October 11


Amber pages



Ulrich Zwingli, Swiss humanist and author killed, today in 1531. By whom, and how, and where, and why?


Second Vatican Ecumenical Council opened in Rome, today in 
1962 - in what ways if any was it significant enough to merit inclusion?



The "Gang of Four" arrested in Peking, today in 
1976 - or should this go on the date of the outcome of the process?


You can see why I have amber pages!





You can find David Prashker at:


Copyright © 2018 David Prashker
All rights reserved
The Argaman Press

March 11

 

1818


KOSHER FRANKENSTEIN



My holiday excursion into John Banville's 
splendid little book about Prague (click here) continues (see September 2 for another piece resulting from that read).

"… a visit to the Old Jewish Cemetery," he writes, "a pilgrimage every traveller to Prague must make… a Dantesque scene, thronged with tourists shuffling along specified walkways between the jumbled, moss-grown tombstones, the estimated number of which varies between 12,000 and 20,000, depending on which guide-book you choose to trust. The oldest stone, from 1439, is that of Rabbi Avigdor Kar, or Kara, or Karo; the latest, marking the grave of Moses Beck, is dated May 17th, 1787. Buried here also are two of the leading Jews of the Emperor Rudolf's time, the financier Mordechai Meisl, richest Praguer of his day – a great philanthropist, he built three synagogues, one of which bears his name, as well as public baths, a hospital, and the Jewish Town Hall, overlooking the cemetery, which has a Hebrew clock the hands of which turn backwards, a detail not missed by Apollinaire in his famous hallucinatory poem "Zone" – and Rabbi Judah Loew ben Bezalel (?1520-1609), one of the greatest Jewish scholars of the Renaissance, and Prague's Chief Rabbi from 1597 until his death."

It is the naming of Judah Loew that draws me to this response.

"Rabbi Loew," Banville continues, "is the subject of many legends, especially those featuring Yossel the Golem, the giant clay man whom Loew is said to have fashioned from a lump of earth, as God created Adam from the dust of Elohim" (I am not sure that Banville has got his Judaics quite right here, but let that be).

"The story goes that in the year 1850 a certain friar by the name of Thaddeus, a fanatical anti-Semite, raised accusations of superstitious rituals and blood sacrifices against the Prague Jews. Rabbi Loew appealed to Yahweh for help, and in a dream was instructed to create the Golem as a protector of the faithful against the Christian mob. He summoned his son-in-law, Isaac ben Simon, and a disciple, the Levite Yakob ben Chaim Sasson, to represent respectively the elements of fire and water, while the Rabbi himself was the element of air; the Golem, of course, would be the final element, earth. After the three had performed the intricate ceremony of religious purification they went to the banks of the Vltava at midnight and kneaded a human figure from river clay. First Rabbi Loew instructed Isaac the priest to walk seven times around the Golem, starting from the right, chanting Psalms and reciting magical formulas and letter combinations as he went; then Yakob the Levite was ordered to circle the figure another seven times, starting from the left. After this, Rabbi Loew himself circled the Golem, which, feeling the effects of the three elements, began to glow with the heat of life. Finally, the Rabbi inserted a shem hameforash, a slip of paper on which was written the unutterable name of God, under the Golem's tongue, and the creature rose to his feet, a living homunculus ready to do his master's bidding."

The Hebrew word "golem" (גולם) appears twice in the Talmud, once to describe a woman who has not yet conceived, the other for a jug that requires polishing; the root means "rudiment", or "embryo", or merely earthly "substance", and also makes a solitary appearance in the Bible itself, in Psalm 139, verse 16, to be precise:

גָּלְמִי רָאוּ עֵינֶיךָ וְעַל סִפְרְךָ כֻּלָּם יִכָּתֵבוּ
יָמִים יֻצָּרוּ ולא אֶחָד בָּהֶם

My substance was not hidden from you,
when I was made in secret,
and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.

The next verse is also worth quoting; though it does not repeat the usage of the word, it does complete the intent and meaning of the language:

Your eyes saw my substance, though it was imperfect;
and in your book all my members were written,
which continued to be fashioned,
while as yet there were still none of them.

A hint, perhaps more than just a hint, and one to which I shall return, that the original Frankenstein did not belong to Mary Shelley, but to King David.

