SHAKSPER 1993: Re: The Human Condition

From: Hardy M. Cook (hmcook@boe00.minc.umd.edu)
Date: 12/16/93 

Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 4, No. 948. Thursday, 16 December 1993.
 
From:           Kenneth S. Rothwell <krothwel@moose.uvm.edu>
Date:           Wednesday, 15 Dec 1993 11:17:26 -500 (EST)
Subject: 4.0935 The Human Condition
Comment:        Re: SHK 4.0935 The Human Condition
 
I appreciate John Cox's and Chris Kendall's comments about the human
condition. One can be a "lurker" for only so long on SHAKSPER before being
tempted to jump in with a sound byte or two of one's own.  I can't possibly
defend my faith that the human condition remains unchanged. I meant of
course that accidents may alter but not the substance. I find myself
pushed further and further into the archaic world of Shakespeare's own
systems of Christian belief, which is horribly out of sync with
fashionable ideologies. The plays themselves offer endless examples of
timeless human dilemmas: Angelo's sexual harassment of Isabella in MM;
Hal's hangups about his father in the Henriad; Kate's sibling rivaly with
Bianca in Shr.; Lady Mac's boundless ambition for her husband; Lear's
foolish belief that he can "unburthened crawl toward death." But everyone
out there has his/her own similar lists, I'm sure. I thought this
relevance to our own lives, as well as his skill with words, is what made
most of us want to read Shakespeare. Although I have neither, the time, the
inclination, nor the erudition to write at length on this subject, I still
think that nature as much as material circumstances explains a great deal
about us human beings. For this dialogue, much thanks.
 
Ken Rothwell


about SHAKSPER | current postings | submitted papers | browse SHAKSPER | search SHAKSPER
  
Copyright © 2002, Hardy M. Cook, design by Eric Luhrs. All rights reserved.