Shakespeare exhibit & new stage production of RIII

Not a new article (it dates from August 3, 2012) but interesting
nonetheless. It describes the Shakespeare exhibit timed to coincide with the
Olympics and also a new production of Richard III which attempts to
reproduce the play as it would have been seen in Shakespeare's day.



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/theatre-and-performance/behold-shakespea
re-as-a-1591-londoner/article4460788/



Here's a tinyurl -



http://tinyurl.com/chjlg7h



Loyaulte me lie,



Johanne

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Johanne L. Tournier



Email - jltournier60@...

or jltournier@...



"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In today's DM..two letters re Richard, one arguing for Richard to be buried in York...and the second one....here it is:-

"As a retired teacher of English Literature I was dismayed (me: dismayed! how does this man cope if he loses his shopping list!) to read Rosemary Hawley Jarman's opinion that Shakespeare 'swallowed whole' Thomas More's version of Richard lll's life. More portrayed Richard lll as a ruthless killer with no redeeming features. Shakespeare's Richard, though an evil tyrant, has a winning charm, formidable intelligence, sense of humour and sublime poetic language that makes him one of the playwright's most fascinating characters.
For more than 40 years Ms Hawley Jarman who, in her acclaimed 1971 novel We Speak No Treason, made Richard a sympathetic character, has argued that Richard lll was a good man and a fine king whose reputation was vilified by the usurping Tudors. They believe Henry Tudor (me: aka Weasle on here), not Richard, was the likely murderer of the princes in the T of L. All this is unlikely. On usurping the throne in 1483, Richard executed or imprisoned most of his rivals. He tried several times to make the Duke of Brittany surrender the most dangerous claimant to his throne, Tudor, whom the Duke was protecting. Had Richard succeeded there would have been no Tudor dynasty - no Henry Vlll (me: aka Fat Henry or Henry the Fat) no Elizabeth l.

The two princes were seen playing in the grounds of the Tower in 1483, They disappeared for ever in 1484 while HT was in Brittany, so he could not have been responsible for their disappearance (me: Give-me-strength!).

The sympathetic, romantic view of Richard is baseless.

JON S SMITH, Surbiton Surrey

--- In , Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...> wrote:
>
> Not a new article (it dates from August 3, 2012) but interesting
> nonetheless. It describes the Shakespeare exhibit timed to coincide with the
> Olympics and also a new production of Richard III which attempts to
> reproduce the play as it would have been seen in Shakespeare's day.
>
>
>
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/theatre-and-performance/behold-shakespea
> re-as-a-1591-londoner/article4460788/
>
>
>
> Here's a tinyurl -
>
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/chjlg7h
>
>
>
> Loyaulte me lie,
>
>
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
>
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
>
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Arghhhh!!! (scream of anguish)



Other writers have noted that More/Morton's and Shakespeare's Richard III is
not really a human being - despite the fact that he is also charismatic, in
a twisted way.



Johanne



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Johanne L. Tournier



Email - jltournier60@...

or jltournier@...



"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of EileenB
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 9:01 AM
To:
Subject: DAILY MAIL LETTER.....URGGGGGGH.....





In today's DM..two letters re Richard, one arguing for Richard to be buried
in York...and the second one....here it is:-

"As a retired teacher of English Literature I was dismayed (me: dismayed!
how does this man cope if he loses his shopping list!) to read Rosemary
Hawley Jarman's opinion that Shakespeare 'swallowed whole' Thomas More's
version of Richard lll's life. More portrayed Richard lll as a ruthless
killer with no redeeming features. Shakespeare's Richard, though an evil
tyrant, has a winning charm, formidable intelligence, sense of humour and
sublime poetic language that makes him one of the playwright's most
fascinating characters.
For more than 40 years Ms Hawley Jarman who, in her acclaimed 1971 novel We
Speak No Treason, made Richard a sympathetic character, has argued that
Richard lll was a good man and a fine king whose reputation was vilified by
the usurping Tudors. They believe Henry Tudor (me: aka Weasle on here), not
Richard, was the likely murderer of the princes in the T of L. All this is
unlikely. On usurping the throne in 1483, Richard executed or imprisoned
most of his rivals. He tried several times to make the Duke of Brittany
surrender the most dangerous claimant to his throne, Tudor, whom the Duke
was protecting. Had Richard succeeded there would have been no Tudor dynasty
- no Henry Vlll (me: aka Fat Henry or Henry the Fat) no Elizabeth l.