But first let me pick up Banville's tale where I left it, his observation that

"Rabbi Loew was a great scriptural scholar, and also an adept of the Cabala, a mystical philosophy based on philosophical writings which originated among the Jews in thirteenth-century Spain, and which had a widespread vogue during the Emperor Rudolf's reign. Cabalistic teaching reached well beyond the Ghetto, and was a strong influence in Neoplatonism, for instance, and even on the magical thinking of John Dee"

- the original 007; and if you would like to know more about that surprising piece of information, go to my novel "The Plausible Tragedy of Roderigo Lopes", due for publication very soon.

"Rudolf, needless to say, was deeply interested, and on February 23rd 1592 summoned Rabbi Loew to the Hradčany…" 

(I cannot resist interjecting that the local name for it is the Pražský hrad, Pražska being the Slovakian and Bohemian name for the town, a minorly spelling-varied version of my own ancestral village in Poland, just two hundred and ninety miles to the north-east)… 

"and had a lengthy, secret meeting alone with him. How one longs to have a record of that conversation.

"The Cabala might be said to be the underground religion of the Jews. It is a creation myth and a Jewish form of Messianism, and incorporates numerology and a complex science of alphabetical combinations known as gematria. The legend of the Golem's creation speaks of complex rituals in which permutations of the Tetragrammaton, the four-letter symbol of God's name, were of paramount importance. From this and other hints it seems clear that a Golem story is a debased, popular version of a Cabalistic creation myth.

"How peculiar, then, that the never less than dogmatic Ripellino [see footnote 1] should insist that the legend of Prague's Golem 'goes back no further than Romanticism', making its appearance first in a five-volume collection of tall tales and anecdotes, in German, not Yiddish, entitled Sippurim, published by Wolf Pascheles in the middle of the nineteenth century. There is no mention of the Golem, Ripellino points out, in David Gans's 1592 chronicle of the Jews of Prague, Zamach David ("Descendants of David"), nor in a biography of Rabbi Loew published in 1718.

"However," Banville concludes, "Ripellino is speaking only of the written legend. Yossel the Golem is as old as the Prague Ghetto…"

Indeed he is. "Yossel the Golem” - the kosher version of Frankenstein's monster - "had both a benign and a bad side. Having thwarted Friar Thaddeus, he took to patrolling the streets and back lanes of the Ghetto, keeping guard over the houses of the poor so that no malignant goy could come creeping in to hide the bodies of Christian children in Jewish homes. One night he surprised the butcher Havlíĉek carrying the corpse of a baby hidden in the belly of a slaughtered pig into the house of Mordechai Meisl, to whom he was indebted, with the intention of denouncing the banker as a ritual murderer.

"There came, however, that Friday evening when Yossel went on the rampage. Rabbi Loew had forgotten to give him his Sabbath eve instructions for next day, and in his boredom Yossel ran amok, stamping everything in his path to pieces, until the Rabbi was called upon to quell his monster. Eventually, like a pet that refuses to be house-trained, the Golem had to go. One night at the beginning of 1593 – the designation of a particular year is a nice touch on the part of the legend-maker – Rabbi Loew instructed Yossel to sleep not in his own bed in the Rabbi's house but to spend the night in the attic of the Old-New Synagogue. Two hours after midnight, Rabbi Loew, with his henchmen Isaac and Yakob, climbed to the loft where the Golem lay sleeping. First the Rabbi removed the shem from under the creature's tongue, then the three men performed the same ceremony by which they had brought the Golem to life, but this time in reverse, and by morning all that was left of poor Yossel was a pile of clay."

If only it might have been that easy for Dr Frankenstein as well; but then we would never had the psychological tale, which in the end is so much more powerful than the mythological one.


"The Rabbi himself met a more poetic end, when he bent to savour the perfume of a rose his granddaughter had presented to him, only to discover that Death himself was hiding among the petals. A better way to go, certainly, than the ignominious end that befell, literally, his Polish colleague, the famous miracle-working Rabbi Elijah of Chelm, called Israel Baal Shem Tov, who had his own Golem. When the latter's time was up, Rabbi Elijah chose to destroy him by erasing the first letter of the word emet (Hebrew for "truth") graven on the creature's brow, leaving the word met (Hebrew for "death"). However, the Rabbi made the mistake of ordering the Golem to erase the letter himself; when he did so, he turned back at once into a load of clay, which promptly collapsed on Rabbi Elijah, crushing him."


