🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mar 2, 6:16 pm, "Peter F." <pete...@rey.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
> Franz Gnaedinger wrote:
>
> > Peter Farey wrote:
>
> > > Franz Gnaedinger wrote:
>
> > > > In the play 'Romeo and Juliet' a quarrelsome character
> > > > by the name of Tybalt seeks trouble,
>
> > > Tybalt is Juliet's cousin who, angered at Romeo (a Montague)
> > > gatecrashing the Capulets' ball - but being prevented by
> > > Capulet from challenging him at the time - has apparently
> > > sent a challenge to the Montagues' house and is now looking
> > > for him.
>
> > > > draws against Romeo's friend Mercutio,
>
> > > No he doesn't. Mercutio is the first to utter provocative
> > > words and neither draws initially.
>
> > > > this one also draws, a sword fight ensues,
>
> > > Not yet it doesn't. Romeo arrives, at which point Tybalt
> > > says "Here's my man", and tries to provoke him to fight.
> > > Romeo refuses (because this is Juliet's cousin), which
> > > angers Mercutio as a "vile submission", and he's determined
> > > to fight even if Romeo won't. He draws first, and some
> > > lines later Tybalt draws too.
>
> > > > Romeo intervenes, but in vain, he makes it only worse,
> > > > Mercutio falls,
>
> > > Romeo tries to beat down their swords, but in doing so
> > > allows Mercutio to be stabbed (under Romeo's arm). Tybalt
> > > flees and Mercutio, mortally wounded but still alive, is
> > > led away by Benvolio, who soon returns to say that he has
> > > died. Romeo decides that this death must be revenged.
>
> > > > whereupon Romeo takes revenge by killing Tybalt for
> > > > having murdered his good and funny friend.
>
> > > Tybalt returns and Romeo challenges him. They fight and
> > > Tybalt dies. Benvolio urges him to flee, which he does
> > > eventually.
>
> > > > Romeo was not guilty under Verona's law,
>
> > > The Prince arrives, and incensed that his prohibition of
> > > any such fighting has been ignored and his kinsman Mercutio
> > > killed, he banishes Romeo from Verona on pain of death.
>
> Interesting that you snipped all of those parts of your own
> report of what happened which I pointed out as being wrong.
> Seems to me that in order to have anything sensible to say
> about who wrote Shakespeare one should at least have a work-
> ing knowledge of what was written. You apparently don't.
>
> > Kindly consider me an eyewitness delivering my personal
> > report. Ask the police, they will tell you that one witness
> > saw a blue jacket, the next one a red jacket, and the third
> > a yellow one. What counts in the end is that the right villain
> > is revealed by a witness.
>
> I see. So we are to assume that Shakespeare's own account of
> what "really" happened was inaccurate? Interesting theory!
>
> > > Peter Farey was joking. Any alleged "hidden meanings" like
> > > these are worthless unless that meaning is grammatically
> > > correct, says something which is actually meaningful, and
> > > can be proved beyond reasonable doubt to have been placed
> > > there deliberately.
>
> > The joke in the Baroque theater is that the chester is speaking
> > the truth, the least likely one to do so. And you, as a Marlowe
> > supporter in the Shakespeare question, helped me establish
> > de Vere. So Peter Farey made a fine joke.
>
> Yes, we chesters have our uses. Pity you didn't get it.
>
> > > The only "fine advice" I gave you was to make sure that you
> > > have a satisfactory answer to the questions posed in my
> > > short article at <http://tinyurl.com/ydzqv8r>. How are you
> > > doing?
>
> > I replied yesterday afternoon, telling you that I can't print
> > out your blog, told you so in all detail, and therefore had to
> > answer your question in a general way. Didn't you see it?
>
> No I didn't. Not being a subscriber to sci.lang, the only posts
> I would see as a matter of course would be those to newsgroup
> <humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare>.
>
> > Must I repeat it for you? Well then:
>
> > (begin of copy)
>
> > I just tried to print it out, impossible, four pages
> > slid out of the printer, the first one with the title,
> > rest of the sheet empty, then your blog on the next
> > page, cut off in the middle of the second table,
> > then another empty page, only a narrow column
> > of advertisements on the margin, then a page with
> > a couple of links at the top, rest empty. Most of
> > your question blog swallowed. So I had to read
> > it online and will answer it here, without having
> > studied it at home.
>
> You must have more trees in Switzerland, I guess?
>
> > Kurt Kreiler wrote a book on
> > The Man who Invented Shakespeare, I heard him
> > on a radio program but didn't see his book, an
> > English translation is bound to appear this summer,
> > as I am informed, and he will answer your questions,
> > I hope, for he found a lot of remote material.
>
> I look forward to reading this in translation, although I'm
> rather less optimistic than you are about his being able to
> answer those specific questions, there being a complete lack
> of success in doing so among your fellow-Oxfordians so far.

I told you that I can't print out your blog, and for
your information: I tried to do so at the ETH Zurich,
Federal Technical Institute, where young Einstein
was teaching for a while, they have really good
equipment there, and the best maintenance.
When I can't print out your paper there, I can
do it nowhere. So pray tell me the first question,
the most important one, the one you believe
I absolutely can't answer. Just a plain simple
question, here, in a couple of lines. I met a lot
of kooky theories in the Usenet, and I always
tell people to give me one single idea, or, if they
think me a kook, to point out my biggest blunder.
Single questions can be handled in the Usenet,
hundred questions at once can't, and being very
tired of endless meta-discussions and meta-meta-
discussions I snipped the rest of your message.
Just one single question please. You must have
many. The most challenging one I surely can't
answer will do. I'll be happy answering it or
confessing defeat.