Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, March 10, 2009
Arts William Shakespeare
Posted by Dan Savage on Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 5:41 AM
This is kind of thrilling news for theater and Shakespeare geeks like me.
2
I didn't know you were a Shakespeare geek... I love you even more now!
It's a bummer you're taken... my brother's a gay Renaissance Lit major. :-P but I guess there's a few of those out there.
It's a bummer you're taken... my brother's a gay Renaissance Lit major. :-P but I guess there's a few of those out there.
3
Well, the article says they took liberties with portraits in his era, so that may not be exactly accurate.
5
You mean "and Shakespeare geeks such as myself," right? Because you're someone who's paid to be articulate, right?
...and Shakespeare geeks like me.
You mean "and Shakespeare geeks such as myself," right? Because you're someone who's paid to be articulate, right?
6
Oh wow! that is quite a thrill. I just read about this portrait in Bill Bryson's great biography of Shakespeare - I terrific read for all you S'peare geeks.
8
@7: Even more now that he's stoked the fire in their loins with a reasonably attractive portrait that makes his portrayal by Joseph Fiennes seem way way more true to life.
"Oh, be stille mye beatinge hearte! Swoone!"
"Oh, be stille mye beatinge hearte! Swoone!"
13
Why does every Renaissance portrait look the same?
The gene pool must have been very small...
and Joseph Fiennes turned out to be a pretty good choice for "Shakespeare in Love".
The gene pool must have been very small...
and Joseph Fiennes turned out to be a pretty good choice for "Shakespeare in Love".
14
Well my cousin Bert Baldrick, Mr Gainsborough's butler's dogsbody, says that he's heard that all portraits look the same these days, 'cause they're painted to a romantic ideal rather than as a true depiction of the idiosyncratic facial qualities of the person in question.
16
Portraits like this surface occasionally. Unless there's some genuine archival evidence that directly links this painting with THE Shakespeare, I'm inclined to remain dubious.
I attended a conference in university several years ago when a similar portrait appeared. The same debate raged then. (There was even a crazy old couple who attended and tried to get the fusty academics to debate whether Shakespeare wasn't Shakespeare, or the Earl of Whastits.)
The point then was that scientific analyses of works -- infrared chromotography, dendrochronology, etc., -- does not substitute for real, primary source research and archival evidence. There were lots of handsome and rich men wandering around Elizabethan England. This gentleman was one of them. Just because we want to put a face to the father of English Lit doesn't mean that we should leap to conclusions about this work.
I attended a conference in university several years ago when a similar portrait appeared. The same debate raged then. (There was even a crazy old couple who attended and tried to get the fusty academics to debate whether Shakespeare wasn't Shakespeare, or the Earl of Whastits.)
The point then was that scientific analyses of works -- infrared chromotography, dendrochronology, etc., -- does not substitute for real, primary source research and archival evidence. There were lots of handsome and rich men wandering around Elizabethan England. This gentleman was one of them. Just because we want to put a face to the father of English Lit doesn't mean that we should leap to conclusions about this work.
17
Big Sven...you cannot correctly use the word 'myself' in a sentence like that unless you have already been referred to earlier in the sentence. Your point is well taken...however your sentence, too, is gramatically incorrect.
20
@19, it's not a fake, and it doesn't have to be a fake OR misattributed to be bogus.
I think we're dealing with an epistemological failure here; we want this to be a portrait "of Shakespeare", but there is no adequate agreement on what that phrase means. Is it a GOOD LIKENESS? Is it even a likeness at all? Even if it's Shakespeare, does that mean it really LOOKS LIKE HIM? Because it does, sorta kinda, look like other pictures of him. What if it is a PERFECT LIKENESS, but was actually painted as a portrait of someone else?
All this new evidence is supposing only that it was painted to represent Shakespeare. From life? From memory? The experts are saying that based on the time period the chances that it actually LOOKS LIKE SHAKESPEARE are slim, even if it was painted from life.
Ultimately, this is sort of a 17th-century version of celebrity gossip. Does he look fat in those pants?
I think we're dealing with an epistemological failure here; we want this to be a portrait "of Shakespeare", but there is no adequate agreement on what that phrase means. Is it a GOOD LIKENESS? Is it even a likeness at all? Even if it's Shakespeare, does that mean it really LOOKS LIKE HIM? Because it does, sorta kinda, look like other pictures of him. What if it is a PERFECT LIKENESS, but was actually painted as a portrait of someone else?
All this new evidence is supposing only that it was painted to represent Shakespeare. From life? From memory? The experts are saying that based on the time period the chances that it actually LOOKS LIKE SHAKESPEARE are slim, even if it was painted from life.
Ultimately, this is sort of a 17th-century version of celebrity gossip. Does he look fat in those pants?
22
Helga@17: damn. It should be ""and Shakespeare geeks such as I." Which is an example of correct grammar that sounds stilted as hell.
Thank you for the correction. I know what I must do. {Falls on belt sword.)
Thank you for the correction. I know what I must do. {Falls on belt sword.)
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Putting It In by Dan Savage
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
Meet the UW "Swagga Suit" by David Schmader
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (23) RSS