So much for Banville. This picture of the Golem takes us in two directions, and I shall follow both. The first is his transition, midway through the legend, from a Creation Myth of Adam composed from the dust, into an alternate version of that other great myth, which began with Cain the son of Adam, and ended as the Wandering Jew – and which, as we shall see, becomes the fate of both Dr. Frankenstein and his Golem, which is the second direction I shall follow. Given that I am writing about literature, and having been citing literature citing literature to do so, let me follow the Wandering Jew through Mark Twain's portrait of him, pilfered mostly from Wm. C. Grimes, in chapter 54 of his "The Innocents Abroad":

"And so we came at last to another wonder of deep and abiding interest - the veritable house where the unhappy wretch once lived who has been celebrated in song and story for more than eighteen hundred years as the Wandering Jew. On the memorable day of the Crucifixion he stood in this old doorway with his arms akimbo, looking out upon the struggling mob that was approaching, and when the weary Saviour would have sat down and rested him a moment, pushed him rudely away and said, 'Move on!' The Lord said, 'Move on, thou, likewise,' and the command has never been revoked from that day to this. All men know how that miscreant upon whose head that just curse fell has roamed up and down the wide world, for ages and ages, seeking rest and never finding it - courting death but always in vain - longing to stop, in city, in wilderness, in desert solitudes, yet hearing always that relentless warning to march - march on!

"They say - do these hoary traditions - that when Titus sacked Jerusalem and slaughtered eleven hundred thousand Jews in her streets and by-ways, the Wandering Jew was seen always in the thickest of the fight, and that when battle-axes gleamed in the air, he bowed his head beneath them; when swords flashed their deadly lightnings, he sprang in their way; he bared his breast to whizzing javelins, to hissing arrows, to any and to every weapon that promised death and forgetfulness, and rest. But it was useless - he walked forth out of the carnage without a wound. And it is said that five hundred years afterward he followed Mahomet when he carried destruction to the cities of Arabia, and then turned against him, hoping in this way to win the death of a traitor. His calculations were wrong again. No quarter was given to any living creature but one, and that was the only one of all the host that did not want it. He sought death five hundred years later, in the wars of the Crusades, and offered himself to famine and pestilence at Ascalon. He escaped again - he could not die.

"These repeated annoyances could have at last but one effect - they shook his confidence. Since then the Wandering Jew has carried on a kind of desultory toying with the most promising of the aids and implements of destruction, but with small hope, as a general thing. He has speculated some in cholera and railroads, and has taken almost a lively interest in infernal machines and patent medicines. He is old, now, and grave, as becomes an age like his; he indulges in no light amusements save that he goes sometimes to executions, and is fond of funerals. There is one thing he can not avoid; go where he will about the world, he must never fail to report in Jerusalem every fiftieth year. Only a year or two ago he was here for the thirty-seventh time since Jesus was crucified on Calvary. They say that many old people, who are here now, saw him then, and had seen him before. He looks always the same - old, and withered, and hollow-eyed, and listless, save that there is about him something which seems to suggest that he is looking for some one, expecting some one - the friends of his youth, perhaps. But most of them are dead, now. He always pokes about the old streets looking lonesome, making his mark on a wall here and there, and eyeing the oldest buildings with a sort of friendly half interest; and he sheds a few tears at the threshold of his ancient dwelling, and bitter, bitter tears they are. Then he collects his rent and leaves again. He has been seen standing near the Church of the Holy Sepulchre on many a starlight night, for he has cherished an idea for many centuries that if he could only enter there, he could rest. But when he approaches, the doors slam to with a crash, the earth trembles, and all the lights in Jerusalem burn a ghastly blue! He does this every fifty years, just the same. It is hopeless, but then it is hard to break habits one has been eighteen hundred years accustomed to. The old tourist is far away on his wanderings, now. How he must smile to see a pack of blockheads like us, galloping about the world, and looking wise, and imagining we are finding out a good deal about it! He must have a consuming contempt for the ignorant, complacent asses that go skurrying about the world in these railroading days and call it traveling. When the guide pointed out where the Wandering Jew had left his familiar mark upon a wall, I was filled with astonishment. It read: 'S. T. - 1860 - X.' All I have revealed about the Wandering Jew can be amply proven by reference to our guide."