The two princes were seen playing in the grounds of the Tower in 1483, They
disappeared for ever in 1484 while HT was in Brittany, so he could not have
been responsible for their disappearance (me: Give-me-strength!).

The sympathetic, romantic view of Richard is baseless.

JON S SMITH, Surbiton Surrey

--- In
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> , Johanne Tournier
<jltournier60@...> wrote:
>
> Not a new article (it dates from August 3, 2012) but interesting
> nonetheless. It describes the Shakespeare exhibit timed to coincide with
the
> Olympics and also a new production of Richard III which attempts to
> reproduce the play as it would have been seen in Shakespeare's day.
>
>
>
>
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/theatre-and-performance/behold-shakespea
> re-as-a-1591-londoner/article4460788/
>
>
>
> Here's a tinyurl -
>
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/chjlg7h
>
>
>
> Loyaulte me lie,
>
>
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
>
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
>
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Why does the view taken of Richard that he was a good king, a good man etc. etc., lead to
people translating said meaning of that view of Richard into "romantic'. even in some cases "Saintlike"...I don't get it. Is it a sly attempt to make supporters of Richard look or even feel like numpties?
If this is the case can I point out...it ain't working. Eileen

--- In , "EileenB" <cherryripe.eileenb@...> wrote:
>
> In today's DM..two letters re Richard, one arguing for Richard to be buried in York...and the second one....here it is:-
>
> "As a retired teacher of English Literature I was dismayed (me: dismayed! how does this man cope if he loses his shopping list!) to read Rosemary Hawley Jarman's opinion that Shakespeare 'swallowed whole' Thomas More's version of Richard lll's life. More portrayed Richard lll as a ruthless killer with no redeeming features. Shakespeare's Richard, though an evil tyrant, has a winning charm, formidable intelligence, sense of humour and sublime poetic language that makes him one of the playwright's most fascinating characters.
> For more than 40 years Ms Hawley Jarman who, in her acclaimed 1971 novel We Speak No Treason, made Richard a sympathetic character, has argued that Richard lll was a good man and a fine king whose reputation was vilified by the usurping Tudors. They believe Henry Tudor (me: aka Weasle on here), not Richard, was the likely murderer of the princes in the T of L. All this is unlikely. On usurping the throne in 1483, Richard executed or imprisoned most of his rivals. He tried several times to make the Duke of Brittany surrender the most dangerous claimant to his throne, Tudor, whom the Duke was protecting. Had Richard succeeded there would have been no Tudor dynasty - no Henry Vlll (me: aka Fat Henry or Henry the Fat) no Elizabeth l.
>
> The two princes were seen playing in the grounds of the Tower in 1483, They disappeared for ever in 1484 while HT was in Brittany, so he could not have been responsible for their disappearance (me: Give-me-strength!).
>
> The sympathetic, romantic view of Richard is baseless.
>
> JON S SMITH, Surbiton Surrey
>
> --- In , Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@> wrote:
> >
> > Not a new article (it dates from August 3, 2012) but interesting
> > nonetheless. It describes the Shakespeare exhibit timed to coincide with the
> > Olympics and also a new production of Richard III which attempts to
> > reproduce the play as it would have been seen in Shakespeare's day.
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/theatre-and-performance/behold-shakespea
> > re-as-a-1591-londoner/article4460788/
> >
> >
> >
> > Here's a tinyurl -
> >
> >
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/chjlg7h
> >
> >
> >
> > Loyaulte me lie,
> >
> >
> >
> > Johanne
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Johanne L. Tournier
> >
> >
> >
> > Email - jltournier60@
> >
> > or jltournier@
> >
> >
> >
> > "With God, all things are possible."
> >
> > - Jesus of Nazareth
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

I do find Richard fascinating, attractive, admirable - and a romantic figure
in the sense that his life is a tragedy and he was cut off before his time.
And - he may have been slandered more completely than any other human being
in history (since much of the denunciations of Hitler et al are largely
justified).



But my picture of Richard is an ever-evolving picture - of course we can
never know for sure what a historical figure was like, just try to become as
knowledgeable as possible about that person and his era. That's why I have
tried to explain here on a number of instances that, although my feelings
about Richard do involve love, part of the reason for the love is that he
was so able but was a real, flawed but capable person. I really do think he
was an enlightened man of his time who was cruelly cut off.



