Doesn't anyone in your editorial offices have an education in something other than computer science? Not to be personal or insulting, but I cannot imagine a literate adult publishing the specious, babbling nonsense written in your January Commentary on Richard III. Really, folks, the trite, pompous comparison of Shakespeare's second most complex character to your average hardware, software, or network guru is beyond comprehension and trying of patience.
Richard Shorr
Paris, France
The members of our editorial staff have diverse educational backgrounds, with degrees in electrical engineering, physics, mathematics, geology, journalism, architecture, English, and so on. As a matter of fact, one of us studied Shakespeare intensively for three years and thus, if nothing else, was able to write the headline that appears above your letter.
--Eds.
I read with great interest the January Commentary written by Thornton A. May comparing an MIS director with Shakespeare's Richard III. While the subtitle of the article did not differentiate between a dramatic character and a historical one, May was careful to make note of the fact that it was indeed Shakespeare's fictional character, and not the actual king, that he was writing about. May is to be congratulated for making this distinction.
Far from being the bloodthirsty tyrant of the play, Richard III was in fact an enlightened monarch and was responsible for a great deal of farseeing legislation. The subsequent blackening of his reputation by the Tudor dynasty that followed him was due to the fact that Henry VII had to justify an extremely slim claim to the throne.
Margaret Gurowitz
Richard III Society
New Orleans, LA
Much Ado About Richard III
