![]() |
||||||
|
SHAKSPER 1992: Response to Cheap Advice
From: Hardy M. Cook (hmcook@boe00.minc.umd.edu) Date: 09/06/92
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 3, No. 213. Sunday, 6 September 1992. From: Nicholas Ranson <R1NR@VM1.CC.UAKRON.EDU> Date: Saturday, Sept. 5, 1992, 17:42:50 EDT Subject: 3.0209 Re: Cheap Advice Comment: Re: SHK 3.0209 Re: Cheap Advice [In response to Steve Urkowitz's "Cheap Advice" to Larry Schwartz, > . . . A cry out into the used book marketplace should be able to turn up a >copy of the Hinman Facsimile or even one of the notoriously "fixed up" >Koekeritz facsimiles of a few decades earlier. But in no way can you consider >the Oxford Old Spelling Complete Works as a viable substitute. Well, maybe in >some ways. But it just looks, feels, and reads so different, so often, that to >me at least it's a whole different vegetable. At the risk of being >repetitious, let me say again that the juggling done with the "multiple text >plays," especially the Henry Sixes, repeatedly demonstrates that the editors >had theatrical tin ears, and the rhythmic and visual codes found in the Oxford >Henry Sixes produce painfully inferior music if compared to either the quarto >or Folio versions. >As for the other modern set of single-play editions, I like David Bevington's, >except that too many of the plays appear only bound up with others. If your >library's bindery can deal with that, Bevington offers consistently strong >introductions and listings of very recent criticism. The Signets do have the >advantage of printing a lot of criticism right in the volumes themselves. >Barbara Mowat and Paul Werstine are newy editing the Folger series, announced >for August '92 but not yet in my corner newstand. >But I'd not give up my Hinman for a wilderness of monkeys. Nicholas Ranson writes, ] Right on.
|
|
|||||