Comments | angevin2: they shall be my East and West Indies, and I will trade to them both

angevin2

they shall be my East and West Indies, and I will trade to them both

Sep 19, 2004 19:53

So I've been reasonably productive this evening, in that I got the assignment for Tuesday mailed out to my students, and printed out a bunch of citations and one article on Perkin Warbeck (since I got to thinking after adding a bunch of stuff to the Big File o'Possible Dissertation-Related Information and Ramblings. Which is also productive, come ( Read more... )

perkin warbeck, spenser

Comments 9

roxulasbride September 20 2004, 00:01:59 UTC

Will look forward to your review.
Yeah "Ed II" and "Rich II" do seem to get but together a lot. Both on in the same Globe season..then they share a CD with the music from the two.
Both those plays were actor revelations for me though. "Rich II" was the first thing I saw at the Globe and the first time I saw Mark!!(;o) Then Liam Brennan was amazing in "Ed II"It's nice that you had a good time overall in Chicago. Oh it's so easy to dwell on what might have been etc. I do it all the time but I know that I shouldn't really - I should concentrate on the present and future. It is hard sometimes though.
By the way. You must have read "Beowulf" yes? Just wanted yo ask as I love it to bits!!(;o)

angevin2 September 20 2004, 01:41:48 UTC

Yeah "Ed II" and "Rich II" do seem to get but together a lot. Both on in the same Globe season..then they share a CD with the music from the two.

And quite a good CD it is, too! Sadly, it's probably all I'll ever get to hear of their Edward II (I'm still holding out hope that they'll do a U.S. tour of Richard II). I spent much of last summer fretting about my inability to see either of those productions (but especially Richard) so when I first heard (by means of a note in the program for the Twelfth Night tour) that they might bring it over here I was entirely thrilled.

(I've actually never seen Edward II in performance at all, except for the last hour or so of Derek Jarman's 1991 film version, which is very, very weird ( ... )

roxulasbride September 20 2004, 05:18:45 UTC

I have the Morgan translation of "Beowulf". Yeah hopefullyyou'll get "Richard II" There were talks of doing it this Autumn but that hasn't happened. It was so amazing!! It was on TV as a live broadcast here too but no plans to release that on DVD that I know of which is a shame!

angevin2 September 20 2004, 10:08:19 UTC

I know! I too am hoping for a DVD release, though with my luck it'll end up only being available in Region 2 and then I'll be quite sad. Better far off than near be ne'er the near! ;)

Perhaps they'll show it over here on PBS or something -- plenty of the Shakespeare plays that get broadcast on your side of the pond eventually make it to mine, after a while. I've promised myself that if PBS does air it I will so give them money next time they have a pledge drive...

Thread 5

slipstreamsurfr September 20 2004, 06:42:59 UTC

"Thought here is meant in the sense in which Heidegger addresses it"

wow! First off, I took a 3000 level class on Philosophy and Lit about a year ago where we went through Heidegger and his "Paramendies" and viewed a piece of lit we picked through the lens of Heideggerian understanding of his concepts of truth and being throughout the class. The subject of the lecture you attended sounds like it could have been really mindblowing. Heidegger always tended to bend our heads a bit when trying to read and understand, even a little, "Paramendies."

Second off, I wish I had heard the lecture! I'm jealous! I'm so going to have to talk with my prof from Philo and Lit and tell her about the lecture. (although I'm sure she has heard of it by now.. she's a big Heideggerian)

When I took the class, I wasn't sure how I would ever apply Heidegger in Lit. As a lowly undergrad, and late-comer to English Lit as a major(and as a life), this is such a validating find. /grin

(yes, I'm easily impressed and wowed) ;)

Yes, I'm a sad, sad man /grin

angevin2 September 20 2004, 10:11:18 UTC

Nothing sad about being impressed by this stuff! :)

When I was working on my MA I had to take a course called Foundations of Interpretive Theory which was basically a philosophy survey. I hated it with a burning passion because it was dreadfully tedious most of the time, but I suppose that applying some of the stuff covered in the course to works of literature is actually kinda fun. I've never really liked theory for its own sake, I must admit...

(And Spenser is pretty brain-bending too when you really think about him! ;) )

slipstreamsurfr September 20 2004, 10:54:24 UTC

Yeah, I well remember the first day in our Phil and Lit class. The prof told us what we'd be doing, how we'd take what we were learning on examining Heidegger and applying it as a filter/lens to another work of literature. We were all like, WHAT?!?! We are just puny Juniors!! Tedious wasn't the word for 16 weeks of pure Heidegger for us. But I really was suprised at how much I learned in the class. It has really helped me to be able to apply some of this stuff in my writings. I'm glad I took it ( ... )

angevin2 September 22 2004, 00:47:50 UTC

I've been reading the Longman edition, edited by A.C. Hamilton -- this is the standard scholarly edition. It has really good footnotes, although on the other hand they do tend to give the game away occasionally. But it's very thorough.

And yeah -- I've tried to read the poem on my own before as well, and never really made it through. I'm on a schedule now so that's easier. And I know what you mean about the Elizabeth thing -- every time I run across a female character I find myself wondering "Now what's she got to do with the Queen?" ;)