Anyway, I guess the way to deal with people like Mr. Smith is to write a few
letters back and demonstrate how delusional (without using that word, of
course) they really are. Of course, he's an English teacher, so he must know
the truth! You gotta laugh, or you'd cry.



Johanne

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Johanne L. Tournier



Email - jltournier60@...

or jltournier@...



"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of EileenB
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 9:08 AM
To:
Subject: Re: DAILY MAIL
LETTER.....URGGGGGGH.....





Why does the view taken of Richard that he was a good king, a good man etc.
etc., lead to
people translating said meaning of that view of Richard into "romantic'.
even in some cases "Saintlike"...I don't get it. Is it a sly attempt to make
supporters of Richard look or even feel like numpties?
If this is the case can I point out...it ain't working. Eileen

--- In
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> , "EileenB"
<cherryripe.eileenb@...> wrote:
>
> In today's DM..two letters re Richard, one arguing for Richard to be
buried in York...and the second one....here it is:-
>
> "As a retired teacher of English Literature I was dismayed (me: dismayed!
how does this man cope if he loses his shopping list!) to read Rosemary
Hawley Jarman's opinion that Shakespeare 'swallowed whole' Thomas More's
version of Richard lll's life. More portrayed Richard lll as a ruthless
killer with no redeeming features. Shakespeare's Richard, though an evil
tyrant, has a winning charm, formidable intelligence, sense of humour and
sublime poetic language that makes him one of the playwright's most
fascinating characters.
> For more than 40 years Ms Hawley Jarman who, in her acclaimed 1971 novel
We Speak No Treason, made Richard a sympathetic character, has argued that
Richard lll was a good man and a fine king whose reputation was vilified by
the usurping Tudors. They believe Henry Tudor (me: aka Weasle on here), not
Richard, was the likely murderer of the princes in the T of L. All this is
unlikely. On usurping the throne in 1483, Richard executed or imprisoned
most of his rivals. He tried several times to make the Duke of Brittany
surrender the most dangerous claimant to his throne, Tudor, whom the Duke
was protecting. Had Richard succeeded there would have been no Tudor dynasty
- no Henry Vlll (me: aka Fat Henry or Henry the Fat) no Elizabeth l.
>
> The two princes were seen playing in the grounds of the Tower in 1483,
They disappeared for ever in 1484 while HT was in Brittany, so he could not
have been responsible for their disappearance (me: Give-me-strength!).
>
> The sympathetic, romantic view of Richard is baseless.
>
> JON S SMITH, Surbiton Surrey
>
> --- In
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> , Johanne Tournier
<jltournier60@> wrote:
> >
> > Not a new article (it dates from August 3, 2012) but interesting
> > nonetheless. It describes the Shakespeare exhibit timed to coincide with
the
> > Olympics and also a new production of Richard III which attempts to
> > reproduce the play as it would have been seen in Shakespeare's day.
> >
> >
> >
> >
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/theatre-and-performance/behold-shakespea
> > re-as-a-1591-londoner/article4460788/
> >
> >
> >
> > Here's a tinyurl -
> >
> >
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/chjlg7h
> >
> >
> >
> > Loyaulte me lie,
> >
> >
> >
> > Johanne
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Johanne L. Tournier
> >
> >
> >
> > Email - jltournier60@
> >
> > or jltournier@
> >
> >
> >
> > "With God, all things are possible."
> >
> > - Jesus of Nazareth
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Saw it when I was on the train this mornign  I really must stop reading this rag (or at least paying for it).



From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 2 November 2012, 12:00
Subject: DAILY MAIL LETTER.....URGGGGGGH.....

 
In today's DM..two letters re Richard, one arguing for Richard to be buried in York...and the second one....here it is:-

"As a retired teacher of English Literature I was dismayed (me: dismayed! how does this man cope if he loses his shopping list!) to read Rosemary Hawley Jarman's opinion that Shakespeare 'swallowed whole' Thomas More's version of Richard lll's life. More portrayed Richard lll as a ruthless killer with no redeeming features. Shakespeare's Richard, though an evil tyrant, has a winning charm, formidable intelligence, sense of humour and sublime poetic language that makes him one of the playwright's most fascinating characters.
For more than 40 years Ms Hawley Jarman who, in her acclaimed 1971 novel We Speak No Treason, made Richard a sympathetic character, has argued that Richard lll was a good man and a fine king whose reputation was vilified by the usurping Tudors. They believe Henry Tudor (me: aka Weasle on here), not Richard, was the likely murderer of the princes in the T of L. All this is unlikely. On usurping the throne in 1483, Richard executed or imprisoned most of his rivals. He tried several times to make the Duke of Brittany surrender the most dangerous claimant to his throne, Tudor, whom the Duke was protecting. Had Richard succeeded there would have been no Tudor dynasty - no Henry Vlll (me: aka Fat Henry or Henry the Fat) no Elizabeth l.

