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 This feature, while it still provides useful information, is no longer maintained.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
and when you approach it, you need be honest. Academic dancing
isn't honesty, and it's got no rhythym either. The 'bad Quartos'
weren't bad due to typos, if that's your contention. They were
pirated editions, bottlegs, if you will. If you don't know that,
as it seems by what you said, you haven't studied any of this honestly.
It seems to sigh a lot. It seems to me, that if you can't see the difference
between Venus and Adonis, or Hamlet, and the sonnets, you're consist of
a scholarly majority of one. I can absolutely assure anyone else reading this
that there isn't a single Shakespearean professor in the country who doesn't
draw a marked and irrevokable distinction between the sonnets and everything
else Shakespeare wrote. Then we have the safe distinction from Mr. Spielbauer
between writing about gay and being it. One seems bad and the other OK. Is this
sound literary thought, or just plain old bigotry? He also talks about the
difficulty of getting anything published, (using the word mayhaps to start his
sentence) referring to the sonnets. OK. The sonnets are talked about in print
years before they are published. Many of shakespeare's plays are
published. But there is some problem, some difficulty WS would have in
getting them published. Hmmm. Can't think of why at the moment.
You talk about evidence, shoclarship, ethics and honesty, but there
isn't any evidence of any of them in your posting. Just academic flatulence.
Posted by Bill Routhier on April 12, 1997 at 23:12:19
In Reply to "This is what "convinces" you?" posted by Bruce Spielbauer on April 10, 1997 at 15:07:36
Replies | Post Reply | Shakespeare Queries & Replies From Everyone Else 4.2.97: Top | Help