And a great deal more that I shall reveal, tomorrow indeed, on March 12.

"The kosher version of Frankenstein's monster", I wrote earlier, and now we can begin to see how the ancient myths of Adam and Cain have been continued down the ages, through the legends of the Golem and the Wandering Jew. Did Mary Shelley know all this when she created both in both her "monster" and that "monster's" creator, Victor Frankenstein?

Quoting two great authors like Banville and Twain is entirely legitimate; I am not so certain about quoting myself, especially from my own diary, but the lines are pertinent, so here is what I wrote there, on March 11th 2002 as it happens:

"I looked up Mary Shelley, as today is the anniversary of the publication of 'Frankenstein', and was reminded of how the book came into being. The winter of 1816, when the volcano Tambora erupted, and its impact was to reduce the world to so much snow and ice an estimated million people died of it (the pursuit across the ice at the end of the novel was probably not unconnected).

"Mary and Percy Bysshe went to visit Lord Byron in Switzerland, where Byron's personal physician was also staying, John Polidori by name. They read aloud from a German book of ghost stories, after which Byron challenged them all to write their own. B and PB failed to deliver. Mary came up with the idea for Frankenstein, but didn't begin writing it. Polidori fulfilled the challenge, writing a tale he called 'The Vampyre', and which he then worked up into a novel and published three years later. Given that we know this tale as the origins of the Gothic novel, given that 'Frankenstein' wasn't actually written then, why is Polidori so overlooked, and Bram Stoker, who wrote his 'Dracula' decades later, regarded as the patriarch of vampire fiction?"

To which I will now add that actually Polidori took his idea from Byron, who had published a vampire story of his own three years before, entitled "The Burial", in his collection "The Giaour"; and Byron then responded to Pollydolly's "Vampyre" by drafting, but alas not completing, what is now remembered as "the Unfinished Novel of 1819, likewise a vampire story.

All of which brings me back to the question posited above, one that has been occupying me for some while, throughout this essay, but already many months ago, when I re-read "Frankenstein" as part of my background work for "A Small Drop Of Ink", my "Life of Lord Byron": to what extent, if any, was Mary Shelley aware of the Golem-tales of Prague, and the Wandering Jew tales of wider Europe, and did she consciously, or even unconsciously, deploy them in her creation of both Doctor Victor and the poor, sad creature whom we have mis-named ever since as "the monster"?

It seems to me likely, and yet there is nothing of any merit or significance among the academic critics that even touches on the subject. Type in "Mary Shelley + Golem" to an Internet search engine and you will find some cranky pages of Frankenstein idolatry, which raise the same question that I have here, but likewise fail to answer it (click here, and here, for two examples), simply re-telling the Jewish legends without investigating the Shelley. One day, perhaps, I shall undertake that task, but not today. Enough to have written this.

And then the decision where to post this essay on the blog: which day, which date? Originally I went for September 17th, the date in 1609 on which the Maharal, as he is known in the Jewish world, Rabbi Judah ben Bezalel Loew, returned like his Golem to the dust and clay; but also, because I love these arbitrary coincidences, because this was the closing date, in the year 2017 in which I was writing, of the film festival in another of my old home towns, Toronto; the film on gala night that year was the world premiere of a new movie about Mary Shelley and the writing of "Frankenstein".

But even that does not suffice. This is Kosher Frankenstein, and it needs to bring the two together: so March 11 it now is; and now continue to March 12 for Achashverosh.


-------------------------------------------------------------
Much of Banville's text is in fact out-sourced from Angelo Maria Ripellino's "Magic Prague", using the David Newton Marinelli translation published by Macmillan in 1994; his extensive usage, with an acknowledgement, is my justification for doing the same with his own text here, though I have not sought permission either from him or from his publisher. Banville also notes (page 241) that Ripellino's text, "I am glad to note, relies heavily on the writings of others." So we too are a kind of Cabal.




September 17

 

1925


An entry in my diary claims to be for September 17th 1925, which is somewhat unlikely, as I was minus-thirty at that time. I had been trying to watch a documentary from the American PBS (Public Broadcasting Service), an extremely powerful documentary about the unutterably extraordinary Frida Kahlo, found on YouTube some while before, but at each attempt to watch it, the agony of her physical destruction at various moments of her life reduced me to self-scorn over my nothing-ailments in comparison with hers, and I lacked the composure to keep watching. So I tried to write, with wobbly brain as much as wobbly heart and wobbly hand. So the irrelevant mutilation of a mere time-statement, reparable with white-out and the surgery of a black pen.

