Comments on: James Shapiro and the “Notorious Hyphen,” Part II

By: Some Love Links | knitwitted

Some Love Links | knitwitted — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:08:16 +0000

[...] A most lovely article regarding Mr. Shapiro’s book published under the tome de plumet Contested Will. So as not to give away the plot, I won’t reveal the original name of the book has been critically reasoned to have been Willtested Con. By all means, please do not be remiss and fail to follow that part of the article which has been continued here. [...]

By: Roger Stritmatter

Roger Stritmatter — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:44:04 +0000

How interesting, Richard. Thanks so much for the reference. This just goes to show that if you are a Stratfordian, you can’t invent anything you like. You can let your imagination run riot. Too bad that N & Q would fall for such balderdash.

By: richard waugaman

richard waugaman — Sat, 04 Jun 2011 01:03:29 +0000

Shapiro has apparently launched something of a Save the Hyphen movement.
He has now been one-upped.Boris Borukhov, in the June, 2011 Notes & Queries, seriously proposes that Shake-speare signed his name with the hyphen. He concludes this from
the fact that Robert Chester’s 1601 Love’s Martyr included the
editor’s statement that “writers whose names are subscribed” to their
poems meant the editor had seen Shakespeare’s manuscript of his poem,
signed with a hyphen. Borukhov knows perfectly well this only means
the authors’ names are printed below their poems. But the editors of
Notes & Queries seem to have decided that things are getting a bit
desperate for the traditional theory, if they found this article
worthy of publication. Doesn’t anyone read the Journal of
Onomastics?? Thomas E. Murray published a crucial article that shows
hyphenated last names only became common in England in the 19th
century ["The overlooked and understudied onomastic hyphen," Names: A
Journal of Onomastics 50 (2002):173-190].

By: Some Love Links | knitwitted

Some Love Links | knitwitted — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 23:19:38 +0000

By: hewardwilkinson

hewardwilkinson — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:37:56 +0000

PS for the delightful ‘counterfeited signature’ in its photographic form:
http://www.mcgill.ca/files/crclaw-discourse/Signature_Event_Context.pdf

By: hewardwilkinson

hewardwilkinson — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:30:39 +0000

Roger
Writing from the middle of the Irish Sea, driven there by the great Icelandic Thunder god, under the auspices of Hamlet’s Mill no doubt, I am perforce compelled to be patient!

Of course!

Heward

By: Roger Stritmatter

Roger Stritmatter — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:59:37 +0000

Heward,

Thanks for the challenge to reconsider Derrida. Give me a day or to do some further reading before I comment.

Cheers,

RAS

By: hewardwilkinson

hewardwilkinson — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:32:14 +0000

Dear Roger
Following my previous comment on part I, I just want to impishly note that your commentary about signatures is VERY Derridean!! and contextual deconstruction of what Shapiro is doing is precisely what we are up to.

http://hydra.humanities.uci.edu/derrida/sec.html
(see the end!)

Heward