Core Sound 20 Hull #102

[Ken_Potts]

  I guess I would have been Shakespeare's motor, then...

[Ken_Potts]

  I believe it's spelled "panty-waste"...

Hey - Are you talkin to me?!? 

[Joel B]

Wes

Give me a reference for a good printing with a decent interpretation or maybe a DVD.  I want to read it now.  The last time was in high school and I think I used the Cliff's notes (before google).

Joel

[wkisting]

Hi Joel, I teach my students from The Norton Shakespeare (a single volume of the complete works of Shakespeare, published by W.W. Norton & Co.). Most any edition of the play should be fine, but if you're looking for an edition with scholarly/supplementary materials (critical essays, historical documents for context, etc.), Bedford/St. Martin's Press has a terrific series of paperback editions of the plays. The title is "The Tempest," of course, but the editions I have in mind also say "A Case Study in Critical Controversy" across the top, and the ISBN # for the Tempest in this series is 978-0-312-45752-5 (which should be enough to find it on Amazon or Barnes & Noble). I don't know what these editions cost (I get them for free as a professor), but I suspect they're a little pricey compared to a basic text-only edition; however, the explanatory footnotes are very good and the play is followed by about 270 pages of supplementary material either analyzing or giving historical context to the play. Probably overkill if you just feel like brushing up on your Shakespeare, though. Really, any cheap edition of the play should still have a fairly accurate text. The major thing that sets different editions apart is the quality/clarity/usefulness of the explanatory footnotes (to help you understand outdated words or sayings, etc.). Probably more than you wanted to know... 

On another note, thanks for reminding me about being a panty-waist, Ray.    I tuned up the little 3.5hp motor a few days ago and she's running beautifully. I was going to change the lube/oil, but then I realized we haven't put more than 2 hours on the thing yet, so my usual "seasonal" maintenance will probably become a once-every-three-years maintenance cycle for those things. Didn't even have to winterize it this year because it's so small I just stored it in the house (after emptying the fuel, of course). I'm hoping to get the CS20 out to the lake this weekend (temps will be in the low 80s) for the first sail of the year. Should be putting the rub rails on soon, too, if I can just find the motivation. I've been feeling exhausted for awhile, and I spent the last two weeks thinking I was suffering from allergies, but found out yesterday that I have pneumonia, so now that I have antibiotics, I'll hopefully get my energy back soon. [Edit: By the way, Ray, the pneumonia is why I sounded like hell when you called the other morning. But it was very nice to chat with you again.]

[Joel B]

Wes

I got a copy of  The Tempest: A Case Study in Critical Controversy (Case Studies in Critical Controversy) (Paperback) for $6.00 plus shipping.  I'm a professor of Earth Science.  I was trying to figure out how to relate Shakespere to land use planning or environmental policy in order to get a desk copy. I don't have to now.

This will be fun.

thanks

Joel

[Joel B]

Wes

I don't know if this is the correct forum, being a boat building forum and all, but I got my copy of the Tempest today.  I haven't even gotten to the play yet and I already have questions.  Oxfordian or Stratfordian?  I tell my students in Anthropology that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  I have only read those 3 or 4 pages at the start of the book but it seems like they need more evidence to support this claim.  It seems more likely to me that De Vere was a patron to Will.  I take students several times a year to Mexico to do humanitarian/research work.  There are no bounds that I won't go to, to suck up to my "patrons" (rich donors) that sponsor the work. Including publishing articles in various media sources that flatter my patrons. It would seem natural to me that Will would do the same hence the relationship to De vere.

Joel

[wkisting]

Joel, I've heard the arguments for the idea that "Shakespeare" was actually the Earl of Oxford, but most of the arguments are profoundly un-scholarly, based on misunderstandings of historical information. For example, in dumbest form, I've seen claims that the different spellings of Shakespeare's name from the period (Shaxberd, Shaksper, Shakspear, Shagsper, etc.) are a deliberate "clue" that Shakespeare was not the author's real name or identity. Of course, this is simply ignorance of the fact that, in Elizabethan England, there was no fixed spelling yet (that came really after the 1750s with the proliferation of Johnson's Dictionary--the first dictionary that was adequately popular to promote uniformity in spelling), and that most people regularly spelled their name at least a few different ways; often, they did so even in the same document--which is true, for example, of Shakespeare's will.

The "strongest" arguments in support of the Earl of Oxford thesis are admittedly persuasive sounding, and a few scholars seem to take the idea seriously, but the probability of its truth is very low given what we do know about the man named William Shakespeare (who did exist, did have a stake in the Globe theater, and is alluded to by contemporaries). For me, the most damning evidence against the Oxford thesis--albeit not direct rebuttal--is the fact that it is one of some 150 alternate identities proposed for Shakespeare, ranging from de Vere, to Francis Bacon, to Mary Wroth. It seems people are interested in proving Shakespeare was anyone except himself, but that seems to be a trend only in the modern age. No one appears to have had any real doubt about Shakespeare in the period of his life or the 200 years immediately following it.

Of course, you realize that this post may provoke an army of Oxfordians to descend upon this site and angrily tout my "ignorance" and how unwilling I am to "question established authority." That, to me, just discredits their argument further. It always comes with hyperbole and invective, sometimes politely excused by claims that they are just "exasperated" with how they have been mistreated by "experts" in the profession who refuse to take their evidence seriously. Of course, sometimes experts are wrong, but in this case, experts are not simply taking it on faith that Shakespeare was Shakespeare. There is evidence, though Oxfordians repeatedly claim it doesn't exist or isn't sufficient to explain things.