Born in Coyoacán, Mexico, in 1906 (you can read a full biography here), she had already had polio by the age of six, which left her right leg somewhat thinner than the left, something she was able to disguise by the simple expedient of always wearing long skirts. Or it may have been spina bifida, or even both - either way it affected the development of her spine as much as her legs, and if she took up boxing and other competitive physical sports as a child, this was because she was a bloody-minded and determined young girl, as she would become in her youth and remain in adulthood, who simply wasn't going to have her life inhibited or ruined by the vagaries of intelligent design.

So she made it through the gangland that was school in Coyoacán, as she made it through the years of revolution that had begun when she was only three, and which rendered daily gunfire the normality of life. But then, on September 17th 1925, the date I mis-wrote in my diary... but I still can't find the emotional strength to tell this story. Instead, let me simply quote the description on the splendid blog of Lisa Waller Rogers:

It was a gray day. A light rain had just fallen. After spending the afternoon wandering among the street stalls of downtown Mexico City, Frida and her boyfriend Alex Gómez Arias caught a bus that would take them home to Coyoacán. The new bus was brightly painted with two benches along the sides. It was nearly full but Alex and Frida found seats together near the back. The bus driver sped off to cross the busy streets on his way out of town.

As the bus driver began to turn onto Calzada de Tlapan, a street trolley approached. The bus driver rashly tried to pass in front of the turning streetcar. He didn’t make it. Alex remembers the point of impact:

"The electric train with two cars approached the bus slowly. It hit the bus in the middle. Slowly the train pushed the bus. The bus had a strange elasticity. It bent more and more, but for a time it did not break. It was a bus with long benches on either side. I remember that at one moment my knees touched the knees of the person sitting opposite me. I was sitting next to Frida. When the bus reached its maximal flexibility it burst into a thousand pieces, and the train kept moving. It ran over many people... I remained under the train. Not Frida. But among the iron rods of the train, the handrail broke and went through Frida from one side to the other at the level of the pelvis."

Frida said that the "handrail pierced me the way a sword pierces a bull." Alex continues:

"When I was able to stand up, I got out from under the train. I had no lesions, only contusions. Naturally the first thing that I did was to look for Frida... Something strange had happened. Frida was totally nude. The collision had unfastened her clothes. Someone in the bus, probably a house painter, had been carrying a packet of powdered gold. This package broke, and the gold fell all over the bleeding body of Frida. When people saw her, they cried, ‘La bailarina, la bailarina!’ With the gold on her red, bloody body, they thought she was a dancer... I picked her up… and then I noticed with horror that Frida had a piece of iron in her body. A man said, ‘We have to take it out!’ He put his knee on Frida’s body and said, ‘Let’s take it out.’ When he pulled it out, Frida screamed so loud that when the ambulance from the Red Cross arrived, her screaming was louder than the siren. Before the ambulance came, I picked up Frida and put her in the display window of a billiard room. I took off my coat and put it over her. I thought she was going to die. Two or three people did die at the scene… others died later.”

Frida’s condition was so grave the doctors didn’t believe that they could save her. They thought she would die on the operating table. Her spinal column was broken in three places in the lumbar region. Her collarbone was broken and her third and fourth ribs. Her right leg had eleven fractures and her right foot was dislocated and crushed. Her left shoulder was out of joint, her pelvis broken in three places. The steel handrail produced a deep abdominal wound, entering through the left hip and exiting through the genitals. She convalesced for two years though she would never fully recover.

It was while she was confined to bed that Frida began to paint, using a small lap easel her mother bought for her. Frida had a mirror hung overhead in the canopy of her bed so she could use her reflection as a beginning subject for portraits.

A year before that accident, Frida had begun occasionally dating the internationally renowned artist Diego Rivera, colleague of Braque and Picasso during his time in Paris, now chief muralist of Mexico City. In 1929 they married. In 1939, after both had engaged in numerous extra-maritial affairs with women, her extra-marital with a man proved too much for the macho "Elephant", and his with her younger sister too much for the crippled "Dove", and so they duly divorced, only to realise at once the unadult if not unadulterated stupidity of that decision, and so they remarried in 1940, promising to be more fastidious in their future choice of extra-maritals. Both were recognised as painters of world class by this time. But what Frida wanted out of life wasn't Art, or even Love, and certainly not Fame; what Frida wanted was the one thing that her shattered body was incapable of producing: a child.


