Shakespeare's Thread

Etaoin Shrdlu

Civis Illustris
'Logical and fair'. Perhaps I fail to appreciate your wit at times.

The thing is, you don't learn. Or read, for that matter.

But I see you still think you can dictate who responds to your posts. Some things never change.
 
You know what is the most telling about your nature, the fact that you deem me to be thick and stuff but are not content to let it lie there but feel the need to remind me of it at opportunity after opportunity. To me this is the most telling about your nature. Much more so than your charming and funny posts.
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
But I see you still think you can dictate who responds to your posts. Some things never change.
I suppose he would mind less if your replies contained more substance than mere insults.
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
I know, and I appreciate that (since it addresses some of my questions) ... I don't see the point in the subsequent personal addresses, though.
 

Etaoin Shrdlu

Civis Illustris
Frustration, I suppose. Hawkwood's response to any correction (of anything, and not only when it's me doing it) is to respond by showing how it's not really wrong, and dragging the kitchen sink in to attempt to prove why even if it is wrong, a bit, there is something out there that shows how it's more righter than wronger, or something like that.

Good example above: I don't think he's thick, at least not by nature. He's chosen not to take in information, not to listen, not to read. But there's no point in saying this, because he doesn't read. Hence we go round in circles.
 
Frustration, I suppose. Hawkwood's response to any correction (of anything, and not only when it's me doing it) is to respond by showing how it's not really wrong, and dragging the kitchen sink in to attempt to prove why even if it is wrong, a bit, there is something out there that shows how it's more righter than wronger, or something like that.
Did you not get the Copernicus memo? Unfortunately you and your ideas, like the rest of us, are orbiting at breakneck speed around the sun, not the other way around. I did read your posts and I disagree with you. Mythology covers not just Gods but stories about heroes and villians of folklore both before and after the pagan tradition.


Frustration, I suppose.
Ah right, so that justifies your attacks on my state of mind too? You know the stuff, like my so-called paranoia, my inability to retain information, etc. Again, if you believe this to be true and are of a healthy mindset, why would go on to contintually ridicule me over these sorts of deficiencies? It speaks volumes.



Say, what are your plans for mental awareness month next year? How about trolling schizophrenics on suicide watch?
 
Last edited:

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
Amleth meaning 'stupid' has a certain parallel to Brutus ...
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
Some scholars also seem to think that there had already been a Hamlet play prior to Shakespeare (which is lost by now) upon which Shakespeare based his play. They call it Ur-Hamlet.
 
Some scholars also seem to think that there had already been a Hamlet play prior to Shakespeare (which is lost by now) upon which Shakespeare based his play. They call it Ur-Hamlet.
From what I've read (wiki) it could also have been an early draft of Shakespeare's. The fact the play itself revises through Q1, Q2 and then again posthumously in Heminges and Condell's first folio could point to the fact Shakey was developing and tweaking it over the years. The Arden edition (82) dismisses this assertion though. Dunno why. I suppose having the Arden edition might shed more light on it.
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
The Arden edition (82) dismisses this assertion though. Dunno why. I suppose having the Arden edition might shed more light on it.
Jenkins argues that 20th century research had demonstrated conclusively that Q1 is not a prior, but a posterior version and that it was not written by Shakespeare himself, but reconstructed by some actor to make money (an act of early literary piracy if you will). In his opinion, later version are not an expansion of Q1; Q1 is an abridgement (and corruption) of the actual text.
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
Jenkin's Arden edition from 1982 is quite old, though. The 3rd Arden edition (Thompson, Taylor) mentions that other scholars have more recently assumed (e.g. Erne 2003) that while Q1 may have been constructed from memory, it may be based on a version of the play that Shakespeare wrote for the stage (because Q2 is way too long to be performed)
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
Shakespeare is supposed to use a total vocabulary of 25,000 words. Milton is a close second with about 12,200 words.
The play Hamlet comprises a vocabulary of about 3,800 words. 600 of those words had not been used by Shakespeare in any other play before. 400 of those words were never used again anywhere else.
 
Top