[Edit to add: One problem, of course, is that many Oxfordians seem to expect a whole documentary trail confirming the authenticity of someone's identity, but the modern penchant for documentation, surveillance, and personal accountability (driver's licenses, social security cards, passports, etc.) was only beginning to emerge in the Elizabethan period, and it is often the case that a person's identity might be linked to only a few documents like those we have for Shakespeare: a baptismal certificate, a marriage license, a will, a few records of business transactions, etc. In Shakespeare's case, we also have a number of plays attributed to him by contemporaries or near-contemporaries, but for Oxfordians this is just part of the elaborate cover-up of de Vere's identity.]

Some of the websites on this issue--especially those supporting the de Vere/Oxford claim--are remarkably well-written from a rhetorical-persuasion standpoint. I sometimes assign my students to read and analyze them for precisely that reason. They are quite good at spotting the fallacies and some of the miscontextualized "evidence," and they learn something about how historical research works in the process. The thing they are most surprised by, of course, is how much "experts" actually depend on educated guesses to fill in huge gaps for a vast amount of our knowledge, including some major figures like Shakespeare. Those gaps are why there will always continue to be disagreement--and conspiracy theories.    At the end of the day, the identity matters very little for our appreciation of his plays and the excellent scholarship that has helped us to understand them better.

[Joel B]

Wes

I read the play and the first article on the tempest as a possible commentary on colonialism.  I am an Anthropologist and this type of debate is usually formed in terms of hegemony and anti-hegemony and relates closely to linguistics.  Saussure started it his treatment of signifier and signified which led to Jakobsen and his theory of negotiated meaning. In this case meaning is not just what the speaker or writer intends but the meaning is negotiated by the listener or reader as well.  This is the reason for so many interpretations of the Bible or in this case Shakespear. But the guy who I think brings a lot to this debate is Stuart Hall a post colonialist sociologist who was born in Jamaica. He took Jakobsen's work and said meaning is not just negotiated between a single speaker and listener but can be done at a societal level as well through it's media.  He then took Gramsci's writings on hegemony and said that meaning can be interpreted in a mainstream/hegemonic way or in as anti-hegemonic or counter-cultually.  The meaning would have been negotiated then by hearers just as it is now 400 years later. 

In this case the hegemonic interpretation at the time would have been the natural order of rightful leadership.  But the anit hegemony was alive and well in the 16th century as well.  The Las Casas - Supulvada controversies were being debated in Spain over the issue of weather the Indians possesed souls because if not they were natural slaves.  The conclusion by most being that the Indians did posess souls but were inferior and so could not be slaves but could be exploited through the encomienda. And while this was going on in Spain the English were raiding Spanish possesions in the new world and the monarchies of Spain and England were linked by marraige.

Even though it is obvious to me that Shakespeare was following the hegimonic line of thought, it is very posible that he was throwing little political barbs into the play to keep it interesting.

And to keep this in context with a boat building forum.. the all built Core Sound 20's and lived happily ever after.

Of course I could be full of it

Joel

[Ken_Potts]

So to stay on/off topic - "Southbound, with oars or outboard, would still sail as sweet."

Sorry - That's all the Shakspree I know  ;D

[Garry]

Next someone will try to tell me that "Boatbuilder Joe" is simply Wes' alias!    It's all drama!

[Apteryx]

Gee, it's true what they say - I came here for boatbuilding tips and guess what, all the world really is a stage!  ;D

But it's refreshing, no twice-told tale to my ear.   

[John Weigandt]

But we should all know that Shakespeare is best appreciated in the original Klingon.

John

[wkisting]

I'm delighted to see that you're all so well-versed in Shakespeare.    And Ken is also versed in elegant transitions that bring us back to topic.

Who would've guessed boat-builders were such a literary bunch, but it makes sense, given literature's longstanding love-affair with nautical lore. The Old Man and the Sea, Moby Dick, Treasure Island, Billy Budd, Rime of the Ancient Mariner, .... the list goes on...

[John Weigandt]

Have you ever played the dictionary game??  Open the dictionary anywhere... on the 2 pages visible, almost every time there will be a word referring to something nautical, or to water... 

Water is life

John

[Apteryx]

The sea is pervasive - so many phrases in common use that hail from maritime tradition.  'By and large' is one of my favorites, because almost no one who uses it realizes what it really means.  Or 'the devil to pay'.

[Joel B]

Now you have to tell me where they come from because I don't know

[lbrewer]

the seam where the deck meets the hull side is called the "devil".  "Paying the devil" is caulking that seam.  If a ship can sail "by and large" it can sail close to the wind, "by" as well as off the wind "large".

[lbrewer]

I thought of another one.  "Caught between the devil and the deep blue sea"

[JeffM]

My new reading passion, the Aubrey/Maturin novels of Patrick O'Brien, are full of these, all from the great age of sail.  How about "the cat's out of the bag"?

[wkisting]

Had a wonderful second outing of the year on Sunday. Wind was a steady 9-10 knots, so we cruised around in the CS for almost 4 hours, averaging between 4 - 6 knots of speed, occasionally touching 7 knots briefly on some points of sail. We had a few runs up and down the lake near a 30-footer flying a main, jib, and genoa (much more sail area than our boat), and we were able to keep pace and eke ahead on every point of sail. What also surprised me is that we managed to sail much higher into the wind, but I suspect that's because I was doing a better job reading the contours of the coves (where the wind angles shift). I think he was tacking prematurely instead of counting on the wind to bend around the far corners of the coves, which we took advantage of. Also had a neat moment when we sailed up to a beach and watched a couple of pontoon-boaters hold their breath in anticipation of us running aground in the very shallow 2' deep approach... they weren't expecting us to be a centerboarder of such shallow draught, and seemed confused when they didn't hear the sound of a keel grating on the lakebed.

After 15 sail outings since our launch, we still can't get over what a superb design the CS really is. For us, it has proven to be the ideal boat... exactly what we hoped for, and more.