|
Post by Harry on Jun 24, 2002 20:52:20 GMT -5
Welcome aboard! Both of us post to Shakespeare.com under the same names. In my case, it's my real name in addition to being a great Shakespearean nickname. Yes, the surface layer is kind of tender/silly--a lot like R&J's "Palmers" sonnet. The sonnet might even date from the same period as R&J. But, one difference is that R&J celebrates young (virginal) love (precisely the sort celebrated in the sonnets of other poets), and the Dark Lady sonnets celebrate a mature, and certainly unvirginal, love. It seems to me that many a youth would benefit from reading a frank adult discussion of the sonnets. By "adult" I do not mean "dirty." The conversation that can be heard in the halls of any Junior High is very childish, despite their adoption of a vulgar vocabulary. At the very least, it will raise their vulgarity to a less childish level. Please, tell us how you interpret the other sonnets we've been discussing. I'm going to post new ones so I hope we will get to more of your favorites.
|
|
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 24, 2002 21:50:37 GMT -5
You're absolutely right, Juliet. The surface of these sonnets should not be ignored simply because they are simple. Shakespeare is often very good at capturing idealized cuteness! Wow, Shakespeare.com. I don't think I've been there on a regular basis for about two months now. I've been very busy. I'm flattered that you recognize me!
Welcome aboard, by the way! Always great to see a new friendly face around here with some great ideas and opinions to contribute. Please feel free to introduce yourself in the General Discussion as well!
|
|
The_Turtle
Denizen
Nay, faith, let not me play a woman; I have a beard coming
Posts: 52
|
Post by The_Turtle on Jun 26, 2002 3:54:11 GMT -5
As a matter of fact I used to hang out on Shakespeare.com for a while too. But too many stupid questions asked out of sheer laziness chased me away. I was Yorick the Prankster. (Just looking for my personal 5 minutes of fame here, ofcourse.) That aside, I totally agree with your opinion that the surface of a Shakespearian sonnet is as rewarding as any second or third or umpth reading may yield in depth. mmm, untidy grammar, but what the heck? Indeed, Juliet, the co-existence of 'superficial' sweetness and a hidden 'smutty' undertone makes the sonnets so enormously enjoyable. I wonder how obscure much of the suspected bawdiness would have been to a seventeenth century audience.
|
|
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 26, 2002 10:40:04 GMT -5
I have several editions of Shakespeare's plays from the late 19nth century (I used to collect them), and in each of them, whenever there is a clearly bawdy joke being made (ex. "Did you think I meant country matters?"), either no footnote is included, or a footnote is included which says something like "may be a joke that is sexual in nature". It seems to me that scholars were aware of these puns, but attempted to disregard them. These are, after all, the old wrinkled men in smoking jackets and pipes who made Shakespeare into this terrible icon of haughty greatness.
|
|
Juliet
Denizen
There's many a man hath more hair than wit.
Posts: 53
|
Post by Juliet on Jun 26, 2002 18:24:03 GMT -5
Ah, the Victorians and Shakespeare. Who was it that said something along the lines of, "If Shakespeare had considered that our innocent daughters would wish to read his plays, he would have amended them and not made them so....so...coarse!" Was it Charles and Mary Lamb? You can almost see their prim expressions. It seems a miracle that Shakespeare could have survived that intact (and I know they did a great deal of rewriting) Luckily, we're now in a more "enlightened" age and can appreciate all sides of Shakespeare, not just the poetical and 'highminded,' one.
~Juliet~
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Jun 26, 2002 19:41:56 GMT -5
Definitely too many "do my homework for me" questions on Shakespeare.com. I don't mind if I think I can provide an answer that guides rather than spoonfeeds, but it's hard to have a good conversation with friends.
Didn't Bowdler and The Family Shakespeare come before the Lambs?
|
|
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 27, 2002 1:48:47 GMT -5
My favorite has always been my friend Nahem Tate, who rewrote King Lear because the ending was too tragic!
|
|