Talk:Paradise Lost: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Martin Wyatt (Talk page generated using Special:MetadataForm) |
imported>Peter Jackson No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{subpages}} | ||
Shakespeare has artillery in ''King John''. Ignorance, or a different attitude to anachronism? Is this relevant? [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 15:18, 20 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
:I think the idea of artillery in PL is ridiculous rather than anachronistic. As for ''King John'', you might, if you were very ingenious, argue that Shakespeare is using artillery in its old sense of any engine of war (OED), but it is more likely it is just plain not caring. --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 21:28, 20 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
::I didn't mean he used the ''word'' "artillery". If memory serves right, he talks about "cannon", but don't quote me on that. | |||
::Anyway, it's clear from what you say that it's not relevant to this article. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 09:11, 21 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 04:11, 21 January 2014
Shakespeare has artillery in King John. Ignorance, or a different attitude to anachronism? Is this relevant? Peter Jackson 15:18, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- I think the idea of artillery in PL is ridiculous rather than anachronistic. As for King John, you might, if you were very ingenious, argue that Shakespeare is using artillery in its old sense of any engine of war (OED), but it is more likely it is just plain not caring. --Martin Wyatt 21:28, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- I didn't mean he used the word "artillery". If memory serves right, he talks about "cannon", but don't quote me on that.
- Anyway, it's clear from what you say that it's not relevant to this article. Peter Jackson 09:11, 21 January 2014 (UTC)