Page 1686 of 3369 FirstFirst ... 68611861586163616761684168516861687168816961736178621862686 ... LastLast
Results 33,701 to 33,720 of 67370
  1. #33701
    Quote Originally Posted by Bostondevil View Post
    I had a rather spectacular fall from a horse in high school. I had some but not a lot of experience riding horses at the time. I was with a group and wasn't paying close attention to my horse, chatting with the friends who were on the ride with me when my horse decided it was time to race with the horse my brother was on. She ran me into a low hanging tree branch which, thank goodness, was dead, otherwise I might have broken my neck, but that part of the incident caused me to lose my grip on the reins. After that it was hang on to the saddle horn for all I was worth. If she had merely slowed instead of coming to an abrupt stop (with a slight turn sideways), I probably would have stayed on. But that was not to be. Because of the sideways turn, I did not go headfirst over the top but instead slide off the side which probably saved me from serious injury. I didn't even have a minor injury. When I found myself flat on the ground though, I realized I had exactly one course of action, get back on that horse immediately. I told her, "Ok, that was fun, but I'm getting right back on you and you are going to WALK me back to the stable, right now." She did. I will still ride horses, but I'm not much for going fast on one.
    I was thrown from my horse when I was 16. The horse had been spooked by a loud moped that had come up from behind. Apparently I was knocked out because the first thing I remember after being bucked is me in the passenger seat of my car and my 14yo cousin driving me home. Fortunately it was just a few miles of country road to my house since he had never driven a car before.

  2. #33702
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC area
    Quote Originally Posted by Skydog View Post
    I was thrown from my horse when I was 16. The horse had been spooked by a loud moped that had come up from behind. Apparently I was knocked out because the first thing I remember after being bucked is me in the passenger seat of my car and my 14yo cousin driving me home. Fortunately it was just a few miles of country road to my house since he had never driven a car before.
    Ah, the "throw 'em in the deep end", sink-or-swim approach!

    -jk

  3. #33703
    Quote Originally Posted by Skydog View Post
    I was thrown from my horse when I was 16. The horse had been spooked by a loud moped that had come up from behind. Apparently I was knocked out because the first thing I remember after being bucked is me in the passenger seat of my car and my 14yo cousin driving me home. Fortunately it was just a few miles of country road to my house since he had never driven a car before.
    Manual or automatic?

  4. #33704
    Quote Originally Posted by YmoBeThere View Post
    Manual or automatic?
    Aren't all cousins automatic?

  5. #33705
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Outside Philly
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    Aren't all cousins automatic?
    I think that’s illegal in most states.

  6. #33706
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Boston area, OK, Newton, right by Heartbreak Hill
    I started a twitter war by making this joke on a complete unrelated tweet, "Yeah, but it's still not possible that the Earl of Oxford could have written some of Shakespeare's plays after he was dead." This tweet caused someone else in the twitterverse to lose his mind. He went off on how the dating of the plays was inexact and how much of an idiot I am and blah, blah, blah. I responded with "Bless your heart." ]

    This brought in another Oxfordian who was more reasonable to calmly explain to me how the dating of the plays was inexact and that Stratfordians were always moving the goalposts. I then explained that I was somewhat of a Stratford agnostic. It's not that I refuse to entertain the possibility that William Shakespeare was not actually William Shakespeare. I will admit that maybe he wasn't but that is beside the point I made. Shakespeare might not be Shakespeare, but Shakespeare is definitely not Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford. I repeated that de Vere died before at least one of the plays was written. My more reasonable twitter person started in on the shipwreck in The Tempest and how there were lots of shipwrecks and how could it ever be definitively proved that the shipwreck Stratfordians say inspired The Tempest is shaky at best. I responded with, "Tempest, Shmempest, the proof is in Macbeth." Oxford died in 1604. Macbeth was written after the Gunpowder Plot was foiled in 1605. IMHO, the Porter's speech, especially his use of the term equivocator, is a direct reference to the Gunpowder Plot. I am far from the only one who feels this way. When I explained this bit to my Oxfordian opponent, he started referencing earlier use of the term equivocation. Then it was my turn to mention the moving of goalposts.

    But, then, out of kindness, I allowed that perhaps the term equivocation was in broad use prior to the Gunpowder Plot (despite what some historians have to say about it) but the Banquo character and the scene where the weird sisters tell him he will get kings but be no king himself was obviously written for James I. And my Oxfordian then proved himself to be a complete idiot by arguing that point with me. Seriously? James I, according to Holinshed, (the source material for most of Shakespeare's history plays), was a direct descendent of Banquo (a historical person). He did not take that as proof that Macbeth was written during the reign of James I. Yeah, pound sand, dude. So, Elizabeth I died in late March, 1603. James I was coronated in June, 1603. Oxford died in June, 1604. Oxford certainly did spend much of his last year currying favor with the new king. Could he have written Macbeth in that time frame? I mean, yes, he had time, I guess. But he didn't do it.

    There has been statistical text analysis done on Shakespeare, by the way. We mostly on have poetry samples from people that have been put forth as the actual author (there are many, Oxford has the most supporters). Text analysis excludes any of the other well known playwrights of the time from also being Shakespeare. The poetry is less conclusive because there isn't as much of it from Shakespeare. What samples we do have from Oxford are from his early life and Oxfordians will claim that the reason we don't have later samples is because he was too busy being Shakespeare. What text analysis has shown is that Shakespeare is remarkably internally consistent. His known poetry correlates very highly with his other known poetry, more highly then almost all other poets of the era. Shakespeare is Shakespeare is Shakespeare throughout his career and Oxford's early work does not correlate with Shakespeare.

    One other knock against Oxford - and almost all other potential authors put forward - Shakespeare was famous in his own time. His plays were published with his name attached which was uncommon at the time. I do not for one minute believe that a man with power, even if he had to hide the fact that he was the Bard during his lifetime, would not have left documents claiming authorship to be revealed after his death. So, if it wasn't Shakespeare, it was not a member of the nobility. And if it wasn't a member of the nobility, why the need for secrecy? Yeah.

    So why do I admit to being an agnostic? Two things: 1) that highly correlated with himself stuff leads me to believe he had either a collaborator or an editor. Two people writing together will often be more internally consistent than one person alone. 2) Shakespeare is Shakespeare and not Middleton or Webster or Ben Johnson or even Marlowe because of his female characters. His women are women, actual living breathing people. That's not true of most female characters written by other playwrights of the time. Heck, it's not even true for many male playwrights ever. Or novelists (Dickens comes to mind here.) So, if Shakespeare wasn't Shakespeare or if he had a significant collaborator, that person was a woman.

    The article in The Atlantic a couple of years ago about Emilia Bassano sent chills down my spine. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...assano/588076/

    I say I'm a Stratfordian agnostic but that's not exactly true. I think William Shakespeare of Stratford-Upon-Avon was Shakespeare, but I think a woman contributed to his work in some way, and I now think that woman was Emilia Bassano.

  7. #33707
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Boston area, OK, Newton, right by Heartbreak Hill
    I just killed it in my audition for Tartuffe. I know from experience that doesn't always translate into getting cast, but, I've never been cast when I didn't kill it in auditions, so.

  8. #33708
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Outside Philly
    Quote Originally Posted by Bostondevil View Post
    I just killed it in my audition for Tartuffe. I know from experience that doesn't always translate into getting cast, but, I've never been cast when I didn't kill it in auditions, so.
    I was in Tartuffe in high school! Fun play. In retrospect, I'm surprised they picked it. We did Spring Awakenings, too. Similarly surprised. I guess the parents who complained about the books and the humanities classes didn't come watch the plays.

  9. #33709
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Boston area, OK, Newton, right by Heartbreak Hill
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    I was in Tartuffe in high school! Fun play. In retrospect, I'm surprised they picked it. We did Spring Awakenings, too. Similarly surprised. I guess the parents who complained about the books and the humanities classes didn't come watch the plays.
    Yeah, not a lot of overlap between those types and theater goers.

  10. #33710
    Unfortunately, the weekend doesn't mean the work ends.

  11. #33711
    Quote Originally Posted by Bostondevil View Post
    The article in The Atlantic a couple of years ago about Emilia Bassano sent chills down my spine. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...assano/588076/

    I say I'm a Stratfordian agnostic but that's not exactly true. I think William Shakespeare of Stratford-Upon-Avon was Shakespeare, but I think a woman contributed to his work in some way, and I now think that woman was Emilia Bassano.
    This is a fascinating article. I have heard the rumors that Shakespeare was not the actual author of the plays attributed to him and this does a good job detailing why those doubts exist.

  12. #33712
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Outside Philly
    If it’s Saturday morning, it’s grocery shopping time!

  13. #33713
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Getting ready for a nice long hike by the river. Should be crisp but clear. Been looking forward to this all week.

  14. #33714
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    preparing my equipments for subzero grilling of prime steaks tonight, possible Blue Devil victory dinner?

  15. #33715
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Boston area, OK, Newton, right by Heartbreak Hill
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    This is a fascinating article. I have heard the rumors that Shakespeare was not the actual author of the plays attributed to him and this does a good job detailing why those doubts exist.
    Nobody really questioned his authorship until a couple of centuries after his death. We have more information on the lives of other well known playwrights of the time. But there is evidence, nothing completely definitive, but enough evidence to support the belief that Shakespeare was known as a playwright during his lifetime. Too many people who did leave records would have known if Shakespeare wasn't Shakespeare for it to be completely believed that he wasn't. It is, however, plausible to me, that he had a behind the scenes collaborator/editor/assistant, like I said before. And again, I completely believe that if he did, that collaborator/editor/assistant was a woman and I believe that because you will never convince me that a man would have kept quiet about it - he would have demanded credit. Women in the 16th century? Not so much.

  16. #33716
    I'm at work.

    Goods news (I guess) - I have a job.

  17. #33717
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Boston area, OK, Newton, right by Heartbreak Hill
    Quote Originally Posted by DukieInKansas View Post
    I'm at work.

    Goods news (I guess) - I have a job.
    I've got one too starting in a couple of weeks! Well, not a new job, a new project. This one is very topical. We're looking at access to healthcare over the past year for patients who do not have covid.

  18. #33718
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by Bostondevil View Post
    I've got one too starting in a couple of weeks! Well, not a new job, a new project. This one is very topical. We're looking at access to healthcare over the past year for patients who do not have covid.
    If it’s topical, does that mean you are working on a COVID vaccine ointment? Because THAT would rock.

  19. #33719
    Quote Originally Posted by Bostondevil View Post
    Nobody really questioned his authorship until a couple of centuries after his death. We have more information on the lives of other well known playwrights of the time. But there is evidence, nothing completely definitive, but enough evidence to support the belief that Shakespeare was known as a playwright during his lifetime. Too many people who did leave records would have known if Shakespeare wasn't Shakespeare for it to be completely believed that he wasn't. It is, however, plausible to me, that he had a behind the scenes collaborator/editor/assistant, like I said before. And again, I completely believe that if he did, that collaborator/editor/assistant was a woman and I believe that because you will never convince me that a man would have kept quiet about it - he would have demanded credit. Women in the 16th century? Not so much.
    I am as pedantic as a mug. My phone has installed an update which fails to recognize Proper nouns for some reason. But I am hiking and I am not going to kill myself To fix the Abhorrent Lack of Understanding Of what constitutes a proper noun. I am so angry. I apologize that this is distracting.

    I'm not sure How to classify it on a likelihood scale, but your argument sounds reasonable and compelling. I agree that Many who Believe He was Completely uninvolved are operating Under the assumption That Those who believed he was the sole author are the ones who have to prove Their Theory, And that Simply isn't the way This works. Since these works are already attributed to Shakespeare, the onus for Proving The Works Were authored by Someone else Is on those Who believe that to be true. You have to operate under the assumption That He wrote them until absolutely proven otherwise. The most compelling arguments for Him at least Having assistance are The Ways that female characters are depicted (Which is so Different from his contemporaries) And his Italianate Influences . Perhaps There was a Better Working knowledge of Italy, and especially Classical Italian History Because the Renaissance Moved From Italy Towards The rest of Europe And Italian Cultural hegemony Was so pervasive That even Someone who had not Traveled to Italy Had a Significant working knowledge Of Italian History. But The subject of the article's Italian heritage, Intricate working knowledge of The Royal Court And proximity To the orbit of Shakespeare Is at least suggestive that if he Had a collaborator, It Could have been her.

  20. #33720
    Quote Originally Posted by YmoBeThere View Post
    Unfortunately, the weekend doesn't mean the work ends.
    Quote Originally Posted by DukieInKansas View Post
    I'm at work.

    Goods news (I guess) - I have a job.
    Exactly.

Similar Threads

  1. Duke History (new thread-- posts moved from unrelated thread)
    By jimsumner in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 12-25-2019, 08:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •