Did Shakespeare describe fellatio in any of his works?
RayLopez99
ask.
RL
book...@yahoo.com
Since you ask, legend has it that Shakespeare first worked in theatre
holding horses for customers; and that he had helpers known as
"Shakespeare's boys."
Now, you may not find Shakespeare writing about fellatio, per se, but
I have no doubt that going-ons around the theatres, and indeed many
London taverns, included pennyless children doing oral sex in alleys.
In those days of city venereal diseases and high jinks, this would
have been a likely alternative to whores.
Furthermore, the boys used as players may well have been employed in
the sex industry as assets by the secret service, aimed at foreign
courtiers.
I think it was Nell Gwynn who was coached by a theatre player to
become the mistress of Charles II. She was working at an early age as
one of the "orange girls" who sold fruit and nuts to theatre audiences
and made sexual assignations. Her player coach, Charles Hart,
supposedly has some connection to Shakespeare.
Melanie Sands
Since Ray Lopez is a troll-klone of Houlsby, why would we want to
reply to his posts?
Melanie
Melanie Sands
> become the mistress of Charles II. She was working at an early age as
> one of the "orange girls" who sold fruit and nuts to theatre audiences
> and made sexual assignations. Her player coach, Charles Hart,
> supposedly has some connection to Shakespeare.
Wikipedia tells me that Charles Hart was born ca. 1625 -
nine years after Shakespeare's death - and died 18 August 1683.
Wikipedia also tells me:
"In 1682, when the King's Company joined with the Duke's Company to
form the United Company, Hart retired due to poor health, with a
pension of 40 shillings per week.[9] The well-known story that Hart
was the illegitimate grandson of Shakespeare's sister Joan is largely
discredited"
Melanie
book...@yahoo.com
In the states we have what are known as "tumble bugs," really just
scaribs, that work with BS literally by rolling it up and depositing
its eggs inside, then tumbling it along to be deposited aside.
So why not use someone's dump in the way of a tumble bug and add
something to it that may be useful?
Willedever
definitions)
sucked the honey
blown youth
blasted with ecstasy
quite, quite down.
Unless you are a total moron, you will notice something.
The real question is "why?"
book...@yahoo.com
So if you're conversant with actresses and their ways, not that you're
a Mata Hari yourself, I'm guessing it's not too much of a stretch to
imagine show biz in those days had its side businesses along with
others on that side of the Thames? Players traveled, theatres special
seating for privileged, and who knows what rooms were frequented by
actors and patrons of the arts?
In these circumstances, one may wonder what acting talents were useful
for spy masters. Must we assume that the great Shakespeare would not
have deigned to coach a Lisa to be someone's My Fair Lady? He would
have been great at cross-dressing parties. bookburn
Melanie Sands
>
> So if you're conversant with actresses and their ways, not that you're
> a Mata Hari yourself, I'm guessing it's not too much of a stretch to
> imagine show biz in those days had its side businesses along with
> others on that side of the Thames? Players traveled, theatres special
> seating for privileged, and who knows what rooms were frequented by
> actors and patrons of the arts?
>
> In these circumstances, one may wonder what acting talents were useful
> for spy masters. Must we assume that the great Shakespeare would not
> have deigned to coach a Lisa to be someone's My Fair Lady? He would
Well obviously many showbiz people earned a bit on the side with
all kinds of sugar-daddies. Even in the late 1800's, actresses
were supposed to furnish their own costumes and jewels - maybe even
up to the 1930's in rep theatre in the States and Britain, I'm not
sure - anyway, that afforded a lot of cash and not everybody
earned that much in the theatre, so additional income was welcome -
probably still is. I know that at the Luzern (Switzerland) many
of the full-time chorus members would have additional jobs,
coaching singers or even cleaning flats and offices - to
plump up their income.
And everybody knows that only 5% of all actors worldwide
can actually LIVE off their artistic work and work more
than 6 weeks per year as an actor, so
WE ALL HAVE A DAY JOB
and there is nothing wrong with that, it keeps us in
touch with reality.
I thought just this morning how nice that Tom Selleck -
who as Jesse Stone for example is a really GOOD actor -
works hard on his avocado farm. This keeps him physically
fit and down-to-earth.
That some theatre actors of the past, with their gruelling
schedules - many performances, always in the theatre
with either rehearsals or performances, etc. earned a
bit on the side as partygirls and boys or with
the bestowal of sexual favours - well, who can blame
them, really.
Whether Shakespeare was much involved in any sexual
hustling is another matter. Maybe, maybe not. Probably
merely to get important patrons to the theatre. And
he did have an income back in Stratford, watched over
by his wife.
I think it's understimated, his wife's importance.
He's often seen as a chap that ditched his wife and
went off to live the high life in London.
But many families were/are like that - the wife
stayed home with the kids and the husband had to
go off - sometimes to foreign countries - to
earn money which he sent back home.
(Think of the Italian workers coming to Switzerland
and Germany in the 1960's - think of Abigail
Adams and John Adams in the 1750's in America)
So probably Anne Hathaway was one tough lady, and ran the
Shakespeare business side by side with William.
Melanie
Willedever
> He's often seen as a chap that ditched his wife and
> went off to live the high life in London.
A mad interpretation, of course. London was ground zero for the
plague, and everybody knew it. Not that Stratford was immune, we
know, but if you wanted the plague in England, London was the best
place to get it.
Hey, honey, let's all go live in Plagueville. And be sure to bring
the kids. Whoa. He cared more about his family than that.
London was also filthy, and lots of crime. No modern police force.
No sewer system - well, the Thames and the gutters - and the transport
was horse-drawn. People think cars pollute. Fill a city with
thousands of horses. How did ANY of them survive?
We're seeing, in what he did, the exact opposite of self indulgence.
We're seeing him express concern for his family's well-being, as best
he could provide it. Bad enough he had to risk himself in London, in
the theater he loved and at which he was so talented, but bring the
wife and kids, too? Not when there was an alternative.
Melanie Sands
But I thought that his son Hamnet DID visit him in London, and there
is speculation that his wife may have been with him in that house
where
he left without paying all the taxes...
Since we don't have all the facts, of course, it's useless to
speculate.
Melanie
Willedever
> ...
> But I thought that his son Hamnet DID visit him in London, and there
> is speculation that his wife may have been with him in that house
> where
> he left without paying all the taxes...
Visit, and live there, are much different. As far as speculation on
that, yeah, what you said.
But it's not speculation that so many thousands died from the plague.