• Next message: Hardy M. Cook: "Conjuring in Shakespeare's Time"
• Previous message: Hardy M. Cook: "ESTC to Go Online Free in the Fall"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ]

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0481  Monday, 22 May 2006

[1] 	From: 	Elliott Stone <elliott.stone@comcast.net>
 	Date: 	Wednesday, 17 May 2006 18:05:17 -0400
 	Subj: 	Re: SHK 17.0456 A Roof on the Globe?

[2] 	From: 	Kathy Dent <kathryndent@hotmail.com>
 	Date: 	Thursday, 18 May 2006 20:40:19 +0100
 	Subj: 	RE: SHK 17.0456 A Roof on the Globe?


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Elliott Stone <elliott.stone@comcast.net>
Date: 		Wednesday, 17 May 2006 18:05:17 -0400
Subject: 17.0456 A Roof on the Globe?
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.0456 A Roof on the Globe?

Peter Holland makes a valid point that the plays within the play in the 
Shakespeare Canon might very well have been performed outside in a 
courtyard rather than inside in a hall at the castles and palaces.  The 
point I was making is different. There is no evidence from the Shakespeare 
plays within the plays themselves that they were to be performed at a 
playhouse or were meant for performance at a playhouse. I also believe 
that we have little evidence for any Shakespeare original performance at 
the Globe.

If my thesis is correct then I should think it would make no difference at 
all if they put a roof on the Globe insofar as it might effect an 
"original" Shakespeare performance. It would, however, make watching a 
performance bearable in inclement weather for all of us Shakespeare 
lovers.

Best,
Elliott H. Stone

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Kathy Dent <kathryndent@hotmail.com>
Date: 		Thursday, 18 May 2006 20:40:19 +0100
Subject: 17.0456 A Roof on the Globe?
Comment: 	RE: SHK 17.0456 A Roof on the Globe?

Thanks to Tony Burton for summarising the original purpose of the Globe:

>Wasn't the original purpose of the Globe project to recreate
>that particular theater with the utmost authenticity, and to
>see and experience Shakespeare's plays in very nearly their
>original setting?

And to Todd Lidh for drawing attention to the new artistic director's 
viewpoint:

>I think Original Practices is something that belongs to Mark,
>Jenny [Tirimani] and Claire [van Kampen]

Personally, I'm with Tony Burton on this.  The concept of Original 
Practices belongs not to any particular person, but to the Globe building 
itself.  If its purpose is not to explore Original Practices, why on earth 
was all that time and money spent on trying to create a replica building? 
And, as for design, I thought that was what went into the building.

I fail to see how a mechanism used by ancient Romans to cope with the 
extreme temperatures of their summer climate is in any way relevant to the 
Globe.  If today's weather is anything to go by, its only positive 
function in London will be to keep the spectators a bit less cold and wet 
than they otherwise might be.

The Coliseum wasn't a theatre and the purpose of their roof was clearly 
not for psychological atmospherics, so the designer is making an 
irrelevant connection.  I only hope that this doesn't signal a future of 
clunky anachronisms and bizarre historical gimmicks at the Globe.

Kathy Dent

_______________________________________________________________
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.

• Next message: Hardy M. Cook: "Conjuring in Shakespeare's Time"
• Previous message: Hardy M. Cook: "ESTC to Go Online Free in the Fall"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ]