 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I've always been intrigued by this subject, having first read it being brought up by Michael H. Hart.
What do you think? Was William Shakespeare merely a front for a different personality? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I always ponder on the autorship of everything tbh...
There is sentence in the autobiography of Malcolm X that got stuck in my head and when I finally understood it, the question of autorship took all its meaning. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago
Over the rainbow, under the bridge |
There's a very good book called 'Shakespeare :The Evidence ' by Ian Wilson which puts the case very carefully that he was indeed the author except for the last play (Henry VIII) which he co-wrote. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"There's a very good book called 'Shakespeare :The Evidence ' by Ian Wilson which puts the case very carefully that he was indeed the author except for the last play (Henry VIII) which he co-wrote. "
I shall have to read that one. I'm currently leaning on the side of those who say the historic personality known as William Shakespeare was not the author for most, if not all, of the works ascribed to his person. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"All but a few Shakespeare scholars and literary historians consider it a fringe belief and for the most part acknowledge it to only dispute it."
Indeed. Fringe beliefs are often held onto more fervently than mainstream ones, however. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago
Over the rainbow, under the bridge |
When you read a number of his plays you can clearly recognise that this is one voice. Except for the final play as I referred to. You can tell that it was not all his own work. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"All but a few Shakespeare scholars and literary historians consider it a fringe belief and for the most part acknowledge it to only dispute it.
Indeed. Fringe beliefs are often held onto more fervently than mainstream ones, however."
Supporters of alternative authors argue that theirs is the more plausible author, and that William Shakespeare lacked the education, aristocratic sensibility, or familiarity with the royal court that they say is apparent in the works. Those who have responded to these claims hold that interpretations of literature are unreliable in determining the author,and that the evidence used to support Shakespeare's authorship title pages, testimony by other contemporary poets and historians, and official records is the same used for all the others of his era.
No direct evidence exists for any other author and Shakespeare's authorship was not questioned during his lifetime or for centuries after his death. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"When you read a number of his plays you can clearly recognise that this is one voice. Except for the final play as I referred to. You can tell that it was not all his own work. "
Indeed, however the question is, who was the one voice, rather than was there more than once voice.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago
Over the rainbow, under the bridge |
"When you read a number of his plays you can clearly recognise that this is one voice. Except for the final play as I referred to. You can tell that it was not all his own work.
Indeed, however the question is, who was the one voice, rather than was there more than once voice. "
William Shakespeare. The evidence is irrefutable and copious. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rlo67Man
over a year ago
Dumfries |
This is one of my enthusiasms: I have read all of the plays and seen them all.
William Shakespeare wrote them. The notion that it was someone else started from snobbery - nobody so low born could have done it. In the last 50 years there have been countless books with specious or flimsy arguments. The only one that holds any water is that he was a secret catholic.
Several of the plays are co-authored. The Two Noble Kinsmen is mostly Fletcher. The first two acts of Pericles are by someone else etc. He was a member of a company and it was common practice to cooperate in the writing. At the height of his powers it was all him though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"All but a few Shakespeare scholars and literary historians consider it a fringe belief and for the most part acknowledge it to only dispute it.
Indeed. Fringe beliefs are often held onto more fervently than mainstream ones, however."
This, the public is widely ignorant about the difference of how we determine historical truth vrs scientific truth. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
