Print

Print


This IS a tempting diversion from things we ought to be doing. It's made me ruminate on the presence of the fool(s) in a family portrait(s). I'm interested in them in general, anyway.  Any suggestions for a good read on such a topic (the meaning or importance of their representation in the dynastic imagery)?
 
Cheers,
Carolyn
 
 
Carolyn Coulson-Grigsby
Assistant Professor of Theatre and Humanities
Centenary College
400 Jefferson St.
Hackettstown, NJ 07840
908-852-1400 ext 2309
[log in to unmask] 

________________________________

From: REED-L: Records of Early English Drama Discussion on behalf of Twycross, Meg
Sent: Mon 6/2/2008 2:56 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: New portrait of Elizabeth I]



It looks strangely fudged?  The personnel are the same as in the Hampton Court painting (omitting Jane the Fool and Jane Seymour).  But Mary's face is the pinched older one of the official royal portraits, not the rather bland one of the Hampton Court painting, where they are presumably about the same age as in this portrait?  Ditto the Edward, who seems to have been a rather solid child -- or represented as one.  Check out the various portraits of Will Somers as well.

Why am I worrying about this?  I have other things to do!

Meg Twycross

________________________________

From: REED-L: Records of Early English Drama Discussion on behalf of Ingram, William
Sent: Mon 6/2/2008 3:48 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: New portrait of Elizabeth I]



I had no trouble loading either page, but it's nice to have a second
image and a second set of comments.  Users of the Guardian link will
have to mend the line-break to make it functional (as I've done below).

Bill Ingram

-----Original Message-----
From: REED-L: Records of Early English Drama Discussion
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Thomas Larque
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 9:03 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: New portrait of Elizabeth I]

> Is anyone else having trouble loading this page?

Yes.  I had to refresh a couple of times, but it finally turned up.  The
same picture appears more rapidly at
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/neel_mukherjee/2008/05/elizabeth_at_
first.html

Thomas Larque.