. Matthew Westcott Smith, PhD Lecturer of Political Philosophy Kossuth University, Debrecen Hungary (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Anna Joell Goodman Date: Friday, 20 Jan 1995 23:56:11 -400 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0037 Re: *MV* Spinoffs In reponse to the question posed regarding the film "My Own Private Idaho", with the Keanu Reeves and the late River Phoenix: It was actually a modern-day take on *Henry IV, Part I*, not *MV*. It was reasonably well-acclaimed when it came out in the late 80's. In it, Phoenix plays a narcoleptic male prostitute, and Reeves is the Hal-esque young man running away from his political- figure father. Unfortunately, I have not been able to see this one, but several of my friends assure me that it is worth a look. --Anna Joell Goodman [Again, the DATABASE function will enable anyone interested in previous discussions of *My Own Private Idaho* to locate and retrieve them. --HMC] ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 10:01:56 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0042 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies and Act Five Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0042. Monday, 23 January, 1995. (1) From: Ben Schneider Date: Saturday, 21 Jan 1995 11:53:37 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies (2) From: Matthew Henerson Date: Sunday, 22 Jan 1995 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0037 Re: *MV*, Especially Act V (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ben Schneider Date: Saturday, 21 Jan 1995 11:53:37 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0033 Re: *MV*: Inconsistencies Answer to Aaron Tornberg: Shylock says, regarding Laban's device, "this was a way to thrive, and he was blest." The rest of the story only confirms that "he was blest." However, Antonio disagrees about why he was blest. Joan Holmer whose essay on MV and Elizabethan arguments against usury appeared in Shakespeare Studies 1993 has a lot to say about 16th century thought on the Laban story. Yours ever BEN SCHNEIDER (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Matthew Henerson Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0043 Re: Globe; Reinventing Shakespeare; *Idaho* Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0043. Monday, 23 January, 1995. (1) From: Paul Nelsen Date: Saturday, Jan 21 12:22:49 1995 Subj: Globe project (2) From: Michael Groves Date: Saturday, 21 Jan 1995 09:40:26 -0800 Subj: "Reinventing Shakespeare" and problematic endings (3) From: Robert Lloyd Neblett Date: Sunday, 22 Jan 1995 12:28:12 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0037 (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul Nelsen Date: Saturday, Jan 21 12:22:49 1995 Subject: Globe project Re: ISGC Globe Joseph Nathan's recent report (20 January, SHK6.0040 #2) on progress of the International Shakespeare Globe Centre's effort to construct a rendition of the first Globe on London's South Bank conveys a sense of the enthusiasm for this project that so many of us share. I visited the site three times in early January as part of ongoing research. As much as I concur with Mr. Nathan's delight in the progress of the project, some aspects of his report are inaccurate. Here is a modest effort to set a few matters straight. This project should not be understood as a "restoration" -- nothing remains of the first or second Globe to restore. The enterprise is a careful effort to build an Elizabethan style public playhouse incorporating as many authentic elements as possible. For detailed discussion of design issues related to the ISGC project, see my articles "Reinventing Shakespeare's Globe?" 10, iv (Fall 1992), "Sizing up the Globe" in 11, iv (Fall 1993), and "Transition and Revision at the Globe" in 12, ii (Spring 1994).Fifteen bays of triple tiered audience galleries form a horseshoe around what is now a barren concrete yard. Thatching of the galleries' roof is nearly complete; some plastering of internal walls is done but the vast majority of plaster work awaits return of warm weather. A composite of ash, clinker, and hazelnut shells will eventually cover the yard on which "groundlings" will stand. This surface will be pitched ever so slightly - dropping 8 inches toward the center of the yard over a span of 35 feet -- for the sole purpose of aiding drainage (not for sight-lines). The brick in the foundation (those above ground level) are made from the same recipe as those found in Tudor brickwork at Hampton Court Palace but are not "authentic" 16th-century recyclables. The timber framework for the tiring house is presently being fabricated in workshops off the site. Architect Jon Greenfield states that he hopes the five bays of the tiring house frame will be joined the galleries prior to August. The actual stage, the heavens with its machinery, and frons scenae, will not be ready to install until sometime after the "prologue season" is completed next Fall. The official festive opening of the Globe is scheduled for 14 June 1996. Michael Holden, Chief Executive of the ISGC, advises me that advertisement of the Queen's participation in opening festivities is premature and inappropriate. I join Mr. Nathan is recommending a visit to the Globe exhibit. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Groves Date: Saturday, 21 Jan 1995 09:40:26 -0800 Subject: "Reinventing Shakespeare" and problematic endings 1) When I first started thinking about the possible Victorian influences on Shakespeare scholarship and how I think about Shakespeare, I decided to read more about "tragic flaw." The suggestions from the conference will keep me busy for a long time, and I thank you for them. From my own library I rediscovered Taylor's _Reinventing Shakespeare_, which I had read a few years ago. In it he has a chapter on the "Victorian Values" and Shakespeare. He reminded me that some of the popular editions (Cambridge Shakespeare, Clarendon Shakespeare) were published during the period. Shakespeare studies at the univserity level became popular ("the dominant component of the new subject of English Literature"), and because of technological changes in the book publishing industry more editions became available at a cheaper price and many readers felt they too could be experts. The plays, like the novels of Dickens and others, were serialized. As never before, "women and children shaped the prevailing image of Shakespeare" (209). And, according to Taylor, although it did not originate with the Victorians, "the author question" has its roots in Victorian scholarship. It occurred independently of the late 18th century scholarship of James Wilmot as a "kind of intellectuall spontaneous combustion" (211). Although there was no discussion of the tragedies per se, other than a lengthy discussion of the influence of A. C. Bradley's lecture-like comments, I found the chapter well worth a read. 2) _Reinventing Shakespeare_ made me wonder how we have reinvented Shakespeare. An example probably concerns the problematic endings to some of the plays, _Measure for Measure_, _Two Gentleman of Verona_, and _Much Ado about Nothing_. Last weekend I saw _Measure for Measure_ produced by the Portland Center Stage, an offshoot of the Oregon Sahkespeare Festival. When the Duke asked for Isabella's hand, the audience laughed; during another evening, they groaned. The reactions are not what the director wanted. What is to be done? In two other plays, _TGOV_ and _MAAN_, traditonally the women must overlook the harsh treatment of their lovers and in the end all reconcile and depart together for better and more enlightened lives as husbands and wives. In productions of _TGOV_ and _MAAN_, which I saw at the Tygres Heart Theatre, the ending suggested that the men did not, will not, get off so easily. The couples are not reconciled. For example, while not ignoring Claudio, Hero does not celebrate with him when dance and music is called for in the end. She exited with someone else and left Claudio standing alone; he left alone. When she told him, "As surely as I live, I am a maid," she challenged him. It seems that such "reinventions" are needed if we are to continue to produce the plays. The laughter and groans at the ending of _Measure for Measure_ suggested a disatisfied, incredulous audience who walked away thinking Shakespeare and some of his characaters rather silly. ----------- Michael Groves mgroves@teleport.com (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Robert Lloyd Neblett Date: Sunday, 22 Jan 1995 12:28:12 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0037 Gus Van Sant's film "My Own Private Idaho" (atrocious) is based upon HENRY IV Parts I & II, focusing on Part II, due to the Hal character's abandonment of his past. The movie not only "borrows" the plot from the Bard, it also modernizes some of the verse. And if you thought Keanu Reeves slaughtered Don John's character in an otherwise pleasant production of MUCH ADO with Branagh & Co., hearing him spout iambic pentameter about "lines of coke" will make you run from the room screaming. The cinematography is interesting, but for the most part, MY OWN PRIVAYE IDAHO should be abandoned as anyone's MUST SEE. Robert L. Neblett rlneblet@artsci.wustl.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 10:21:34 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0044 Bibliography on Historical Approaches Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0044. Monday, 23 January, 1995. From: Douglas M Lanier Date: Saturday, 21 Jan 1995 13:43:43 -0500 (EST) Subject: Bibliography Three months ago, I asked SHAKSPER members for help in concocting a bibliography on historical approaches to Renaissance literature (in conjunction with a graduate course I'm offering this semester). I promised at the time to share the bibliography with interested SHAKSPER subscribers. If you want an e-copy, send me your name and e-address (my address is dml3@christa.unh.edu). Please send your request to me and NOT to the SHAKSPER group. Some caveats: this bibliography is geared to graduate students at UNH in this particular course and to the limited resources of our research library (i.e., I make no representations of completeness); since the class is finally a literary-critical one, the bibliography is weighted heavily in that direction; the divisions I've made in the materials--again, geared to my syllabus--are to some extent arbitrary. I'd be grateful for additions or corrections, but not for flames. My thanks to those who gave suggestions--I deeply appreciate the help and encouragement many offered. Cheers, Douglas Lanier dml3@christa.unh.edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:09:37 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0045 Keanu Reviews Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0045. Tuesday, 24 January, 1995. From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Monday, 23 Jan 95 10:00:57 -0500 Subject: Reviews of Keanu's Hamlet Here are the three reviews I've received via the Internet so far. Enjoy! (Please note that these are all reproduced without permission.) [As I understand, these reviews can be reproduced for "fair use" so long as they are not used commercially or sold. --HMC] **************************************** Winnipeg Free Press Saturday, January 14 PRINCELY PERFORMANCE Kevin Prokosh Every actor who utters "This is I, Hamlet the Dane" is under intense scrutiny to justify the claim. None more so than Keanu Reeves, the Hollywood movie star returning to the stage to star in the triumphant MTC production of Hamlet, which opened Thursday to a capacity audience. Reeves pulled on the dark tights of the troubled Prince Of Denmark and pulled off a credible princely performance, crowned with power, poetry, and humor. The role may be worn through with familiarity, but Reeves commands our attention throughout this visually rich, strongly acted, and clear minded production. The VIP laden opening night crowd accorded Reeves and the cast a well earned standing ovation. But not even the screams of adulation from some of his female fans drew a smile from the still melancholy looking Reeves. More likely this sweet prince was exhausted and relieved from passing acting's ultimate test. His was a mercurial, intense, and physically heroic Hamlet. Any Hamlet has to face a house divided, and no doubt Reeves will be taken to task for his un-Shakespearean voice, as well as for not always sustaining the music of the words and their meaning. He did not flatter the "To be or not to be" soliloquy where Hamlet contemplates "self-slaughter" but delivered a stirring "Oh what a rogue and peasant slave" to close out the first act with a flourish. His portrayal will not share the same breath with that of legendary Hamlets. He is a younger Hamlet than most, not necessarily a better one. His Hamlet is not the traditional Hamlet, wrapped in pale and inky despair. Reeves is a fierce and demanding rebel hell-bent for revenge, awaiting only a proper opportunity. When he says he could drink hot blood, he is convincing. His antic disposition cloaking his plan for revenge is nicely worked out. His comic scenes are all realized and then some. The climactic swordfight scene - a cut above the typical offering thanks to fight director B.H. Barry - reveals an athletic Reeves with plenty of swash and buckle. Reeves's work in his opening scenes did not bode well, as he portrayed a malcontented Hamlet, who returns to Denmark brooding over the death of his father, and his mother's all too quick marriage to his uncle Claudius, the new king. His acting was bloodless and his delivery so breathless as to raise doubts as to whether or not he would survive this stage ordeal. But as with many actors, Reeves began to find the passion for his prince as soon as he began to move around set designer Brian Perchaluk's cold damp Elsinore Castle In such dreary greyness sits King Claudius's opulent and decadent court, pervaded with a sense of its own imminent destruction. The courtiers are all finely dressed in Debra Hanson's eye popping scarlet and gold costumes. The production is more than three hours and 30 minutes long. But director Lewis Baumander avoids Shakespearean tedium by keeping his production moving briskly. It was not the endurance test it could be. Baumander provides capable and invisible direction, which is sovereign for its clarity. He also adds several fine touches, such as a projection that serves as a window on the action. When Hamlet is feigning madness, the moon representing lunacy appears. Hamlet puncuates the second act by throwing his sword thorugh the stained glass window depiction of the madonna and child, signifying his break with his mother just before he is to confront her in her closet. Surrounding Reeves was an impressive cast headed by Stephen Russell, who ofers Claudius as a haunted, corrupt usurper. Louisa Martin, Baumander's wife, is a weak shallow Gertrude, who is terrified by the pressure of events she does not understand. The resourceful Robert Benson is a deftly amusing old poop of a Polonius, a pumped up domestic tyrant in need of some deflating. As Ophelia, Liisa Repo-Martell is a casting conundrum. Although a more than competent actor, her childlike Ophelia is mismatched with Reeves's virility. Andrew Akman happily storms the part of Laertes, a man of finely tortured nobility who unlike Hamlet, acts immediately without a thought to avenge the death of his father. Gary Reineke's strong work as the ghost, grave digger, and player king, is an example of how placing superior actors in small roles raises a production. The Winnipeg contingent in the cast did themselves proud. Lora Schroeder was a fine player queen, as was the platoon of small part men of Elsinore: Gene Pyrz, Wayne Nicklas, Robb Paterson, Derek Aasland, Myles Burdeniuk, Dan Deurbrouck, and Neal Rempel. To see or not to see Hamlet? No question, based on the opening night performance. (Four stars out of five) [Note from the friend who forwarded the article to me: "The same paper has comments from some of the international critics which I'll post later. The London Sunday Times critic compared Keanu to a young Olivier !! Quite a compliment!"] ***************************************** Ottawa Citizen Saturday, January 14, 1995 Speed Demon Reeves delivers uneven Prince of Denmark Jamie Portman Winnipeg- A usurping new king and his queen coil and uncoil in elevated sexual ecstasy, while stained-lass images of the Crucifixion and the Madonna and her Child provide and ironic visual counterpoint. Meanwhile, below and in the foreground, another image is taking shape on the stage of the Manitoba Theatre Centre, that of a young prince mourning at the tomb of his murdered father. Such is our first glimpse of Keanu Reeves as Hamlet. The scene is nowhere in Shakespeare's text, but it does provide a powerful beginning to what is destined to be the most talked-about production of the current Canadian theatrical season - a production that sold out its 3 1/2 week run months before it opened. It also gives doting fans (some have from far away as Japan) the chance to get over their initial excitement at seeing Hollywood's hottest superstar (Speed, Little Buddha) in the flesh before settling down to the serious business fo Hamlet itself. Reeves takes playing Shakespeare very seriously. It really isn't his fault that his celebrity status has stireed up a media circus: foreign press outlets converging on wintry Winnipeg this month have reanged from teh respectable (The Guardian) to the direputable (the U.S. tabloid shows, Hard Copy and Current Affair). The 30 year old actor, who was raised in Toronto, could have been doing another movie this winter. Instead, he has chosen to come to Canada's oldest established regional theatre (a theatre whoe total budget is less than half the $7-million fee he now commands for a single movie) to play Hamlet for a salary of $2,000 a week. Given the glare of public scrutiny, it's a courageous initiative for him to have taken. But it's also a foolhardy one: this is the Everest of roles for even the most experienced of young actors, and they take it on at their own peril. So it's scarcely surprising that this is a frequently uneven characterization. At this stage in his development, Reeves simply lacks the equipment to sustain such a role. Even so, his Hamlet is not quite the act of effrontery that one might expect. Reeves never disgraces himself. And if some cast members do act circles around him - notably Stephen Russell and Robert Benson who are both splendid in the respective roles of Claudius and Polonius - Reeves's Hamlet far outshines the insipid Ophelia of Liisa Repo-Martell and the excessively bland Horatio of Donald Carrier. What Reeves does bring is a strong and sometimes commanding stage presence, emotional sensitivity and genuine warmth of character, a sleek and assured athleticismm, and some refreshing moments of humor. He's also capable on occasion of surging dramatic power, such as his explosion of rage and psychological pain over the murder of his father, the king, by Hamlet's ursurping uncle, Claudius, and the latter's "incestuous" marriage to Hamlet's mother, Gertrude. But repeatedly, Reeves is undermined by his own lack of classical theatre technique. True, he brings intelligence to the role. But - and this may partly be due to opening night jitters - there's a real problem with a number of Hamlet's speeches. There's a failure to find the right rhythm, phrasing and cadence, to achieve th fusion of sound and meaning so vital in communicating Shakespeare to audiences. The soliloquies are particularly disappointing in the regard, even To Be Or Not To Be is perfunctorily spoken, without conviction or emotional reflection. One searches in vain for a sustained dramatic sensibility both in this production and in Reeves' performance. On the other hand, there have been productions of Hamlet far more pretentious - and far worse - at both the Stratford and the Royal Shakespeare Company. And one must give Reeves credit. He is never less than interesting on stage. And on those occasions when he does fail, he does so with honor. ********************************************* Western edition of the Toronto Globe and Mail. REEVES AS HAMLET? IT LOOKS GOOD ON HIM H.J. Kirchoff Let's get the most important point right out front: Keanu Reeves is not a bad Hamlet. I've seen better, I've seen worse. He did not embarrass himself in the Manitoba Theatre Centre's Hamlet which opened Thursday night, and that was a considerable risk for the hunky Hollywood superstar, who made his fame and fortune mostly in film roles that could generally be described as bimbo-esque. He didn't really need to return to the stage to take on arguably the most difficult, complex role in the Shakespearean canon. But he did, and it looks good on him. All right, he won't make anyone forget Geilgud or Branagh, or even Mel Gibson, but Reeves remembered all of his lines -- all 1,500-plus of them -- and delivered them without a hint of "hey, dude." If anything, he overenunciated, carefully pronouncing every consonant in the text ("bit-ter.") After a shaky half-hour or so on opening night, in which his voiced sounded breathless and thin, he limbered up and began speaking with punch and vigour, and a lot more assurance, and his delivery of the famous monologues was plain-spoken and clear. He is undeniably better in the more physical scenes and with the larger emotions; he does anger and madness well, but his brooding seems more like fretfulness. And he does look great in tights. Director Lewis Baumander -- who directed Reeves in Romeo and Juliet at Toronto's Leah Posluns Theatre many years ago -- seems to have gotten the max out of his young star, partly through intensive coaching, and partly by tailoring a large-scale, extravegantly visual production that well suits Reeves' undeniable physical presence. His fatal duelling scene with Laertes (Andrew Akman), arranged by fight director B.H. Barry, is sprawling, violent and scary. Brian Perchaluk's set -- a gothic creation of enormous stone pillars, arches, buttresses, platforms and stairways -- simply shouts "castle," and Debra Hanson's costumes are elaborate, colourful and bejewelled confections that would fit right into the court of any Renaissance prince. There's enough velvet in this show to clothe Winnipeg. Baumander has surrounded his star with a generally strong supporting cast. These are mostly veteran actors who know what diction is and don't have problems "speaking Shakespeare." Stephen Russell and Louisa Martin are especially good as Claudius and Gertrude, Hamlet's uncle and mother. Russell is a particularly smooth-talking and decadent Claudius, murderer of the late king (his brother and Hamlet's father) and usurper of both the throne and the widowed queen. For her part, and in keeping with the tone of the production, Martin is a very sexual Gertrude. (In one very interesting directorial touch, Baumander opens his Hamlet with the Prince standing silently over his father's body, while above and behind him, in hot red lighting and little else, Claudius and Gertrude perform a stylized, graceful and pretty mime-dance of lust. Apart from anything else, this gives the audience a look at Reeves, permitting his more vocal fans to get their cheers and moans and swoons out of the way before the play actually begins.) Robert Benson, decked out like a Borgia cardinal, is a superb Polonius, holding a fine edge of dignity while playing the fussy pomposity for laughs. Liisa Repo-Martell is at the other end of the scale as Ophelia, Hamlet's sometime love interest; her mad scenes are good in a twitchy sort of way, but she seems far out of her depth through most of the play. Nor was I much impressed by Gary Reineke, who gave the same bland, restrained tone to both the Ghost and the Player King, and barely loosened the stays for a jokey turn as the Gravedigger. Baumander and the MTC were clearly intent on doing it up big for Reeves, and so they have. He, in his turn, has given them a credible performance and a red-hot ticket -- Hamlet is already sold out for its entire run. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:21:20 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0046 Re: *MV*: Act Five Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0046. Tuesday, 24 January, 1995. (1) From: Bradley S. Berens Date: Monday, 23 Jan 1995 09:36:22 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0042 Re: *MV*: Act Five (2) From: John Owens Date: Monday, 23 Jan 1995 10:58:00 -0800 Subj: RE: SHK 6.0042 Re: *MV*: Act Five (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bradley S. Berens Date: Monday, 23 Jan 1995 09:36:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0042 Re: *MV*: Act Five Greetings all, I just read my dear friend Matt Henerson's comments about recent productions of Merchant and the inability of a modern audience to re-enter the romance in Act V. I have two responses. 1) Was it ever that easy to wallow in the romance of Belmont? We only even GET there after that odd scene between Bassanio--who must be the biggest drip in the comedies--and Antonio. That tends to inflect it away from "happy" for me both in reading and in the productions I've scene. Also, at least in the current political atmosphere Portia's intense xenophobia in 1.2 makes her less attractive. 2) More importantly, I remember having a discussion a few years ago-- it was probably with the very same Matt Henerson-- in which the other person suggested that Shylock, characterologically speaking, got away from Shakespeare and popped out into three dimensions when, functionally speaking, he should have been more like Marlowe's Barabas. Norman Rabkin says along vaguely similar lines that Shylock was one of the first truly individual characters with speech patterns all his own: "At this point in Shakespeare's career his ability to create characters with authentic voices and to effect mercurial changes in his audience's emotions leaped beyond what he had been able to do earlier..." (Shakespeare and the Problem of Meaning, 6-7). Now, what I'm interested in is the uncontainability of a character like Shylock. I am NOT particularly interested in whether or not he was more easily contained in the 1590s. What does it mean that a character so exceeds his function as villain, hero, etc? Other candidates might include Mercutio, or Malvolio (who is the same as Shylock anyway). Yours, Bradley Berens UC Berkeley email: claudius@garnet.berkeley.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Owens Date: Monday, 23 Jan 1995 10:58:00 -0800 Subject: RE: SHK 6.0042 Re: *MV*: Act Five Another way out? First of all, I agree that the antisemitism in MV may prevent audiences from enjoying Act V in the form Shakespeare intended. That said, I cannot imagine a truly attentive audience buying Antonio as a fascist. This is equally, if not more, unsatisying. Can a play be enjoyed if its author's intentions are so completely ignored? Secondly, I want to address a tendency I have seen in this discussion to ignore or minimize Shylock's villainy. "Not nice" and "unpleasant" are gross understatements. At the risk of repeating the obvious, allow me to summarize Shylock's behavior. He fully intends to publicly skin a living human being in front of his friends. This is sadistic, not "unpleasant". Mutilation for the sheer pleasure of killing is absolutely unforgivable, and Shylock should alienate any unbiased spectator here if not for the idiotic antisemitism of some of the Christian characters. Directors who play up this prejudice to the point where Shylock appears to be a prisoner in a concentration camp are merely shooting themselves in the foot. First, because it isn't true, and second, because the play makes no sense once the deeply bloodthirsty Shylock is made the hero. One answer to the MV problem was investigated in a production some years back where Tubal was shown to be deeply contemptuous of Shylock in their scene together. Recognizing his brutal temperament, he intentionally toys with him, bringing him up and down for his own amusement. Unfortunately, this doesn't really set Tubal in a very good light. I guess I am at a loss to understand how this play can be salvaged in a century sensitive to the results of religious and ethnic intolerance. Make Shylock the hero -- you turn the play inside out and glorify the sadism of his revenge. Make Shylock a snarling villain, and you seem to buy into the genuinely repulsive teasing of his enemies. Finally, have we no other choice but to recognize the play as a failure, albeit a failure not lightly dismissed, with fine poetry and fascinating characterizations? Regarding the breakdown of Lorenzo and Jessica's marriage: You can, I suppose, play any dialogue as an argument if you shout and stamp your feet, but the text really doesn't seem to support this course. John Owen ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:26:36 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0047 Defending the NEA and NEH Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0047. Tuesday, 24 January, 1995. From: Edward Gero Date: Monday, 23 Jan 1995 12:46:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: Mobilize to Defend the NEA and NEH Hardy and SHAKSPEReans: As an artist working with theatres that are supported by the National Endowment for the Arts; a member of the Goals 2000 Arts Action Committee; a member of the National Committee for Standards in the Arts, and as a private citizen, I feel compelled to forward this message as widely as possible. As you know, since the November elections the future of our arts national cultural agencies, including the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities, is seriously threatened. These agencies are facing severe cuts to their current funding or possible elimination. Congress may make decisions about these and other agencies within the next several days. The Emergency Committee to Save Culture and the Arts, a project of the American Arts Alliance, has set up a 1-900 number so that citizens can quickly and easily register their support for the continued funding of the arts and culture with their members of Congress, for a nominal fee. Time is short. You are invited to use this number immediately. When you call this number, 1-900-370-9000, the following will happen: 1) Following a brief statement that the call costs $1.99 per minute and that you must be 18 or over, the operator then asks the caller if s/he would allow the Emergency Committee to send a mailgram in the caller's name to their two Senators and one Representative. 2) If the caller says yes, the above process takes place and is billed to the caller's home phone. The caller leaves his/her name, address, and zip code, which is then matched with the corresponding congressional district to assure that the correct elected officials receive the mailgram. The Alliance has put together a steering committee currently made up of more than a dozen organizations to participate in this campaign. Please call the American Arts Alliance at 202-737-1727 if you would like to join this steering committee or have questions. In order for this emergency campaign to be effective, we need your help to distribute the 1-900 number. Please make use of all means at your disposal including e-mail and electronic bulletin boards. Thank you for participating in this critical grassroots effort. Sincerely, Edward Gero ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:42:47 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0049 Q: Renaissance Webs Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0049. Tuesday, 24 January, 1995. From: Luc Borot Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 95 11:51:44 +0100 Subject: Renaissance W3s Dear all, I am preparing a presentation of the Shakespearean and Elizabethan servers on the Net for the coming issue of Cahiers Elisabethains. I have spotted 2 WWW servers in Germany, and several links to US servers. I would be very grateful if the colleagues involved in W3 or gopher or ftp servers in Tudor and Stuart studies sent me a note with a description of their servers, their addresses of course, and a brief blurb on the spirit behind the machines. The servers offering a choice of Shakespeare editions are also welcome to inform us of the choice they made. It is not always bery obvious: which text? why? which editions were considered in a first phase? how were they made into e-texts? If time gets too short (you know how printers are), I will only publish a catalogue this April, followed by a review essay in the October issue. Glad to be of some help to advertise our activities in the 'paper' world. Yours, Luc ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:37:49 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0048 Re: *Idaho*; Wilson's *Sh.*; New Globe Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0048. Tuesday, 24 January, 1995. (1) From: Thomas Berger Date: Monday, 23 Jan 95 14:03:55 EST Subj: *Idaho* (2) From: David Joseph Kathman Date: Monday, 23 Jan 1995 16:12:43 -0600 Subj: *Shakespeare: The Evidence* (3) From: Andrew Gurr <> Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 1995 10:14:01 +0000 (GMT) Subj: Re: The Rebuilding Globe. (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thomas Berger Date: Monday, 23 Jan 95 14:03:55 EST Subject: *Idaho* In response to Robert Lloyd Neblett on *MY OWN PRIVATE IDAHO*; yes, there are some really bad parts, too be sure, but the narcoleptic role (and its treatment by the film and by River Phoenix, who acts it) is the best essay on Poins I have ever "read." Tom Berger (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Joseph Kathman Date: Monday, 23 Jan 1995 16:12:43 -0600 Subject: *Shakespeare: The Evidence* With regard to Tad Davis' query on Ian Wilson's book *Shakespeare: The Evidence*: I just finished reading this a couple of weeks ago, and I can't say I was all that impressed. I, too, was led by the title to think he would deal with anti-Stratfordian claims, but his one chapter on that consists mainly of a brief summary of Baconian, Oxfordian, Derbyite, etc. claims, all of which he dismisses without any actual arguments to speak of. The book as a whole is basically just a biography of Shakespeare, with the underlying purpose (more or less explicitly stated in the preface) of arguing that Shakespeare was a closet Catholic. Thus, he dwells on John Shakespeare's Testament of Faith, but as far as I remember he doesn't say anything that isn't in Schoenbaum's *Documentary Life*; he also dwells on the Catholic connections of Ferdinando Stanley (Wilson assumes, a little too easily for me, that Shakespeare started out as a member of Strange's Men) and the Earl of Southampton. The level of scholarship is, I'm afraid, nothing special; by his own admission, Wilson seems to have relied mainly on the biographies of A. L. Rowse and Samuel Schoenbaum, and while these are both fine scholars, there were many times when some variation would have been helpful. Wilson's admiration of Rowse, and his concomitant subtle digs at Schoenbaum, are almost embarrassing at times; his chapter on the sonnets consists mainly of a summary of Rowse's positions on the identity of the Fair Youth (Southampton), the Dark Lady (Emilia Bassano-Lanier), and the Rival Poet (Marlowe), interspersed with approving comments and a rather patronizing swipe at Schoenbaum's agnosticism in this area. There are a few morsels in the book, such as some new (as far as I know) information about John Heminges' connection with the Company of Grocers, but there are also lacunae (Wilson's summary of the Elizabethan theatre scene makes no mention of the Boar's Head playhouse, for instance). I wanted to like this book more than I did; it's not a bad summary of a lot of issues, but it's rather one-sided as well, and Wilson's prose style is not particularly to my liking. That's my two cents; I'd be interested to hear other opinions. Dave Kathman djk1@midway.uchicago.edu (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Andrew Gurr <> Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 1995 10:14:01 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: The Rebuilding Globe. I can add a few points to Joe Nathan's account of the New Globe. That, by the way, seems to be the current title. Southwark Borough Council has re-named Emerson Street at "New Globe Walk", and the name is apt enough to stick. His comment on the wooden trough with stones in it puzzles me. I didn't think any such thing had been found, though at the Rose in 1989 they found a long rectangular wooden trough that seems to have been a drain, leading down from the tiring house out north to the ditch there. There are refs about stone-rolling in troughs from the time, but I doubt if this discovery was one of that kind. The yard at the New Globe is at present about fifteen inches lower than it will eventually be. There's a black line around the inner gallery walls that marks the eventual level. Like the Rose's yard, it's sloped for drainage, and will eventually have a deposit on it not unlike the Rose's permeable layer of ash, clinker and hazel-nut shells. This, it is thought, was 'industrial debris' from the local soap-making factories, laid to give a standing surface through which the rainwater would drain itself. As for the hazel-nut shells as audience debris, when a test was done on some of the Rose remains to see how permeable it was, they found a few cherry-stones, which can't have come from the soap factory. So we needn't abandon the idea that the yard surface was pure and unsullied road-surfacing entirely. Readers with memories of previous kinds of social combat might also enjoy the news that the stage and tiring-house structure is being put up in a hangar at the Greenham Common air base. Please note also, as in my previous piece, that there's a conference to discuss what academic benefit might be gained from proper use of the Globe stage once it's in use: what kinds of experiment can it best bear? If you can't come to the conference (on 18-20 April at the Globe: for information fax Alastair Tallon, Globe Education, London, 0171-928-7968), then please send me your ideas. Andrew Gurr. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 10:00:57 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0050 More Keanu Reviews Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 050. Wednesday, 25 January, 1995. From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 95 11:17:47 -0500 Subject: More Winnipeg Hamlet Reviews Winnipeg Sun, January 13, 1995 Sweet Prince Reeves excellent in MTC's Hamlet Riva Harrison There was much ado about Keanu Reeves last night as he took to the Manitoba Theatre Centre mainstage to perform Hamlet -- William Shakespeare's most challenging role -- in front of a sold-out house. At press time, the three-act, three hour Elizabethan marathon wasn't complete, but Reeves was going strong in the first act in his portrayal of the brooding Prince of Denmark. With his trademark movie star voice, he was at times a fiery, passionate Hamlet -- the lines of agony etched clearly on his $7 million profile. Although the 30-year-old Beirut-born actor flubbed his lines during recent Theatre For Young Audience performances, he was quite clear last night, stumbling only a couple of times when he seemed to be rushing his lines. In other words, he was a pretty good dude; appropriately tormented as the melancholy Dane and charming as a madman. The audience was quiet throughout, except to chuckle when he greeted Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as "my excellent good friends." The curtain rose to reveal a tormented Hamlet kneeling over his dead father, while his uncle, Claudius (Stephen Russel), and his mother, Gertrude (Louisa Martin), make passionate love on a raised platform behind the troubled prince. Claudius and Gertrude are both naked, except for a strategically placed sheet. The wordless, five-minute scene is set to ominous music that says something is rotten in the state of Denmark. Moments later, through an eerie fog appears a ghost, which looks like the late king of Denmark, Hamlet's father, at the castle of Elsinore. Meanwhile Hamlet is in a deep, mournful funk; his mother married his uncle within two months of his father's death, a move considered incestuous at the time. This is the true source of his deep depression, revealed by his sarcastic "the funeral bak'd meats did coldly furnish forth the marriage tables." Hamlet meets the ghost of his father (Gary Reineke), who tells Hamlet that Claudius killed him by pouring poison in his ear. A heartbroken Hamlet is instructed to avenge his father's death, but to leave his mother's punishment to heaven. Time passes and Hamlet is acting like a madman, ranting and raving around the castle. At this point, much of Hamlet's inner turmoil is the result of his own inability to avenge his father's murder and lingering bitterness over Gertrude's relationship with Claudius. The play, set in the 16th century, has a soft, illusory aspect to it. The iron-grey set covering the entire mainstage creates a dungeon-like aura. It's an enormous, moody, medieval creation, with various levels and plenty of black spaces that swallow up the actors and heighten the sense of foreboding. (For a complete review, see tomorrow's Saturday Scene.) *********************************** Maclean's Magazine January 23, 1995 KEANU, PRINCE OF DENMARK Brian D. Johnson HAMLET By William Shakespeare Directed by Lewis Baumander It is a daunting role for any actor, no matter how talented. Master thespian Daniel Day-Lewis once walked offstage during a London performance of _Hamlet_, never to return. Keanu Reeves is no Daniel Day-Lewis. And on opening night in Winnipeg last week, as Reeves prepared to scale this Everest of theatrical roles, anticipation was running high. Local TV crews combed the crowded lobby at the Manitoba Theatre Centre, hoping to line up instant post-play verdicts from out-of-town critics. Kiosks conducted a brisk business in black Hamlet T-shirts sporting Reeves's image on the front and a Shakespeare quote on the back -- "To thine own self be true." Hamlet is, quite simply, one of the most ballyhooed stage events in Winnipeg history. And during the play's five-week rehearsal period, the star who fell to earth in the Manitoba capital seemed to charm everyone from crew members to people on the street. They said he is friendly, humble, accessible, hardworking. And, above all, brave to take on _Hamlet_. They worried about him, as if he were attempting a daredevil stunt. How on earth would he do it? How would he remember all those lines? Well, he did remember his lines. In fact, at times he recited them. Very quickly, like a schoolboy dying to get to the end. Perhaps it was just opening-night nerves, but Reeves raced through some lines at such a clip that the sense was almost unintelligible. He whipped through the soliloquies, the signature tunes of _Hamlet_, as if they were air-guitar solos. Locked into Shakespeare's iambic pentameter, he surfed from one consonant to the next, faster and faster. He rode the play as if it were wired to blow up below a certain speed. But it was not a performance that deserves harsh criticism. Although he was out of his depth in the big swatches of text, Reeves proved adept in the comic scenes. And whenever he had a chance to get physical, he was impressive. Even when his delivery was lacking, there was something intriguing about his presence. The ingenuous lilt to his voice, the blank sense of disconnection that he projects and his valiant efforts to overcome it -- those qualities make him a more suitable casting choice for Hamlet than he might at first seem. The Winnipeg production is a handsome one. Debra Hanson's costuming has an old-fashioned opulence. Brian Perchaluk's set consists of brooding, slanted walls with Escher-like stairs and arches. The production opens with an imaginative tableau, a "dumb show" in which a dour Hamlet stands silent over his father's corpse, while above him Gertrude (Louisa Martin) and Claudius (Stephen Russell) make love beneath scarlet sheets. But it is a false promise, for the play then settles into a traditional and unprovocative interpretation. Reeves has little impact until he acts out Hamlet's madness. Dressed in tattered breeches and bare feet, the actor seems visibly relieved by the scene's jocularity. And as he greets Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as "my excellent good friends," a titter from the audience underscores the inevitable allusion to _Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure_. Unfortunately, Reeves does not cultivate complicity with the audience. Instead of capitalizing on Hamlet's role as the play's outsider, he portrays the prince in an earnest fashion. Director Lewis Baumander must take some of the blame for the shapeless interpretation -- for the throwaway tone of the "To be or not to be" passage, for instance, which falls utterly flat. Throughout, Reeves is overshadowed by several more eloquent Shakespearean actors, notably Russell and Robert Benson (Polonius). At the end, however, he does take charge in spectacular fashion. The sword fight is breathtaking. Suddenly, Reeves commands the stage with acrobatic finesse, leaping and rolling like a true action hero. Finally, he is there, a Hollywood star on stage, acting the part. On opening night (the play runs until Feb. 4) the audience accorded him a standing ovation. At the reception after the show, when Reeves finally joined the crowd, he spent half an hour patiently signing autographs for a throng of young women who had him trapped in a corner. One fan proudly displayed what he had scribbled on her program: "To bee or not to bee." Awesome. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 10:24:12 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0052 Announcements: Job; Middleton Performances Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 052. Wednesday, 25 January, 1995. (1) From: Lawrence S Schwartz Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 1995 14:34:54 -0600 (CST) Subj: Job Announcement (2) From: Timothy Reed Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 1995 15:39:12 -0700 Subj: Performances of Middleton (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lawrence S Schwartz Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 1995 14:34:54 -0600 (CST) Subject: Job Announcement Opening for Director, Division of Fine Arts North Dakota State University, Fargo invites inquiries, nominations and appli- cations for the position of Director, Division of Fine Arts. The Division, with 16 FTE faculty, includes programs in Music (B.A., B.S., M. Music Ed.), Theatre (B.A., B.F.A., M.A.) and Visual Arts (B.A., B.S.). The Director reports to the Dean, College of Humanities and Social Sciences. For more information on responsibilities and qualifications, see the January 20th issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education and/or contact Search Committee Chair, Dr. George Youngs (701.231.8941, youngs@plains.nodak.edu). (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Timothy Reed Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 1995 15:39:12 -0700 Subject: Performances of Middleton The Upstart Crow Theatre Company in Boulder, Colorado has selected as the first play of its 1995-1996 season "The Second Maiden's Tragedy" by Middleton. This is the work that Charles Hamilton has touted as the lost Shakespearean play "Cardenio". We would be greatly interested to know of any instances of fully staged productions of this play. (For general interest, our production of Middleton's "The Changeling" opens February 9, 1995, followed by Giraudoux's "The Madwoman of Chaillot". The 1995-96 season includes "The Second Maiden's Tragedy", Shaw's "Heartbreak House", Shakespeare's "Much Ado About Nothing", and Ibsen's "The Wild Duck") Timothy Reed The Upstart Crow Theatre Company Boulder, Colorado ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 10:17:17 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0051 Re: "Globe"; Electronic Riverside; *MV*'s Act Five Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 051. Wednesday, 25 January, 1995. (1) From: Terence Hawkes Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 1995 18:25:16 GMT Subj: The Globe project (2) From: Don Foster Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 1995 11:13:12 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0027 Q: Copyright and Commentary (3) From: Sean Lawrence Date: Wednesday, 25 Jan 1995 01:01:08 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0046 Re: *MV*: Act Five (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Terence Hawkes Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 1995 18:25:16 GMT Subject: The Globe project Perhaps Paul Nelsen is unaware that what he describes as simply 'a careful effort to build an Elizabethan style public playhouse incorporating as many authentic elements as possible' is in fact being forcefully marketed as 'Shakespeare's Globe'. The pamphlet offering to arrange for the inscription of your name on the flagstones outside (at 300 quid a go) promises that 'Your Name Goes Down In History next To Shakespeare's Globe'. It adds that 'The Shakespeare Globe Theatre is being RECONSTRUCTED in London . . .' Terence Hawkes (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Don Foster Date: Tuesday, 24 Jan 1995 11:13:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0027 Q: Copyright and Commentary Dear Stan Beeler: For the past several years I've been using ETC Word Cruncher (an electronic text of the Riverside Shakespeare, ed., G.B.Evans, et.al.). Word Cruncher is based on the BYU Concordance program, and it has some limitations, but you might want to have a look at it. Don Foster (Vassar College) (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sean Lawrence Date: Wednesday, 25 Jan 1995 01:01:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0046 Re: *MV*: Act Five Hi. On the question of *Merchant*'s Act V being anticlimactic, a few recent critical movements seem to point towards a possible solution. On one hand, queerists have pointed to the intensity of the Antonio-Bassanio relationship, and the need to marginalize Antonio. Portia forces Bassanio to make an absolute choice between her and Antonio, using the ring. In Belmont in Act V, in what could be a very tempestuous scene of lust turned to aggression, Antonio is alienated from the central conflict. Finally, his love for Bassanio is turned on itself when he becomes honour-bound for Bassanio's faithfulness towards Portia, and hence Bassanio's rejection of himself. Similarly, some Marxists (I think) have suggested that the merchant is an outsider within the aristocratic society, to which he hopes to ingratiate himself by his largesse. Portia's "Which is the merchant here, and which the Jew?" seems relevant. Suffice to say that the rejection of the bourgeois merchant by the decadent aristocrats, or the rejection of the queer by the hetero could both be played with a similar emotional power to that of the rejection of the Jew by the Christian. Moreover, the tragedy of Shylock's fate would be amplified into more than an individual fall. It would be shown as a rejection of commerce itself, or as the triumph of a bigotry that soon extends to all forms of otherness. Cheerio, Sean. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 26 Jan 1995 19:18:25 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0052 Re: *MV*: Jacob/Laban; Margins; NYSF Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0052. Thursday, 26 January, 1995. (1) From: Aaron Tornberg Date: Wednesday, 25 Jan 1995 10:28:42 -0500 Subj: Re: Jacob and Laban's Sheep/Daughters (2) From: T. Fred Wharton Date: Wednesday, 25 Jan 95 14:02:56 EST Subj: *mv* (3) From: Joe Nathan Date: Wednesday, 25 Jan 1995 18:55:17 -0800 Subj: *MV* Inconsistencies (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Aaron Tornberg Date: Wednesday, 25 Jan 1995 10:28:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Jacob and Laban's Sheep/Daughters I appreciate the discussion which has been going about MV thus far, especially Don Foster's comments about the "Jacob and Laban" passage which I found extremely intriguing. One thing I have noticed further is the possible connection between Laban fooling Jacob with regard to the daughters and MV. Jacob was forced to marry the older daughter due to the laws of primogeniture, but had thought he would be able to marry the younger, Rachel, not the elder, Leah. (Incidentally, he had no real problem cohabitating with Leah regardless of the fact she wasn't Rachel.) Could Shylock's plight not be represented in the story? After all, Shylock feels he is "fooling the Christians" at the beginning of the play. Then, Shylock himself is fooled by the Christians during the trial. So Shylock is Jacob, and Laban is the Christians, who based on the Biblical text should not be victorious over Shylock/Jacob. The two parts of this story have direct connections to MV in my mind, and yet, Shakespeare must let the Christians have victory over the Jew. Thus Shakespeare's exclusion of the first part of the Jacob/Laban story. Jacob's servitude to Laban and Laban's broken promise is *followed by* the part quoted by Shakespeare regarding the sheep Jacob appropriates from Laban. (I would argue justifiably given the nature of Laban's actions.) When dealing with Biblical criticism, I believe it is necessary to look at the whole picture, and not just a part as Shakespeare tries to do here. Aaron Tornberg, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada yku02829@cawc.yorku.ca (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: T. Fred Wharton Date: Wednesday, 25 Jan 95 14:02:56 EST Subject: *mv* I much enjoyed Sean Lawrence's piece on queerists, marxists and otherness in *MV*. While Shylock in the theatre is rather hard to cram into any margin, that's clearly where the play's christians would prefer him to be. When their prejudice becomes self-fulfilling -"since I am a dog, beware my fangs" - a little "compulsion" becomes necessary. Tolerance of Antonio comes much more easily, not only to his hangers-on, but to an entire mercantile community. That would surely have included Portia, had not Antonio's potential martyrdom rendered him suddenly much more threatening to her marriage. At that point, she has to elminate him as a rival - by rescuing him. I've never been able to see Act V as sunny, even without the ghost of Shylock. Portia's entry is brisk: she seems thoroughly "pumped-up" for the "ring" encounter with Bassanio and Antonio. So, the marxists and queerists have a real point, but part of the entertainment of the play - perhaps its true central interest - is to watch the contortions the "christians" go through, to disguise a termination as mercy, cupidity as contempt of lucre, ruthless exclusion as smiling welcome. Fred Wharton. (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe Nathan Date: Wednesday, 25 Jan 1995 18:55:17 -0800 Subject: *MV* Inconsistencies So many interesting postings under this heading. I just attended a preview of the NYSF production of *MV* at the Joseph Papp Public Theater in New York City - directed by Barry Edelstein with Ron Liebman as Shylock. Liebman was excellent - tho, having seen him in *Angels in America* it was a little bit like watching Roy Cohn play the part. The rest of the cast was only so-so and the direction was uneven. There were some unecessary homosexual overtones in the first act between the courtiers featuring some gratuitous male-to-male kissing. (?????) But there were also some very good touches and the notorious ACT V which has been the subject of so much discussion in this conference came over rather well. I wonder whether anyone has actually attended a broadly comic performance of this play -- all out burlesque including the courtroom scene. Could Shakespeare have been serious about an obvious impossibility like excising a pound of flesh? I can only think of one part of the anatomy where it could be obtained in one piece, and the business of Antonio and Shylock preparing for that would produce a truly ludicrous scene. It makes me fantasize about Shylock being played by Jerry Lewis, and wondering when and how this "comedy" became a vehicle for tragedians. I'm new to this conference, has this been covered previously? Joseph Nathan, Happy Retiree joebabe@cerfnet.com wccm15a@prodigy.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 26 Jan 1995 19:22:11 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0053 CTI Conference Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0053. Thursday, 26 January, 1995. From: Stuart Lee Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 14:58:56 +0000 Subject: "Beyond the Book": One-day conference, Oxford **************************************************************************** Beyond the Book: Text in the World of Electronic Communication Friday 17 February 1995 Oxford University 9.30-5.00pm A One-Day Conference Co-Sponsored by the CTI Centre for Textual Studies and Office for Humanities Communication, Oxford University and the Centre for English Studies University of London The aim of this conference is to address some of the issues around books and electronic publishing in an era when hypermedia and Internet communications are becoming increasingly important and popular. The presenters are all working in literary or cultural studies and are all interested in the changes brought about in teaching, scholarship, and culture by the new modes of publication and communication in electronic form. They include Kathryn Sutherland, Professor of English at Nottingham University and Director of Project Electra, a major electronic resource of women's writings and images of women; George Landow, Professor of English and Art History at Brown University, and an author of several key works on hypertext, literary theory, and humanities computing; Sadie Plant, Lecturer in Cultural Studies at the University of Birmingham, and a controvertial, newsworthy cyberfeminist. There will be plenty of time for discussion, and we anticipate an exciting and lively day. Draft Programme 9.00-9.30 Coffee and Registration 9.30-9.45 Introduction and Welcome Marilyn Deegan 9.45-10.55 Textual Encounters of a Postponed Kind Kathryn Sutherland, Nottingham University Re-viewing the Film (Studies) Text Mike Allen, University of East Anglia 10.55-11.20 Coffee 11.20-12.30 The Web, Semiotics, and History: Samuel Delaney's Imagined Worlds Laura Chernaik, Nottingham University Title to be Announced, Sadie Plant, Birmingham University (to be confirmed) 12.30-2.00 Lunch 2.00-3.45 Hypermedia: when will they feel natural? John Pickering, University of Warwick Beyond the Book, Towards Hypertext George P. Landow, Brown University Text and Interfaces Jon Cook, University of East Anglia 3.45-4.00 Tea 4.00-4.30 Panel Discussion ************************************************************************* The cost will be 30 pounds (waged); 15 pounds (unwaged). This includes tea and coffee, but not lunch. There are plenty of cafes and restaurants of all kinds in the vicinity. To reserve a place at the conference, contact: Mari Gill CTI Centre for Textual Studies Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 6NN Fax/phone: 0865-273221 E-mail: MGill@vax.ox.ac.uk Please give your full name and contact details. Cheques should be made payable to 'Oxford University Computing Services'. If you book by e-mail, please send your cheque by post as soon as possble after booking. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 09:20:02 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0054 Q: Migrating Characters Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0054. Saturday, 28 January, 1995. From: Helen Ostovich Date: Thursday, 26 Jan 1995 15:50:50 +0001 (EST) Subject: Migrating characters (fwd) [NOTE: This question originally was posted on FICINO. Any responses should most properly be sent there -- FICINO@UTORONTO.BITNET -- or to the inquirer -- Matthew Steggle . You may, of course, CC: to SHAKSPER. --HMC] Another question about drama characters I'm afraid, but the previous one attracted some interesting responses: Can anyone think of an example in, say, pre-Restoration drama where Author A invents a fictional character in a play, and then Author B steals that character and redeploys him/her in a new context? I'm not bothered here about three rival versions of someone historical like Julius Caesar, or about authors adapting non-drama works like the Faerie Queene: but simply appropriating individual characters. So far the only examples I have found are DekkSATIROMASTIX which explicitly remakes Captain Tucca from POETASTER, and possibly Field's AMENDS FOR LADIES which steals and recolours the (admittedly not entirely fictional) Moll Cutpurse from THE ROARING GIRL. Any other parallels or suggestions about relevant criticism are gladly received, either to the list or to me (STEGGLE@VAX.OX.AC.UK). All the best, Matthew Steggle Trinity College Oxford ENGLAND. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 09:26:28 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0055 Re: *MV*: Shylock and Moonlight Bank Scene Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0055. Saturday, 28 January, 1995. (1) From: Shirley Kagan Date: Thursday, 26 Jan 1995 18:23:28 -1000 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0046 Re: *MV*: Act Five (2) From: Ben Schneider Date: Friday, 27 Jan 1995 10:47:17 -0600 (CST) Subj: moonlight bank, MV 5 (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shirley Kagan Date: Thursday, 26 Jan 1995 18:23:28 -1000 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0046 Re: *MV*: Act Five In response to John Owens post that we should keep Shylock in perspective because: "He fully intends to publicly skin a living human being in front of his friends.. .Mutilation for the sheer pleasure of killing is absolutely unforgivable, and Shylock should alienate any unbiased spectator here if not for the idiotic antisemitism of some of the Christian characters". It is true that mutilation for the sheer pleasure of killing is unforgivable, but it is NOT true that this is Shylock's motivation. On the contrary, his desire for Antonio's pound of flesh is motivated not by some inexplicable tendency to gore but by that same "idiotic antisemitism" that would probably drive the sanest of us towards some pretty malicious feelings. It is very important that we see Shylock's bloodthirtiness in its proper context. It is specifically this context that causes so many of us to read him as "nasty" and "unpleasant" but not as a villain. Shirley Kagan University of Hawaii at Manoa. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ben Schneider Date: Friday, 27 Jan 1995 10:47:17 -0600 (CST) Subject: moonlight bank, MV 5 The trouble with all of these nasty renditions of the moonlight bank scene is that they ignore the way it ends. Does one have to repeat that these aren't real people but characters in a play? Jessica admits, as the scene closes, that she is sad, because music always makes her so. Lorenzo tells her, that's because she really appreciates it, her "spirits are attentive." A person who doesn't like music, he continues, is "fit for treasons, stratagems, and spoils." Shylock doesn't like music. Belmont is full of music. In context, then, Jessica proves in this scene that, far from being an outcast, she is a well-qualified member of Belmont society, and that, I would say, is the function of the scene. All these nasty renditions of act V only prove once more that a director can make a play say anything he wants it to, and the author be damned. See Lawrence Danson, _The Harmony of MV_, and my article in _Restoration_, aforementioned. Yours ever, BEN SCHNEIDER ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 09:36:27 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0056 QE1 Novel; Greek Tragedy Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0056. Saturday, 28 January, 1995. (1) From: Raymond Crispin Date: Friday, 27 Jan 1995 11:59:53 -0800 (PST) Subj: New Elizabeth I book (2) From: Steve Urkowitz Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 95 08:39:36 EST Subj: Re: SHK 6.0030 Re: Greek (Athenian) Tragedy (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Raymond Crispin Date: Friday, 27 Jan 1995 11:59:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: New Elizabeth I book I just finished reading _I, Elizabeth_ by Rosalind Miles and would like to recommend it for anyone interested in the life of Elizabeth I. Although this is a novel which reads like an autobiography, the material was carefully researched by Ms. Miles who is a serious historian, and the book carefully follows the life of the queen and her court. For anyone looking for a readable biography, this would be a good choice. And, yes, Shakespeare is not ignored. Toward the end Elizabeth rages against the Lord Chamerlain's men and "their hack Shakespeare--he took my shilling.... I am Richard II, know you not that?" Cheers, Brenda Crispin (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Urkowitz Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 95 08:39:36 EST Subject: Re: SHK 6.0030 Re: Greek (Athenian) Tragedy Sorry for the delay in getting in this comment on edible Thebans and condescending Athenians . . . but here goes: I'd like to point out that the apotheosis of Oedipus at the end of the Colonus play isn't the end of the action. Yes, the Chorus says nice things about him, okay. But then Antigone, swelled up with the godliness of it all, says, "Hey, I'm now going off to end the strife between my brothers" or words to that effect. The effect has to be something like ending a movie about a romantic pursuit with the couple sailing off on the honeymoon cruise on the Titanic. Seems to be a lot of condescension by we moderns. G'morning gracie. Urk ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 09:40:21 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0057 Announcement: UWV Summer Seminar Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0057. Saturday, 28 January, 1995. From: Wayne Hilt Date: Friday, 27 Jan 1995 15:16:30 EST Subject: WVU Summer Seminar West Virginia University is presenting a summer seminar entitled "Radiant Textuality: Humane Studies in Virtual Spaces" by Jerome McGann. It would be greatly appreciated if you would consider posting the following announcement to your discussion list. Thanks for your consideration. **************************** Announcement ************************************* West Virginia University Summer Seminar in Literary and Cultural Studies presents RADIANT TEXTUALITY: HUMANE STUDIES IN VIRTUAL SPACES Seminar Leader: Jerome J. McGann Commonwealth Professor of English University of Virginia June 8-11, 1995 West Virginia University Morgantown, WV For seminar rates and more information, contact: Dr. David C. Stewart Department of English West Virginia University PO Box 6296 Morgantown, WV 26505-6296 304-293-3107 WVSSLCS@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jan 1995 09:21:26 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0058 Re: Greek (Athenian) Tragedy, esp. Oedipus Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0058. Monday, 30 January, 1995. (1) From: Grace Tiffany Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 1995 18:43:53 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0031 Re: Hamartia (2) From: E. L. Epstein Date: Sunday, 29 Jan 1995 00:15:57 EDT Subj: RE: SHK 6.0056 Greek Tragedy (3) From: Victor Gallerano Date: Sunday, 29 Jan 1995 15:28:51 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0056 Greek Tragedy (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Grace Tiffany Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 1995 18:43:53 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0031 Re: Hamartia; Keanu's Hamlet Especially to Piers Lewis: I've been teaching the Oedipus Cycle this week and, with my students, pondering your questions about what moral lesson the plays contain for us. I say "plays" because while Oedipus at Colonus was not initially performed immediately after Oedipus at Rex, it's an indispensable part of the Oedipus myth, one with which Sophocles' audience was undoubtedly familiar, and a final phase of the story to which the closing ode of Oedipus Rex clearly points us ("Count no man happy until he is dead" ultimately culminates in "his ending was wonderful, if mortal's ever was"). It seems clear to me that the Oedipus cycle, and even Oedipus Rex in isolation, contains a profound moral lesson, though the lesson is not the simplistic and wrong-headed one so often taught to high-school students and college freshmen, i.e., that Oedipus deserves to be a parricide and commiter of incest for "disobeying" some divine decree (he doesn't disobey, for one thing; there's no decree, but a prophecy), and this judgment makes no sense as any high school student can tell because if he had done his best intentionally to fulfill the prophecy he would have ended up a parricide and committer of incest anyway, which are precisely the things he curses himself for at the end of the play. The moral (as opposed to moralistic) lesson of Oedipus Rex, which is enhanced, deepened, and clarified by the profoundly moving Oedipus at Colonus, lies more in the area of the teaching of what true hubris is (a lesson elaborated on by the choral odes): i.e., the wrong-headed and prideful assumption that one is in utter control of one's fate, that one's personal intellect is sufficient to supply all the answers to the mystery of life, and that one may in fact function as God in one's own universe, mistreating and slighting those whose perspectives don't fit one's own paradigm (note Oedipus's short-sighted treatment of Tiresias's words). It seems to me that Oedipus is just BEGINNING to learn the lesson of openness at the end of Oedipus Rex, beginning to learn to listen to someone else, to begin on a pathway toward humility, to understand that his own mind and being are not the central fact of the universe, but he still has a long way to go as he begins his pain and exile. For example, the extended pathos in which he blames and indicts himself for committing incest seems a function of his initial hubris, and not an example of humility at all ("How could I, the wisest and best of men, have done this? MOI?") He doesn't begin to reproach himself for impiety, doubt, and skepticism -- the things whcih the choral odes tell us are really at moral issue in the play. In Oedipus at Colonus, while Oedipus is not exactly sweetness and light -- that prideful nature dies hard -- he is MUCH more open and humble, questioning, supplicating, depending on others for help rather than trying to solve it all by himself, and, importantly I think, he's reached the point where he can let his former crimes go by acknowledging that he was following a track laid by god in performing them -- that he wasn't aware that he was committing incest when he did it. Rather than an evasion of responsibility, this seems to be a real evidence of spiritual growth -- advancing to the point of realizing that he isn't the omniscient power saving the universe, but a player in a game which is much larger than he can possibly realize. And when he reaches that point, he is fit to be called blessed. This is a message which Sophocles was clearly inspired by toward the end of his life; the great "Philoctetes," written around the same time as "OC," also dramatizes the paradoxical blessing available in the giving up of self to a greater plan, letting go of control, agreeing to be part of something larger even when you can't CONTROL (through intellect or in any other way) the larger plan, and the enlargement of self that's available through that choice (Act 5 of Hamlet also comes to mind in this context). Anyway, that's how the plays work for me and that's how I teach them. -- Grace Tiffany at U. of New Orleans (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. L. Epstein Date: Sunday, 29 Jan 1995 00:15:57 EDT Subject: RE: SHK 6.0056 Greek Tragedy Oedipus, the confused old fellow, has to end up in good old Colonus, not by coincidence the hometown of the author. You can trust Athens suburbs to solve barbaric problems. ELEpstein (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Victor Gallerano Date: Sunday, 29 Jan 1995 15:28:51 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0056 Greek Tragedy Steve Urkowitz, I'm not sure I follow you. The action at Colonus is both the last of Oedipus the character and the last indication of anything Sophocles has to say about the meaning or importance of the Theban story for Athens. Unless we are going to commit some species of social science theorizing about Athenian attitudes toward Thebes, we have to take what's given in that play. On the issue of what Thebes means to Athens in Sophocles' texts, what we get in the action at Colonus carries greater weight than the action presented in the Antigone for two reasons: First, the Chorus from the Antigone are Theban rather than Athenian and second, although the action of the Antigone is supposed to occur after the action at Colonus, the Oedipus at Colonus was written and performed some sixty-odd years later than the Antigone. Is it modern condescension to think that Sophocles' choices in the matter are not meaningless? Or to think that his last word on the subject is not undermined by one of his first? But, you are right that Sophocles' first and last plays seem to offer two, somewhat different words to Athens. Perhaps, a ninety year old man recognized that he was speaking to a different city. (For which difference see Bernard Knox's introduction to the Fagles translation of these same Theban plays, or better still, consider Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War.) By the time of Oedipus at Colonus (to turn your simile into a metaphor) the honeymoon was over for Athens, not because of the melodramatic appearance of an iceberg, but because of the rather tragic recognition that (to paraphrase Pogo) Athens had met the enemy and married them. (Forgive me for observing the different emphasis of ancient and modern thought here. That the modern, comic version, "we've met the enemy and they are us" turns on the psychological context of "identity" while the paraphrase to fit tragedy turns on the context of marriage and family.) That's why Sophocles will outlast "As the World Turns." The "action" to which he attends adds up to more than one damn thing after another. If it didn't, I'd join you in line for the Burns and Allen re-runs. Vic Gallerano vgallera.osf1.gmu.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jan 1995 09:31:21 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0059 Re: Characters; *MV* Ongoing Discussion Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0059. Monday, 30 January, 1995. (1) From: Thomas Berger Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 95 13:58:31 EST Subj: Migrating Characters (2) From: Phyllis Rackin Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 1995 21:06:48 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0055 Re: *MV*: Shylock and Moonlight Bank Scene (3) From: Melissa Aaron Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 1995 23:14:32 +0200 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0046 Re: *MV*: Act Five (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thomas Berger Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 95 13:58:31 EST Subject: Migrating Characters For Mr. Steggle? I would have him consult AN INDEX OF CHARCTERS IN ENGLISH PRINTED DRAMA TO THE RESTORATION, by Thomas L. Berger and William C. Bradford (Englewood CO: Microcard Editons, 1975) and that might be of some help to him on migrating characters. He will note that Shakespeare's characters very rarely, if ever, migrate. I'm making you edit too hard. Thanks, Tom Berger (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Phyllis Rackin Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 1995 21:06:48 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0055 Re: *MV*: Shylock and Moonlight Bank Scene > The trouble with all of these nasty renditions of the moonlight bank scene is > that they ignore the way it ends. Does one have to repeat that these aren't > real people but characters in a play? Jessica admits, as the scene closes, > that she is sad, because music always makes her so. Lorenzo tells her, that's > because she really appreciates it, her "spirits are attentive." A person who > doesn't like music, he continues, is "fit for treasons, stratagems, and > spoils." Shylock doesn't like music. Belmont is full of music. In context, > then, Jessica proves in this scene that, far from being an outcast, she is a > well-qualified member of Belmont society, and that, I would say, is the > function of the scene. All these nasty renditions of act V only prove once > more that a director can make a play say anything he wants it to, and the > author be damned. See Lawrence Danson, _The Harmony of MV_, and my article in > _Restoration_, aforementioned. > > Yours ever, > BEN SCHNEIDER > What do you make of Portia's statement shortly thereafter that she has a "bad voice"? If being musical is the mark of being at home in Belmont, shouldn't Portia have a good voice? (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Aaron Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 1995 23:14:32 +0200 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0046 Re: *MV*: Act Five >Regarding the breakdown of Lorenzo and Jessica's marriage: You can, I suppose, >play any dialogue as an argument if you shout and stamp your feet, but the text >really doesn't seem to support this course. > I experienced a similar problem with Henry IV, Part 1 some years ago. I was cast as Lady Mortimer. The director wanted me to play the scene as though I hated Mortimer and all my lines were basically "Go away, you Seisnig colonialist pig." Since the audience didn't speak Welsh, I had to pantomime extreme anger and disgust, which made nonsense of the lyrical lines addressed to Lady Mortimer. Maybe it isn't fashionable to say so, but some Shakespeare plays really feel--when you play them--as though they are constructed a cretain way and you play against it at your own risk. My gut suspicion about the Henry IV scene is that the real moral is "For a truly affectionate relationship, marry someone whose language you don't speak. It takes language to build a fight." Melissa Aaron ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 10:54:09 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0060 Re: Oedipus and Greek Tragedy Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0060. Wednesday, 1 February 1995. (1) From: Piers Lewis Date: Tuesday, 31 Jan 1995 12:55:16 -0600 Subj: Oedipus (2) From: E. L. Epstein Date: Monday, 30 Jan 1995 23:58:52 EDT Subj: RE: SHK 6.0058 Re: Greek (Athenian) Tragedy, esp. Oedipus (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Piers Lewis Date: Tuesday, 31 Jan 1995 12:55:16 -0600 Subject: Oedipus I should like to respond to Grace Tiffany's sensitive and intelligent remarks re _Oedipus The King_. For it seems to me that she has, unintentionally, replaced one reductive moralism with another. Where to begin? I keep coming back to the fact that Oedipus has already fulfilled the terrible prophecy that attended his birth when the play begins: he has killed his father and married his mother. That's history and nothing can alter it; and, apparently, nothing he or his parents could have done would have prevented these crimes from being committed. The only question for Sophocles and for the audience is, how or whether these facts should become known. Perhaps, had Oedipus been a different sort of person--less proud, more humble--these facts would not have become known, the great riddle of his identity never solved, but that seems doubtful; for the other fact with which the play begins is that the god, Apollo, is punishing Thebes for allowing itself to be polluted by the presence of King Laius' unknown murderer: as if the god were determined to force the truth about Oedipus into the open, willy-nilly. So it doesn't matter what sort of person Oedipus is: one way or another, the terrible truth about who and what he is will be known. In other words, this play--this monstrous machine as Bernard Knox says, somewhere--is not about moral responsibility at all. For there is no rational connection between crime and guilt and shame in this play, or between crime and punishment. Nor is it about spiritual growth. That's a Christian not a Greek idea. Humility is a Christian virtue. Pride, power, courage--these are the qualities the ancient Greeks admired; and honor and glory is what these intensely competitive people cared about and sought. The heroes of the _Iliad_ are men like Oedipus; Oedipus is made to their measure not ours. The world, the cosmos, of the _Iliad_ is rational: everything is described and explained to the last detail. You always know who is doing what to whom and why and that applies to the gods as well as the people. Actions have predictable consequences. Achilles knows that he can have glory or a long life but not both and he chooses glory. No Greek before Socrates would have thought he made the wrong choice. The same tragic choice faces all the heroes of that great poem. Oedipus is not given a choice. Instead, the qualities that make him great, the qualities that he shares with Achilles and the other heroes of the _Iliad_, are instrumental in closing the trap that fate has prepared for him--for reasons that are not and cannot be known. Sophocles seems to have been willing to contemplate--in this play, if not in the much later _Oedipus at Colonus_--the possibility that the will of the gods cannot be known, that their values and purposes are not commensurate with ours; and that therefore the cosmos may be fundamentally irrational. Or nonrational. This thought makes us very uncomfortable. No doubt, since I don't know Greek, this reading of Sophocles's play is also more or less mistaken. Completely mistaken perhaps-- we know so little about how the tragic drama fit into the festivals to Dionysius in which, for which they were staged. This play has always baffled us and I readily admit it baffles me. Piers Lewis Metropolitan State University (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. L. Epstein Date: Monday, 30 Jan 1995 23:58:52 EDT Subject: RE: SHK 6.0058 Re: Greek (Athenian) Tragedy, esp. Oedipus It is not really necessary to produce wild guesses about Athenian attitudes toward Thebes; the historical facts point to the Athenian attitude. Thebes had notably strong walls and had a military tradition of considerable power. It was the Theban general Epaminondas who contributed greatly to Greek military tactics and strategy, more than any other military leader. In fact, it could be said that Epaminondas destroyed the fabulous military power of Sparta. It requires a bit of imagination, I grant, to extrapolate from the walls and Epaminondas to an Athenian impression of a grim and relentless military power, with little of culture, as the Athenians saw it, with the only exception being Pindar, who lived in Thebes. In addition, there was the civil wars between the sons of Oedipus, with the assistance of such great warriors as Tydeus the father of Diomedes, to contribute to the reputation of a place that was both grim and politically unstable. My application of Greek history to American history and the assignment of the roles of Athens and Thebes to Boston and Dallas is not, I think, entirely indefensible.E.L.Epstein ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 11:00:51 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0061 Re: *Hamlet* in Winnipeg Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0061. Wednesday, 1 February 1995. From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Tuesday, 31 Jan 95 16:15:57 -0500 Subject: Hamlet in Winnipeg Well, fellow Shakespeareans, I had an absolutely transcendent experience in Winnipeg. I loved the city, its museums, restaurants, and people. I had a wonderful time with the busload of Twin Cities folks (and one North Carolinan) with whom I travelled. And the play was magnificent. I've seen numerous filmed Hamlets (Burton, Olivier, Gibson, Kline, Jacobi) and a few on stage, but I've never seen a production that worked as successfully as this one. From the magnificent pre-show to the enthralling and exciting conclusion, it was a riveting experience. As far as I could tell (I haven't gone back to the text to check), it was also one of the most complete *Hamlet* productions I have seen. I was only occasionally aware of missing lines while I was watching it, and I didn't note _any_ missing scenes (though there may have been some). I thought the cast was excellent overall, although I was disappointed by Liisa Repo-Martell, who played Ophelia (this tended to be true of most of the people I talked with). She simply didn't seem to have a clear insight into her character, and although she was somewhat better in the nunnery and the mad scenes than she was earlier, she still didn't quite pull it off. Claudius (Stephen Russell), Polonius (Robert Benson), Gertrude (Louisa Martin), and the Ghost/Player King (Gary Reineke) were superb. I thought all the smaller supporting roles were excellent as well, especially Rosencrantz and Guildenstern (Roger Honeywell and Richard Hughes) and the two gravediggers (sorry, I lost the inserted slip that had their names). Laertes (Andrew Akman) was OK, as was Horatio (Donald Carrier), although I'm especially picky about the latter since it's a part for which I feel a certain affinity, having played it in high school some thirty years ago. And then there was Hamlet. (Caveat: I _like_ Keanu Reeves. I first saw him in *My Own Private Idaho* and was sufficiently impressed to go out and rent all his earlier films.) I thought he was splendid: from the controlled, tormented, long-haired prince of the opening scenes to the shorn and bedraggled madman to the betrayed lover and son to the resigned avenger, I thought he played a remarkable number of variable tunes on his instrument. Others considered the comic and active scenes more successful, but I think that's because they are comic and more active. I do think the soliloquies were not all they might have been, though I think that has as much to do with the director's choices as with the actor's. They were delivered, for the most part, from a single spot with little or no movement--and that didn't work well. But there were moments in all four soliloquies that came alive for me in new ways, even in "To be or not to be," which I thought the least successful. Mr. Reeves's reading of certain lines gave me a whole new sense of the speech and Hamlet's thinking at the moment. I thought the nunnery scene was successful, with Hamlet attentive and concerned intially and then angry and outraged, and then (momentarily) distraught and appalled. The closet scene was also wonderful. He murdered Polonius not with a rapier but much more deliberately with a dagger (though he still couldn't see who it was) and his interaction with his mother ranged from almost comic intially to full-blown rage to despair. Their contract was sealed with a mutual, but amazingly non-erotic, kiss (very unlike Oliver or Gibson). The scenes throughout with R & G were played for comedy, but comedy with a clear edge; we always knew that Hamlet was wary and watching. When they escort him in to see Claudius after the murder of Polonius, his hands were covered with blood and he very deliberately licked one of his fingers: a horrifying but apt touch. And the entire final sequence was exquisite: the graveyard scene both funny and moving. Hamlet and the gravedigger _sang_ the lines Imperious Caesar, dead and turn'd to clay, Might stop a hole to keep the wind away. O that that earth which kept the world in awe Should patch a wall t'expel the winter's flaw. --something I'd never seen done and which moved me in ways that I am still not able to articulate. The final sequence was brilliantely staged--the fight one of the best I've seen: again, it combined some nice comic touches with a true fierceness. And when Hamlet murders Claudius, he first stabs him with the tainted sword, then forces the remaining drink down his throat, _then_ slits his throat with his dagger. Once he got to this moment, he wasn't taking any chances. He uses the last of his energy to prevent Horatio's suicide, then takes his rightful place in the throne, grasps the hand of his dead mother, and dies. Horatio's "Good night, sweet prince, and flights of angels sing thee to thy rest" was the play's final line. The physical production: set, costumes, lighting all worked beautifully. The set had a heavy, dark medieval feel; a stained glass window above the second level changed to show various scenes (I'm sure of a virgin and child--this is the one Hamlet destroys by throwing his sword through it after he comes upon Claudius praying and elects not to kill him; one was an angel, I think; but there were one or two others. I couldn't see the window well because we had seats in the first row[!]). The costumes were what I guess I would call modified Elizabethan; lots of deep, rich colors. The other remarkable thing about this production is that it absolutely sang: none of this attitude that "this is a sacred text, and we must slow down so the poor beknighted audience can understand every single word." They spoke as if they were speaking and it came through beautifully. My spouse, who says it usually takes him a full half-hour to get into the swing of the language says he was with it right from the start, and none of the younger people (we had some middle and high school kids with us) had problems. I thought the language overall, including the verse, was handled beautifully. Something about the interpretation (and, again, I'm still musing on this) captured both a particular essence of Hamlet the character that I haven't seen before, and conveyed a very contemporary sense of the play. I only wish I could have seen it again, and I sincerely hope that despite the $7 million film offers Keanu Reeves will take on more Shakespeare in the future. Chris Gordon University of Minnesota ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 11:45:04 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0063 Re: Characters; *H5* Film; Rare Books Course Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0063. Wednesday, 1 February 1995. (1) From: John Cox Date: Monday, 30 Jan 1995 09:36:21 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0054 Q: Migrating Characters (2) From: Marty Jukovsky Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 95 16:01:26 Subj: 1989 Henry V (3) From: Daniel Traister Date: Monday, 30 Jan 1995 21:24:39 -0500 (EST) Subj: Summer rare book courses at the University of Virginia (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Cox Date: Monday, 30 Jan 1995 09:36:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0054 Q: Migrating Characters With regard to characters borrowed by one playwright from another, does Jaques count in *As You Like It*? He has often seemed to me to be based on Jonson's misanthropic satirists that were being staged by the Chamberlain's Men at just about the same time as AYLI. Jaques's railing way of "curing" Orlando is strongly remininiscent of Jonson's satire (though not, perhaps, of any particular Jonsonian character, unless it be Macilente), and Jaques's "cure" strongly contrasts (especially in its ineffectiveness) with Rosalind's, which is Shakespeare's own invention. John Cox (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marty Jukovsky Date: Saturday, 28 Jan 95 16:01:26 Subject: 1989 Henry V I thought the subscribers to the Shakespeare list might find the following of interest. it was posted on the Self-Referential Films Mailing List, and I'm forwarding it on. Martin Jukovsky Cambridge, Mass. martyj@yankeegroup.com ************************************************************************ Not sure if this is the proper format - I don't have an essay prepared or anything and I'm new to this list. Was wondering if anyone had any comment on the Prologue to Kenneth Branagh's film of HENRY V, a film which is presented as a film-within-a- film. One interesting effect in particular is when the Chorus leads the audience out of the movie studio in the beginning, through the double doors, and into the "real" film of HENRY V. As you go through the doors into blackness, the first thing you see is another door opening in the distance. This is the door to the conspirators' chamber, obviously, and through a cut, the audience is admitted into the "conspiracy" of the film (the conspiracy to put Shakespeare on film??) and doesn't leave the "real" movie until the very end of the film (via the doors). However, if the audience isn't in the movie studio, and they are not admitted into the film yet -- where are they? (Spatially they are standing in a dark hallway, but one could argue that the hallway isn't "real" until the conspirators let the audience "in" to the real film...) If only for a moment, it would seem the audience has no point of reference for "where" they are -- where they are in relation to the in-studio framing device, or the "real" movie, that is. (The only thing in this film that gives the audience a sense of continuity, in fact, is the music soundtrack, which links everything -- opening credits, framing device, and the "real" movie in between.) There are other self-referential issues in this film and some of Kenneth Branagh's other films. Many, many in-jokes and references in DEAD AGAIN -- Branagh's birthday in the newspaper front page, a scene filmed on "Shakespeare Bridge," a LIFE magazine cover featuring Laurence Olivier in HAMLET (presumably a retort to talk about Branagh being "the next Olivier,"), Roman Strauss' prison number reading 25101415 (October 25, 1415, date of the Battle of Agincourt), for example. Branagh's composer also has appeared in some of the films (HENRY V and MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING) playing characters who provide music; he was to appear in FRANKENSTEIN as a band conductor but the scene was cut from the film. (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Daniel Traister Date: Monday, 30 Jan 1995 21:24:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: Summer rare book courses at the University of Virginia Copies of the announcement for this coming summer's sessions of the University of Virginia's Rare Book School--which will run for five weeks, from the week of July 10 through the week of August 7--are now available. Several of this year's courses should interest Renaissance and early modern specialists, Shakespearians among them, including: July 10-July 14 (Week 1) Peter Blayney, "The Company of Stationers to 1637" ***N.B.*** July 17-July 21 (Week 2) Terry Belanger, "Book Illustration to 1880" (how did they do it? how can you tell what it was they did?) July 24-July 28 (Week 3) Jeanne Veyrin-Forrer, "Book Production in c16 France" July 31-August 4 (Week 4) Donald W. Krummel, "How to Research a Rare Book" (bibliographically, of course!) August 7-August 11 (Week 5) Albert Derolez, "Latin Paleography, 1100-1500" The school will also offer other courses--it offers some 30 courses altogether, counting repeated courses--especially in the areas of bookbinding history, papermaking history, early modern typography, electronic texts and uses of the Internet, and introductory descriptive bibliography, as well as a general introduction to the history of printed books in Europe and North America. Some of these courses, too, may interest people at work in early modern fields (as well as their students!). This announcement and additional information are available from: Rare Book School, University of Virginia, 114 Alderman Library, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2498 (phone 804 924 8824; fax 804 924 8851; e-mail biblio@virginia.edu). Daniel Traister Department of Special Collections Van Pelt-Dietrich Library University of Pennsylvania ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 11:24:41 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0062 Re: Portia's Voice Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0062. Wednesday, 1 February 1995. (1) From: Ben Schneider Date: Monday, 30 Jan 1995 11:08:04 -0600 (CST) Subj: Portia's Voice (2) From: Dudley Knight Date: Monday, 30 Jan 1995 19:35:50 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0059 Re: *MV* Ongoing Discussion (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ben Schneider Date: Monday, 30 Jan 1995 11:08:04 -0600 (CST) Subject: Portia's Voice Dear Phyllis Rackin: Thank you very much for calling my attention to Portia's self-proclaimed "bad voice." She has just commanded the music to stop, and is about to begin the jest of the ring. In this context her voice won't be musical. But even here the music bursts through. Answering Bassanio's defense, in which every line ends with the word "ring," comes her riposte, in which the firt four and the last end with "ring." If your spirits are attentive you may hear a bell tinkling in these lines, and they may remind you of Shylock tolling "bond," "bond," "bond," at the ends of an earlier series of lines. But of course if you read the ending as Portia establishing domination over Bassanio, your spirits will not hear any music. Yours ever, BEN SCHNEIDER (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dudley Knight Date: Monday, 30 Jan 1995 19:35:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0059 Re: *MV* Ongoing Discussion To Phyllis Rackin: There's another possibility, which I am somewhat timorous to suggest. Maybe- just maybe--Portia has a sense of humor (in the contemporary sense, which may not last too long from current indications). Dudley Knight University of California--Irvine ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 09:05:42 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0064 Q: Performance Criticism Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0064. Thursday, 2 February 1995. From: Jeff Nyhoff Date: Wednesday, 1 Feb 1995 09:24:06 -0800 Subject: Performance Criticism? I decided to assemble a bibliography of "performance criticism" for a course I'm teaching, and I must confess that I'm surprised by the difficulty I'm having. I've not had difficulty in finding instances of usage of the term "performance criticism," but in these instances the term is generally used axiomatically. What are the origins of the term, the concept? Where have critics offered definitions of the term? Where are the best (and/or worst) examples of "performance criticism"? Secondly: is performance criticism possible...? Jeff Nyhoff [One place to begin would be the SHAKSPER Fileserver. By sending the following command -- GET PERFORM PACKAGE SHAKSPER to LISTSERV@UTORONTO.BITNET -- you will receive eight very long files that constitute an electronic workbook of the "Shakespeare and the Languages of Performance" NEH seminar that met at the Folger Shakespeare Library from September 1992 through May 1993. --HMC] ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 09:14:46 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0065 Re: Athenian Tragedy; Portia's Voice Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0065. Thursday, 2 February 1995. (1) From: Grace Tiffany Date: Wednesday, 01 Feb 1995 13:15:11 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0060 Re: Oedipus and Greek Tragedy (2) From: Phyllis Rackin Date: Wednesday, 1 Feb 1995 14:35:06 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0062 Re: Portia's Voice (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Grace Tiffany Date: Wednesday, 01 Feb 1995 13:15:11 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0060 Re: Oedipus and Greek Tragedy Thanks to Piers Lewis for his comments -- in quick reply I just want to say that the Homeric view of proper behavior is radically different from the Sophoclean view; for the late 5th century Sophoclean hero -- as well as for the Aeschylean hero and the Euripidean hero (Philoctetes, Orestes, Pentheus) -- humility is indeed powerfully required and the ability to be humble, questioning, and accept guidance and wisdom from others (what Creon doesn't do in Antigone) is crucial to spiritual growth. This fact need not be understood in Christian terms; humility is an attribute that transcends religions. Socrates was a man of his time in advocating a kind of questioning and openness -- such an attitude, or at least the new valuing of such an attitude, marks not only the tragic playwrights but the historians concerned with describing (correctly or propagandistically) the difference between the new Greece and the bad old Greece in the age of tyrants. How accurate the vision of Athens they generated was -- a place where the ability to put ego aside and listen to reason was practiced and valued (this was the image) -- is of course open to question; certainly we know they idealized themselves. But I can't see any reason to assume that 5th century Athenians simply duplicated the values of a radically different and centuries-prior Homeric period, especially when the plays, philosophy, and history so clearly argue otherwise. Euripides "Bacchae," The Oedipus Cycle, "Philoctetes," and numerous other plays of this period (not excepting Aristophanes's great satiric works) dramatize the dangers of a "reductive moralism" that would limit inquiry and put the egotistical self at the center of the universe; everything in the plays, including the choral odes, pushes this message. In noticing this 20th century readers aren't imposing moralism on the plays; instead, they're pointing out how strongly the plays argue against a limiting moralism. And of course that's why they're so great and why we should keep reading them! (In my view of course.) -- GCT (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Phyllis Rackin Date: Wednesday, 1 Feb 1995 14:35:06 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0062 Re: Portia's Voice I did notice the repetition of the word "ring," but it never struck me as musical. Maybe my spirits are inattentive, but I always thought the speech was kind of funny. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 09:22:55 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0066 Re: Migrating Characters; Mrs. Mortimer's Welsh Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0066. Thursday, 2 February 1995. (1) From: E. H. Pearlman Date: Wednesday, 01 Feb 1995 12:56:21 -0600 (MDT) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0063 Re: Characters (2) From: John Drakakis Date: Wednesday, 01 Feb 95 19:57:00 GMT Subj: SHK 6.0063 Re: Characters (3) From: Terence Hawkes Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 1995 11:50:03 GMT Subj: Mrs Mortimer's Welsh (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. H. Pearlman Date: Wednesday, 01 Feb 1995 12:56:21 -0600 (MDT) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0063 Re: Characters Persons interested in migrating characters should re-read _The First Part of Sir John Oldcastle_ by the Henslowe collaborative. E. Pearlman (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Drakakis Date: Wednesday, 01 Feb 95 19:57:00 GMT Subject: SHK 6.0063 Re: Characters On the question of borrowing, what about Thorello from Jonson's Every Man In (in which Shakespeare was thought to have played a role himself). I would imagine that after a few tankards of ale which Shakespeare might have shared with Burbage, Thorello could very easily have become Othello. After all, with the aid of no ale at all Othello seems to have become OJ Simpson! At least the first letter's right! Cheers, John Drakakis University of Stirling (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Terence Hawkes Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 1995 11:50:03 GMT Subject: Mrs Mortimer's Welsh Melissa Aaron concludes that the 'real moral' of Lady Mortimer's use of Welsh in 1 Henry 1V is "for a truly affectionate relationship, marry someone whose language you don't speak'. But why divert attention from the scene's central concern: the crucial issue of rebellion and the questions this raises for multi-cultural entities such as Britain? The Welsh language not only serves to make clear the fatal disunity of the rebel camp, it also stands as a challenge to the cultural supremacy of English in Britain, and thus to the political project of which Hal -ironically Prince of Wales- is the leading agency. A united, English-speaking Great Britain, intent on 'Englishing' any culture that lies in its path (Henry V's dismissal of French confirms the point) must construct languages like Welsh as potentially subversive where they're not merely ludicrous or barbaric. This complex issue is as carefully probed in this scene as it is later in the cycle when Fluellen, an English-speaker who proclaims his Welshness in the language which has bull-dozed his own, enthusiastically supports its driver (who cannily also proclaims himself Welsh). The remorseless 'Englishing' of Welshness, Scottishness and Irishness are fundamental, and still-potent issues in these plays. To drain them away, as 'character' analysis tends to do, is to reduce a serious engagement with politics to the cosy domestic level of soap opera. Terence Hawkes ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Feb 1995 09:49:45 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0067 Re: Performance Criticism Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0067. Saturday, 4 February 1995. (1) From: Ron Shields Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 1995 09:38:23 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0064 Q: Performance Criticism (2) From: Fran Teague Date: Thursday, 02 Feb 95 10:59:01 EST Subj: Re: SHK 6.0064 Q: Performance Criticism (3) From: Daniel M Larner Date: Friday, 3 Feb 1995 12:25:25 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0064 Q: Performance Criticism (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ron Shields Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 1995 09:38:23 -0500 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0064 Q: Performance Criticism "Performance criticism" is alive and well in contemporary theatrical/ performance studies circles, as played out in the journals Text and Performance Quarterly, The Drama Review, Theatre Journal, Performing Arts Journal, etc. Two recent books which contain examples of recent efforts in this area: Upstaging Big Daddy and Critical Theory and Performance (both published the the University of Michigan). In answer to your question, "Is Performance criticism possible"--I would say yes--onstage, in the audience, and in print. Ron Shields Bowling Green State University Chair and Associate Professor Theatre (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Fran Teague Date: Thursday, 02 Feb 95 10:59:01 EST Subject: Re: SHK 6.0064 Q: Performance Criticism Performance criticism is a term that is used to mean a wide range of things, from traditional performance history (e.g., Carol Carlisle, Arthur Colby Sprague), records of performances used to discuss literary issues (Rosenberg), anthropological/cultural studies use of performance (e.g., Schechner's work), semiotic analysis (Elam), issues of dramaturgy (Styan or Beckerman), and so on and so on. A good starting place for the study of Shakespeare performance issues is the collection _Shakespeare and the Sense of Performance_ by Marvin and Ruth Thompson (U Delaware). It has a historical survey of performance criticism at the outset, essays from a wide variety of scholars, and an appended list of suggested readings in Performance Criticism. I hope you find this information useful. (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Daniel M Larner Date: Friday, 3 Feb 1995 12:25:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0064 Q: Performance Criticism For Jeff Nyhoff--:Look for the works of Richard Schechner, and review The Drama Review and Performing Arts Journal for the last 10-15 years. Hello, Jeff! Daniel Larner Fairhaven College Western Washington University. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Feb 1995 09:59:01 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0068 Re: Athenian Tragedy Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0068. Saturday, 4 February 1995. (1) From: Edward M Moore Date: Thursday, 02 Feb 1995 09:08:20 -0500 (CDT) Subj: Oedipus (2) From: Bob Gingher Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 1995 12:43:47 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0065 Re: Athenian Tragedy (3) From: Ron Macdonald Date: Thursday, 02 Feb 1995 14:12:17 -0500 (EST) Subj: Epic and Tragedy (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Edward M Moore Date: Thursday, 02 Feb 1995 09:08:20 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Oedipus "Sophocles seems to have been willing to contemplate . . . the possibility that the will of the gods cannot be known, that their values and purposes are not commensurate with ours; and that therefore the cosmos may be fundamentally irrational. Or nonrational." --Piers Lewis Perhaps . . . but. The fact that the prophecy comes true, despite the efforts of Laius, Jocasta, and Oediupus, shows that the cosmos, at least at the level of the gods' relation to humans is rational and ordered. Had they been able to thwart Apollo's prophecy, what kind of universe would there be? Jocasta dismisses such prophecies (tr. Grene, 707ff.), as does Oedipus (964ff.), and Jocasta even concludes "Why should man fear since chance is all in all/ for him, and he can clearly foreknow nothing?" (977-8). Of course she is proved wrong--there is an order, inscrutable, but not at our level irrational as would be the case if Oedipus were the "child of Fortune" (1080) he at one points proclaims himself. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bob Gingher Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 1995 12:43:47 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0065 Re: Athenian Tragedy Interesting commentary. The Sophoclean sense of humility and morality invites consideration of the way Mystery, the big "Other," breaks into the lives of procrustean heroes, the loss-before-transformation route of the circular journey. One of my best teachers once noted that the hero or heroine of a work is always the one with the most to lose. Creon does come to mind... (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ron Macdonald Date: Thursday, 02 Feb 1995 14:12:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: Epic and Tragedy I have to agree with Grace Tiffany that values differ between Homeric epic and the tragedy of fifth century Athens. Indeed, I think the _Oresteia_ of Aeschylus can be plausibly read as a self-conscious critique of Homeric values, a dramatization of the superseding of the archaic warrior ethos, a progress from aristocratic _oikos_ to democratic _polis_. It's not just that values are different: Aeschylus' trilogy is a celebration of difference. --Ron Macdonald ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Feb 1995 10:11:44 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0069 Qs: Book Search; Caius; Homoerotic; Auditions Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0069. Saturday, 4 February 1995. (1) From: Jim Rapport Date: Thursday, 02 Feb 95 13:45:08 EST Subj: Book Search (2) From: Melissa Kolar Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 95 14:24 EST Subj: Lear/Caius (3) From: Jung Jimmy Date: Thursday, 02 Feb 95 17:29:00 PST Subj: Naive questions from the homoerotic front (4) From: Dan Kois Date: Friday, 3 Feb 1995 15:01:15 -0500 (EST) Subj: Auditions (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim Rapport Date: Thursday, 02 Feb 95 13:45:08 EST Subject: Book Search Am I the world's only owner of the out-of-print paperback, Shakespeare Was A Computer Programmer by Jeffrey Holmes, Brunswick Press, Fredricton , New Brunswick, Canada, 1975? It's lovely and great fun. (My computer maven son buys the whole enchilada.) I would like to buy new or used copies for some of my uptight/authorship freak/somewhat humourless/albeit good friends/colleagues. Responses duly appreciated. Have all of you heard about the serious note posted on the backstage callboard by the senior costumer at the Stratford Festival theatre? "All actors will wear jockstraps including those with small parts." Jim Rapport CAPS Northern Michigan University (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Kolar Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 95 14:24 EST Subject: Lear/Caius In the last scene of the play, Kent refers to himself as Lear's servant by the name of Caius. Does anyone know why Shakespeare might have chosen this name? (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jung Jimmy Date: Thursday, 02 Feb 95 17:29:00 PST Subject: Naive questions from the homoerotic front I've been embroiled in a discussion that centers on Emily Dickinson's poetry as lesbian, and while the argument seems convincing, it is countered by an attitude that passionate exchanges between female friends were the norm in her time. Does that have anything to do with Shakespeare, or am I writing to the wrong list? No, it's just that the argument echoed what I remembered being taught about the sonnets. So I was wondering; 1. Is the current thinking still that sonnets to beautiful young boy have no sexual aspect? 2. Are there other sonnets from Shakespeare's time that also fall into the same-sex/no-sex-intended category? Back to lurking, Jimmy P.S. About a year ago I saw a T-shirt that said, "Are you Shakespearienced?" Since then, I've been unable to relocate it. Can anyone help? (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dan Kois Date: Friday, 3 Feb 1995 15:01:15 -0500 (EST) Subject: Auditions I'm a non-Equity actor, looking for summer work. If any of you out there on SHAKESPER know of summer Shakespeare festivals that are having auditions soon, could you let me know? I'm looking mainly in the SE (NC, SC, VA, GA, DC, TN) or midwest (WI, IL, IA, MN, IN). Write back to dankois@email.unc.edu Thanks! ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Feb 1995 10:24:20 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0070 Re: Portia's Voice; Welsh; Fortinbras at Winnipeg Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0070. Saturday, 4 February 1995. (1) From: Naomi Liebler Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 95 11:16:00 EST Subj: RE: SHK 6.0065 Re: Portia's Voice (2) From: Melissa Aaron Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 1995 10:10:04 +0200 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0066 Re: Mrs. Mortimer's Welsh (3) From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 95 11:00:16 -0500 Subj: Fortinbras in the Winnipeg *Hamlet* (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Naomi Liebler Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 95 11:16:00 EST Subject: RE: SHK 6.0065 Re: Portia's Voice An addendum in support of Phyllis Rackin's notice re Portia's diminished "musicality": When Portia and Nerissa enter the scene at around line 95 or so, P. says, "Music! hark!" and Nerissa points out to her that "It is your music, madam, of the house." I've always thought this was a bit peculiar: why wouldn't Portia recognize her own musicians? why would she be surprised that there should be music coming from her house? My guess has been that she, too, "hath no music in [her]self," ironically pointing to the insistence the play makes on hierarchical "difference" between the (best of?) the Venetians and Shylock. This eradication of "difference" (as I read it) underscores the artificiality of Shylock's demonization. Also, if I may, a belated response to Grace Tiffany's richly-informed discussion on _Oedipus Rex_ et alia: Brava! Moreover, the idea of "harmatia" as "missing the mark" (to return to THAT one again) is well-supported in the plot and story of Oedipus. From the time Oedipus learned that his doom was parricide and incest, he did all he could to avoid fulfilling it--he left Corinth where his "parents" (as he thought) lived, and made his way to Thebes. In other words, he aimed to do the right thing, to avoid the extreme sin that was his destiny, and "missed the mark." That is why the play's tag is "Count no man happy until he has seen the end of his days"--the tragic core of hamartia is that we sometimes DO not (not to say CAN not) avoid evil. We take aim, and sometimes we miss. The fact that Oedipus takes responsibility for his actions also marks him as heroic in the tragic mode: as king, as son, he DID the deeds that brought the plague upon Thebes. Responsibility is not the same thing as "guilt" in the emotive frame. None of this "my client couldn't help himself, milord; he was doomed to do what he did" that we might hear from defense counsel today. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Aaron Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 1995 10:10:04 +0200 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0066 Re: Mrs. Mortimer's Welsh I would never suggest draining away the Celtic issues in Henry IV:1, nor reducing it to the level of soap opera. Surely, though, this does not obviate the difficulty of this director's rendition of the play: THE AUDIENCE IN CAMBRIDGE HAD NO IDEA WHAT WAS GOING ON. A "seduced" or "bewitched" Mortimer, a Mortimer who has been seduced by Welsh and is therefore no longer "really English" makes as effective of a political point. It also happens to coincide with the cynical reading of personal relationships I cited earlier--that linguistic and indeed political unity are inimical to romance. I think that's pretty political. Melissa Aaron (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Thursday, 2 Feb 95 11:00:16 -0500 Subject: Fortinbras in the Winnipeg *Hamlet* Dan Colvin asked me about the director's handling of Fortinbras in the Manitoba Theatre Centre's production of *Hamlet,* since I indicated that the play ends with Horatio's "good night, sweet prince" line. Fortinbras _was_ in the production: we had Horatio's description of the political situation in the third scene, and saw Fortinbras himself in 4.4 as he embarks on his Polish invasion. So he did provide a foil to Hamlet as intended; I thought this made Hamlet's "How all occasions do inform against me" one of the more powerful soliloquies. I have to admit that I wondered how they would end the play, and I think in this case they made the right choice. True, we lost both the ambassadors from England and Fortinbras, but the moment they chose worked very well for this production. You definitely got the sense of the Danish situation being national/political as well as personal/familial. Gene Pyrz played Fortinbras (as well as Barnardo and a sailor) and came across as brash, energetic, and non-intellectual, so although the part was small, it had its own special impact. Chris Gordon ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Feb 1995 10:28:14 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0071 Multimedia Shakespeare Project Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0071. Saturday, 4 February 1995. From: Leslie Harris Date: Friday, Feb 03 22:59:34 EST 1995 Subject: Multimedia Shakespeare Project Hi, Folks. I mentioned last semester a "Shakespeare Multimedia Project" that I did in my Shakespeare class. I said I would talk about how the project went if people were interested, and someone has requested the information, so here goes! ;-) In general, I would say that the project was a success. The students had lots of fun with it (after they figured out how to use the software), the projects turned out pretty well, and--heck--I actually got them to check books out from the library! :-) For those who didn't hear about the project the first time I posted about it, here's what it involved. I broke the students up into groups, with each group responsible for annotating a passage from one of the Shakespeare plays we read during the semester (a different play for each group). The software they used was Multimedia ToolBook 3.0, by Asymetrix. Their task was to create a hypertext document, linking words in the passage to explanatory notes, background information, scanned pictures, sound clips, video clips--whatever they deemed appropriate to help explain the meaning of the passage. In hypertext documents, when you click on a "hotword," the program takes you to the linked page, and you read the note, see the picture, or whatever. Then you can click on a button to return to the passage. I wanted them to learn to read their passage closely, explore contextual information relevant to the passage, and be creative in the process, producing a document that others could use, benefit from, and enjoy. In all those aspects, I think the project succeeded. The problems: some students were a bit frightened by the freedom the project gave them (here's what you need to do, here are help sheets to teach you how to use the software, here's when it's due--with subsidiary deadlines--o.k., get going). That's basically how I assigned the project, although we continued to meet while it was going on, so I could make announcements, give further directions, troubleshoot the projects, and so on. This might not be true of all students, but the very traditional students here wanted a bit more hand-holding than I gave them. I think the project would work even better for students who like being independent learners. Another problem: video clips are *huge* files. Students could basically include only a few lines of dialogue for a clip, before the size got pretty unmanageable. Such clips are definitely too large to be saved on a disk, and that involved using shared network drives on which to save the files. Making back-up copies was difficult, especially because we couldn't use floppy disks (or hard drives, for that matter, since the computers were in a public lab). Despite the problems, though, I was very pleased with the end results, and I was pleased with the work the students put into thier projects. They *did* check out books from the library (lots of them, in fact), they learned lots of interesting things about the period, many of the students enjoyed the project and found the multimedia software totally cool, and they were highly motivated to do the work. I saved the projects (on a shared network drive, of course), and if anyone knows how to change MultiMedia ToolBook files into HTML (and can offer space on a WWW server), I'd be willing to put the better ones on the Web (if anyone were interested). Let me know if you want any more information about the project. Leslie Harris Department of English Susquehanna University Selinsgrove PA 17870 lharris@einstein.susqu.edu ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 15:03:51 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0072 Q: The Scottish Play Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0072. Sunday, 5 February 1995. From: Bill Schmidt Date: Saturday, 04 Feb 1995 11:21:41 -0500 (EST) Subject: The Scottish Play From a review of Garry Wills's, "Witches & Jesuits" in the February 16, NYRB: "I had assumed that this superstition [about Macbeth in performance] had degenerated into a custom or running joke, but to make sure I troubled a number of experienced actors with inquiries. The results were, I think, of some interest. It is still forbidden in the green rooms for anybody to name the play or quote from it, something you might do inadvertently, for instance by saying you had won "golden opinions" from the reviewers. An offender is obliged to leave the room, and in the corridor, turn thrice in a circle, and swear an oath. He or she may then bereadmitted. Or if immediately on offending, the culprit remembers to quote Hamlet's 'Angels and ministers of grace defend us!' he or she may stay in the room." Really? I would appreciate hearing from any subscribers with experience of Shakepeare in production whether this is true. Is there any difference in custom between the US and the UK? I'd also be interested in hearing about any other theatrical superstitions relating to Shakespeare. Thanks. Bill Schmidt (WASCHMIDT@delphi.com) ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 15:10:09 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0072 Re: Portia's Voice Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0073. Sunday, 5 February 1995. (1) From: Richard C. Jones III Date: Saturday, 04 Feb 1995 13:04:32 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0070 Re: Portia's Voice (2) From: Joan Hartwig Date: Sunday, 05 Feb 95 13:14:38 EST Subj: Portia's Voice (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard C. Jones III Date: Saturday, 04 Feb 1995 13:04:32 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0070 Re: Portia's Voice Naomi Liebler's comments on Portia's not recognizing her own musicians are lucid and interesting, but I wonder if we aren't over-intellectualizing a bit here. This is a play, after all, not a novel. I've always viewed the passage in question simply as a means of telling the *audience* what's up, and of making sure the music cue didn't disappear. Not the subtlest of devices, to be sure, but forgiveable, I think.... Rick Jones rjones@falcon.cc.ukans.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joan Hartwig Date: Sunday, 05 Feb 95 13:14:38 EST Subject: Portia's Voice Reading Naomi Liebler's response in support of Phyllis Rackin's opinion that Portia is not "musical," I realized that I am surprised. I have always thought that Portia hears the music as unusual, possibly even ethereal, possibly thinking that she has for an instant been allowed to hear the music of the spheres. After all, the audience has been prepared to think in these terms by Lorenzo's preceding discussion of the "harmony [that] is in immortal souls." Portia's response to Nerissa's literal reading, "It is your music, madam, of the house," is somewhat wry to my ear: "Nothing is good, I see, without respect. / Methinks it sounds much sweeter than by day." Nerissa, as so many comic parallel characters do, has the literalizing ear that brings Portia back to recognize that values cannot be absolute, but are related to their contexts--a point that Shakespeare seems to be making with the working out of "vows" violated and forgiven in the final scene, a point that contrasts with Shylock's adherence to the letter of the law. To differ respectfully, Joan Hartwig ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 15:20:53 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0074 Re: Homoerotic and *The Sonnets* Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0074. Sunday, 5 February 1995. (1) From: E. L. Epstein Date: Saturday, 04 Feb 1995 14:34:00 EDT Subj: RE: SHK 6.0069 Qs: Homoerotic (2) From: Jon Connolly Date: Sunday, 5 Feb 1995 00:18:37 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0069 Qs: Homoerotic (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. L. Epstein Date: Saturday, 04 Feb 1995 14:34:00 EDT Subject: RE: SHK 6.0069 Qs: Homoerotic We must be very careful when we apply modern standards to previous ages. The matter of homoeroticism is a case in point. In the old days (that is, the Old Stone Age , when I was a boy), marrying a wife was in essence, hiring a housemaid who would bear your children. Of course, there is some reason for this attitude: in an age when everybody lived on the edge, what we call sentiment was a seldom thing. You *could* love your wife; nothing could stop you. However, if you did, the Romans at least had a pejorative to apply to you: uxorius. It is difficult to find affection in early marriages. In tHe Bible, for instance, there are only two marriages that come to mind where the husband is considerate of his wife's feelings: the man who will later be the father of Samuel consoles his wife, Hannah, by saying when she laments her barreness, "Am I not better for you than ten sons?" That is, I love you and this should make up for a great deal of your pain." In addition, there is Boaz who behaves like a gentleman to Naomi and Ruth. However these are the exceptions. Now here is the point: In such a society if the husband does not look for affection from the wife, nor does he give her any, where can he expend his affection? With his menfriends, that is, a male-bonding unit. (The women presumably did the same with their female friends) Therefore, strong male friendships need not have any sexual content, nor should strong female friendships. In our own time, however, we are on the other side of the Romantic Revolution, in which personal sincerity and strong emotion were considered de rigeur in personal relationships. Hence, affection between husband and wife is now take for granted as a condition of their relationship. Now, if a married man has *strong* friendships with other men, and the wife with other women, it is not without justification the strong friendships could be seen to have a sexual component. Women are now, in intention, autonomous, that is, in charge of their own destiny, and therefore equal partners in a marriage, at least in a healthy modern relationship. Therefor the firiendships of David and Jonathan and Achilles and Patroclus, or to get back to the subject Shakespeare and Southampton, can be seen to be examples of male bonding, rather than love affairs in our modern sense of the term. This would also relieve the possibility\ of sexual tinge in the men acting as women in the theatre. Comments? E.L.Epstein (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jon Connolly Date: Sunday, 5 Feb 1995 00:18:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0069 Qs: Homoerotic To Jung Jimmy, Re: Homoeroticism and *The Sonnets* I would hesitate to generalize about what the "current belief" on the subject is, but for two nuanced takes on the subject that avoid the "are they or aren't they" trap, you might try Alan Bray's "Homosexuality and the Signs of Male Friendship in Elizabethan England" in _Queering the Renaissance_ (Jonathan Goldberg, ed. Duke U.P., 1994) and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick's chapter on the sonnets in _Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosocial Desire_ (Columbia UP, 1985). Jon Connolly U.C. Santa Barbara ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 15:34:45 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0075 Re: Hubris; Fortinbras; Welsh; Multimedia Project Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0075. Sunday, 5 February 1995. (1) From: David Wilson-Okamura Date: Saturday, 4 Feb 95 10:36:01 CST Subj: HUBRIS and HAMLET (2) From: David Glassco Date: Saturday, 04 Feb 1995 17:01:57 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0070 Re: Fortinbras at Winnipeg (3) From: Bob Gingher Date: Sunday, 5 Feb 1995 05:42:32 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0066 Re: Mrs. Mortimer's Welsh (4) From: Bob Gingher Date: Sunday, 5 Feb 1995 05:55:09 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0071 Multimedia Shakespeare Project (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Wilson-Okamura Date: Saturday, 4 Feb 95 10:36:01 CST Subject: HUBRIS and HAMLET My knowledge of Greek is rudimentary, but I have it on good authority (viz., my wife) that _hubris_ is not to be confused with "intellectual pride," much less some "tragic flaw." Its primary meaning is suggested, rather, by the verbal form _hubrizdo_, which L.S.J. defines thus: "to wax wanton, run riot, Lat. _lascivire_, opp. to _sophronein_ to practice moderation; of over-fed horses, to neigh, snort, prance, etc.; of plants, to run riot, grow over-rank. 2. with regard to others, to treat despitefully, do despite to, to outrage, insult, affront, ill-treat; in Att. more commonly, _hubrizdein eis tina_ to deal wantonly, commit outrages towards one; _hubrizdein hubries_ to commit outrages; so, _hubrizdein adikemata_ to do wanton wrongs. -> at Athens to do one a personal outrage, to beat and insult, assault . . ." Now it is not hard to see from this how _hubris_ came to be translated as "overweening pride" and the like. But in the case of Oedipus, it seems obvious to me that we can take the word in a far simpler sense: Oedipus assaulted his father, the king of Thebes. This constitutes a double outrage, in that Laius is his superior both by reason of paternity and civil rank. THAT is why Oedipus is called "hubristic": not because he strove against his Fate, but because he killed a kinsman who was also his superior. Wherefore (I would suggest) we ought not to speak of Oedipus's pride so much as his "unkindness," in the old sense of the word: in that sense, his crime is like that of Claudius in Shakespeare's _Hamlet_--not "murther," perhaps, nor even "foul," since he struck in self-defense--but "unnatural," an affront to kinship and to kingship; as for the incest, it is condemned in both plays on similar grounds. The difference is, that Oedipus is not a "villain," since he commits these unnatural acts unwittingly, whereas Claudius knowingly persists in them (v. Claudius' attempts at prayer, _Hamlet_ III iii). Yours faithfully, David Wilson-Okamura dswilson@midway.uchicago.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Glassco Date: Saturday, 04 Feb 1995 17:01:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0070 Re: Fortinbras at Winnipeg I wonder if Chris Gordon would elaborate on exactly why or how Hamlet's soliloquay "How all occasions do inform against me..." was made so powerful in the production she's discussing. I have always been bemused by the fact that the occasion Hamlet has just experienced (Fortinbras going off to a pointless war) is precisely the sort of occasion that might lead to a recognition of the need for further thought _before_ action, rather than encouraging anything precipitous. David Glassco Trent University (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bob Gingher Date: Sunday, 5 Feb 1995 05:42:32 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0066 Re: Mrs. Mortimer's Welsh Of interest here also is the (linguistic) Outsider, the role of the artist and visionary as outcast, able to straddle two worlds like Kierkegaard's Knight of Faith and thus write meaningfully in the way Yeats means when he notes "conflict is consciousness." The Anglo-Irish tradition and explosion of American "Southern fiction" testify to the importance of "fighting the Englishing" (or any other homogenizing ruination) of nativ language, roots. Writers "write what they know," always better than looking with one eye over the shoulder back at the metropolis... (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bob Gingher Date: Sunday, 5 Feb 1995 05:55:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0071 Multimedia Shakespeare Project I'm interested in the "video clip" portion of your announcement and in your distinguishing between independent learners and hand-holders when involved with classes of "the subscribed." I have over a hundred students on-line in various classes now and find the independent learners are having a ball, the hangers-back aren't. P.S. Are you the Leslie Harris w/whom I went to grad school? --bob gingher ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 16:56:52 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 5.0076 Re: The Scottish Play Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0076. Monday, 6 February 1995. (1) From: Melissa Aaron Date: Sunday, 5 Feb 1995 14:02:11 +0200 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0072 Q: The Scottish Play (2) From: Michael Faulkner Date: Sunday, 5 Feb 1995 14:46:12 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0072 Q: The Scottish Play (3) From: Steven Gagen Date: Monday, 06 Feb 1995 10:44:34 +1100 Subj: Re: The Scottish Play (4) From: Jean Peterson Date: Monday, 6 Feb 1995 12:53:35 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0072 Q: The Scottish Play (5) From: Fran Teague Date: Monday, 06 Feb 95 14:01:59 EST Subj: Re: SHK 6.0072 Q: The Scottish Play (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Aaron Date: Sunday, 5 Feb 1995 14:02:11 +0200 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0072 Q: The Scottish Play My experience is that it's still forbidden. The operatic equivalent is Verdi's *La Forza del Destino*, sometimes called "the one without a name." Along this line, does anyone know if there's a curse or something funny associated with John Ford's *Tis Pity Shee's a Whore?" Stoppard's *The Real Thing* seems to suggest that it's a play that breeds a lot of inappropriate relationships backstage, and I've heard this from other sources. Anyone know? Melissa Aaron University of Wisconsin-Madison (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Faulkner Date: Sunday, 5 Feb 1995 14:46:12 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0072 Q: The Scottish Play Bill, Having done many productions of Shakespeare's, including the dread play itself, I can say that the superstition is indeed alive and well. I have heard of many variations on the "cure", however, those being: After turning around three times, one must *spit* over the left shoulder After turning around three times, one must quote from "Midsummer Night's Dream" Once the entire ritual is completed, one must knock on the dressing room door, formally ask for re-admittance, and be welcomed in by a fellow actor that speaks their full name, as in "Yes, you may enter, Michael John Faulkner". I have been witness to many backstage arguments about the validity of the superstition (as I have inadvertantly let the name slip out), the most notable being one in which people that didn't believe in it were divided between whether or not one should honour the superstitions of other actors, and, being a disbeliever, still participate in the "cure". I myself am not sure what to believe...and would be curious to see if you learn the source of the superstition. Unlike the "no whistling" backstage fear, which has a basis in the early technical operation of the theater, no one I have met seems to know the origin of the "Scottish Play" superstition. Regards, Michael Faulkner hotspur@mcs.com (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steven Gagen Date: Monday, 06 Feb 1995 10:44:34 +1100 Subject: Re: The Scottish Play Bill Schmidt is dubious as to whether the superstitions surrounding The Scottish Play are still alive. I can tell him that plenty of people still believe in them here in Melbourne Australia. Many people in the theatre world will not mention the play's name or quote from it (or whistle in the theatre either, for that matter). It is often referred to simply as 'That Play'. According to friends of mine who say they know about such matters, the reason for the play's bad reputation is that some of the spells and incantations used by the witches are _genuine_ spells and incantations, capable of invoking evil entities. Our theatre group planned to stage a production of That Play in April this year. My wife and I were to have co-directed it. We were scornful about the superstitions, and blase about the prognostications of those who told us about the number of productions that had had to be cancelled because of ill-health and death. Until, that is, my wife developed sudden and serious valvular heart disease which meant that the production has had to be deferred for at least a year, and two members of our company died suddenly (one at the age of 26 years). We are still planning to stage That Play next year. But this time, we will respect those superstitions -- just to be on the safe side. Regards from Steve Gagen. (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jean Peterson Date: Monday, 6 Feb 1995 12:53:35 -0500 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0072 Q: The Scottish Play BE WARY HOW YOU SCORN SUPERSTITION... About 3 years ago at Bucknell, during a rehearsal of a student-directed show (NOT the scottish play, but nonetheless), the director and stage manager got into a conversation about that "stupid" superstition. Secure in their secular rationalism, they tempted fate by joyously screaming the M-word, onstage and backstage... Opening night's performance was interrupted by a backstage fire, which started in the room where the conversation began...(no one was hurt, but it WAS eerie). Verily, I say, these things are true! Cheers Jean Peterson Bucknell University (5)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Fran Teague Date: Monday, 06 Feb 95 14:01:59 EST Subject: Re: SHK 6.0072 Q: The Scottish Play The theater group I work with regularly (non-profit community) does observe the prohibition on Macbeth when someone notices that a violation has occurred. Perhaps the parties who enforce the superstition are trying to show off; the two of us who regularly teach Shakespeare don't fuss too much about it. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 17:10:56 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0078 Re: The Homoerotic Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0078. Monday, 6 February 1995. (1) From: Grant Moss Date: Monday, 6 Feb 1995 09:48:08 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0069 Qs: Homoerotic (2) From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Monday, 6 Feb 95 09:34:39 -0500 Subj: SHK 6.0069 Qs: Homoerotic (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Grant Moss Date: Monday, 6 Feb 1995 09:48:08 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0069 Qs: Homoerotic Regarding the recent inquiry on homoeroticism in the sonnets I would suggest the book "Queering the Renaissance," a collection of essays edited by (I think) Jonathan Goldberg. To the best of my knowledge, the debate still rages on, but I think we need to be wary of trying to apply 20th-century standards and definition of gayness to the 16th and 17th centuries, tempting though it often is. I don't mean to reject the idea of the sonnets and other works being gay--they may very well be--but the fact that they sound like love letters to someone in 1995 is not enough to establish anything definite. Grant Moss UNC-Chapel Hill (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Monday, 6 Feb 95 09:34:39 -0500 Subject: SHK 6.0069 Qs: Homoerotic In addition to Jon Connolly's suggestions, I would highly recommend Bruce Smith's *Homosexual Desire in Shakespeare's England.* Chris Gordon ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 17:15:05 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0080 Re: Oedipus and Greek Tragedy Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0080. Monday, 6 February 1995. (1) From: Bernice W. Kliman Date: Monday, 06 Feb 1995 09:22:53 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Oedipus (2) From: Piers Lewis Date: Monday, 06 Feb 1995 11:18:38 -0600 Subj: Greek Tragedy (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bernice W. Kliman Date: Monday, 06 Feb 1995 09:22:53 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Oedipus Yes, Oedipus kills his father and marries his mother unwittingly--but he had gone to the oracle in the 1st place because he had been told that the couple who had brought him up were not his parents. He runs off, then, forgetting about that concern, and kills the 1st person he meets old enough to be his father and then marries the 1st woman he meets old enough to be his mother. I don't think he is entirely the victim of fate. Just adding my two cents.... Bernice (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Piers Lewis Date: Monday, 06 Feb 1995 11:18:38 -0600 Subject: Greek Tragedy Nietzsche would be amused. You've missed the point he'd say: Sophocles isn't "contemplating" the possible irrationality of the cosmos in _Oedipus_, he's proclaiming it. The play's a fable, he'd say, about knowledge, inquiry, the new philosophies that call all in doubt. Preceding Aristophanes' attack on Socrates and the sophists by six years, it dramatizes the futility of intellectual inquiry and rational understanding. And he'd have had a good laugh at the notion that democracy and the decline of the aristocratic warrior ethos should be acclaimed as evidence of progress. 'Progress' is a modern, post-renaissance idea. "Why," he asks in the posthumous fragment, 'Homer's Contest'," did the whole Greek world exult over the combat scenes of the _Iliad_? I fear that we do not understand these in a sufficiently 'Greek' manner; indeed, that we should shudder if we were ever to understand them 'in Greek.'" Bernard Knox makes a related point in his 'introduction' to Robert Fagles' translation of the _Iliad_: "Homer's Achilles is clearly the model for the tragic hero of the Sophoclean stage; his stubborn passionate devotion to an ideal image of self is the same force that drives Antigone, Oedipus, Ajax and Philoctetes to the fulfillment of their destinies. Homer's Achilles is also, for archaic Greek society, the essence of the artistocratic ideal, the paragon of male beauty, courage, patrician manners--'the splendor running in the blood,' says Pindar . . . And this too strikes a tragic note, for Pindar sang his praise of aristocratic values in the century which saw them go down to extinction, replaced by the new spirit of Athenian democracy." Knox goes on to say that even Socrates, "a man whose life and thought would seem to place him at the extreme opposite pole from the Homeric hero, who was so far removed from Achilles' blind instinctive reactions that he could declare the unexamined life unlivable . . . on trial for his life, should invoke the name of Achilles" in order to explain to his judges "why he feels no shame or regret for a course of action that has brought him face to face with a death-sentence . . . rejecting all thought of a compromise that might save his life . . . . In the last analysis, the bloodstained warrior and the gentle philosopher live and die in the same heroic, and tragic, pattern." It's the strangeness of the ancient world that ought to impress us: not how much our distant ancestors resemble us but how little. None of them were liberals. Why on earth should we suppose that the Dionysian religious and literary culture of 5th century Athens supports the values and principles of modern liberalism or responds to the demands of the liberal imagination? Piers Lewis Metropolitan State University ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 17:02:17 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0077 Re: Epilepsy in the Tragedies; Staging *Ant.* Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0077. Monday, 6 February 1995. (1) From: Jocelyn G. Shannon Date: Sunday, 05 Feb 1995 17:56:20 -0500 (EST) Subj: Epilepsy in tragedies (2) From: Harry Hill Date: Monday, 06 Feb 1995 09:11:43 -0500 (EST) Subj: Staging *Anthony and Cleopatra* (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jocelyn G. Shannon Date: Sunday, 05 Feb 1995 17:56:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: Epilepsy in tragedies Forgive a query which may have been discussed many times here, but my students and I are constantly discussing the fact that both Caesar and Othello suffer from "the falling sickness". What was the Elizabethan point of view on this malady? What was Shakespeare's slant? As my television wraps around another grim day at *Camp OJ*, I sometimes wonder if Nicole said, "I do fear you when your eyes roll so." No, that was NOT a part of my request....just the flickering of an overloaded yellow journalist. Thank you for any enlightenment! Jocelyn G. Shannon CAJGS@delphi.com (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Harry Hill Date: Monday, 06 Feb 1995 09:11:43 -0500 (EST) Subject: Staging *Anthony and Cleopatra* The artistic director of the Centaur Theatre in Montreal has asked me to provide him with answers to these questions as he sets about plans for a production of *Anthony and Cleopatra* for next season, and I thought I would see what posting them here might glean. Replies could be sent to me privately, at hilhar@vax2.concordia,ca 1. What seem to you to be the main pitfalls to avoid in staging *Anthony & Cleopatra*? 2. How can the political "background plot" be made compelling in the theatre? 3. What design ideas can make the *story-telling* clear? Marice Podbrey is a fine man of the theatre, with the Order of Canada [the equivalent of a knighthood] and other honours. It is partly his South African background that draws him to the play as a work in which private passions are played out in the midst of political wranglings. He is sharply aware of the possibilities of artistic failure, and therefore interested in as many answers to his questions as possible. Thank you. Harry Hill ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 08:41:33 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0079 Re: Multimedia Project Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0079. Monday, 6 February 1995. From: John Boni Date: Monday, 6 Feb 1995 09:32:54 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0075 Re: Multimedia Project RE: Multimedia Project, comments of Leslie Harris and Bob Gingher-- Fall term I set up a listserv for my Shakespeare Honors Seminar. Since I am at an urban commuter institution, one of my goals was to provide an opportunity for students to "talk" in ways analogous to those available on a residential campus. Secondarily, we have recently instituted a computer Literacy requirement and my course helped fulfill it. Prof. Gingher's comments I found most apt: The good students profited from this new tool. I learned from colleagues in history and literature that sending assignments, or amplifications of assignments, or news about upcoming examinations, etc., through the list helped motivate others who might not have used it as much. We have continued the lsit this term, and a few of us convened to see the Chicago Shakespeare Repertory's very good production of "Troilus & Cressida." It is no surprise that while our colleagues in the sciences use computers for mathamatical analysis, we in the humanities find them a tool to communicate better with our students and thus augment instruction and learning. I'd be interested in others' ideas and experiences. John M. Boni, Dean College of Arts & Sciences Northeastern Illinois University ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 08:50:34 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0081 Re: Welsh; Shylock; Fortinbras Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0081. Tuesday, 7 February 1995. (1) From: John Owen Date: Monday, 6 Feb 1995 15:10:28 -0800 Subj: RE: SHK 6.0075 Re: Welsh (2) From: Alexander D. Smith Date: Monday, 6 Feb 1995 17:16:08 -0600 Subj: Re: Fortinbras at Winnipeg (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Owen Date: Monday, 6 Feb 1995 15:10:28 -0800 Subject: RE: SHK 6.0075 Re: Welsh It is difficult for me to understand Terence Hawkes statement regarding character vs. political analysis, as the two are completely in harmony in this case. The idea of 1 Henry IV only as a political tract reduces the heartbreaking personal implications of the scene. Mortimer is quite tragically a nincompoop who marries a woman he can't communicate with; and his co-conspirators are the unstable Hotspur, the half-mad Glendower and the self-seeking Worcester. The realization, certain by the end of the scene, that they are utterly doomed is almost unendurably pathetic. Regarding Shylock, I don't want to get into a war where the only weapon is repeated assertion, but I feel compelled to remind Ms. Kagan that the motive Shylock himself confesses is that of "making what merchandise I will". In other words, Antonio is bad for business. Shylock's treatment at the hands of the Christians inflames the desire to destroy the merchant, but that intent is calculated before the action of the play. Shakespeare's humanization of the character is purely a post facto transformation of a villainous stereotype. John Owen (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Alexander D. Smith Date: Monday, 6 Feb 1995 17:16:08 -0600 Subject: Re: Fortinbras at Winnipeg David Glassco called the war Fortinbras is preparing for in the background during IV, iv a 'pointless war'. I couldn't disagree more. Old Norway (Fortinbras' father) and King Hamlet (Hamlet's father) made a 'bet' and fought a war a short while ago. The deal was that whoever won would get the all of the land that the loser had conquered. King Hamlet won, slayed Old Norway, and took the lands. Now Fortinbras' will not sit passivley by and let his father be killed and his honor destroyed and all of the lands he had conquered by taken away. He prepares to wage war againt Denmark to regain the land that King Hamlet won from his father and to regain his father's honor. In IV, iv Fortinbras is not preparing for his attack on Denmark, but rather on Poland. Perhaps this is a 'pointless war' in the senese that there is no real reason as to why Fortinbras should attack Poland save to gain some more land, but it is not at all pointless in how it speaks of Fortinbras' person. Fortinbras takes what he wants. He does not let his environment confuse and reduce him to a coward in "bestial oblivion" (IV, iv) as becomes of Hamlet in this chaotic and disguised world (a world where his mother runs to marry his uncle, his uncle kills his father and crowns himself, Ophelia, the woman he loves, is used as bait before him so that Poloniuns can spy on him, and his two close friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, are sent to spy on him by Claudius). Fortinbras can motivated himself to fight for a war that does not have very special and close meaning to his heart, yet Hamlet cannot motivate himself to fight for something of the greatest importance (avenging his father's murder). ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 08:53:45 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0082 Q: Shakespeare and Science Fiction Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0082. Tuesday, 7 February 1995. From: Paul Franssen Date: Tuesday, 07 Feb 1995 12:46:44 -0600 (CST) Subject: Shakespeare and SF Dear Fellow Shakespeareans, In my search for stories linking Shakespeare with Science Fiction, I have come across references to two volumes of _The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction_: volume 63, of November 1982, contains a story entitled "Shakespeare MCMLXXXV," by Bill Pronzini and Barry N. Malzberg, and book reviews concerning Shakespeare by the same authors; and vol. 72 of January 1987 contains a story by E. Bertrand Loring, "The Man who Wrote Shakespeare." So far I have been unable to trace the magazine anywhere. Could anyone help me out? Paul Franssen University of Utrecht Department of English Trans 10 3512 JK Utrecht The Netherlands e-mail: p.franssen@let.ruu.nl ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 08:56:25 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0083 Re: Shakespeare and Science Fiction Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0083. Wednesday, 8 February 1995. (1) From: Daniel Traister Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 09:46:01 -0500 (EST) Subj: Shakespeare and science fiction (2) From: James Schaefer Date: Tuesday, 07 Feb 1995 09:45:35 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0082 Q: Shakespeare and Science Fiction (3) From: Hardy M. Cook Date: Wednesday, February 8, 1995 Subj: Shakespeare and Science Fiction (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Daniel Traister Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 09:46:01 -0500 (EST) Subject: Shakespeare and science fiction Paul Franssen seeks "stories linking Shakespeare with Science Fiction." In addition to the specific story for which he is looking, in the commonly available *Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction*, he might also want to know about *Weird Tales from Shakespeare*, ed. Katharine Kerr and Martin H. Greenberg (New York: Daw Books, 1994). This title is in print in the United States and should be readily available from general or specialist booksellers with large paperback stocks. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: James Schaefer Date: Tuesday, 07 Feb 1995 09:45:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0082 Q: Shakespeare and Science Fiction To Paul Franssen: F&SF is the Grand Old Man of science fiction (actually, it was founded in the '30's by one of the Grand Old Men: somebody Campbell, I believe, who first published people like Asimov and Heinlein. Somebody out there will know.) As one of the original and true examples of "pulp fiction," you're not going to find it in standard library collections. Your best bets are either (a) a university library with a strong collection of American popular culture, or (b) a bookstore that specializes in catering to the fantasy and sci-fi market. Uncle Hugo's in Minneapolis is a well-known one; perhaps Christine Mack Gordon could supply you with their phone number and address. They, or similar stores, could also put you in contact with clubs whose members collect such things. "Grok," to quote an obscure source. Jim Schaefer Georgetown University schaefej@guvax.georgetown.edu (202) 687-4478 (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hardy M. Cook Date: Wednesday, February 8, 1995 Subject: Shakespeare and Science Fiction I've always been fond of Isaac Asimov's "The Mortal Bard" from *Earth Is Room Enough*. At my suggestion, Marilyn Schoenbaum included it in her *A Shakespeare Merriment: An Anthology of Shakespearean Humor*, Garland, 1988. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 09:07:10 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0084 Re: The Scottish Play Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0084. Wednesday, 8 February 1995. (1) From: Jon Enriquez Date: Tuesday, 07 Feb 1995 09:50:32 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 5.0076 Re: The Scottish Play (2) From: Jim Hamilton Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 95 13:52:00 CST Subj: Another tangent on superstitions (3) From: Anna Joell Goodman Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 17:14:37 -400 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0072 Q: The Scottish Play (4) From: Roger D. Gross Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 16:35:55 -0600 (CST) Subj: The Scottish Play (5) From: Tom Dale Keever Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 95 01:10:01 EST Subj: The Macbeth curse (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jon Enriquez Date: Tuesday, 07 Feb 1995 09:50:32 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 5.0076 Re: The Scottish Play I was always taught that the Scottish curse dates back to the earliest indoor production of the play. In those days, of course, an indoor production was unheard of. That production was beset with elaborate difficulties -- fires, smoke, stuff collapsing -- and the legacy remains today. Jon Enriquez Georgetown University ENRIQUEZJ@guvax.georgetown.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim Hamilton Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 95 13:52:00 CST Subject: Another tangent on superstitions I've been digging recently in search of information on a particular theatrical tradition. While on the hunt last week, I ran across Richard Huggett's *Supernatural on Stage*, which devotes a chapter to the curse of the Scottish Play. A number of associated disasters are recounted. Some companies, it seems, refuse even to allow reuse of their Scottish props in other productions. If I may wander just a bit, I wonder if anybody on the list is familiar with the tradition of the ghost light. That's the thing I was looking for when I found Huggett's book. Does anyone out there work with a theatre that uses a ghost light? Is there any tie to Shakespeare? Jim Hamilton (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Anna Joell Goodman Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 17:14:37 -400 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0072 Q: The Scottish Play In response to Bill Schmidt's enquiry about theatrical superstitions surrounding "The Scottish Play", I would respond that those superstitions are not only alive--they are thriving. It has been my experience in working in the theatre (as an actor, as a technician, as a stage manager, and as an associate director of p.r. and marketing) that the play is definitely out-of-bounds backstage. Whether the theatre in question is academic, professional, or what-not, mention of the play is forbidden behind the scenes of ANY production--be it Shakespeare or no. An interesting aside--the only production on which I have ever worked when the play was mentioned backstage featured numerous sound and set glitches, one actor breaking a leg, a dancer with a stress fracture, and a stage manager with a sprained ankle--all on the night in question! --Anna J. Goodman (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Roger D. Gross Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 16:35:55 -0600 (CST) Subject: The Scottish Play Those interested in the Scottish Play superstition will find lots of history and anecdote in these sources: - Richard Huggett, THE CURSE OF MACBETH AND OTHER THEATRICAL SUPERSTITIONS: AN INVESTIGATION, Clippenham: Picton, 1981 - Margaret Lucy, SHAKESPEARE AND THE SUPERNATURAL, A BRIEF STUDY OF FOLKLORE, SUPERSTITION AND WITCHCRAFT IN MACBETH, MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM, AND THE TEMPEST, Liverpool: Shakespeare Press, 1906 - Cumberland Clark, SHAKESPEARE AND THE SUPERNATURAL (pt. 1 about superstition) London: Williams and Norgate, 1931 My personal eerie example: listening to the Metropolitan Opera radio broadcast of the Verdi MACBETH. First interval, they're playing the usual Metropolitan Opera quiz. It goes on and on and on. I kill time by laughing with my colleague about the naivete of the Scottish Play superstition. Finally the announcer comes on to say the performance has been cancelled because a patron has fallen out of the upper balcony to his death in the orchestra. It's not enough to make me a believer but I'm less likely to be openly scornful about the superstition. Read THE CURSE OF MACBETH; the sheer volume of terrible anecdote is impressive. Finally, I find that actors over forty all know the superstition. Most younger actors never heard of it. We don't say the play's name in our theatre but we all know it's just a game. (At least we all SAY it is.) (5)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Dale Keever Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 95 01:10:01 EST Subject: The Macbeth curse In twenty years onstage I have shed my own blood only twice - in my two appearances in MACBETH. In Michigan, playing Ross, I caught a flying lead-weighted goblet, meant for Banquo's ghost, in the side of the head. It knocked me senseless and the wound would have been stitched if I wasn't determined to do my next scene with Lennox. Playing Macbeth here in NY at Bouwerie Lane Theater one matinee I parried MacDuff's most energetic down-swing - the one we had found would throw sparks off our steel blades if we did it hard enough - and caught the edge of his machete across my knuckles. Only my insistence on wearing heavy leather gloves for the battle scene saved my index finger, which healed a bit twisted to one side and retains its deformity to this day. Both wounds bled copiously and left visible scars. I retain a low tolerence for superstitious nonsense in all its forms, and if anyone ever again offered me a role in MACBETH (which title I speak aloud whenever necessary, in or out of theaters) I would accept without hesitation. But I would be very careful..... A good friend worked for Penn and Teller on their last Broadway production and told me about their nightly routine. Before the curtain opens Teller strolls about backstage whistling a few of his favorite tunes, Penn opens a copy of MACBETH and declaims a speech or two, and both go about to the backstage crew and say, "Good luck!" or "Have a good show!" ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 09:12:19 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0085 Re: Teh Homoerotic Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0085. Wednesday, 8 February 1995. (1) From: John Cox Date: Tuesday, 07 Feb 1995 10:23:35 -0500 (EST) Subj: homoerotic sonnets (2) From: Stefanie DuBose Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 15:54:42 -0600 Subj: Homoeroticism in the Renaissance (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Cox Date: Tuesday, 07 Feb 1995 10:23:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: homoerotic sonnets While acknowledging those who've addressed the issue of homoeroticism in the sonnets, don't neglect Joseph Pequigney, *Such Is My Love* (Chicago, 1985). John Cox (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stefanie DuBose Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 15:54:42 -0600 Subject: Homoeroticism in the Renaissance In response to Jung Jimmy's question on Renaissance homoeroticism, Jonathan Goldberg published a book in 1992 titled Sodometries: Renaissance Texts, Modern Sexualities. I have gone through parts of his text and found it quite interesting and useful in for a (Renaissance) paper with a subtext on sexual orientation. The index lists references to male friendship; and the first chapter is "'Wee/Men': Gender and Sexuality in the Fromations of Elizabethan High Literariness." The rest of the book focuses on representations of sodomy in the theater and the New World. His notes at the end of the text are also good for further research. Hope this helps ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 09:21:43 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0086 Re: Multimedia Project Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0086. Wednesday, 8 February 1995. (1) From: Leslie Harris Date: Tuesday, Feb 7 11:30:42 EST 1995 Subj: Shakespeare Multimedia Project (2) From: Edward Gero Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 11:55:14 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0079 Re: Multimedia Project (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Leslie Harris Date: Tuesday, Feb 7 11:30:42 EST 1995 Subject: Shakespeare Multimedia Project I thought I'd send this response to the list rather than to Bob Gingher himself, since his question asked for some clarification. My class was actually a traditional Shakespeare class, at least in terms of its setting. I met with a group of about 24 students, synchronously present, in a classroom (with occasional meetings in a computer lab). These are traditional students, coming to college out of high school, most of whom come from rural or suburban areas with small populations. The project took up the last two weeks of the class (during which we met MWF in the computer lab), plus some time during finals week. When I made a distinction between "independent learners" and "hand-holders," I was thinking of those who enjoy the kind of project assigned the way I did, in which I became the "guide on the side." I gave them the assignment, provided incremental deadlines (chosen passage due this date, bibliography due this date, overview due this date, complete "draft" of the hypertext document due this date, final project due this date), and gave them help sheets (telling them how to use the hypertext software). I didn't specify what they needed to annotate or how deeply to annotate. I just told them: annotate this passage the way an editor would (or a future editor would), giving as much detail as you think is necessary to explicate its significance fully. They got to choose what contextual and background information to explore (and to include), based on their own interests. I've done projects like this before, but in a MOO environment, rather than true hypertext. With the Shakespeare Multimedia project and my MOO projects, I always get students who complain that I didn't give them enough "guidance," despite my very clear help sheets (and my continual presence in the lab, answering their questions). For those students, giving reference sheets isn't enough. They want to be taken through the process step-by-step, and they don't want to experience the frustration of learning something new. They want it to be painless, without set-backs, and they don't like the challenge of learning things on their own. Those students don't get the same sense of exhiliration that independent learners do--of successfully meeting a true challenge. To me, the independent learners are those who like the freedom that such an assignment gives them, want some help from me, but basically want to do the project themselves. They tend to have fun with such projects, they explore the software beyond the information I give them, and do things that are new and unexpected. As for video clips (your other query), that involved a "video capture" process, in which you attach a VCR to a properly equipped computer (needing a special board, I've been told), use video capturing software (I think we used "Splice"), and create a file with a .avi extension. You can't capture more than a few lines of action, though, because such files get *huge* very quickly. Multimedia ToolBook allows you to play such videos within your hypertext document (after you learn the write scripting commands). As to your final question (sorry for ending with a personal note), I doubt I'm the Leslie Harris you went to grad school with. I received my Ph.D. from U.C. Berkeley in 1993, and your name doesn't ring a bell with me. Is my memory faulty, or is there another Leslie Harris out there also with a Ph.D. in English, but from a different grad school? Hope this response helped. Leslie Harris Department of English Susquehanna University lharris@einstein.susqu.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Edward Gero Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 11:55:14 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0079 Re: Multimedia Project In response to Dean Boni's post: I, too, have set up a mailing list for my advanced undergraduate Acting students. In fact, we are the first course in the Division of Dance and Theatre to require students to have e-mail accounts. I think it works wonderfully. The students discuss work from the previous class and share their experiences as they prepare the next assignments. I also have them send me their journals electronically so I can interact with them in a more immediate way with their artistic and educational process. I have required one on-line chat with me at the midterm break to discuss their progress in class. [As many of my students commute or work their way through college, this is a particularly helpful net to catch those students who would otherwise be unavailable to meet. As I balance my schedule between performances and the classroom, it supports me as well.] Nothing can replace the classroom contact when it comes to this particular content area, but the augmented discussions, announcements and queries absolutely enhance classroom participation. Most of the students have little or no contact with the technology. It is a joy to shephard them into the 20th Century in time for the 21st. Electronically yours, Edward Gero Actor, Shakespeare Theatre Assistant Professor, George Mason University ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 09:38:39 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0087 Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0087. Wednesday, 8 February 1995. (1) From: Andrew Gurr Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 13:33:31 +0000 (GMT) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0066 Re: Mrs. Mortimer's Welsh (2) From: Naomi Liebler Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 95 10:34:00 EST Subj: RE: SHK 6.0077 Re: Epilepsy in the Tragedies (3) From: Roy Blount, Jr. Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 11:31:22 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0081 Re: Shylock (4) From: Steven Metsker Date: Tuesday, 07 Feb 1995 11:14:00 -0600 (CST) Subj: RE: SHK 6.0077 Re: Staging *Ant.* (5) From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 95 16:28:43 -0500 Subj: SHK 6.0070 Fortinbras at Winnipeg (6) From: E. L. Epstein Date: Tuesday, 07 Feb 1995 18:17:23 EDT Subj: RE: SHK 6.0075 Re: Hubris (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Andrew Gurr Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 13:33:31 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0066 Re: Mrs. Mortimer's Welsh To: Terry Hawkes on colonising the Welsh in Henry V. Dear Terry, Paola Pugliatti has a neat article on the languages in Henry, in The Yearbook of English Studies 23 (1993), pp.235-53. I do think that a 'band of brothers' speaking in strange tongues needs a broader frame of reference. Andrew Gurr. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Naomi Liebler Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 95 10:34:00 EST Subject: RE: SHK 6.0077 Re: Epilepsy in the Tragedies Jocelyn Shannon asks about the early modern understanding of epilepsy. Plutarch's _Roman Questions_, trans. Philemon Holland 1603, has several entries regarding the "falling sickness," associating it with goats (because the Romans thought that the goat's bleating sounded like what emanated from the throat of an epileptic during a seizure). In an article published in _Shakespeare Studies_ 14 (1981), I made something of this in regard to _Julius Caesar_, linking this association with goats to Caesar's sacrificial function in the play and to the rites of the Lupercalia in which the sacrifice of the goat is a central element. See what you think. I didn't do anything with _Othello_, but as I recall, he mutters something about goats and monkeys. The point of the goat-connection in _JC_ has to do not only with its Lupercalian function but also with the interpenetration of sacred and taboo in the body of the sacrificial victim. --Naomi C. Liebler (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Roy Blount, Jr. Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 11:31:22 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0081 Re: Shylock Regarding the _Merchant of Venice_, I personally think the whole play was constructed in such a way that Shylock could be taken as the stereotypical evil Jew, but to the critical reader, or watcher, Shakespeare undermines the various themes the play seems to be enforcing, arriving at a much more complex conclusion than first appears. As evidence, all of the different elements in the play are not what they first appear: Antonio's latent or overt homosexuality (depending on your reading), which calls into question Bassanio's orientation (if he's gay, he's marrying Portia strictly for the money, if he's not, he's using Antonio) The crossdressing of all the women. Physically on the Elizabethan stage this would be boys playing women dressing as men, which gives all the sodomy jokes another level of meaning, and reinforces the homosexual subtext. Portia's caskets -- clearly Shakespeare warns against assuming the outward appearance is in reality the inward one. Even worse, carefully read Portia's song before Bassanio chooses; she cheats. Even Portia's "quality of mercy" speech is ironic; for all her words she still enacts a harsh penalty on Shylock. I imagine Shakespeare was caught between the pressure to put on a successful Jewish play like Marlowe's _The Jew of Malta_ while also recognizing the anti-semitism such works enforce. The work he finally produced may not be entirely successful at deconstructing itself, but I think it contains enough subversive elements to make the comedy a somewhat dark and troubled one. A final note about the Laban reference: Marlowe's _Doctor Faustus_ contains a similar situation, where Faustus quotes the Bible but doesn't quote the portion which is most relevant. Shakespeare could be doing the same thing, expecting his audience to fill in the relevant portion. The lapse is as telling as the quote. -- Roy Blount, Jr. (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steven Metsker Date: Tuesday, 07 Feb 1995 11:14:00 -0600 (CST) Subject: RE: SHK 6.0077 Re: Staging *Ant.* The commentary in the Oxford edition of "Antony and Cleopatra" is terrific. It does a nice job of covering the staging problems. As I recall, the hardest scenes include Antony's "How! not dead? not dead?" lines, which may appear humorous, and the hoisting of him "aloft" by Cleopatra and her maids. Steve (5)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 95 16:28:43 -0500 Subject: SHK 6.0070 Fortinbras at Winnipeg To David Glassco and interested others: I wish I had a photographic memory, so I could instantly relive the performance in Winnipeg. But here's my take on why "How all occasions do inform against me" worked so well. The Fortinbras we saw, even though briefly, was clearly a very action-oriented, non-intellectual type. Reeves's Hamlet was both action-oriented and thoughtful, but clearly the thinking/weighing has been predominant. When he sees this foil going off to a pointless war, he recognizes how different his own situation is, especially now that Claudius's actions have clarified his guilt. Hamlet already has Polonius's blood on his hands (which I've always seen as a crucial turning point in the play, and which seemed to be one in this production as well), but now he knows he will have to follow through with the rest. It's as if by removing himself from the court (or, rather, being removed), he can finally confront the absolute necessity of returning to set things right. There was a sense of resolve in this speech that conveyed that, while he also commented ironically on Fortinbras's action. The full humanity, the amazing complexity of this young Hamlet was what made the performance so compelling, and his death at the end so very heart-rending. Hope this helps. Chris Gordon (6)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: E. L. Epstein Date: Tuesday, 07 Feb 1995 18:17:23 EDT Subject: RE: SHK 6.0075 Re: Hubris In re hybris: the root of the word *hybr-* is cognate with the Latin *super-*, so someone suffering from hybris is burdened with a superiority complex, and has definitely gotten above himself! ELEpstein ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 09:48:34 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0088 *The Spanish Tragedy*; UCLA Shakespeare Colloquium Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0088. Wednesday, 8 February 1995. (1) From: Ed Gieskes Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 08:59:36 -0500 (EST) Subj: THE SPANISH TRAGEDY (2) From: Martin Zacks Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 17:20:11 -0800 (PST) Subj: UCLA Shakespeare Colloquium (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Gieskes Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 08:59:36 -0500 (EST) Subject: THE SPANISH TRAGEDY Dear SHAKSPEReans, I am writing to announce that Willing Suspension Productions (a graduate student theatre organization at Boston University) will be performing Thomas Kyd's THE SPANISH TRAGEDY (directed by Andrew Hartley) April 21, 22, and 23 on the Boston University campus. Willing Suspension has produced THE REVENGER'S TRAGEDY and THE ALCHEMIST in past years and is committed to staging plays from early modern England that do not often get performed-- i.e. plays not written by Shakespeare. More information will be forthcoming as we get closer to opening night. We can be reached care of the English Department at Boston University (236 Bay State Road, Boston MA 02215). Address any correspondence to Andrew Hartley, Kirk Melnikoff, Lauren Kehoe, or Ed Gieskes. Sincerely, Ed Gieskes (egieskes@acs.bu.edu) (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Martin Zacks Date: Tuesday, 7 Feb 1995 17:20:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: UCLA Shakespeare Colloquium A Colloquium on Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice: To Cut the Flesh: The Law Allows It. Friday, February 24, 1995. California Room, UCLA Faculty Center. Cosponsored by the UCLA Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, UCLA Department of English, and the UCLA Friends of English. Registration by telephoning (310) 825-1880. 8:45 Registration 9:00 Welcome Prof. Patrick J. Geary, Director, Center for Medieval & Renaissance Studies 9:15 Film: The Merchant of Venice Directed by John Sichel, starring Laurence Olivier 12:00 Lunch 1:30 Introduction Michael J. B. Allen, Dept. of English, UCLA 1:45 Cat and Mouse: Converting Jews in Renaissance England James Shapiro, Dept. of English, Columbia University 2:45 Break 3:00 The Classroom on the Rialto: Reflections on Teaching The Merchant of Venice in High School Stephen Bellon, Dept. of English, Harvard-Westlake School 3:45 A Reading from the Merchant of Venice Alan Mandell, Actor & Director, former General Manager of the Repertory Theater at Lincoln Center, former Consulting Director of Los Angeles Theater Center 4:00 Round Table Discussion A.R. Braunmuller, Dept. of English, UCLA Michael J. B. Allen, Dept. of English, UCLA Stephen Bellon, Dept of English, Harvard-Westlake School Kathleen Irace, Writing Programs & Dept. of English, UCLA Alan Mandell, Actor & Director Claire McEachern, Dept of English, UCLA James Shapiro, Dept. of English, Columbia University Debora Shuger, Dept. of English, UCLA ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 15:40:03 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0089 Re: The Scottish Play Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0089. Thursday, 9 February 1995. (1) From: Gregg Henry Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 95 08:15:00 PST Subj: RE: SHK 5.0076 Re: The Scottish Play (2) From: Edward Gero Date: Wednesday, 8 Feb 1995 09:35:49 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 5.0076 Re: The Scottish Play (3) From: Timothy Reed Date: Wednesday, 8 Feb 1995 08:01:23 -0700 Subj: The Scottish Play (4) From: Ed Pechter Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 1995 10:15:16 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0084 Re: The Scottish Play (5) From: Peter Greenfield Date: Wednesday, February 8, 1995 Subj: The Scottish play and indoor performance (6) From: Kathryn M. Moncrief Date: Thursday, 9 Feb 1995 00:00:22 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0084 Re: The Scottish Play (7) From: Tom E. Hodges Date: Thuursday, 9 Feb 1995 14:00:09 GMT-6 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0084 Re: The Scottish Play (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Gregg Henry Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 95 08:15:00 PST Subject: RE: SHK 5.0076 Re: The Scottish Play To add to the discussion about the Scottish Play . I was playing Teach in _American Buffalo_ ten years ago. The cast's pre-show ritual was to play some gin. I quoted from "that play" (although, I can't, now, for the life of me remember what I said) when I won. The other two actors tsk- tsk'd me. In the final scene that night, when I was trashing the junk shop with the "pig sticker", I very freakily smashed my nose and finished the play with blood pouring down my face. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Edward Gero Date: Wednesday, 8 Feb 1995 09:35:49 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 5.0076 Re: The Scottish Play The superstition regarding the "Scottish Play" or one I heard most recently, the "Plaid Play" is observed to this day in my circles. At the slip of the tongue, (while in the theatre only) the offending person is asked to leave the dressing room, spin around three times, repeat "goats and monkeys" from Lear and formally request readmittance. The genesis of this superstition and the whistling derives apocryphally from the 19th Century. Tradition has it that when traveling companies were having financial problems at the box office, the producer would announce a performance of Macbeth, assuring two things: (1) That the box office would have a terrific take, and (2) The company would be disbanded thereafter. In the 19th Century, Macbeth apparently meant unemployment. The phrase "the ghost walks", on the other hand, meant that Hamlet was on the bill and the company would surely be paid. Consequently, "the ghost walks" on Thursdays, the official Actor's Equity pay day. The whistling superstition stems from the 19th Century as well. Hemp houses, theatres that had rope and pulley to fly sets [before the advent of counterweights et. al.], were often operated by sailors; their rigging expertise put to good use. They would use a system of whistles to communicate directions concerning which rope and pulley to lower or raise. So, any interference from anyone other than the master flymen could result in a bag of sand landing on your, or someone else's, head, or some other sort of disaster. Hence, no whistling in the theatre. Traditionally yours, Edward Gero Shakespeare Theatre Washington, DC (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Timothy Reed Date: Wednesday, 8 Feb 1995 08:01:23 -0700 Subject: The Scottish Play Evidence in support of the Macbeth superstition is like the daily newspaper horoscope; theatre people who believe in it will vividly remember and recount the one or two coincidences that support the theory and discount the hundreds of times it doesn't work. My stage experience, both in performances of Macbeth and other plays, shows no evidence to support the superstition; nor do the experiences of many of the actors I work with. Many of the theatre people I know are openly scornful of anyone who takes the superstition as anything more than an amusing in-joke. (Interesting sidebar: During a performance of Henry IV, Part I, some of the actors spent their long breaks between scenes in the green room by reading questions off "Trivial Pursuit" cards for the others to answer. The question "What is generally regarded as bad luck backstage at a theatre?" came up. The actors instantly chimed in "Macbeth!") At our theatre company, due to a particularly problem-ridden production of Schnitzler's "La Ronde" it is now only acceptable to call it "The 'R' play" or "The Austrian play" Timothy Reed The Upstart Crow Theatre Company, Boulder, Colorado (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Pechter Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 1995 10:15:16 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0084 Re: The Scottish Play Without wishing for a moment to deny the social utility and scientific validity of beliefs associated with productions of The Scottish Play, I wonder about two things: 1. Have people catalogued the number of instances in which the taboo was broken and nothing untoward occurred? 2. Have people catalogued the number of instances in which untoward events occurred in productions of plays other than Macbeth? Ed Pechter (5)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Peter Greenfield Date: Wednesday, February 8, 1995 Subject: The Scottish play and indoor performance The notion that the curse on the Scottish play derives from disasters at its first indoor performance won't stand up if an important element in the story is that indoor performance was unheard of. In fact, with the exception of the few most famous London theatres, indoor performance was the norm in Shakespeare's time: halls of noble households, town halls, and inns provided the overwhelming number of known performance locations outside London. The literary dominance of the Globe, Rose and Fortune have tended to obscure this fact. Please see the Records of Early English Drama series for the documentary evidence, J.A.B. Somerset's article in the most recent SHAKESPEARE SURVEY, and especially Robert Tittler's excellent book on Elizabethan town halls, ARCHITECTURE AND POWER. Peter Greenfield University of Puget Sound (6)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathryn M. Moncrief Date: Thursday, 9 Feb 1995 00:00:22 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0084 Re: The Scottish Play Roger D. Gross claims that only actors over 40 are superstitious about "the Scottish play." Not true! Being a younger actor and academic I can report that the tradition/ superstition is still going strong in theatres where I have worked. The cure with which I am most familiar: leave the room, turn around three times, then spit. On the subject of "ghost lights." This, in my experience, refers to a single light left shining on stage. It looks rather like a tall, standing lamp with no shade, just a bare bulb. Its purpose is practical: when you are the first person to enter or leave a dark theatre from a backstage entrance (as a stage manager often is) it can be very dark and potentially dangerous, especially when the set, or pieces of it begin to appear on stage. The "ghost light" is for safety. Are there superstitious associations as well? Kathryn M. Moncrief University of Iowa (7)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom E. Hodges Date: Thuursday, 9 Feb 1995 14:00:09 GMT-6 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0084 Re: The Scottish Play Columbia Pictures' _The Dresser_(1984) includes a scene in which The Scottish Play is mentioned backstage, followed by the ritual of atonement required of the transgressor. In addition the movie is a hilarious and poignant rendering of a veteran actor's 227th performance of _King Lear_, and the backstage activities (sound effects, props, etc.) are usually interesting to American undergraduates. For what it's worth, Tom Hodges ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 15:45:10 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0090 Re: Ghost Light Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0090. Thursday, 9 February 1995. (1) From: Roger D. Gross Date: Wednesday, 8 Feb 1995 17:21:15 -0600 (CST) Subj: Ghost Lights (2) From: Fran Teague Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 95 15:31:26 EST Subj: Superstitions (fwd) (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Roger D. Gross Date: Wednesday, 8 Feb 1995 17:21:15 -0600 (CST) Subject: Ghost Lights Jim Hamilton asks about ghost lights. I've worked in about fifty theatres in this country and never seen one without a ghost light nor heard the instrument called by any other name. Many cities have a ghost light requirement (not by that name). It's a matter of safety. Too many of us have fallen in orchestra pits or walked through scenic walls while fumbling for the light switches. So, after turning out all of the stage lights and work lights, the last thing a stage manager does before locking up is roll out the ghost light on its pedestal (most of us still use this primitive version) and screw the bulb in. We are about evenly split between those of us who want to believe that the light is there to: - protect us from the ghost which every theatre houses - keep the ghost company during the long, lonely nights - keep the ghost at bay so he doesn't get us when we come in It seems that we began having ghost lights somewhere around 1875. I can't learn if there was such a thing before electricity. There are much more convenient ways to safely light the theatre when its out of use but most of us cling to the tradition of that awkward little three-wheeled trolley with the bare light bulb and no switch. I've never heard any kind of "story" connected with the ghost light; no allusion in the name. Roger Gross (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Fran Teague Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 95 15:31:26 EST Subject: Superstitions (fwd) Re: the various superstitions. My husband was amused by an earlier message and sent this information along. Fran Teague ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- From: Ben Teague <71320.1174@compuserve.com> Our community theater uses a ghost light. It's an unshaded floor lamp that is left on whenever the theater is (otherwise) dark. This is absolutely a matter of superstition. We consider it bad luck to fall on an invisible step or trip over an invisible brace and break our ankle. I have personally been responsible for chasing two miscreants out of the theater ("Don't say that name!" "What, Macbeth?") and making them go through the curse-lifting ritual before readmitting them. But now we have the problem that one of our best tech people has "Macbeth" for his middle name. After an afternoon's pilpul we concluded that it's all right to say "Macbeth" in the theater _provided_ we are referring to Mike (a loud minority wanted to expel him altogether). ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 17:20:11 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0091 Re: Shakespeare and Science Fiction Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0091. Thursday, 9 February 1995. (1) From: James Schaefer Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 1995 09:45:14 -0500 (EST) Subj: More S & SF (2) From: Wolfgang Hink Date: Thursday, 9 Feb 1995 06:34:16 +0100 Subj: Re: Shakespeare and Science Fiction (3) From: Daniel Traister Date: Wednesday, 8 Feb 1995 11:29:11 -0500 (EST) Subj: Shakespeare and science fiction: a follow-up (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: James Schaefer Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 1995 09:45:14 -0500 (EST) Subject: More S & SF Lurking somewhere in the backroom of my memory is an episode of Rod Serling's "The Twilight Zone" in which Shakespeare is brought to the 20th Century. Was this the plot in which he registers for, and fails, a college course in Shakespeare? Or do I have that memory entangled with Asimov's or someone else's short story? Sometime ago we had a thread going about "first times" with Shakespeare. But that first time assumed having been hooked earlier on reading itself. The reading habit feeds itself, and satiation, as in all habits, promotes a desire for variety. My 14 y.o. son has been heavily into Tolkein, SF, and other alternative realities ever since he could read. That's how I got started, too. Others I know got hooked on 19th C novels as teenagers, and that led to other books, and .... No call to action here, just musing on the strange ways of the Muses. James F. Schaefer Jr. Georgetown University schaefej@guvax.georgetown.edu (202) 687-4478 [You appear to be describing the Asimov short story I mentioned yesterday. At a faculty Christmas party, a physics professor tells a colleague in English he has made a time machine and brings people back from the past. He brought Socrates, but he could not understand Greek and sent the philosopher back. Then he mentions that he brought back Shakespeare. The English professor says, "You know I teach Shakespeare?" The physics professor says, "I know, poor guy." As it turns out, Shakespeare enrolled in the English teacher's course and failed. --HMC] (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Wolfgang Hink Date: Thursday, 9 Feb 1995 06:34:16 +0100 Subject: Re: Shakespeare and Science Fiction In my Guide to Literature on the Internet (which I publish monthly in some Usenet newsgroups) I found the following list: >Shakespeare in Star Trek >From: petersm@CSOS.ORST.EDU (Marguerite Petersen) I didn't see this list yet, but it may be interesting for the subject Shakespeare and Science Fiction. Wolfgang Hink (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Daniel Traister Date: Wednesday, 8 Feb 1995 11:29:11 -0500 (EST) Subject: Shakespeare and science fiction: a follow-up As I reread my message replying to the inquiry about a science fiction story when it appeared on screen today, I thought that it might have sounded a *little* arrogant ("readily available" indeed!--well, it may *not* be readily available where the writer resides). The next message sounded more or less the same to me, with additional warnings about how, as a "pulp," *F&SF* won't be held by "ordinary" libraries. I understand the writer's fear on that point--but, perhaps surprisingly, it isn't exactly justified: even *this* properly be-Ivy-ed library, the one from which I write, holds it; so do our neighbors in town (Temple has a *real* science fiction collection, quite noteworthy). What original inquirer ought to do is to either (1) send an Interlibrary Loan request through his or her own university library or (2) send me a private message (traister@pobox.upenn.edu) and I will see what I can do here. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 17:24:36 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0092 Newberry Library Fellowships Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0092. Thursday, 9 February 1995. From: Michael T. Calvert Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 95 09:14:18 CST Subject: Newberry fellowships Please cross-post as appropriate. ***************************************************************** APPLICATION DEADLINE FOR SHORT-TERM FELLOWSHIPS IN THE HUMANITIES AT THE NEWBERRY LIBRARY THE NEWBERRY LIBRARY invites applications for short-term residential fellowships in the humanities for 1995-6. The application deadline for fellowships for the second half of 1995 is March 1. The deadline for the first half of 1996 is October 15. These fellowships are for scholars, including those at the dissertation stage, who desire a short period of residency to use particular Newberry collections. The fellowships carry a stipend of $800 per month. THE Newberry is an independent research library, free and open to the public, located on the near north side of the city of Chicago. Founded in 1887, its holdings today number more than one and one-half million volumes and five million manuscripts in the humanities. The Newberry's collections concern the civilizations of western Europe and the Americas from the late middle ages to the early twentieth century. Bibliographic holdings are extensive, and certain collections are internationally noted. These contain material on the following subjects: American history and literature Discovery, exploration, and settlement of the New World The American West Local history, genealogy, censuses Family and social history Literature and history of the Midwest, especially the Chicago Renaissance Native American history and literature European history and literature The Renaissance The French Revolution Portuguese and Luso-Brazilian history History of cartography History and theory of music History of printing Early philology and linguistics For further information and application forms, contact the Awards Committee, Newberry Library, 60 W. Walton St., Chicago, IL 60610, call 312-255-3666, or e-mail your name, and _ground mail_ address to u30373@uicvm.uic.edu. Be sure to specify that you are inquiring about Newberry short-term fellowships. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 19:26:28 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0093 Re: Welsh; Athenian Tragedy; Hubris; Shylock Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0093. Thursday, 9 February 1995. (1) From: Terence Hawkes Date: Wednesday, 8 Feb 1995 15:55:45 GMT Subj: Mrs Mortimer's Welsh (2) From: Steve Urkowitz Date: Thursday, 09 Feb 95 01:13:38 EST Subj: Re: SHK 6.0068 Re: Athenian Tragedy (3) From: Steve Urkowitz Date: Thursday, 09 Feb 95 01:38:35 EST Subj: Re: SHK 6.0075 Re: Hubris (4) From: David Evett Date: Thursday, 9 Feb 95 12:14:49 EST Subj: [Shylock] (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Terence Hawkes Date: Wednesday, 8 Feb 1995 15:55:45 GMT Subject: Mrs Mortimer's Welsh To Andrew Gurr, on speaking in strange tongues: Annwyl Andrew, Diolch yn fawr! Terry Hawkes (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Urkowitz Date: Thursday, 09 Feb 95 01:13:38 EST Subject: Re: SHK 6.0068 Re: Athenian Tragedy Ron Macdonald's thought about the Orestia as a critique of "Homeric" warrior values might also be applied to the ODYSSEY as a similar critique. Odysseus is a terrific hero, but Homer makes it very clear that you don't really want to build a house next to his nor go out a-voyaging with him. Not if you want to survive to hear the tale told to your grandchildren. As ever, Grandpa Steve Urkowitz (off to see Benjamin Max Fischer Urkowitz, age 2, in Bloomington Indiana next weekend) (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Urkowitz Date: Thursday, 09 Feb 95 01:38:35 EST Subject: Re: SHK 6.0075 Re: Hubris On hubris et alia . . . David Wilson-Okamura mentions that the unwitting murder of his poppa by Oedipus somehow makes it not his fault that he did the deed. He was TRYING not to kill his poppa by running away. But ain't that the point? You shouldn't kill any damn soul on the road just because the dude does you dirty. He might be your poppa. If you're gonna live in a polis, you treat all folk like family or you wind up with plagues, (or so Sophocles may have learned from Dante where folks lost the sense of civility in exchange for slaughter.) Oedipus is NOT a nice fellow. Teiresias reads him loud and clear. Aristotle doesn't. And now that I'm a department chairman, everyone is entitled to my opinion! Say goodnight, Jocasta. Steve Egreekowitz (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Evett Date: Thursday, 9 Feb 95 12:14:49 EST Subject: [Shylock] As somebody who has been stung by others' treating with severe literalness a word or phrase tossed carelessly onto the net in the heat of some moment, I don't want to hold John Owen too stringently to the letter of his recent posting. I am nonetheless disturbed by his notion that Shylock's "destruction" of Antonio was "calculated before the beginning of the play" and by the accompanying proposition that a humanized Shylock is merely a "post facto transformation of a villainous stereotype"; neither will stand examination. With regard to the first. The nature of dramatic images such as Shylock--at base, not a person but a string of words--is that they enter the time of readers and auditors a word at a time, beginning with the first word by and about them; as far as the reader or auditor is concerned, they have no existence "before the beginning of the play". To the extent that they have a kind of "history" which involves events and statements and feelings from a time before the time presented/represented by the speeches and stage directions of the text, the indisputable content of that history is confined to those events, etc., explicitly recalled by the words of the text, and those that can be unequivocally inferred from them. Thus the dramatic image called Shylock tells us that in a time prior to that [re]presented by the speeches and stage directions of someone named Leah gave him a turquoise (Riverside ed. 3.1.121-22); it seems reasonable to infer that this person became his wife and the mother of his daughter Jessica (the text does not explicitly say so). We may choose to develop other inferences, for instance, on the ground that Tubal's mention of the ring is a torture to Shylock to suppose that the character has felt conjugal affection for this Leah. But even when (as here) there is no obvious reason to think otherwise--that he married some other woman, or that their marriage was unhappy--we can only suppose, not assert. Shylock does tell us (and Antonio confirms the telling) that in a time prior to the time [re]presented by the text Antonio interfered with Shylock's practice of lending money at interest, and spat upon his Jewish gabardine, and he tells us that if he has a chance he will "feed fat" this "ancient grudge" should he catch Antonio at a disadvantage (1.3.46-47); the phrase is metaphoric and hence polysemous but very likely implies revenge of some kind. But he does not say anywhere that he has previously "calculated" Antonio's "destruction". It seems very improbable that prior to the beginning of the play he had "calculated" the device of the pound of flesh ("Boy, if that Antonio ever comes to borrow money from me, instead of charging monetary interest I'll set the bond at a pound of his rotten Christian flesh"); not only is it Antonio, not Shylock, who has initiated the deal, against all Antonio's normal practice ("I neither lend nor borrow . . . Upon advantage" [1.3.61-69]), but under circumstances (the failure of six different shipping ventures) that make collection of the bond unlikely. A clever financier who wished to "calculate the destruction" of a venture capitalist such as Antonio could presumably try to do so-- suborn sailors or shipwrights, hire pirates, set up enticing dummy ventures whose guaranteed failure would eat away at his enemy's capital. But that's not Shylock's proceeding here. It seems much more probable that the human behavior imitated in this scene of the text is impulsive, improvisational: a preposterous collocation of circumstances has given Shylock a remote chance to "catch [Antonio] once upon the hip" and he offers an equally preposterous response to it. Indeed, it seems more plausible to me that having offered the preposterous but psychologically gratifying response, when, preposterously, the fantasy turns real, Shylock is trapped in it (not by any means unwillingly), caught between prudence and desire, with not only personal but ethnic honor at stake, his anger exacerbated by Jessica's betrayal and the incessant goading of the Christians, by the Christians' refusal to treat the situation (despite the momentary distraction of Portia's speech about the quality of mercy [what mercy does she show to Morocco or Aragon?]) in any but literal, monetary terms, so that his customary prudence gives way, with disastrous results. Such a reading humanizes the image, of course--treats Shylock as a person rather than as an animated stereotype. Theoretically speaking, I should tread carefully here. What I argue, however, is that the text invites this kind of reading--that as constructed it has already begun to progress of complicating the stereotype, by giving the rapacious Jewish usurer a domestic as well as a business setting, moments of geniality, a rhetorically if not logically effective expression of his outrage at his Christian tormentors, tormentors who themselves are conspicuously deficient in the peculiarly Christian virtues, especially mercy. The stereotype, as defined by figures such as the comic tormentors and priests of the mystery cycles and Marlowe's Barabbas, is assuredly present as a ground on which this image is being constructed, but the Shakespearean image itself cannot be reduced to the formula without loss of actual complexity. Which does not mean that it has achieved, on its own, the kind of liberal humanization present in the Karnovsky-Olivier-Ron Liebman tradition of performance. Characterologically, Dave Evett ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 19:30:18 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0094 Q: Kiss Me Video Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0094. Thursday, 9 February 1995. From: Suba Subbaro Date: Wednesday, 08 Feb 95 13:14:16 EST Subject: re: shrew video Could somebody tell me where I might borrow/rent the video Kiss Me Petruchio? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 19:36:24 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0095 Re: *Hamlet* in Winnipeg Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0095. Thursday, 9 February 1995. From: Christine Mack Gordon Date: Wednesday, 8 Feb 95 16:04:18 -0500 Subject: Hamlet in Winnipeg (London Times review) MOST EXCELLENT PRINCE -- "What a piece of work is Keanu's Hamlet! This is one role that might have been written for the star of Speed, says Roger Lewis." {this is a 2 page spread with a large picture of Keanu holding the skull in the middle} I crossed oceans of time to find him: 30 hours from my house in France, through several time zones and the polar wastes, to Winnipeg -- of all places the most God-forsaken. Situated in the dead centre of Canada, ice-bound for half the year, once a trading post for the Hudson Bay Co, and now a maze of subterranean shopping malls, Winnipeg is a town even the locals mock: "Winnipeg folk travel a lot -- to get away from Winnipeg";"Winnipeg looks great -- after dark, when the view is better..." They need not be so diffident. The standard of living is high (no beggars, no litter, no germs); they have opera, ballet, theatre -- and Keanu Reeves, the 30-year-old actor who had fled there, to be far out of reach, to play Hamlet. Let's get it out of the way at once, and wipe that smirk off your face; if you had anticipated Bill and Ted's Shakeapearean Adventure, forget it. He was wonderful. He quite embodied the innocence, the splendid fury, the animal grace of the leaps and bounds, the emotional violence, that form the Prince of Denmark. He has the sheer virility of Larry Olivier's melancholy Dane -- which Keanu saw on video just the other week -- plus the Peter Pannishness, the little-boy-lost quality, that I remember Mark Rylance bringing to the role. He was both vulnerable (as in the scenes with Gertrude when a goodnight kiss goes on and on until mother and son recoil in horror at their arousal) and severe (as in the bit where he flies at Rosencrantz and Guildenstern for presuming to "play upon me...you would pluck out the heart of my mystery"). He is one of the top three Hamlets I have seen, for a simple reason; he *is* Hamlet, and he has been a lonely a resourceful type, who won't submit, in film after film. He is full of undercurrents and overtones, which is why the world's big directors want to work with him. He is killingly attractive, no question. He can look, from moment to moment, faintly oriental, with his slanted black eyes -- he has Chinese, Hawaiian and British blood in him -- or crew-cut clean Caucasian; he can be Californian (especially in his locutions: I'd not been asked whether I felt a really cool dude before) and exotic, like a Canadian-Indian -- I kept seeing his profile in ancient Inuit sculpture, which Winnipeg has museums full of. But his physique is just the first thing which sets him apart. What counts is the impression we get of a nature that is turbulent and proud -- though he can exude calm and courtliness -- and that he has a gift given to few; like Garbo, he is an actor who can register -- simultaneously -- both pleasure and pain. And, like Garbo, he prefers to keep his own company. He doesn't want to be crowded. Is that why he chose Winnipeg? A self-enclosed community in the lonesome prairie? He was there without bodyguards or companions; there is no Court of Keanu; no agents or PR persons or those curious factotums, former ballet dancers usually, who tend to cluster around a star, like maggots on a chop. He walked to work, shuffling through the snow (it was minus 25 degrees C) in his curious, dancing, tripping-over-himself way. He'd been seen in a cafe on his own, nursing a Perrier. Here was the paradox of this famous and desirable man, and there is nobody with him, ever. He is loved -- by million of hungry fans -- but does he know how to love? He went to the Prarie Oyster restaurant with the cast, and left early; taking his food away in a doggy bag; he went to an Italian restaurant and left in case two girls at the bar pestered him. None of this behaviour is sulky, tantrumy, make no mistake about that, for he has a great and unfeigned tenderness; it is more that, like Hamlet, he has a world within himself. He is coping with stardom, and trying to appear normal (when he knows he is not) by ignoring it. He doesn't own a house in L.A. He lives in hotels or in the rooms of actors who are out of town. He doesn't want too easy a life -- the mansions and the flunkeys. He anchors his ship for a little while only, and this is how he struck me in conversation -- though he is sitting there, he is not quite there all the time, as he darts from mood to mood, curving and winding, cautious and direct. Though he had been an athletic, piratical Hamlet, there is this huge, I can only call it ethereal, element. He is retiring from society, from life -- and that might be dangerous; his spirituality could intensify, and he could spirit away. He is in his dressing room hours and hours before the show. I'll bet he is bouncing around and getting himself into mortal and human shape so that he can appear or stage. For he is an eagle, really; or a glossy and supple stallion. Hollywood, meantime, would prefer this wild beast to be back with them, making more bomb-on-the-bus stuff; there were brokers and moguls, less interested in him than in the money he makes, doing their best to scupper the production. Shakespeare in Winnipeg! Three weeks on a basic Equity rate! When he could be reaping billions after Speed! (After all, reports last week of his sign-up fee for the new movie, Drop Dead, ranged from 4 million pounds to 10 million pounds.) Thus, the Manitoba Theatre Centre, a concrete lump that looks as though it is dissolving, was forbidden from arranging publicity interviews with the Principal Boy; there were to be no press tickets, photo calls, nothing. CBC was forbidden to run a clip of Keanu in action -- so their bulletin was literally Hamlet without the Prince. Hollywood pretended it was not happening; they were deeply contemptuous and suspicious of the entire affair. The rumor was that Keanu's own representatives would not fly to see his performance until they were absolutely certain he had not made a fool of himself. Supportive, huh? It just makes him the more like Hamlet, coming here, against the odds; embattled. It had been his idea to work again with his drama school mentor, the Toronto director Lewis Baumander, for whom he was once a thrilling Mercutio; and the production was built around Keanu, quite deliberately. Gone is the messy, modern, neurotic Hamlet; Baumander has encouraged us to see the character's sense of duty; and Keanu -- who is himself facing a challange, taking a risk -- would make a good King of Denmark, because he has re-discovered the splendour of heroism, its Camelot quality; which is how he transfigured Speed, giving it extra spin and nuance. The Winnipeggios were tickled pink to have him in their midst -- they had not seen a star since Charlie Chaplin drove through on his way to fish in the lake -- and this, plus the fact that all 22,000 seats for the run were sold out on subscription (i.e. before the box office opened), was a story in itself. The local press had a Keanu Hotline: "If you see Keanu out and about in Winnipeg, don't keep it a secret. Call 697-7368." But this scheme was spiked -- by the readers. "It's wonderful what he has done for Winnipeg," I was often told, and though most people had indeed spotted him, he was to be accorded respect and privacy. This seemed rather British -- old-fashioned and virtuous -- British like an Ealing comedy. People were so polite, they would phone the theatre and ask if they could ask for an autograph ("He's very approachable," said the receptionist. "You could come and see him in the lobby"). The staff at the Sheraton, not wanting to over-do it, obtained a single signature and photocopied it. Best of all -- a moment out of a Boulting Bros. film -- was the opening night itself. "Ladies and gentlemen, please be upstanding for the Governor General of Manitoba and Mrs Carlton Browne, and the Lady Mayoress and her goddaughter Patsy." And in trooped these Peter Sellers characters, in medals and ostrich plumes and we sang God Save the Queen. That this was followed by a burst of jangling rock music and Keanu in a spotlit tableau grieving over his father's tomb is I suppose what these days gets to be called surreal. Afterwards, the cast party: to which the entire audience was invited. Though the Winnipeg Free Press and the Winnipeg Sun reported this as a stellar evening to outrank Graumann's Chinese, the atmosphere, for all the ice sculptures of Elsinore and cavier canapes, was actually much more like a village hall -- with Keanu down at the end scribbling on people's programmes and posters. He was still performing -- or continuing to be, in endless permutation. For each person, he would adjust, to make them special: a puppyish younger brother with men; a chivalric knight when calming the hyperventilating teens; the adored grown-up son to the older women, who want to be his mother, Wendy to his frowning Peter Pan. Men and women desire that he should like them, and he would speak to them and pose for their Instamatics, and they'd fantasise forever that he'd stay with them. (There were no ogling gays in evidence, by the way. Perhaps the Canadian cold snaps keep them down.) He doesn't need applause; he wants to survive the flattery. His exhortation to me was to deal justly with him. He is measurelessly puzzling and fascinating. I'll never forget one occasion. It was midnight and we were standing outside the theatre, wrapped up against the cold -- and there was this huge hearse-like stretch limo 20 or so yards away. This was the only touch that said "movie star" and was very un-Winnipeg. "My mother," he said, in his low, soft and furry voice. She had come to town to see the production and the sinister car conveyed her -- and him -- around the corner to the Westin Hotel. Before disappearing, he glanced at the the vehicle with amusement and embarrassment. Dressed in his layers of black, tall and elegant and as slim as a shark's fin, and with the snowflakes softly falling on his hat, twinkling and refusing to melt on his skin, and with his face inclined towards me, so intent you would swear he could listen to the wolves barking amid the ice and frozen rivers, he was very beautiful. Photograph by Bruce Monk. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 19:40:58 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0096 Ben Jonson Conference Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0096. Thursday, 9 February 1995. From: David Phillips Date: Thursday, 9 Feb 1995 06:35:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Conference Announcement CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT ***************************************************************** ********** BEN JONSON: TEXT, HISTORY, PERFORMANCE ************* ***************************************************************** An international conference on Ben Jonson will be held at The School of English, University of Leeds on July 5th through the 7th, 1995. This conference will focus on changing critical perceptions of Jonson, both in relation to his own times, and to his afterlife in the theatre and on the page. A central purpose of the conference will be the discussion of proposals for a new complete edition of Jonson. We shall be seeking to define the needs that such an edition should fulfil for scholars, teachers and readers in the next century. Speakers will include David Bevington, Martin Butler, Michael Cordner, D.H. Craig, Ian Donaldson, Joseph Loewenstein, Stephen Orgel and Lois Potter. Conference fee: 97 (English pounds) residential; 34 (English pounds) non-residential. For further details, contact: Dr. Martin Butler School of English University of Leeds Leeds LS2 9JT UK TEL UK (0113) 233-4766 or 233-4739 FAX UK (0113) 233-4774 E-mail engmhb@leeds.ac.uk ** This announcement posted on behalf of Dr. Martin Butler by the editors of The Ben Jonson Journal. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 08:22:02 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0097 Re: Ghost Light Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0097. Monday, 13 February 1995. (1) From: John Mills Date: Friday, 10 Feb 1995 13:30:08 -0700 (MST) Subj: [Ghost Light] (2) From: Cary Mazer Date: Friday, 10 Feb 1995 09:56:26 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0090 Re: Ghost Light (3) From: Alice Kroman Date: Saturday, 11 Feb 1995 00:27:39 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0090 Re: Ghost Light (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Mills Date: Friday, 10 Feb 1995 13:30:08 -0700 (MST) Subject: [Ghost Light] The Ghost light: At Ind. Univ. in the late fifties we used the light, wheeled tripod, bare bulb with no switch and all, but to the best of my recollection we did not call it the ghost light. But I no longer remember just what we did call it. I think though it was "fire light." State law required that the "fire curtain" or "asbestos" be lowered whenever the theatre was unoccupied; hence the last two things the stage manager did in closing up was lower the fire curtain and set out the light which was called fire light by association with the curtain. (It strikes me that we may even have been so prosaic as to call it simply the night light). (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cary Mazer Date: Friday, 10 Feb 1995 09:56:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0090 Re: Ghost Light > It seems that we began having ghost lights somewhere around 1875. I can't > learn if there was such a thing before electricity. There were indeed Ghost lights before electricity--usually an array of gas jets on a crossbar on top of a post, in the shape of a T. One can be seen in the middle ground of the caricature by "Spy" of Henry Arthur Jones conducting a rehearsal, which appeared in Vanity Fair 2 April 1892. Cary (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- About the ghost light issue. I am aware of the placing of a sort of street light on the stage and that this is called a ghost light. But in the theater where I do a lot of work, there is another type of ghost light. Some light boards will leave one or two lights glowing even after the board has been shut off and the main power supply disconnected. It is truly rather eerie because there is no logical pattern to which light will be the ghost light each night. Eventually it will fade out after about ten minutes, but it is still rather odd. Perhaps this is where the 'ghost' in ghost light came from. Any ideas on this? Alice Marie Kroman akroman@osf1.gmu.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 08:28:53 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0098 Conferences: Performance Studies; Medieval/Renaissance Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0098. Monday, 13 February 1995. (1) From: Amanda Barrett Date: Saturday, 11 Feb 1995 17:10:51 -0500 (EST) Subj: Performance Studies conference information: March 23-26 (2) From: Thomas M. Costa Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 95 14:06:02 EST Subj: CFP: Medieval-Renaissance Conference (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Amanda Barrett Date: Saturday, 11 Feb 1995 17:10:51 -0500 (EST) Subject: Performance Studies conference information: March 23-26 F I R S T A N N U A L PERFORMANCE STUDIES CONFERENCE "The Future of the Field" Thursday March 23-Sunday March 26, 1995 Department of Performance Studies Tisch School of the Arts New York Univerity, NY We invite you to attend the First Annual Performance Studies Conference, "The Future of the Field." The program will feature over 50 events, including panels, roundtable discussions, practical workshops, and performances. Over 180 scholars, graduate students, and artists will participate as speakers, moderators, and performers. In all, our participants will represent over 40 academic or artistic institutions from around the country and abroad. Our international participants will hail from France, the former Yugoslavia, Slovenia, Canada, England, Israel, and Australia. The conference will feature four plenary sessions and seven "breakout" sessions, during which smaller panels, seminars, and performances will be held concurrently. Many panels address interdisciplinary topics and aim to expand and complicate issues in performance scholarship. Major areas of inquiry include: new dance scholarship; theatre research; new technologies and performance studies; queer performativity and performance; gender in/as performance; reading/writing the body; race and performance scholarship; and performing new identities. Performances will be held each night. A Kick-Off cabaret will be held on Thursday night. The Friday and Saturday night events at a nearby nightclub, Fez, will feature Yareli Arizmendi, Circus Amok, The Five Lesbian Brothers, Marianne Goldberg, Dan Hurlin, Guillermo Gomez Pena, La Grand Scena Opera, Holly Hughes, Salley May, Peggy Pettitt, and Carmelita Tropicana. This conference inaugurates an annual event to be hosted on alternate years by the departments of Performance Studies at the Tisch School of the Arts and at Northwestern University. The Mid-Atlantic Chapter of the Society of Ethnomusicology will hold their annual conference concurrenty on the NYU campus. The theme of this year's MACSEM conference is "Ethnomusicology and Performance Studies." The two conferences will co-sponsor a panel, and registered members of the Performance Studies Conference will be welcome at selected MACSEM events. Conference events on Friday and Saturday, March 24 & 25, are scheduled from 9am to 6:30 pm, followed by a reception on Friday and a Dinner on Saturday. On Sunday, events begin at 9am and end at 2pm. A book fair will be held throughout the conference. ========================================== IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO REGISTER BY E-MAIL. ========================================== You may download or copy the following form, or send a letter including your name, address, phone number, institutional affliliation (if any) and a check payable to New York University for the appropriate amount (remember to include both registration and dinner if you choose) to: Jill Lane and Amanda Barrett Directors, First Annual Performance Studies Confernence Department of Performance Studies, 6th Floor 721 Broadway NYU, Tisch School of the Arts New York, NY 10003 Phone: (212) 998-1624 Fax: (212) 995-4960 Email: PS-CONF@acfcluster.nyu.edu ------------------------------------------------------------- Performance Studies Conference Registration Form **Early registration: postmarked by February 21 [ ] $35 [ ] Students $15 Registration after February 21 [ ] $40 [ ] Students $20 (On-sight registration: Students $50; students $30) **Special dinner Saturday March 25 in the spectacular Snow Dining Room: Don't miss it: great views, open bar, and a chance to get to know your colleagues! (Dinner reservations must be made by March 5, 1995.) [ ] $30 [ _______ ] TOTAL Name: Address: Phone number: Institutional affliliation (if any): E-Mail address: ------------------------------------------------------------- Hotel information: We recommend that you make your reservation at one of the following hotels as soon as possible: The Washington Square Hotel 103 Waverly Place. Reservations: (212) 777-9515 European-style hotel on Washington Square. Double bed, $120; 2 twin beds or 1 queen sized bed, $120; quad (2 doubles) $142. Includes continental breakfast. The Grammercy Park Hotel 2 Lexington Avenue at 21st Street. Reservations: 1-800-221-4083 Overlooks Gramercy Square Park. Rates range from $125-$140 per night. The Carlton Arms Hotel 160 East 25th Street. Reservations: (212) 679-0680 Funky student-style accommodations, a bit of a walk from NYU. Rates: single $40-$50; double $50-60; triple $75. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thomas M. Costa Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 95 14:06:02 EST Subject: CFP: Medieval-Renaissance Conference CALL FOR PAPERS MEDIEVAL-RENAISSANCE CONFERENCE IX SEPT. 28-30, 1995 CLINCH VALLEY COLLEGE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA KEYNOTE ADDRESS: KELLY DEVRIES OF LOYOLA COLLEGE, BALTIMORE, "LEGENDS OF THE MIDDLE AGES" Submissions on all topics of interest to Medieval and Renaissance scholars, including history, philosophy, literature, art, and music, are welcome. Please submit a brief abstract accompanied by a one-page vita by June 1 to: Tom Costa Dept. of History and Philosophy Clinch Valley College Wise, Va. 24293 (703)328-0231 tmc5a@clinch.edu For further information, please contact Dr. Tom Costa Dept. of History and Philosophy tmc5a@clinch.edu Clinch Valley College, Wise, Va. 24293 (703)328-0231 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 08:37:56 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0099 Re: The Scottish Play Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0099. Monday, 13 February 1995. (1) From: Richard J Kennedy Date: Thursday, 9 Feb 1995 17:46:30 -0800 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0089 Re: The Scottish Play (2) From: John Gardiner Date: Thursday, 9 Feb 1995 18:33:39 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0089 Re: The Scottish Play (3) From: William Godshalk Date: Thursday, 09 Feb 1995 23:12:06 -0500 (EST) Subj: Macbeth (4) From: Julie Dubiner Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 01:08:03 -0500 (EST) Subj: RE: The Scottish Play (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard J Kennedy Date: Thursday, 9 Feb 1995 17:46:30 -0800 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0089 Re: The Scottish Play I played the bear in A Winter's Tale, and will answer to the question of bad luck in plays other than Macbeth. It was my first appearance in a Shakespeare play, and I growled so wonderfully that the audience cried out, "Let him growl again." At least I hoped that was on their minds. I was to chase Antigonus off the stage and devour him in the wings. Antigonus defended himself with a piece of driftwood, and I told the actor to lay on, since I was well-padded and mounted with a bear's head on top of my own head, and so Antigonus slugged at me desperately with his driftwood club, and one night broke my finger, and I had to trade in my manual typewriter for an electric because I was hurting for many weeks and could not stand the pounding. So there's an example of injury not connected to Macbeth, and there are hundreds no doubt. But not having that aura of bad luck, they are not mentioned. However, who can be sure. One night of a full moon, I was scorning were-wolves among friends, then drove home and was stopped by a cop for something dumb in my opinion, a mere sliding stop, and he would not repent his gross misuse of his power, but gave me a ticket. I took a look at his name badge before we parted so that I might sic my congressman on him or something. His name was Wolf. Kennedy (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Gardiner Date: Thursday, 9 Feb 1995 18:33:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0089 Re: The Scottish Play In the new and very fine film "A Man of No Importance", Albert Finney's character enngages in a connversation with a fellow thespian in the theater in which they hope to stage Wilde's "Salome". His assistant cannot remember what was the Shakespeare play or scene that was cursed, to which Finney replies "you mean Macbeth". You can guess the fate of their production. Foreshadow through superstition. I love it. By the way, how safe is it to mention the Dreaded Scottish Play on a Shakespearian listserve? ;) (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: William Godshalk Date: Thursday, 09 Feb 1995 23:12:06 -0500 (EST) Subject: Macbeth "Angels and ministers of grace defend us!" According to Frank Kermode, if you say that line immediately after mentioning MACBETH, you'll be all right. My account has been jammed for some days, and I've missed a good deal of the MACBETH stuperstition thread. Is all of this commentary a result of Garry Wills' book and Frank Kermode's review? My students recall a scene from the Black Adder series. Yours, Bill (William.Godshalk@uc.edu) Department of English University of Cincinnati 45221-0065 (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Julie Dubiner Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 01:08:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: RE: The Scottish Play For those who find superstitions silly, I implore you all to at least not tempt trouble. When I was an undergraduate, the new theater history professor was directing _Tartuffe_. At the first rehearsal he told the cast that superstitions were bunk, they should all whistle back-stage, turn off the ghost light, and then he proceeded to run around our little Arena screaming that Scotsman's name. Well, by the top of opening night, he had suffered through a mean case of pneumonia and his wife had left him and taken the children. By the end of opening night, his Tartuffe had slipped off the set and broken his ankle. In what may be perceived as an unrelated event, a few years later he was denied tenure. So, believe what you will, but please show proper respect. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 08:46:19 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0100 Re: Shylock; Fortinbras Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0100. Monday, 13 February 1995. (1) From: W. L. Godshalk Date: Thursday, 09 Feb 1995 22:18:14 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0093 Re: Shylock (2) From: Charles Adler Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 07:54:19 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0093 Re: Shylock (3) From: Scott Shepherd Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 1995 22:20:17 -0500 Subj: Re: Fortinbras (4) From: Scott Shepherd Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 1995 22:20:31 -0500 Subj: Hamlet (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: W. L. Godshalk Date: Thursday, 09 Feb 1995 22:18:14 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0093 Re: Shylock David Evett, after very carefully telling us that Shylock is merely a verbal construct, goes on to tell us that his "text invites this kind of reading." Note the metaphoric slip that Dave makes. He implies that he has an active text that invites him to read in a certain way. As we all know, unfortunately, texts do not read themselves, nor do they invite specific readings. What Dave sees as an invitation in the text is in reality inside his brain. Yours, Bad Bill (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Charles Adler Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 07:54:19 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0093 Re: Shylock While I agree that the text leaves little room for an ealier contrivance of Shylock's bargain, I wonder why one would be less justified in inferring the history of a dramatic character than a a real live person about whom one has similar information? Charles Adler (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Shepherd Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 1995 22:20:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Fortinbras David Glassco writes >I wonder if Chris Gordon would elaborate on exactly why or how Hamlet's >soliloquay "How all occasions do inform against me..." was made so powerful in >the production she's discussing. I have always been bemused by the fact that >the occasion Hamlet has just experienced (Fortinbras going off to a pointless >war) is precisely the sort of occasion that might lead to a recognition of the >need for further thought _before_ action, rather than encouraging anything >precipitous. Alexander Smith answers this by defending the character of Fortinbras, which I think is a side issue. It isn't necessary for us (or Hamlet) to think that Fortinbras is a good man or that his attack on Poland is justifiable. The point of the pointlessness of Fortinbras' excursion is strategic: intensify the comparative effect. The same thing happens in "And all for nothing, for Hecuba!" etc, the common idea being to contrast Hamlet with someone who responds to his predicament definitively and with vehemence, and to exaggerate that contrast by giving that person a flimsy excuse for their behavior, while Hamlet's cause is indisputable: "What would he do had he the motive and the cue for passion that I have?"; "How stand I then that have a father killed, a mother stained, excitements of my reason and my blood, and let all sleep while to my shame I see the imminent death of twenty thousand men who for a fantasy and trick of fame go to their graves like beds...?" The notion that Hamlet might learn a lesson from Fortinbras along the lines of "further thought before action" is related to a general mistake about Hamlet, viz that his procrastination is a matter of being shrewd or of making up his mind on some sort of moral question--even though he is constantly saying the opposite of this, notably "I do not know why yet I live to say this thing's to do, sith I have cause and will and strength and means to do't." Certainly after the Mousetrap there is no more decision-making to be done, and during the Fortinbras speech it is unlikely that the audience will think that further thought is what Hamlet's situation requires. (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Shepherd Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 1995 22:20:31 -0500 Subject: Hamlet Continuing this "How all occasions" thread: This part >Rightly to be great >Is not to stir without great argument >But greatly to find quarrel in a straw >When honor's at the stake. has received some interpretive attention as either a corruption or a case of Shakespeare not quite saying what he meant (not to stir = not to not stir), but has anybody argued for the meaning as written? I think the question "What is it about Fortinbras' expedition that impresses Hamlet," more or less raised by Edward Glassco last week, hangs on what you decide this passage means. My suggestion is that honor = great argument, ie Hamlet's gist is "This attack on Poland is an act of greatness because it is not a gratuitous display of military machismo but unflinching commitment to a question of honor." Well? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 08:52:43 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0101 Re: Hamlet in Winnipeg Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0101. Monday, 13 February 1995. (1) From: Scott Shepherd Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 1995 22:20:27 -0500 Subj: Re: Keanu Reeves (2) From: Paul Stanwood Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 1995 21:08:28 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0095 Re: *Hamlet* in Winnipeg (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Shepherd Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 1995 22:20:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Keanu Reeves Am I the only one who thinks Keanu Reeves is the worst screen actor this side of Steven Segal? Isn't he indisputably horrible in Branagh's Ado? Is even his _accent_ endurable in Dracula? I figured in Speed at least he'd be limited to Schwartzeneggerish oneliners and nonspeaking action sequences, but he honestly ruined the whole experience for me, every time he opened his mouth or made any show of emotion. He has one good trick, the one he does in Parenthood, Bill&Ted, River's Edge, and My Own Private Idaho. But HIM in the role of roles? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! I get ulcers reading about it. Are there no bad reviews of that show? Will somebody post them please oh please? (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul Stanwood Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 1995 21:08:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0095 Re: *Hamlet* in Winnipeg I wonder if this review appeared in the SUNDAY Times magazine? It is cheap, stupid, insulting, and condescending, though these are all characteristics of the Times of London, too, especially when considering anything that occurs outside of London itself. Winnipeg IS a long way from Hollywood (one of its many virtues)! I suppose this silly reviewer meant "Lieutenant-General" for "Governor-General", though he/she would not know the difference! --Just a first impression of an irritating, though (I suppose) well meaning review. Paul Stanwood English, Univ. of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 09:01:55 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0102 Re: Science Fiction; Homoerotic; Musicals Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0102. Monday, 13 February 1995. (1) From: William Russell Mayes Date: Friday, 10 Feb 1995 10:46:32 -0500 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0091 Re: Shakespeare and Science Fiction (2) From: David Schalkwyk Date: Friday, 10 Feb 95 09:20:13 SAST-2 Subj: The homoerotic (3) From: Marty Jukovsky Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 95 02:06:12 Subj: Fwd: Musicals based on Shakespeare (was POSSIBLE MUSICALS) (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: William Russell Mayes Date: Friday, 10 Feb 1995 10:46:32 -0500 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0091 Re: Shakespeare and Science Fiction Regarding Shakespeare and Star Trek, there is a ton of the bard in the movies and throughout the (several) series, though by no means is there a systematic use of W.S. Paul Cantor has a paper on Shakespeare in the Star Trek movies. I am sure he'd be happy to send it to you (he is at the Dept. of English, Wilson Hall, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22903). Half jokingly, I once gave a paper entitled "Historical Criticism: The Next Generation, or Why Doesn't the Federation have a Cloaking Device?" but the writers of _Star Trek: The Next Generation_ (the one with Patrick Stewart) ruined it by writing a show where that question is answered. Alas. W. Russell Mayes, Jr. Dept. of English University of Virginia wrm2b@faraday.clas.virginia.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Schalkwyk Date: Friday, 10 Feb 95 09:20:13 SAST-2 Subject: The homoerotic Is the fact that sonnets addressed by men to _women_ "sound like love letters" enough to "establish anything definite?" David Schalkwyk (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marty Jukovsky Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 95 02:06:12 Subject: Fwd: Musicals based on Shakespeare (was POSSIBLE MUSICALS) I thought the following would be of interest to SHAKSPER subscribers. It was posted on the musical theater mailing list (musicals-post@world.std.com). Martin Jukovsky Cambridge, Mass. martyj@yankeegroup.com *********************************** Michael Soliven Lara (mslara@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu) writes: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8 Feb 1995, Adam Feldman wrote: > What does anyone else think? Any other ideas for musicals to come? It might be interesting to have musicals based on Shakespeare plays. We've already seen works which either touch on Shakespeare (e.g. Kiss Me Kate) or works which freely adapt Shakespeare (e.g. Otello, West Side Story). How about Hamlet? Some problems with this include: if there are new lyrics, the lyricist might be accused of tampering with already perfect verse (such was one reported criticism of the flop Cyrano) if there aren't new lyrics, the composer would have to find some way of musicalizing the work without making it monotonous or ridiculous <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< I was in a musical adaptation of Shakespeare's "A Winter's Tale." It was a pretty horrible mishmash, partly because of some of the above concerns. Much of Shakespeare's beautiful verse was rewritten, some just shortened in the interest of time, but some because the writer was afraid it would not be understood -- it got kind of "dumbed-down." I played Paulina, Hermione's chief lady-in-waiting (or something like that -- it's never made exactly clear even in Shakespeare), which was originally a nice supporting role. However, I get the idea that Paulina was the writer's favorite character. She (the writer, who was also directing) called Paulina the original feminist, and beefed up the role a whole lot just because it was her favorite. I had three solos and three or four duets -- unfortunately, a lot of the music was awful (a song to Leontes about Hermione's child called "The Babe is Yours" stands out as particularly bad). A Pippin-like chorus that showed up at the beginning and end of each act was also added, and Father Time led them -- they were funny but had little or nothing to do with the story and were not integrated into the play at all. There was one glorious moment: Camillo the faithful servant singing a song called "I Know an Island" to Florizel and Perdita. It was a beautiful tenor ballad almost worth the price of admission by itself. Of course, the original play is problematic -- it starts out as almost a tragedy, and ends up as a sort of pastoral romance -- but making it a musical -- at least in this inception -- only exacerbated its problems. I believe this "Musical Winter's Tale" was done once before at Brown University. I'd love to hear from anyone who was associated with it or saw it. Also, back in 1981 or 1982 I saw the pre-Broadway production of "Oh, Brother" at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. It was an adaptation of "The Comedy of Errors" (or going further back "The Menaechmi (sp?)) set in Iran. Parts of it were wonderful -- I seem to remember Judy Kaye having a beautiful ballad about one of the brothers. But parts were incredibly tacky -- there was a kickline of Arabs (which was actually pretty funny, but probably offensive to some) and a lot of Ayatollah (or was it Shah?) jokes. I heard later that it closed on Broadway after something like three days -- I wonder if there's any recording of it out there? Hoping there are better Shakespeare adaptations around ... or being written. Ginny gsl@barw.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 09:08:20 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0103 Qs: Courses; Metadrama; Globe Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0103. Monday, 13 February 1995. (1) From: W. L. Godshalk Date: Friday, 10 Feb 1995 23:33:41 -0500 (EST) Subj: Courses on Shakespeare's Texts (2) From: David Reinheimer Date: Saturday, 11 Feb 1995 09:30:13 -0800 (PST) Subj: Metadrama at the 1977 MLA (3) From: Dan Falk Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 1995 16:52:06 -0500 Subj: Query: Globe Theatre (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: W. L. Godshalk Date: Friday, 10 Feb 1995 23:33:41 -0500 (EST) Subject: Courses on Shakespeare's Texts Yashdip Bains and I are planning a graduate course on the texts of MERRY WIVES, HAMLET, and KING LEAR. We are wondering how many of you teach similar courses, and how you approach the text problems with students who have little or no previous preparation. Yours, Bill Godshalk (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Reinheimer Date: Saturday, 11 Feb 1995 09:30:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Metadrama at the 1977 MLA Researching my dissertation yesterday, I came across an entry in the MLA On-line Bibliography for _Shakespearean Metadrama_, edited by John W. Blanpied (Rochester, NY, Dept of English, University of Rochester, 1977). This is not, of course, Calderwood's 1971 book, but a collection of essays delivered at a special session (I assume on metadrama) at the 1977 MLA Convention. Unfortunately, my library here (which has, probably, the second-most frustrating computer catalog in the world) has never heard of this publication. If anyone on the list has, and could direct me to it, I would be very grateful. Either post or e-mail responses to . Thanks much in advance. Have a good day! Dave UCDavis (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dan Falk Date: Sunday, 12 Feb 1995 16:52:06 -0500 Subject: Query: Globe Theatre Hello. Can anyone tell me if there are any Canadians (and in particular any U of T people) involved in the re-building of the Globe theatre in London? I'm planning to be in London at the time of the Globe grand opening in June, and because I'm a writer, I'm always looking for good stories (especially stories with a Canadian angle). Thanks for your help! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 08:10:28 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0104 Re: Shakespeare Musicals Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0104. Tuesday, 14 February 1995. (1) From: Yvette Grimes Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 10:23:29 -0500 Subj: Re: Shakespeare Musicals (2) From: Jean Peterson Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 12:17:28 -0500 Subj: Re: musical shakespeare (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Yvette Grimes Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 10:23:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Shakespeare Musicals What about Rogers & Hart's _Boys From Syracuse_, an adaptation of _The Comedy of Errors_. Great score including songs like "This Can't Be Love" and "Falling In Love With Love." -Yvette (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jean Peterson Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 12:17:28 -0500 Subject: Re: musical shakespeare Does anyone remember an early Sixties musical version of *Twelfth Night* called, I believe, "YOUR OWN THING"? It was a real product of the times...I recall that it toyed with bisexuality in ways that were probably daring at the time, though pretty tame in retrospect (Ex: Orsino admits to himself that he is having raging sexual fantasies about "charlie"-cesario; he is more than relieved to discover that charlie is really a girl...). Set, costume, & hair a la' Peter Max--flower power, bell bottom pants, big hair... Jean Peterson Bucknell University ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 08:17:00 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0105 Re: Hamlet and Fortinbras Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0105. Tuesday, 14 February 1995. (1) From: Ron Moyer Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 9:53:03 -0600 (CST) Subj: Hamlet, 4.4 (2) From: David Evette Date: Monday, 13 Feb 95 16:36:57 EST Subj: [Hamlet's "Rightly . . ."] (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ron Moyer Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 9:53:03 -0600 (CST) Subject: Hamlet, 4.4 Scott Shepherd's suggestion that Hamlet's 4.4 soliloquy has the dramaturgical effect of intensifying the "comparative effect" of Hamlet/Fortinbras seems apt; further, the strong expression of the "How all occasions" speech helps to keep Hamlet and his bloody thoughts in the audience's mind during his England trip/absence from stage (and gives wonderful chance for rhetorical and emotional display. While theatrically effective, the soliloquy is redundant (e.g., "Now could I drink hot blood"), lacks some logic (as has been discussed on this thread), and seems a bit silly for Hamlet to express this strength of purpose at the moment when he has the least power in the play--being escorted out of the country. Apparently someone in the King's Company (the author perhaps) found the speech unnecessary or undesirable, for it was omitted in the First Folio text. --Ron Moyer, Theatre, Univ. of South Dakota (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Evette Date: Monday, 13 Feb 95 16:36:57 EST Subject: [Hamlet's "Rightly . . ."] I endorse Scott Shepherd's parsing of Hamlet's "Rightly to be great / Is not to stir without great argument" as needing to be read so that "not" governs the entire infinitive phrase rather than "to stir" by itself (Riverside 4.4.53-54). To understand Hamlet is not necessarily to agree with him, however. From one end of the canon to the other, in _Titus Andronicus_, _Romeo and Juliet_, _Merchant of Venice_, both parts of _Henry IV_, _Henry V_, _Julius Caesar_, _Troilus and Cressida_, _Lear_, _Coriolanus_, and _Winter's Tale_, as well as in this play, Shakespeare carries out investigations of masculine honor, particularly those elements of the code that define manhood as the willingness to kill ("If it be man's work I'll do it") and relate it to the obligation for revenge. The _trouvailles_ here is a pile of corpses that consists mostly of the young male combatants but also includes Juliet, Ophelia, Gertrude, the Boy in _Henry V_, and the Norwegian and Polish Williamses and Bateses for whom, as Hamlet goes on to tell us, the dirt fought over by Fortinbras and his Polish counterpart will not be sufficient to make graves. I have fond memories of that wonderfully straightforward and practical critic Alfred Harbage asking the members of his graduate seminar to identify the grounds for Hamlet's delay, and scowling impatiently through a series of convoluted psychological hypotheses before somebody finally said, rather to the shame of the rest of us, "Thou shalt do no murder." ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 10:42:48 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0106 Re: Hamlet in Winnipeg; Teaching Multiple Texts Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0106. Tuesday, 14 February 1995. (1) From: Alice Kroman Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 09:49:49 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0101 Re: Hamlet in Winnipeg (2) From: David M Richman Date: Monday, February 13, 1994 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0103 Qs: Courses; Metadrama; Globe (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Alice Kroman Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 09:49:49 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0101 Re: Hamlet in Winnipeg To Scott Shepherd: I assure you that you are not alone on your opinions of Keanu Reeve's "talent". Although I did not see the Winnipeg Hamlet, I have seen several of his movies and find his acting positively embarrassing to watch. Alice M. Kroman akroman@osf1.gmu.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David M Richman Date: Monday, February 13, 1994 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0103 Qs: Courses; Metadrama; Globe To Bill Godshalk: As regards teaching multiple texts, I have found it fruitful to look at a series of acting/directing problems. How might variant versions of a given sequence be differently played? What are the implications for performance of various cuts and additions? Steve Urkowitz is one of the great people in this field, and your students might like to look at his stuff on multiple texts of Hamlet, M.W.W. R. and J. and his book on Lear. He is terrific on implications for performance. I will immodestly mention my own article The *King Lear* Quarto in Rehearsal and Performance, *Shakespeare Quarterly* Autumn, 1986. Therein, I describe a production based on the 1608 Quarto. Looking seriously and in detail at these early texts is quite rewarding. On another thread--Fritz Leiber, a great science fiction writer and the son of a noted Shakespearean actor, often used the plays in his stories. My favorite is "No Great Magic" title taken from Robert Graves, about an eerie production of Mcbeth in which the company, a band of time-wanderers, is attempting to change history. The story originally appeared in the December, 1963, Galaxy. Cheers, David ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 15:55:07 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0108 Re: Shakespeare and Science Fiction Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 108. Wednesday, 15 February 1995. (1) From: David Reinheimer Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 16:59:27 -0800 (PST) Subj: Shakespeare and Star Trek (2) From: W. L. Godshalk Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 22:13:16 -0500 (EST) Subj: Shakespeare and Sci-Fi (3) From: Stephen Buhler Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 09:25:57 -0600 (CST) Subj: SF Shakespeare and Star Trek (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Reinheimer Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 16:59:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Shakespeare and Star Trek Just a note: The Spring issue of _Extrapolations_ is a special issue containing articles on this topic. The articles treat the original series, the feature movies and the Next Generation. Have a good day! Dave Reinheimer UCDavis (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: W. L. Godshalk Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 22:13:16 -0500 (EST) Subject: Shakespeare and Sci-Fi Has any one mentioned Clifford Simak, SHAKESPEARE'S PLANET (1976) and Aldous Huxley's ISLAND (1962), both of which, as I recall play off of THE TEMPEST. Yours, Bill Subject: Retraction Having recent said that Huxley's ISLAND plays off of THE TEMPEST, I hasten to point out that I was not well served by my memory. Although ISLAND may have some Shakespearean touches, Huxley was obviously updating More's UTOPIA. Yours, Bill (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stephen Buhler Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 09:25:57 -0600 (CST) Subject: SF Shakespeare and Star Trek In response to the recent thread on Science Fiction and Shakespeare, I'm happy to let SHAKSPERians know about a special issue of EXTRAPOLATION, the SF and Fantasy journal. The issue was organized and guest-edited by Susan C. Hines, Middle Georgia College. I have adapted the following from her description of its contents: There's an editor's column by EXTRAPOLATION editor-in-chief, Donald M. Hassler. The Introductory article, "What's Academic About Trek," by Susan C. Hines, is an argument for cultural/media studies, an explanation of how such an special issue of EXTRAPOLATION came to be, and an overview of the essays on Shakespeare and STAR TREK. The issue includes three essays (by John Pendergast, Stephen M. Buhler, and Mark Houlahan) on STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY. Each of these essays has or reflects a particular theoretical slant--one new historicist, one cultural materialist, one postcolonial--and all deal with plays such as HAMLET, THE TEMPEST, JULIUS CAESAR, and RICHARD II. There's one essay on the CLASSIC TREK by Mary Dutta, a feminist perspective which deals with episodes CATSPAW, REQUIEM FOR METHUSULA, ELAAN OF TROYIUS, CONSCIENCE OF THE KING and with plays MACBETH, THE TEMPEST, TAMING OF THE SHREW, and HAMLET). And there are also two essays on STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION. David Reinheimer's is on moral philosophy and the series' most Shakespearean nonhumans, Data and Q; Emily Hegarty's is a feminist close reading of an episode called THE PERFECT MATE and its relationship to Shakespeare's sonnets. I'm told the issue is just out; it's available from the Kent State University Press. Stephen M. Buhler, Department of English, University of Nebraska-Lincoln ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 15:41:20 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 107. Wednesday, 15 February 1995. (1) From: Melissa Aaron Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 08:50:20 +0200 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0102 Re: Musicals (2) From: Sean Lawrence Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 20:20:53 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0102 Re: Musicals (3) From: Gavin H Witt Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 95 18:27:48 CST Subj: Re: SHK 6.0104 Re: Shakespeare Musicals (4) From: Mary Bess Whidden Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 01:07:59 -0700 (MST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0104 Re: Shakespeare Musicals (5) From: Tom Clayton Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 10:51:44 -0500 (CDT) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0104 Re: Shakespeare Musicals (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Aaron Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 08:50:20 +0200 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0102 Re: Musicals My cousin was in a musical version of *Merchant of Venice* as Portia once. This must have been about 15 (?) years ago, in a showcase version off-Broadway. I seem to recall a duet between Portia and Nerissa called "O me, O My, Ah men" and some other stuff which escapes me. Actually, it was pretty good, but then I was a stage-struck teenager and might not have noticed. Anyone hear of this thing? Melissa Aaron (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sean Lawrence Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 20:20:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0102 Re: Musicals If memory serves me correctly, someone on this list mentioned a wonderfully heinous sounding version of Hamlet as a musical. I think I remember that it plays annually at Rice University, but I could be wrong. I wish I could see it performed some time. Cheerio, Sean. (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Gavin H Witt Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 95 18:27:48 CST Subject: Re: SHK 6.0104 Re: Shakespeare Musicals Regarding Shakespeare musicals, there was a musical version of _Two Gents_ done in Shakespeare in the Park back in the 70s (I think Raul Julia was in it and made a big splash with his performance). I'm not aware of any recordings of it available, though.... Gavin Witt University of Chicago (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mary Bess Whidden Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 01:07:59 -0700 (MST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0104 Re: Shakespeare Musicals --and we all cherish Anna Russell's approximation of the operatic *Hamletto.* Mary Bess Whidden (5)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Clayton Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 10:51:44 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0104 Re: Shakespeare Musicals In case anyone is interested in looking into YOUR OWN THING (1968), it was printed together with TWELFTH NIGHT by Dell in 1970--and may well have been reprinted, but I don't know that for a fact. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 16:01:02 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0109 CFP: Western Conference on British Studies Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 109. Wednesday, 15 February 1995. From: Larry Witherell Date: Monday, 13 Feb 95 14:56:47 -0500 Subject: WCBS/CFP WESTERN CONFERENCE ON BRITISH STUDIES CALL FOR PAPERS The WESTERN CONFERENCE ON BRITISH STUDIES invites proposals for papers to be delivered at the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting of the WCBS, in Houston, Texas, 26-28 October 1995. The WCBS welcomes proposals for papers and sessions on all aspects of British studies and the British experience, including history, politics, literature, arts, and culture. For each proposed paper please provide a brief abstract (250 words) and for each participant a brief c.v. (1-2 pages). Send by 17 APRIL 1995 to:-- Dr. Larry L. Witherell Program Chair, WCBS Institute of International Studies 214 Social Sciences Building University of Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455 Tel. (612) 624-0255 FAX (612) 626-2242 E-MAIL withe007@maroon.tc.umn.edu ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 18:14:54 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0110 Re: Reeves; Metadrama; Ghost Light; Kiss Me; Hamlet/Action Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 110. Wednesday, 15 February 1995. (1) From: John Mills Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 13:17:31 -0700 (MST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0101 Re: Hamlet in Winnipeg (2) From: Michael Norman Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 16:49:50 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Shakespearean Metadrama (3) From: James Schaefer Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 13:14:11 -0500 (EST) Subj: Electronic ghost lights (4) From: Matthew Henerson Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 11:22:55 -0800 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0094 Q: Kiss Me Video (5) From: John Boni Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 16:32:51 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0105 Re: Hamlet and Fortinbras (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Mills Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 13:17:31 -0700 (MST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0101 Re: Hamlet in Winnipeg You are certainly not alone in your opinion of Reeves. I thought him execrable in Much Ado and the mind reels at the thought of him playing Hamlet or, for that matter, any other Shakespearean role--large or small. (He was bearable in Little Buddha but then he didn't have much to do except look spiritual.) I wonder though if there is a generation gap here. I cut my teeth on Olivier and went on to admire Burton and Nicol Williamson greatly. Nor am I an anglophile snob. I thought Richard Chamberlain was more than respectable and Gibson's Hamlet was nothing to be ashamed of either-what there was of it. But the stage history of the play shows that "old-stagers" never like the upstart crow newcomer. It is worth remembering in this connection that the oldtimers thought that matinee idol movie actor Olivier had a lot of nerve daring to play Hamlet. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Norman Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 16:49:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Shakespearean Metadrama _Shakespearean Metadrama_, edited by John Blanpied, can be located at the following libraries: Southern Illinois University Northern Kentucky University Brandeis University, MA Bowling Green State University, OH All libraries listed are suppliers with interlibrary loan. I found the information from OCLC's Worldcat on FirstSearch. This is a very valuable tool for finding where desired materials are located. I use it almost daily in my research. Hope this helps. Michael Norman (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: James Schaefer Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 13:14:11 -0500 (EST) Subject: Electronic ghost lights I'm not an electrician, but wouldn't Alice Kroman's electronic ghost lights be the slowly dissipating current from a capacitor? Jim Schaefer (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Matthew Henerson Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 11:22:55 -0800 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0094 Q: Kiss Me Video >Could somebody tell me where I might borrow/rent the video Kiss Me Petruchio? The only place I have seen it is at the main branch of the Santa Monica Library near Los Angeles. But since it is a documentary on a production done through the Public Theater in New York, you might try calling there. Matt (5)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Boni Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 16:32:51 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0105 Re: Hamlet and Fortinbras RE: Hamlet and Action. Several persons have mentioned Hamlet's reasoning as he watches Fortinbras' army preparing to fight over something not worth the sacrifice. To me, in the "How all occasions" soliloquy, Hamlet echoes Hotspur in a fixation upon honor, despite odds and object. Someone in this thread (I'm sorry I can't recall who) pointed out that a character (particularly Hamlet) may say and do things which are very important but which will distance him/her from us. Well, that, to my mind, is part of the duality of the tragic hero, particularly in Shakespeare. Hamlet refuses to kill Claudius for the wrong reasons--he wants to control the fate of Claudius' soul (something reserved to god); he kills Polonius unthinkingly--not the sort of action we associate with the intellectual, sensitive person we have come to know and love; then in belittling his own inaction in contrast to the action of Fortinbras' soldiers, he embraces values worthy of Hotspur. Tragic loss. John M. Boni, Dean College of Arts & Sciences Northeastern Illinois University ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 19:19:34 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0111 Qs: *WT*; Shakespeare Songs; Auditions Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0111. Thursday, 16 February 1995. (1) From: Scott Shepherd Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 15:18:58 -0500 Subj: Winter's Tale (2) From: Michael Martin Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 09:47:14 -0500 (EST) Subj: Shakespeare's songs... (3) From: Dana Goldstein Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 21:50:53 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0069 Qs: Auditions (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Shepherd Date: Tuesday, 14 Feb 1995 15:18:58 -0500 Subject: Winter's Tale I just read somewhere in rec.arts.theatre that a Swedish *Winter's Tale* directed by Ingmar Bergman is coming to the Brooklyn Academy of Music in May (maybe as part of a more general North American tour). Anybody know about it? (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Martin Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 09:47:14 -0500 (EST) Subject: Shakespeare's songs... Hi folks, Are there good (or even *decent*) sound or video recordings of any of Shakespeare's songs, digital would be great, but I'm willing to do the transfer. Looking to create a multimedia archive for a class I teach. I'd like to focus specifically on the music for this particular element, and would include things like Mendelssohn's MND, perhaps a song or two from West Side Story...and I would love to have some samples of Elizabethan music, or even period instruments... Suggestions or references are welcome, as always, from the helpful members of this discussion group. Thanks, Michael Martin (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dana Goldstein Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 21:50:53 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0069 Qs: Auditions I'm looking for the same information regarding summer Shakespeare work. If possible, please send anything relevant to: dgoldstein@binah.cc.brandeis.edu Thanks a lot, Dana ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 19:40:32 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0112 Re: Shakespeare Musicals Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0112. Thursday, 16 February 1995. (1) From: Jerry Bangham Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 20:20:08 Subj: Re: Shakespeare Musicals Two gentlemen and Hamletto. (2) From: Daniel Vitkus Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 13:25 +0200 Subj: RE: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals (3) From: Cary Mazer Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 10:17:42 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals (4) From: Tom Dale Keever Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 95 11:37:36 EST Subj: Shakespeare Sci-Fi Musical (5) From: Mike Young Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 13:50:26 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals (6) From: Matthew Henerson Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 11:19:37 -0800 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals (7) From: Joseph L Lockett Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 12:55:19 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals (8) From: Fran Teague Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 95 10:43:20 EST Subj: Re: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jerry Bangham Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 20:20:08 Subject: Re: Shakespeare Musicals Two gentlemen and Hamletto. >Regarding Shakespeare musicals, there was a musical version of _Two Gents_ >done in Shakespeare in the Park back in the 70s (I think Raul Julia was in it >and made a big splash with his performance). It went on to the St. James and was recorded on a two-record set ABC BSCY-1001. >--and we all cherish Anna Russell's approximation of the operatic *Hamletto.* Is it available? I've been looking for it for years. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Daniel Vitkus Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 13:25 +0200 Subject: RE: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals RE: Shakespeare musicals As a teenager in Chicago I once attended a rock 'n' roll musical version of _A Midsummer Night's Dream_, complete with wigged out fairies, and good, loud rock music. This was in the early 1970s, performed at the Ivanhoe Theater Uptown (now burnt to the ground). Does anyone out there recall such a production? I don't remember much else about the performance, except that I enjoyed it. Daniel Vitkus The American University in Cairo (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cary Mazer Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 10:17:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals Fans of _Your Own Thing_ may be interested to know that a few years later there was ANOTHER attempt to turn _Twelfth Night_ into a musical, this time a Broadway production called _Music Is_, adapted and directed by the late great George Abbott. I have no recollection of WHY I saw it, but I do remember how awful it was. The one scene that sticks out in my memory is a choreographed party scene in Orsino's house featuring a dozen or so mini-trampolines. Cary (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Dale Keever Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 95 11:37:36 EST Subject: Shakespeare Sci-Fi Musical Subject: The Shakespeare Sci-Fi Musical I'd like to tie two recent threads into a tidy bow and recall one of the most delightful evenings I ever spent in the West End. The crew I was working with at the Bloomsbury Theatre said I had to see the new show at the Cambridge and called over to get me a house seat. It was a low budget, but ingeniously staged, gem called RETURN TO THE FORBIDDEN PLANET: the world's first Shakespeare Science Fiction Rock and Roll Musical. Based loosely on the Sci Fi film, FORBIDDEN PLANET, it used rock songs from the 50's and 60's, and featured a marooned mad scientist, Dr. Prospero, a roller skating android Ariel and a Shatnerish commander named Captain Tempest. The show was written and directed by Bob Carlton and developed with a small company called Bubble Productions. After touring the provinces it came to London where it was the season's surprise hit. It even edged out the bloated MISS SAIGON for the Best Musical Olivier, prompting that show's producer to furiously demand that the rules be changed to disallow any show without original music. I never saw the New York version. Others who'd loved it in London warned me away. Even with Julie Cruise as Miranda, it failed to charm the way the original had. On the opposite extreme I, too, recall that OH, BROTHER only lasted a day or two on Broadway, but, sadly, I was trapped in the house for one of the previews. "Tacky" doesn't begin to describe this turkey. My companion was, for some reason, obligated to stick it out, so I reluctantly returned for the second act. She agreed she owed me one for that sacrifice. Tom Dale Keever keever@phantom.com (5)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Young Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 13:50:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals If we really want to review all "Shakespearian" musicals, don't forget the version of HAMLET from Gilligan's Island. Yours in syndication, Michael Young (6)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Matthew Henerson Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 11:19:37 -0800 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals I saw a musical version of *Hamlet* called *To Be* at Cal State Northridge some six years ago. I don't remember it fondly, but then I don't remember much of anything about it. I have no idea if it has ever been performed anywhere else. Matt (7)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joseph L Lockett Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 12:55:19 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals Rice University's occasional Hamlet musical is "Hello Hamlet", performed every five years (need it or not) by Wiess residential college, and authored by former Houston city comptroller (and Rice alum) George Greanias. I've seen two different productions, and enjoyed each. Macbeth's witches make an appearance running a drug store, we hear renditions of "There Is Nothing Like a Dane" and "Ya Got Trouble (Right Here in Elsinore)", Hamlet shows up in drag (a tutu, yet) to perform for Claudius as "Olga, Olga, from the Volga". A good time all around. Greanias owns the rights, I guess, though the rampant stealing of show tunes makes all that quite murky. It's always much looked forward to, and I'm amused to hear that its fame has spread! (8)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Fran Teague Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 95 10:43:20 EST Subject: Re: SHK 6.0107 Re: Shakespeare Musicals The musical version of _Hamlet_ that is done fairly regularly at Rice University is entitled _Hello, Hamlet!_ and it's been produced since the late 60s. My husband played Claudius and I worked backstage on several of the early stagings. His showstopper number began "I'm strictly a heinous highness . . . " and concluded "I enjoy being a ghoul." As you can probably tell, the show did every bit as much damage to Broadway musicals as it did to any Shakespearean text. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 19:51:09 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0113 Re: Coral; Kiss Me; Shylock Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0113. Thursday, 16 February 1995. (1) From: Scott Shepherd Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 15:27:12 -0500 Subj: Of his bones are coral made (2) From: Scott Shepherd Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 21:55:44 -0500 Subj: Re: Kiss Me Video (3) From: David Evett Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 95 14:50:58 EST Subj: [Shylock] (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I know this is an old topic, but because it mutated immediately into a heated meta dispute about appropriate critical inquiry the original question was never addressed. It's been nagging me. I agree that "Of his bones are coral made" scores so many points for euphony and fantastic image that a little semantic problem would be easy to excuse. But in fact there is no semantic problem. "Of his bones are coral made" uses the same "make...of" as "conscience does make cowards of us all." The correct rephrasing is "(Something) has made coral of his bones." E L Epstein's inversion "Coral are made of his bones" is a linguistic red herring that seems to uncover a difficulty not actually in the original. The trick is that word order _matters_ in English, and it sometimes matters in ways that are instinctive and therefore hard to detect. For example, consider this quasipoetic phrase: >From the lips of Demosthenes come diamonds This is perfectly clear, but the inversion >Diamonds come from the lips of Demosthenes sounds like it's accounting for the origin of _all_ diamonds (especially if you don't know what Demosthenes is). A native speaker can sense this without knowing why it happens. Why does it happen? I think 1) A plural or collective noun without an article tends to acquire an implied "all" at the beginning of a sentence (eg "Men are scum") but less usually in the middle (eg "The scum gave me diamonds"). 2) Simple indicative present-tense constructions often have the ring of universal factual statement (cf "Diamonds _came_ from the lips...," where past tense eliminates the confusion). Inversion deadens the encyclopedia effect by separating encyclopedia combinations like "come from" and "are made of". In our *Tempest* example things are further complicated because the present-tense verb actually denotes past action, ie "are made" = "have been made" (cf "I am transformed", "the bed is made", "Christ is reborn"). Adjusting for this will clear up Epstein's version: >Coral(s) have been made of his bones. Yes, poetry enjoys a certain linguistic license, but it's still made of words (anyway it is in Shakespeare) and must operate by means of that mysterious peculiar thing language. True semantic difficulties in the plays, no matter how florid, get plenty of critical attention. Nobody wanted to discuss this one because "Of his bones are coral made" doesn't _sound_ wrong (on the contrary it sounds great!). It only becomes problematic after erroneous examination. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Shepherd Date: Wednesday, 15 Feb 1995 21:55:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Kiss Me Video If Kiss Me Petrucchio is that documentary about the Raul Julia / Meryl Streep *Shrew* production in Central Park that I borrowed once from the Midtown Manhattan Library, I borrowed it once from the Midtown Manhattan Library (not the one with the big lions but just across 5th Avenue from there). It is wonderful. Raul Julia's Petrucchio gets enthusiastically booed, and he LOVES it, gazes no-shit-takingly into the auditorium and in his beautiful Puerto Rican voice bellows "She is my ASS! My household STUFF!" etc. Footage of the play is intercut with interviews backstage and in the audience about the production and the age-old Kate problem. Anybody who was involved in that Shrew thread a few weeks ago should try to get their hands on it. (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Evett Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 95 14:50:58 EST Subject: [Shylock] Bill Godshalk got me dead to rights, of course, when the automatic writing part of my text constructor slipped "the text invites such readings" past the more recently installed postmodernist censor. One of those great shots _through the water barrel_, so that the water arcs out onto the white hat (must be a white hat; if he's _Bad_ Bill he has to wear the black one) where it lies, in the sun, with the dark line of shadow, diagonally across the screen, separating it from the fallen head. But we rise on the stepping stones of our dying selves to higher things, Bill, and a useful thing about the slip is that it helps call attention to two crucial elements in the problem we're concerned with here, of the appearance of stereotypical images and statements in Shakespearean texts (stereotyping not just Jews but Moors and Welshfolk and Wymmyn): (1) the huge weight of habit that governs (sure is hard for somebody with my training and experience to write without personifying the components of the process) everything that even the most assiduously self-aware of us does and says and composes; (2) the intellectual and moral inconsistency that seems to me to be a normal feature of human beings (e.g. the President of Rutgers University), such that a thoughtful writer of popular plays, consciously interrogating the validity of stereotypes which other writers and his own experience have called into question, might still have a corner in the cistern of his heart where lurks a need for a Jewish Other, a Moorish Other, a Welsh Other, a regiment of Female Others in difference from which exultantly or hesitantly to define himself. Penitentially, Dave Evett ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 19:58:27 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0114 Political Commentary Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0114. Thursday, 16 February 1995. From: E. H. Pearlman Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 08:21:23 -0600 (MDT) Subject: Political Commentary Thomas Sowell, darling economist of the right, notes in Forbes Magazine (Feb 13, 1995, p.109): "Some of the worst drivel in academia comes from professors in fields such as English, where there are no breakthroughs to make, but who still have to publish or perish. What is a scholar specializing in Milton or Shakespeare supposed to say that has not been said before?" Sowell may be reached at the Hoover Institution at Stanford, though I doubt that he really wants to know anything about Shakespeare studies. E. Pearlman (ehpearlman@castle.cudenver.edu) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 20:01:03 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0115 Announcement: Renaissance Electronic Texts (RET) Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0115. Thursday, 16 February 1995. From: Ian Lancashire Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 11:56:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: RET announcement The first volume of Renaissance Electronic Texts (RET), a series of online old-spelling, SGML-encoded editions of Renaissance books and manuscripts (with introduction), transcriptions of basic texts, and supplementary studies, is now available as a free resource from World Wide Web URL http://library.utoronto.ca/www/utel/ret/ret.html RET 1 is "The Elizabethan Homilies 1623," ed. Ian Lancashire, Vers. 1 (University of Toronto, 1994). This includes SGML-encoded texts for two volumes of state-authorized sermons, twelve originally published in 1547 and an additional twenty-one published in 1563-71. The reading of these sermons was commanded in English parish churches throughout the reigns of Edward VI and then Elizabeth I. The two volumes had a pervasive influence on the intellectual climate of the entire English Renaissance period. Besides the text of the 1623 folio, the RET edition includes an introduction (a brief history, authorship questions, editorial procedures, and bibliography) and an appendix of encoding guidelines. For further inquiries, contact the General Editor, Ian Lancashire, Department of English, New College, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. M5S 1A1, CANADA. E-mail: ian@epas.utoronto.ca ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1995 09:13:17 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0116 World Shakespeare Bibliography Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0116. Saturday, 18 February 1995. From: Jim Kelly Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1995 12:00:23 -0500 Subject: World Shakespeare Bibliography [James Harner made this announcement on SHAKSPER a while back, but it bears repeating. This message is a cross-posted from SHARP-L. --HMC] I am forwarding a note received from Jim Harner which may be of interest to some members of the above-named lists. If you have any questions, please contact either me or Jim (his addresses are below). An Appeal to All Shakespeareans: The World Shakespeare Bibliography, sponsored by Texas A&M University and the Folger Shakespeare Library, is preparing The World Shakespeare Bibliography on CD-ROM 1900-Present, a comprehensive annotated bibliography of studies, editions, translations, adaptations, and productions of Shakespeare from throughout the world. The first disk, which will cover 1990-93, is scheduled for release by Cambridge University Press in 1995. Updated disks, with both current and retrospective coverage, will be issued annually. Although the Bibliography staff and International Committee of Correspondents regularly scan several hundred journals and newspapers, we can't hope to identify everything published about Shakespeare or learn the details of every production. Consequently, to increase the thoroughness of coverage and to facilitate the preparation of the annual updates, I am asking for the assistance of Shakespeareans worldwide. Please Submit a complete list of your publications, scholarly and popular (including book and production reviews), related to Shakespeare. A photocopy of a portion of your curriculum vitae would serve. Send an offprint or photocopy of future essays and reviews as soon as these are published. (Mailing labels can be supplied.) Send along clippings from local newspapers of reviews of Shakespeare productions (and other items on Shakespeare). Volunteer to annotate an occasional publication in languages other than French, German, Spanish, Russian, or Italian. Please send materials or offers of assistance to: James L. Harner, Editor Dept. of English Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-4227 409-845-3400 409-862-2292 (fax) jlh5651@venus.tamu.edu ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1995 09:27:59 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0117 Re: *WT*; Kiss Me; Songs; Commentary Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0117. Saturday, 18 February 1995. (1) From: Julie Dubiner Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 22:54:11 -0500 (EST) Subj: Winter's Tale (2) From: Patricia Gallagher Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 23:50:11 -0600 (CST) Subj: Kiss Me Petruchio (3) From: Stephen Buhler Date: Friday, 17 Feb 1995 10:13:26 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: Shakespeare and Song (4) From: David Reinheimer Date: Friday, 17 Feb 1995 08:44:59 -0800 (PST) Subj: Political Commentary (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Julie Dubiner Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 22:54:11 -0500 (EST) Subject: Winter's Tale Ingmar Berman's Winter's Tale with Bibi Anderson (and The Royal Dramatic Theater of Sweden) will be at BAM May 31 - June 3. Order tix - (718) 636-4100, or through ticketmaster, or by fax to BAM ticket services (718) 857-2021. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Patricia Gallagher Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 23:50:11 -0600 (CST) Subject: Kiss Me Petruchio The video of "Kiss Me, Petruchio" is listed in the latest catalog from THE WRITING COMPANY. Their number is 800-421-4246, and they are open Mon-Fri 8:30am - 5pm Pacific time. The video is $79.00 and is item number FLM221V-K5. Hope this helps. Patricia Gallagher (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stephen Buhler Date: Friday, 17 Feb 1995 10:13:26 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: Shakespeare and Song Michael Martin asked about versions of Shakespeare's songs and related music. I'm looking forward to other responses, but have a few suggestions already. The venerable Caedmon collection, SONGS FROM THE PLAYS OF SHAKESPEARE, has some very worthwhile settings and performances. I have been unable, though, to get hold of a copy of the booklet that accompanied the recordings when first released--that has severely limited their usefulness for me. As for Mendelssohn, Seiji Ozawa and the Boston Symphony have just released an ambitious version of the Incidental Music for A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM on Deutsche Grammophone, complete with excerpts from the play read by Dame Judi Dench (the Titania, of course, of the Peter Hall film version). A suite (devised by Christopher Palmer) from the William Walton score for Olivier's HENRY V similarly integrates music and text. That Chandos recording features Christopher Plummer reading the appropriate excerpts. There are some wonderful recordings of 16th and 17th Century music out now. I enjoy (and frequently use) releases from Fretwork--especially their Byrd and Dowland recordings--and The King's Noyse. And I still admire the Peter Pears and Julian Bream collaboration entitled LUTE SONGS, which came out on the London label back in the 60s (I think) and has been periodically reissued: the samplings from Campion and Rosseter are delightful. As Lorenzo says (however problematically): Mark the music. Stephen M. Buhler Department of English University of Nebraska-Lincoln smb@unlinfo.unl.edu (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Reinheimer Date: Friday, 17 Feb 1995 08:44:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Political Commentary I have to say that, after reading of this rather inane comment from Thomas Sowell, I am beginning to have serious doubts about the Hoover Institute. About a couple of years ago, the school paper here at UCDavis printed a guest article from another member of the Institute that completely vilified the TA as a waste of money and an inveterate detriment to the undergraduate education. What is the purpose of this institute, and why do they hire people who seem to know little about the humanities in the academy yet still want to vent their spleen? Have a good day! Dave Reinheimer UCDavis ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1995 09:38:18 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0118 Re: Shakespeare Musicals Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0118. Saturday, 18 February 1995. (1) From: Dave Kathman Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 95 21:46:29 CST Subj: Shakespeare musicals (2) From: Shirley Kagan Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 17:41:51 -1000 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0102 Re: Musicals (3) From: Roger D. Gross Date: Friday, 17 Feb 1995 12:39:58 -0600 (CST) Subj: musical of Two Gents (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dave Kathman Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 95 21:46:29 CST Subject: Shakespeare musicals I don't know if it's the same one Sean Lawrence is referring to, but here in Chicago, *Hamlet! The Musical* has been playing weekly for at least the last few months at the Improv Olympic theater at 1218 W. Belmont, and has received rave reviews. I haven't managed to see it yet (my lack of both time and a car being the main reasons), but I will quote in full the capsule review that has been appearing in the Chicago Reader: Hamlet! "Tragedy tomorrow, comedy tonight: that's the spirit behind Great Exploitations' hilarious musical spoof of Shakespeare's most famous play. Written in a perky 60s style that recalls Richard and Robert Sherman's Disney film scores, Jeff Richmond and Michael Thomas's briskly paced one-act doesn't coast on kitschy smugness or gross-out grotesqueness like so many spoofs; instead it offers a clever series of surprising variations on the original story, building to the upbeat ending implied by the title's exclamation point and proving that there is nothing like a Dane. It's all grandly silly, but it works because the company approaches the material without lazy condescension. The witty result should entertain Shakespeare admirers and musical-comedy aficionados as well as the late-night party-show crowd." Showtime is Saturdays at 11 PM, and their phone # is (312) 880-0199 for anyone who wants to check it out. Dave Kathman djk1@midway.uchicago.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shirley Kagan Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 17:41:51 -1000 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0102 Re: Musicals There's a cute adaptation of "Two Gentlemen of Verona" (very early 70's) that I think was John Guare. Don't quote me on that. I played Julia in a version for which new music was written back in 1985 at Williams College. I don't know what the original music sounds like. Our production went over really well. Shirley Kagan University of Hawaii. (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Roger D. Gross Date: Friday, 17 Feb 1995 12:39:58 -0600 (CST) Subject: musical of Two Gents Gavin Witt wondered about a recording of the musical version of TWO GENTS. It was a sensational show which involved several people who were hot at the time. It was called, simply, TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA. It won both the Tony and the New York Drama Critics Circle award for Best Musical in 1972. Adapted by John Guare and the director, Mel Shapiro. Music by Galt McDermot (composer of HAIR). Lyrics by John Guare. Ming Cho Lee did the set. Raul Julia, Clifton Davis, and Diana Davila were knockouts. A very good, two-disc album was released by ABC Records (# ?CSY 1001--do you suppose this was their first album?). Lots of pictures in this big three-fold album. The script, music for several of the best songs, and lots of pictures were published in a volume by Holt, Rinehart & Winston (a Holt Paperback). It was designed for outdoor touring and playing in the park but was so successful that they brought it to Broadway which is where I saw it. It's as good an adaptation of Shakespeare as I have seen. For Michael Martin: in your search for versions of Shakespeare-set-to-music, don't overlook the extraordinary album by the astonishing Cleo Laine. I think it's called SHAKESPEARE AND ALL THAT JAZZ. The orchestra and, as I recall, the melodies are by John Dankworth, her jazz-composer/band leader/alto-sax-playing then-husband. Most of the songs are settings of the sonnets but there is one called THE COMPLETE WORKS which makes a song of ALL of Shakespeare's titles. The style of the music is mostly mellow jazz. There are PLENTY of "period" recordings. I'll send along some titles soon. The more music, the better! Roger ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1995 09:45:31 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0119 Re: Keanu Reeves (Hamlet in Winnipeg) Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0119. Saturday, 18 February 1995. (1) From: Shirley Kagan Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 17:54:32 -1000 Subj: Re: SHK 6.0110 Re: Reeves (2) From: Paul Hawkins Date: Friday, 17 Feb 1995 19:40:44 -0500 (EST) Subj: Keanu Reeves's Hamlet (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shirley Kagan Date: Thursday, 16 Feb 1995 17:54:32 -1000 Subject: Re: SHK 6.0110 Re: Reeves Mr. Mills; I don't know if this will make you feel any better but I'm a generation Xer all the way - I even hate that term to describe the generation - that's authenticity for you! So, not to speak for my generation but at least for myself - Keanu leaves A LOT to be desired. His range as an actor is tremendously limited and I wish people would stop casting him in roles he can't play. It makes everone look bad. I hate to be cynical, but doesn't it make a certain amount of sense that Winnipeg's local press would praise Keanu's performance? Think of what this stint is doing for the tourist industry alone!. Jadedly yours, Shirley Kagan University of Hawaii (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul Hawkins Date: Friday, 17 Feb 1995 19:40:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: Keanu Reeves's Hamlet Sorry if this response is a little belated. I enjoyed the London Times review of Keanu Reeves's Hamlet; in fact, of the reviews that I have read it was far and away the most satisfying, both for its description and sensitive commentary on the performance and the production, and for its comments on what makes Reeves special as an actor. I experienced this first-hand in 1985 when I saw him in a one-act play at the Rivoli in Toronto. His presence on the fairly primitive stage of that small club had something of the effect on me that I later imagined must have been the effect on the audience of Marlon Brando's performance in the stage production of *A Streetcar Named Desire,* to judge by the accounts that have been written of it. Keanu Reeves, on the probably by most who were there now forgotten occasion that I mention, was to me electrifying: sexy, sensitive, assured, intelligent, controlled, and unstoppably watchable. I'll be the first to say I haven't seen anything in his movies to compare with that-- *My Own Private Idaho* comes closest, of the films with him that I've seen, but his performance even in it is not of the same order as the one I saw live. While I didn't find much to praise, and like others, did find much to criticize in his performance in *Much Ado*--I did not think him embarrassing. To me, the example of Keanu Reeves should teach some humility to actors and critics, when I reflect that in even the most mediocre Hollywood actor and star, which Reeves may now be, there is more gift, unique spark, and potential than in *most* of the skilled performers I see in my nation's (Canada's) theatres. The London Times review is, of the handful I've read posted on this group or in magazines, the one I trust, and is all I have to go by since I won't see the production (perhaps it's already closed). Most of the others say something like, "He didn't disgrace himself," but do not demonstrate through their description how it is that he failed to do more. That smacks to me of critical dishonesty and cowardice. Some recent posters actually *want* Reeves to be bad. Are there no negative reviews? Post them! (One recently said). I'm glad Reeves is playing Hamlet, and glad that in the London Times, at least, he has found a serious reviewer. Paul Hawkins ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1995 09:48:29 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0120. Saturday, 18 February 1995. From: Frank Savukinas Date: Friday, 17 Feb 1995 13:05:19 -0500 (EST) Subject: Romeo and Juliet An interensting question came up in one of my Shakespeare classes that I thought would be an good one to pose. If Rosaline had returned Romeo's love and Romeo had gone to the Capulet feast, would he still have fallen in love for Juliet? Of course, I thought he would have, but I have gotten some stiff opposition. What do you think? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 08:53:58 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0121 Re: *Romeo and Juliet* Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0121. Monday, 20 February 1995. (1) From: Nina Walker Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 12:11:21 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* (2) From: Elizabeth Nancy Olesh Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 13:41:20 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* (3) From: Ron Moyer Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 12:49:10 -0600 (CST) Subj: RE: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* (4) From: Gail Lerner Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 15:45:48 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* (5) From: Bradley S. Berens Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 14:49:00 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* (6) From: David Collins Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 17:01:36 -0600 (CST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* (7) From: Ronald Dwelle Date: Sunday, 19 Feb 1995 22:11:55 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Nina Walker Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 12:11:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* To Frank Savukinas: I'm delighted to see this question turn up on SHAKSPER. If it has been discussed before, I've missed it. I only wish I had your students. Mine never ask it, although I hint at it in the hopes that they will raise the issue before I have to. Unfortunately, I have to ask and invariably the nature of the discussion and views of the play change dramatically. Suddenly Romeo's ardor is not confined to Juliet and we are reminded that they are teenagers (with, perhaps, fairy dust sprinkled on their eyes.) As great as their love is for each other, their love of LOVE may be even greater. Once the question has been asked, students take over with little need of my prodding and they are very likely to end up in a thoughtful discussion about teenage suicide-- of the kind involving dying for love. While this may seem to detract from the more traditionally romantic views, it often comes full circle to the idea that the innocence inherent in young love combined with youth's propensity to give themselves over completely to their senses, make this 'brand ' of love so compelling as to be worth everything else that has been said about it. In short, I consider Roseline a crucial key to opening up the play. My compliments to your class. Nina Walker nwalker@lynx.dac.neu.edu (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Elizabeth Nancy Olesh Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 13:41:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* Yes, I definitely think Romeo would have fallen in love with Juliet regardless of any involvement with Rosalinde. As has been said countless times, Romeo and Juliet fall in love NOT out of choice, but because they are "star-crossed lovers" (gag me). They fall in love to satisfy the requiremnets of the play. I think this question points to some larger issues in the way we read Shakespeare today -- people tend to get caught in this Romantic "cult of personality" that sets discussion of character above all else. But we have to ask ourselves how people in the Renaissance would have understood these plays. What signs were they looking for? My understanding is that "character" was subsumed under other issues, such as form, rhetoric, and ritual. Think of Richard III comparing himself to "the formal vice, Iniquity." RIII is looking back to the earlier dramatic tradition while looking forward to a new kind of play. Or, you can examine the difference between Romeo's language in the early parts of R+J (up until the secret wedding) and the later acts -- I see this as a comedy that turns into a tragedy, in part because the wedding was private and thus not sanctioned by society according to the standard Renaissance wedding script. Okay, okay. I know this post is too long, and I know that the people in this group have many exciting ways of looking at Shakespeare. Just thought I'd offer a view that I haven't seen around this group in a while! (3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ron Moyer Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 12:49:10 -0600 (CST) Subject: RE: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* The speculation regarding Romeo and Rosiline can be, as could be the case with other change-one-circumstance speculations, an enjoyable exercise, but it avoids the notion that such speculation simply refers to the reader and has no reference to the playscript. The words and implied actions of the characters are finite (well, kinda finite--considering the vagaries of textual transmission), and the play doesn't deal with Ros and Romeo getting together but does deal with Juliet and Romeo's passion. Extra- textual speculation can be fun--witness the long list of Shakespearean spinoffs--and can stimulate many sociological/philosophical discussions, but, since it cannot be supported or verified from the text, tends to be a reflection of the respondents' personalities/philosophies/aspirations/ disappointments. --Ron Moyer (4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Gail Lerner Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 15:45:48 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* In response to the question about whether Romeo would have fallen in love with Juliet if Rosaline had returned his love and he had gone to to the feast already in her thrall, I can think only of how my grandmother would have responded, "You know, sweetheart, if I had wheels, I would be a streetcar." I can't say for sure if he would have noticed Juliet if his dance card had already been filled, but I am pretty sure that Rosaline wouldn't have been able to co-improvise a love sonnet with Juliet's aplomb. She's beautiful,she's funny, she uses big words, and her name scans better. I don't think Rosaline ever had a chance. (5)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bradley S. Berens Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 14:49:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* Greetings all, Regarding Fred Savukinas question about Rosaline returning Romeo's love, my first thought was that it was a question about as answerable as "how many children does Lady Macbeth have?" My second response, though, was that we already know the answer to the question: of course he would have fallen in love with Juliet, and abandoned Rosaline. How do I know? Because if you change the names a little, Romeo becomes Demetrius, Rosaline becomes Helena, and Juliet becomes Hermia. Whaddya think, Fred? Brad Berens (6)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Collins Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 17:01:36 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* Would Romeo have fallen in love with Juliet had Rosaline returned his love? That depends. Would the family feud still have provided an impediment? Could he have loved Rosaline openly? If so, I'd suspect he would have fallen in love with Juliet whatever Rosaline's feelings. Was it Denis de Rougemont in _Love in the Western World_ who argued that "Happy love has no history?" That's the real key to this question. Romeo need an impediment to his love; it thrives on opposition. It's roots are in the love of suffering and death. Romeo is after all the consumate Petrarchan lover. Witness his "O brawling love! O loving hate!" collection of Petrarchan contraries moments after his first appearance in the play. Like the literary master who has taught him all he yet knows about "love," and who in fact doesn't really get going with his sonnet sequence until Laura is safely dead and out of reach, Romeo needs impossibility, some sort of impediment in order to fuel his love. Were Rosaline to return his love Romeo would not have what he really needs as an adolescent lover and would soon be looking for another object for his affections. Let me quickly add that I don't think Romeo stays an adolescent lover all that long. There's a change in him when he sees Juliet, a change marked by his language. All of a sudden he is a master of metaphor. Love for Rosaline is "a smoke made with the fume of sighs," but Juliet "doth teach the torches to burn bright" and "hangs upon the cheek of night/As a rich jewel in an Ethiop's ear." Nobody could love Rosaline long--if only because nobody could sustain a literary pose that long. (7)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ronald Dwelle Date: Sunday, 19 Feb 1995 22:11:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0120 Q: *Romeo and Juliet* It's always fun speculating about what might have been. What if Rosaline had slept with Romeo? Would he have dumped her for Juliet, revealing that he is just one more unstable teenager? Or would Romeo have remained faithful to Rosaline? I think he would have remained faithful to Rosaline -- at least for a little while. But then I doubt if his marriage to Juliet would have lasted. What keeps him everlastingly faithful is his death. Yours, Cynical Bill ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 09:03:11 EST Reply-To: Shakespeare Electronic Conference Sender: Shakespeare Electronic Conference From: "Hardy M. Cook" Subject: SHK 6.0122 Re: Shakespeare Songs and Musicals Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 6, No. 0122. Monday, 20 February 1995. (1) From: William Schmidt Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 10:21:21 -0500 (EST) Subj: Shakespeare's Songs (2) From: Louis Scheeder Date: Sunday, 19 Feb 1995 18:42:38 -0500 (EST) Subj: Re: SHK 6.0118 Re: Shakespeare Musicals (3) From: Larry Soller Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 18:22:00 -0700 (MST) Subj: RE: SHK 6.0118 Re: Shakespeare Musicals (4) From: Bernice W. Kliman Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 22:20:35 -0400 (EDT) Subj: Rock *Hamlet* (1)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: William Schmidt Date: Saturday, 18 Feb 1995 10:21:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: Shakespeare's Songs There are a number of recordings of settings of Shakespeare's songs, mostly by English composers in the 30's and 40's. Many of these were issued as LPs, and I'm uncertain about their availability on CD. I am particularly fond of Gerald Finzi's "Let Us Garlands Bring" (issued on Lyrita 93). Also, Finzi did some incidental music to LLL, which is on CD (Nimbus 5101). There is also a collection, "Songs to Shakespeare" (Hyperion A66026) with music by Eric Coates, Ivor Gurney and Peter Warlock, among others. Finally, the Folger Theatre Group issued an LP several years ago, "The Music of Shakespeare" with settings by William Penn. Best, Bill Schmidt (2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Louis Scheeder Date: Sunday, 19 Feb 1995 18:42:38 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SHK 6.0118 Re: Shakespeare Musicals Re: Michae' Martin's quest for music from Shakespeare