![]() |
||||||
|
SHAKSPER 2005: Shadowplay
From: Hardy M. Cook (editor@shaksper.net) Date: 12/01/05
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1987 Thursday, 1 December 2005 [1] From: Jim Blackie <classicfilmbuff@yahoo.com> Date: Wednesday, 30 Nov 2005 09:51:17 -0800 (PST) Subj: Re: SHK 16.1972 Shadowplay [2] From: Debra Murphy <dlmurphy601@comcast.net> Date: Wednesday, 30 Nov 2005 10:10:35 -0800 Subj: RE: SHK 16.1972 Shadowplay [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim Blackie <classicfilmbuff@yahoo.com> Date: Wednesday, 30 Nov 2005 09:51:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: 16.1972 Shadowplay Comment: Re: SHK 16.1972 Shadowplay Bravo, Bill Arnold! And also in Hamlet- what are we to make of the references to purgatory? If Shakespeare's is strictly a Protestant view, there IS no such place, therefore the "ghost" would have to have been a demon from hell, no? Jim Blackie [2]------------------------------------------------------------- From: Debra Murphy <dlmurphy601@comcast.net> Date: Wednesday, 30 Nov 2005 10:10:35 -0800 Subject: 16.1972 Shadowplay Comment: RE: SHK 16.1972 Shadowplay I didn't know Sophie Masson was a SHAKSPERian! Alas, we haven't really had a chance to get to know one another as yet. But small world, n'est-ce pas? Yes, "Godspy" is most definitely an allusion to Lear's speech to Cordelia. In fact, Godspy published an article by Fr. Paul Murray, O.P., entitled "Shakespeare and the Mystery of Things": http://www.godspy.com/culture/Gods-Spy-Shakespeare-and-the-Mystery-of-Things.cfm . And speaking of it being a "small world", when I first stumbled on Godspy a little less than two years ago, I, too, was struck initially by the title, which I figured could not possibly be an accident. In fact, it was a bit of a Twilight Zone moment for me, as I was then about to publish a literary thriller (with plots and themes stolen liberally from Shakespeare and Spenser) entitled, yes, _The Mystery of Things_. At any rate, I loved the magazine's mission statement and overall sensibility (aiming to look at the interface between faith and culture from a vantage-point that respects "mystery"), and submitted an article. The editor liked it, and I've been writing for them ever since. I loved the Asquith assignment in particular because it permitted me to indulge my passion for Shakespeare. It also induced me to read further in a problem in Shakespeare biography (and Elizabethan history) with which I was only marginally familiar. As for my own view, I am not scholar enough to argue the particulars of Asquith's case either way, except to say that I agree with her notion that a layer of topicality need not in any way detract from our appreciation of Shakespeare's universality. Also, her theory for the reasons for Shakespeare's sudden retirement makes more sense to me than any I've read heretofore, and possibly her theory about his educational opportunities as well-both matters which have caused no end of scholarly feuding, as we all know, and been at the heart of a good deal of anti-Stratfordianism. I was also intrigued by Asquith's suggestion that Shakespeare biography and criticism from a Protestant perspective has thus far been too parochial; has tended to ignore the possible influence of cultural developments (the Jesuit Drama of the Counter-Reformation, for instance) in the rest of Catholic Europe. Fascinating business, whichever way you jump. And I enjoyed chatting with Mrs. Asquith immensely-a thoroughly engaging and thoughtful person. Debra Murphy www.bardolatry.com _______________________________________________________________ S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List Hardy M. Cook, editor@shaksper.net The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net> DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the editor assumes no responsibility for them.
|
|
|||||