March 12th, 2006

bear by san

(no subject)

23: Peter W.M. Blayney, The First Folio of Shakespeare

A neat little booklet, the coolest parts of which talk extensively about the methodology used for reconstructing the physical process by which the book was typeset and printed--the compositors, their failings, and so on.

On the other hand, it doesn't seem odd to me that marks from scissors--by marks we mean not snips, but rusty or pressed outlines--would be common in a 17th century book. The theory advanced in this article is that they were left there by binders.

Snipping the pages open, as you'd have to with a quarto, isn't an issue with a folio. But it seems to me that you'd still likely have a deckle edge to deal with.

It's a pain to turn pages that have deckle edges. They're floppy and soft and uneven. So as you read, you snip. And what's handy lying around to be used as a bookmark when the missus calls you to dinner?

I dunno--were the books trimmed before they were sold? I don't think so. Some might have been trimmed by the binder, or course.

Okay, taking my cold to bed now. The body has just weighed in on the amount of work its been expected to do recently.
bear by san

I am Richard II, know ye not?

Book 24: Michael B. Young, King James and the History of Homosexuality
More research for the Promethean Age books, yes. I enjoyed this greatly. Although I think the author might be a little naive in maintaining that, really, neither Edward II nor Sejanus were originally pointed at Scottish James.

No, not even a little. *cough*

Then again, I was the only person in the entire theatre who laughed at the joke in The Libertine that Wilmot made regarding Etherege's satire featuring same (Wilmot, that is.) "Oh. You made me engaging, George, didn't you?"

It functions nicely as a brief political history of James VI/I and Charles I, and it has a certain level of delightful snark, such as the wry observation that Thomas Scott, notorious opponent of James' resistance to embroiling England in the Thirty Years' War, was murdered by a soldier... and that the world will have its little ironies.

Those ironies pile up and make historical fantasies in my head. And I'm sort of looking forward to finally executing Sir Walter, when I get around to writing Posthumous Jonson. Also, I thought of a very pleasing bit of business when I was walking to the CVS to buy Dayquil earlier. Because, you know, any work but the work we should be doing. 

Also,m I get all that lovely screwed up Jacobean gender stuff, which builds on some of the games I'm playing in The Stratford Man and The Journeyman Devil. That, and I get the Essexes back, and the Overbury murder. Le yay. Kill them all; the Lord will know his own.

In email conversation, truepenny and I were talking about why I prefer the Elizabethans and she prefers the Jacobeans, and she mentioned that the Jacobeans were more Gothic. Claustrophobic, a tight and drowning world. Whereas, the Elizabethans, I mentioned, are reaching. Claws out and wings wide, and their huge tragedy is that they didn't quite pull it off. It proved, at best a holding action.

And I think that sums up something about the difference in our writing and reading styles. She loves ghost stories, and I can't stand them. Her preference is arabesque horror, and mine is tragedy.

*g* She should really be the one writing this book, shouldn't she? Ah, well; you're just going to have to content yourselves with me.