Eventually I managed to watch the entire documentary, start to finish, though only just (my eyes were hurting, the scar in my back was playing up, a bad cold was the real explanation of my tears - and the pain in my ego, as my alter ego went on berating me for complaining, was simply torturous). The hardest of all was that moment when they amputated her leg, and then put her in a metal corset that looked like Skevington's Irons - the cruellest of all the many barbaric instruments of torture that kept the first Queen Elizabeth safe from Catholic plotters. How can a human being, a fragile human being, endure such torment - and that was just me thinking about me watching the documentary, let alone poor Frida, shattered Frida, ruined Frida, unutterably extraordinary Frida. But the art, the Art, the ART! “To create at the level that you wish to create,” had been my mantra for decades, “you first have to live at the level that you wish to create.” What? Like this? Did I too have to experience something of this order before I could produce genuine poetry? Impossible. Take up sport instead, even the worst injuries are nothing in comparison with this.

There are so many extraordinary paintings to choose from, but for me there is only one that truly matters, her final statement about herself really - the incredible creativity alongside the total inability to have her fertility produce human fruit - but also the one that matters beyond the artist who makes the picture, that matters in the world of icons, regardless of who made them. I am speaking of the painting she called "My Birth", made during her and Diego Rivera's four year stay in America; to be precise, her response to the loss of her child at what was probably her fourth attempt to have one (at least three therapeutic abortions and then this birth-and-death in Detroit), the one in which she is giving birth to her own adult self, the one in which a female response to the male Crucifixion is nonetheless watched over - though she's trying not to look - by what I assume is an aged Virgin Mary disguised as Frida's mother, or perhaps the other way around - it's that hapless and helpless ultimate male, God, who is looking uselessly on. It would, I am quite certain, be banned as obscene in most societies through most of history, including many in the western world today. And yet, is this not the real Crucifixion, far more potent as a symbol than some mere Jew tethered to a Cross? I would be happy to argue the case for this as the most important painting made in the 20th century.



There is so much more to say about her - and I have finally managed to do so, but at far too great a length for a blog entry. In March 2003 I visited Mexico City, and at last, twenty years after the event, I have completed my travel essay, which originally I called "Inside The Volcano" in honour of Malcolm Lowry, but is now titled "Staying for Frida", and will be published in my collection "Travels In Familiar Lands", very soon.





Amber pages


William
       Carlos
    Williams,
                      poet,
                          born today
          in
              1883

I believe this is the appropriate way to present that piece of information


Chaim Herzog, President of Israel, born today in 
1918


Hank Williams Sr (Hiram King Williams), country music pioneer, born today in 1923


Ken Kesey, taker of the Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test and author of the cuckoo's nest, born today in 1935


The first 33-1/3 rpm recording was released, today in 1934 - and I am going to invite you to guess what was on that recording. Was it a) Beethoven's Fifth Symphony; b) Bing Crosby singing "June in  January"; c) a black gospel choir performing "Amazing Grace"; d) the recording engineer at the RCA Victor studio saying "testing, testing, 1, 2, 3"? You are free to phone a friend, or use a lifeline.


Anatasio Somoza, deposed Nicaraguan President, assassinated, today in 1980. Enrique Gorriaran Merlo, alias "Ricardo", was the man who carried out the "execution", not terribly subtly either, firing a rocket which tore off the roof of Sonoza's Mercedes limo, taking both the President's and his chauffeur's head with it. GER!



April 13

Amber pages:

(and a brand-new page at that, March 2024)


1906: Samuel Beckett, playwright (see my essay on Dante, Vico, Joyce on Feb 16, plus cameo walk-on roles on Dec 3, Sept 23, June 6, July 3, Feb 28 and Oct 28.



1964: The first human being who just happened to have darker skin than some of us and why should that be relevant (but sadly it still is and therefore it merits,  no requires, mentioning) won an Oscar as best actor: Sidney Poitier, for "Lilies of the Field".



1576: James Burbage signed the lease for the land on which he would The Theatre.