a word from our sponsors
See the new shakespeare.com. This feature, while it still provides useful information, is no longer maintained.
Replies | Post Reply | Shakespeare Queries & Replies From Everyone Else 4.2.97: Top | Help
Thanks, you have confirmed that you were in fact generalizing.You wrote:
>>> There is no evidence that anybody
in the renaissance understood sexuality to be a definitive
identity-defining trait. <<<And, of course, there is no evidence to the contrary
(the direct contrary, of course).
>>> So nobody would say "I'm gay" or
"I'm bi." <<<No, although they certainly had their own slang
terms for same. In other words, what is your point?>>>> So the social meaning of a character's sexuality
is different in different historical moments. <<<Not necessarily.
>>> Regardless
of what the historical Shakespeare did or didn't do, we can
he understood sexuality differently than do we. <<<Nope.
None of the above, of course, has anything to do with
the issue.-Bruce
Posted by Bruce Spielbauer on April 10, 1997 at 17:45:13
In Reply to "Nope" posted by Cloten on April 10, 1997 at 17:27:47
Replies | Post Reply | Shakespeare Queries & Replies From Everyone Else 4.2.97: Top | Help