![]() |
||||||
|
SHAKSPER 1998: Re: "Bad" Shakespeare
From: Hardy M. Cook (editor@ws.bowiestate.edu) Date: 10/07/98
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 9.0956 Wednesday, 7 October 1998.
[1] From: Frances K. Barasch <Fbarasch@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 6 Oct 1998 11:42:17 EDT
Subj: Re: SHK 9.0946 Re: "Bad" Shakespeare
[2] From: David Schalkwyk <schalk@beattie.uct.ac.za>
Date: Wednesday, 7 Oct 1998 11:59:01 SAST-2
Subj: Re: SHK 9.0946 Re: "Bad" Shakespeare
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Frances K. Barasch <Fbarasch@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 6 Oct 1998 11:42:17 EDT
Subject: 9.0946 Re: "Bad" Shakespeare
Comment: Re: SHK 9.0946 Re: "Bad" Shakespeare
To Krystyna et al.: about Charney. Yes, there is a book edited by
Maurice Charney, called 'BAD' SHAKESPEARE, REVALUATIONS OF THE
SHAKESPEARE CANON. Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson Univ. Pr. , 1988.
frances k. barasch
[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Schalkwyk <schalk@beattie.uct.ac.za>
Date: Wednesday, 7 Oct 1998 11:59:01 SAST-2
Subject: 9.0946 Re: "Bad" Shakespeare
Comment: Re: SHK 9.0946 Re: "Bad" Shakespeare
Steiner's lectures on "bad Shakespeare" are based on Wittgenstein's
musings on his own inability to recognise Shakespeare's supposed
greatness. To Wittgenstein *all* Shakespeare is bad. His notes (not
meant for publication) are in the collection _Culture and Value_
(Oxford: Blackwell).
David Schalkwyk
|
|
|||||