![]() |
||||||
|
SHAKSPER 1996: Re: Politics and Interpretation
From: Hardy M. Cook (hmcook@boe00.minc.umd.edu) Date: 11/25/96
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, SHK 7.0877. Monday, 25, November 1996.
(1) From: Gabriel Egan <exs01gie@gold.ac.uk>
Date: Friday, 22 Nov 1996 20:51:24 -0800
Subj: Re: SHK 7.0846 Re: Politics and Interpretation
(2) From: W. L. Godshalk <godshawl@email.uc.edu>
Date: Friday, 22 Nov 1996 22:56:50 -0500
Subj: Re: SHK 7.0871 Re: Politics
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gabriel Egan <exs01gie@gold.ac.uk>
Date: Friday, 22 Nov 1996 20:51:24 -0800
Subject: 7.0846 Re: Politics and Interpretation
Comment: Re: SHK 7.0846 Re: Politics and Interpretation
Andy White wrote
>There seem to be people on this list who insist on political interpretations of
>a decidedly leftist stripe; would it be irrelevant to point out that in
>England, as well as in the Communist world (China comes to mind in particular),
>popular forms of entertainment are rejected out of hand, branded "elitist" and
>persecuted despite the facts?
However popular drama used to be, it can hardly be said to be popular now. Just
on numbers and the self-identification of class by theatre-goers
(predominantly, they say they are 'middle') it must be called an elitist
entertainment whether or not you approve of it being so. I recall Terry Hawkes
writing in the 1960s or 70s on exit polls at theatres in Stratford on Avon.
I shan't comment on White's story about the Globe funding other than to say it
seems to imply that a punitive fine was imposed on Southwark council (else how
did the project gain capital by it?) which, I thought, was something the
British judicial system does not allow. I'd be interested in informed responses
on this. I'll go and look for the story in Barry Day's book _This wooden 'O':
Shakespeare's Globe reborn_ which purports to be a history of the project.
Gabriel Egan
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: W. L. Godshalk <godshawl@email.uc.edu>
Date: Friday, 22 Nov 1996 22:56:50 -0500
Subject: 7.0871 Re: Politics
Comment: Re: SHK 7.0871 Re: Politics
John Drakakis writes:
>Althusser DOES give an account of change: when the forces of production are out
>of synchronization with the relations of production. All very simple really.
Unfortunately, I don't understand how this imbalance leads to ideological
change. Perhaps a less abstract and more specific, concrete answer would lead
me to an understanding of how Althusser accounts for ideological change in his
chapter on ideology and ISAs.
Yours, Bill Godshalk
|
|
|||||