![]() |
||||||
|
SHAKSPER 2008: Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6
From: Hardy M. Cook (editor@SHAKSPER.NET) Date: 04/22/08
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0236 Tuesday, 22 April 2008 [1] From: Gabriel Egan <mail@GabrielEgan.com> Date: Friday, 18 Apr 2008 23:08:10 +0100 Subj: Re: SHK 19.0232 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 [2] From: John Briggs <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> Date: Saturday, 19 Apr 2008 17:11:50 +0100 Subj: Re: SHK 19.0232 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Gabriel Egan <mail@GabrielEgan.com> Date: Friday, 18 Apr 2008 23:08:10 +0100 Subject: 19.0232 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 Comment: Re: SHK 19.0232 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 John Briggs writes: >Vickers' [TLS] piece would have certainly benefitted >from someone else looking at it: for example, he >claims that the Temple Garden scene (2.4) was added as part of a revision by Shakespeare after >the summer of 1594 - this is implausible for more >than one reason . . . Would you care to name one? (It seems such a tease otherwise.) In case others want to know of errors in Vickers's piece, there's one in the opening sentence: the Red Lion wasn't "converted" to a playhouse, as Vickers writes, since the Red Lion was a farmhouse and the theatre was built in a yard in the garden. But that's trivial. Vickers key pieces of evidence are phrases that appear in Kyd, and in the plays that he wants to attribute to Kyd, and nowhere else. That last point is vulnerable, since Vickers has in the past claimed that certain phrases are unique when in fact they can be found elsewhere. SHAKSPERians may remember that part of Vickers's claim for Peele's authorship of Act One of Titus Andronicus was that the stage direction "enter ... others as many as may be" appears in Peele Edward I (at 1.1.40) but in no other plays of the period. As I mentioned on SHAKSPER (SHK 14.0994 on 20 May 2003) there are several examples of virtually the same phrasing to be found in Literature Online: Anonymous (Jacobean and Caroline) Swetnam, the woman-hater, arraigned by women (1620) "...with a Proclamation, and as many Women as may be, with..." Anonymous (Tudor) Clyomon and Clamydes (1599) "...as valiantly set forth as may be, and as many souldiers as can..." Armin, Robert, fl. 1610 The two maids of More-Clacke (1609) "...Enter Earle, Lords, Ladies, so many as may be, S. Wil...." Chettle, Henry, d. 1607? Hoffman (1631) "...Enter as many as may be spar'd, with..." Fletcher, John, 1579-1625 / Massinger, Philip, 1583-1640 The double marriage (1647) "...Gunner, Citizens, and Souldiers, as many as may be..." Unless I've forgotten entirely, I don't think this evidence ever got countered or explained away. It may be worth someone's time to go through all the phrases in Vickers's TLS article that he claims are unique to Kyd and see if they can be found elsewhere in LION. Vickers doesn't say just what Marcus Dahl and Lene Petersen did to "produce a corpus of seventy-five plays produced before 1596" to be used for his searches for unique phrases, but it apparently didn't include modernizing the texts for he quotes plays using original spellings. Given the variability of spelling in the period, it may be that (even when trying to search for all possible spellings) Vickers missed some 'hits' in the plays that would weaken his case. If anybody would care to do the checking in LION but hasn't the TLS article to hand, I'd be happy to send it electronically, or just a list of the phrases that need checking. This is the sort of testing that empirical work such as Vickers's ought to be put to, and it oughtn't to have a whiff of incredulity about it: scientists are rightly disdainful of humanities scholarship because we have such weak procedures for testing empirical claims. Gabriel Egan [2]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Briggs <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> Date: Saturday, 19 Apr 2008 17:11:50 +0100 Subject: 19.0232 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 Comment: Re: SHK 19.0232 Thomas Kyd and 1 Henry 6 A thought occurs to me: where does that leave Edward III? Vickers doesn't mention it. The conventional wisdom is that the same team were responsible for both 1 Henry 6 and Edward III: Shakespeare seems to revisit the themes of both plays in Henry V. Dating of Edward III is uncertain, but it seems to be later than 1 Henry 6. John Briggs _______________________________________________________________ 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.
|
|
|||||