I've already bribed/cajoled/threatened my family into letting me have the front room so I can watch Firefly. Damnable digital only being on one tv! They can bloody well watch Eastenders upstairs. That's the theory, anyway. In reality, there will probably be some selective, yet convenient amnesia come Monday night.
You want to meet the real me now?
Mal ,'War Stories'
All Ogle, No Cash -- It's Not Just Annoying, It's Un-American
Discussion of episodes currently airing in Un-American locations (anything that's aired in Australia is fair game), as well as anything else the Un-Americans feel like talking about or we feel like asking them. Please use the show discussion threads for any current-season discussion.
Add yourself to the Buffista map while you're here by updating your profile.
Jars - May 09, 2003 5:09:09 pm PDT #4580 of 9843
Betsy HP - May 09, 2003 6:49:23 pm PDT #4581 of 9843
If I only had a brain...
Sob. Y'all Brits are giving up wigs? And taking the drama out of the robes?
Next the Guards will be wearing practical uniforms that they could actually fight somebody postdating 1850 in.
Am-Chau Yarkona - May 10, 2003 1:03:42 am PDT #4582 of 9843
I bop to Wittgenstein. -- Nutty
And don't forget that Firefly starts on Monday too on the SciFi channel!
I know. And yay indeed. But-- may I just take a moment to scream?
(White font for loud noise) AAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Thank you.
(By way of explanation: Monday, 8 pm. Sci-Fi: Firefly. Sky One: Enterprise. I live in a household containing a dedicated Trekkie. I will be seeing Firefly when Sci-Fi repeat it on Friday.)
Leigh - May 10, 2003 9:00:02 am PDT #4583 of 9843
Nobody
Sorry this is so belated, uni has decided to eat me starting with my free-time.
I love your lecturer.I have developed such an academic crush--which may, just possibly, have started around the time she mentioned Buffy in her analysis of the St Crispin's Day speech. The lovely Irish accent isn't helping either.
...someone really, really should write Claudio/Benedick. 'Cause it's canon. Um.
I haven't read the text so I don't know whether it's even remotely canon-esque, but I just went to see the Bell Shakespeare Company's production of Hamlet and I swear Hamlet/Horatio was right there on stage. With the hugging and Hamlet imploring Horatio not to follow him into death and then the dying while clasped in Horatio's arms...*sigh*
moonlit - May 10, 2003 9:37:12 am PDT #4584 of 9843
"When the world's run by fools it's the duty of intelligence to disobey." Martin Firrell
Leigh, I know of what you speak, having seen Bell Shakespeare do Hamlet, Macbeth, Romeo & Juliet, The Tempest, Lear, and Othello, if my memory serves me correctly. Bell does a very good job usually, but I do have to concede that the best ever live Shakespeare performance that I have attended has to have been The Royal Shakespeare Company's Richard the Third, featuring the amazing Antony Sher. My friend and I were openly sobbing after the Coronation scene (along with the majority of Concert Hall patrons). Absolutely amazing performance.
Edited because parentheses usually come in pairs.
Fay - May 10, 2003 9:42:51 am PDT #4585 of 9843
"Fuck Western ideologically-motivated gender identification!" Sulu gasped, and came.
Leigh - May 10, 2003 10:09:32 am PDT #4586 of 9843
Nobody
Leigh, I know of what you speak, having seen Bell Shakespeare do Hamlet
Did Leon Ford play Hamlet in the production you saw? Because he was absolutely fantastic tonight--he had this hectic physicality which worked both the pathos and the comedy into a really intricate, fascinating performance. t /post-show rave
Angus G - May 10, 2003 10:29:24 am PDT #4587 of 9843
Roguish Laird
Without wanting to rain on the Hamlet/Horatio parade, can I just point out that it's only through a modern lens that this kind of thing looks slashy? Between the renaissance and the romantic era (broadly speaking) it was extremely common, in fact conventional, for men to express friendship for each other in very florid, passionate terms. There was nothing sexual about it; in fact being about friendship made it less sexual because there wasn't yet a concept of friendship and sex as things that went together. It wasn't until homosexuality became more culturally visible (during the 19th century) that men felt the need to restrain themselves in expressing their (non-sexual) feelings for each other.
t /killjoy
(The Sonnets are a different story of course...)
Fay - May 10, 2003 10:33:20 am PDT #4588 of 9843
"Fuck Western ideologically-motivated gender identification!" Sulu gasped, and came.
Granted, Angus. But I'm assuming that homosexuality was no more nor less common in the past than it is today. So whilst I'm quite happy to agree that tenderness does not have to be interpreted sexually, I don't see that there's anything to preclude it being interpreted sexually.
Would you argue that the sonnets are a case of agape rather than eros, then?
Angus G - May 10, 2003 10:38:05 am PDT #4589 of 9843
Roguish Laird
Ha, Fay, I just edited my post...no, The Sonnets are a different thing altogether and are totally Eros. But the sonnet is an erotic form of discourse through and through.
What precludes Hamlet's language about Horatio from being interpreted sexually is that in the context of the time it isn't sexual language. Of course you're still free to believe that they were at it, but it's a misreading to claim that the text actually supports this.