Alison wrote:

>PS Forgot to say that Shakespeare's idea of mercy and prayer here is
most certainly not a Christian one, if God's mercy is one of the
central staples of Christendom: assaulting mercy might even be
tantamount to a blasphemy in that sense, an assaulting of God.   One
of the many interesting twists of the speech.  It's fascinated many a
more prominent Shakespeare student than those here, btw, partly
because it's often read as Shakespeare's own abandonment of his art,
if it's true that The Tempest is his last play.<


Yes, I'd agree that the character of the speech is not Christian, whether or
not it represents WS's own views is again an irrecoverable question. It has
long been a commonplace of Shakespeareiana to say that the speech is a kind
of personal farewell to his art, though not all accept that. I'd incline to
the view that The Tempest is the last play he wholly wrote himself, the
placing of it at the beginning of the First Folio suggests it was seen to
have a special significance. But as to what WS actually thought or believed
about anything, good golly, there are as many guesses as the many faces of
g-d.

Documentary evidence depicts a person who was very prone to suing people for
debts, tried to evade paying taxes, possibly hoarded corn during periods of
famine, which is a horrifying thought, and was very keen on having a coat of
arms. Unless some astonishing document is mouldering away somewhere in an
attic, the personal statements we have are minimal. There are the
dedications to Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece, but they are formal
language typical of the time, there is the will, but that may well have been
written by the notary and only signed by the dying man, other than that, the
nearest thing is the record of his evidence in the Mountjoy court case,
which only says that he couldn't remember what exactly happened. I append
the detail below (rather than type it up myself I raided a Web site for it,
url included too). The second bit includes WS's reported words.

Here it is:


http://home.att.net/~mleary/positive.htm

33. 1604: Court depositions given later (1612) indicate Shakspere was
staying in the house of "Christopher Mountjoy, a French Huguenot tire-maker
(i.e. manufacturer of ladies' ornamental headgear) in Cripplegate ward, an
enclave within the north-east corner of" London (@ Schoenbaum 208).
    Joan Johnson's deposition states that, "as she Remembreth the defendant
did send and perswade one mr Shakespeare that laye in the house to perswade
the plaintiff," Stephen Belott, to marry Mountjoy's daughter.
    Daniell Nicholas explains in his deposition that "Shakespeare tould this
deponent that the defendant tould him that yf the plaintiff would Marrye the
said Marye his daughter he would geve him the plaintiff A some of monney
with her for A porcion in Marriadge with her. And that yf he the plaintiff
did not marry with her the said Marye and she with the plaintiff shee should
never coste him the defendant her ffather A groat, Whereuppon And in Regard
Mr Shakespeare hadd tould them that they should have A some of Monney for A
porcion from the father they Weare made suer by mr Shakespeare by gevinge
there Consent, and agreed to marrye" (Public Record Office, Court of
Requests, Belott  v. Mountjoy ).


44. 1612 / 5 / 11: Court Deposition: Shakspere was called into court and
asked to resolve a dispute regarding the amount offered as dowery by him
when he acted as "go-between" to negotiate a marriage in 1604.
    "Only Shakespeare himself could resolve the question, and the two sides
must have looked forward, with hope or apprehension, to his testimony. But
Shakespeare's memory of the precise details of events long since past failed
him. Why should he have recalled? He had no personal stake in the matter.
Mountjoy had promised Belott a dowry of some sort, and there had been many
conferences, but what the portion was, or when it was to be paid,
Shakespeare could not say, nor could he vouch that 'the defendant promissed
the plaintiff twoe hundered poundes with his daughter Marye at the tyme of
his decease.' The witness likewise professed ignorance of 'what implementes
and necessaries of houshold stuff' Mountjoy gave with Mary. [...]
    "The proceedings, for all their mercenary or sordid overtones, reveal
the poet-dramatist of superhuman powers as a somewhat baffled mortal..." (@
Schoenbaum 213).



Best


Dave




David Bircumshaw

Leicester, England

Home Page

A Chide's Alphabet

Painting Without Numbers

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/david.bircumshaw/index.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alison Croggon" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 2:30 AM
Subject: Re: Minor followups to shrinking, etc.


PS Forgot to say that Shakespeare's idea of mercy and prayer here is
most certainly not a Christian one, if God's mercy is one of the
central staples of Christendom: assaulting mercy might even be
tantamount to a blasphemy in that sense, an assaulting of God.   One
of the many interesting twists of the speech.  It's fascinated many a
more prominent Shakespeare student than those here, btw, partly
because it's often read as Shakespeare's own abandonment of his art,
if it's true that The Tempest is his last play.

Best

A

>At 3:10 PM -0800 1/26/03, Jon Corelis wrote:
>>I'm rather surprised so much is being made of the brief reference to
>>prayer and mercy in Prospero's epilogue.  That epilogue always
>>struck me as a nod to Christianity tacked on as a play-it-safe
>>afterthought to a play which is so thoroughly pagan in spirit that
>>it could have been written by Ovid.
>
>So much is made because so much is there.  It is after all a thorn in
>what otherwise might be the kind of rose you describe: and it is not
>"tacked on" so much as an astonishing flowering out of the play.
>
>People so often talk about Shakespeare's plays as if he were not a
>playwright - he is a playwright first, a theatre practitioner (he was
>an actor and producer too) working consciously with the conventions
>of theatre, and it seems to me crucial that isn't forgotten.   In
>Prospero's speech he is playing with the actual literal situation of
>theatre, and in such interesting ways.  Much as Brecht did centuries
>later.  And theatre, yes, is pagan in its soul.
>
>Best
>
>Alison
>--
>
>
>
>Alison Croggon
>Home page
>http://www.users.bigpond.com/acroggon/
>
>Masthead Online
>http://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/

--



Alison Croggon
Home page
http://www.users.bigpond.com/acroggon/

Masthead Online
http://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/