The two princes were seen playing in the grounds of the Tower in 1483, They disappeared for ever in 1484 while HT was in Brittany, so he could not have been responsible for their disappearance (me: Give-me-strength!).

The sympathetic, romantic view of Richard is baseless.

JON S SMITH, Surbiton Surrey

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...> wrote:
>
> Not a new article (it dates from August 3, 2012) but interesting
> nonetheless. It describes the Shakespeare exhibit timed to coincide with the
> Olympics and also a new production of Richard III which attempts to
> reproduce the play as it would have been seen in Shakespeare's day.
>
>
>
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/theatre-and-performance/behold-shakespea
> re-as-a-1591-londoner/article4460788/
>
>
>
> Here's a tinyurl -
>
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/chjlg7h
>
>
>
> Loyaulte me lie,
>
>
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
>
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
>
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (2)
Recent Activity: * New Files 1
Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest " Unsubscribe " Terms of Use " Send us Feedback

Hi Liz...I usually read it online so hence you cannot read the Letter Page...I would have liked to read the letter from Rosemary Hawley Jarman. Eileen

--- In , liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...> wrote:
>
> Saw it when I was on the train this mornign  I really must stop reading this rag (or at least paying for it).
>
>
>
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 2 November 2012, 12:00
> Subject: DAILY MAIL LETTER.....URGGGGGGH.....
>
>  
> In today's DM..two letters re Richard, one arguing for Richard to be buried in York...and the second one....here it is:-
>
> "As a retired teacher of English Literature I was dismayed (me: dismayed! how does this man cope if he loses his shopping list!) to read Rosemary Hawley Jarman's opinion that Shakespeare 'swallowed whole' Thomas More's version of Richard lll's life. More portrayed Richard lll as a ruthless killer with no redeeming features. Shakespeare's Richard, though an evil tyrant, has a winning charm, formidable intelligence, sense of humour and sublime poetic language that makes him one of the playwright's most fascinating characters.
> For more than 40 years Ms Hawley Jarman who, in her acclaimed 1971 novel We Speak No Treason, made Richard a sympathetic character, has argued that Richard lll was a good man and a fine king whose reputation was vilified by the usurping Tudors. They believe Henry Tudor (me: aka Weasle on here), not Richard, was the likely murderer of the princes in the T of L. All this is unlikely. On usurping the throne in 1483, Richard executed or imprisoned most of his rivals. He tried several times to make the Duke of Brittany surrender the most dangerous claimant to his throne, Tudor, whom the Duke was protecting. Had Richard succeeded there would have been no Tudor dynasty - no Henry Vlll (me: aka Fat Henry or Henry the Fat) no Elizabeth l.
>
> The two princes were seen playing in the grounds of the Tower in 1483, They disappeared for ever in 1484 while HT was in Brittany, so he could not have been responsible for their disappearance (me: Give-me-strength!).
>
> The sympathetic, romantic view of Richard is baseless.
>
> JON S SMITH, Surbiton Surrey
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@> wrote:
> >
> > Not a new article (it dates from August 3, 2012) but interesting
> > nonetheless. It describes the Shakespeare exhibit timed to coincide with the
> > Olympics and also a new production of Richard III which attempts to
> > reproduce the play as it would have been seen in Shakespeare's day.
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/theatre-and-performance/behold-shakespea
> > re-as-a-1591-londoner/article4460788/
> >
> >
> >
> > Here's a tinyurl -
> >
> >
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/chjlg7h
> >
> >
> >
> > Loyaulte me lie,
> >
> >
> >
> > Johanne
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Johanne L. Tournier
> >
> >
> >
> > Email - jltournier60@
> >
> > or jltournier@
> >
> >
> >
> > "With God, all things are possible."
> >
> > - Jesus of Nazareth
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (2)
> Recent Activity: * New Files 1
> Visit Your Group
>
> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback
>
>
>
>