#Shakespeare authorship

[hardly-an-escape]

listen, I see your fanon conviction that Hob dislikes Shakespeare on principle after what happened in 1589, and I raise you: Hob learning about the anti-Stratfordians in the mid-19th century and immediately and wholeheartedly coming down on the opposite side of whatever that nonsense is:

you can’t tell me Mister Hob “Bob Everyman” Gadling, who’s visited the heights and depths of the early modern human experience, is going to accept the argument that one needs must be an educated nobleman in order to write great works of literature

or that someone of humble and obscure origins doesn’t have the fine sensibilities and creativity to understand and portray the breadth of emotion in Shakespeare’s plays

(Hob himself is intensely average and though he may not be able to write them, he can sure as hell understand them)

imagine, if you will, Hob constantly getting into trouble when arguing with anti-Stratfordians because half of his evidence is based on the fact that he knows it was Will Shakespeare because he fucking met Will Shakespeare

Hob constantly disgusted at the tendency of Certain Kinds of People to make things far far more complicated than they need to be, i.e… English spelling has never been consistent especially where names are concerned, there are no hidden ciphers, nobody faked their death or hid undiscovered manuscripts in any tombs, Ockham’s Razor for Christ’s sake etc. etc.

he teaches a seminar on the Shakespeare authorship question and it’s one of the most well-attended in the university’s history because he’s gained a reputation as an extremely animated lecturer

“listen, the man may have been a twat on a personal level but twats can be geniuses too”

(I blame @qqueenofhades for this because her fic AITWW is making me think A Lot about Hob and History and I already have feelings about Shakespeare authorship)

[drdamiang]

GHOSTLY

GHOSTLY

did Hamlet's father's ghost

write Hamlet

in the same way

that

Shakespeare is

the ghost

the rest of the plays?

not a question

to pose to you

my friend Professional

my

world of cold truth so

riches to

rags of

its very nature

yours so

smartly sanctified

appropriately sanctioned

allowed you

to make money, get status

more more money

and status

writing this ghostly Shakespeare

than anyone ever

made

writing his

plays

[christofpierson]

It's Willfully Stupid to Pretend the Shakespeare Authorship Question Is Resolved

More than meets the eye? In response to the recent publication of Elizabeth Winkler’s lively and thought-provoking Shakespeare Is a Woman and Other Heresies, which is, among other things, a powerful book-length argument for academic freedom in English departments, Slate.com published a review by staff writer Isaac Butler labeling Winkler’s book “Shakespeare Trutherism” and urging a supposedly…

[shoutsthedustflake]

I'm a Midwesterner with rather a lot of Irish Protestant in my family tree, so I have a selection of grudges that I have cultivated like a formal garden. Many of these, it will not surprise anyone on tumblr dot com to know, are online. This does not say anything good about my character.

Still, the little spark of confirmatory joy at learning that the prolix fascist operating system guy is also an Oxfordian was real and sharp.

[withasideofshakespeare]

In light of recent discoveries, I will be changing the name of this blog to honor the true author of these 37/8 plays we all know and love: Christopher Marlowe.

It has been unequivocally proven as of this week that Marlowe did not in fact meet his judgment in 1593, but rather lived on to continue his career as a great poet and playwright.

Previously, it was believed that his works left unfinished and the body identified as his were solid proof that the plays he wrote under the name of “William Shakespeare” could not have been written by the same hand as the great Tragical History of Doctor Faustus and Hero and Leander.

But as of this week, it has been proven that this evidence has long been misinterpreted. It is true that he left behind unfinished poems and that there was a body identified as his. In fact, it is even true that the body identified that day was his.

Where generations of scholars went awry, however, was in their lack of consideration for the spirit of the man whose body died that day. Using modern technology including EMWA (electromagnetic writing analysis), it was discovered that William Shakespeare did physically write the plays, but it was the spirit of the great Christopher Marlowe who was behind them via the ancient art of human consciousness possession (HCP).

Yes, you heard that right: it has been scientifically proven “Shakespeare’s” posthumously published folio which brought us some of our most beloved plays is simply radiating with electromagnetic particles that suggest the mind behind the text was not Shakespeare’s but Marlowe’s, in possession the former’s body.

I study English rather than paranormal writing analysis, so I can only explain what little I know about the subject, but from what I understand, analysis of an original printing of the first folio produced these results. Modern paranormal expert Sam Winchester says of the discovery: “It reshapes the fields of both English literature and paranormology. Most cases of PoP [Possession of Poets] are fairly low-profile. It’s rare to see a case like this. We studied the folio by analyzing the IPs [inspiration particles] and comparing them against a text authentically written by Marlowe and then one we could expect Shakespeare’s possession by Kit wouldn’t have influenced—his will. The IPs analyzed from over six hundred lines of the folio were similar in shape, color, and potency to those detected from lines of Marlowe’s Faustus, Tamburlaine, Edward II, and Hero and Leander but markedly different from those of Shakespeare’s will. The variations in the hue of the particles between Marlowe’s writings while living and those produced after his death via his possession of William Shakespeare showed that “Shakespeare’s” plays were consistent with the particles we see in other cases of PoP, proving that they were in fact written posthumously by the mind of Marlowe and the hand of Shakespeare.”

Anne Hathaway, actress and immortal wife of the late William Shakespeare said that she was “not surprised” by the new development. “Will sure seemed odd after ‘93—sorry, that’s 1593 for you all. He became suddenly obsessed with writing plays and sonnets. I was pretty excited about the sonnets initially until I realized most of them were written to some twink and not me. I suppose that’s how these things go. I still think Will would be proud of his legacy even if it wasn’t entirely his.”

Winchester recommends that “Shakespeare” scholars worldwide “acknowledge Marlowe as the true author of the plays, sonnets, and poems both out of respect for the mind behind the verse and to avoid being possessed [them]selves.” He says that paranormologists have “no reason to believe that Marlowe isn’t still out there waiting to add a few more plays to his repertoire.” In fact, he and his team are currently analyzing Tom Stoppard’s plays to rule out the possibility of another case of possession by Marlowe.

[apenitentialprayer]

Gagarin flew into space, but didn't see any god there.

attributed to Nikita Khrushchev.

Sed contra,

Looking for God —or Heaven— by exploring space is like reading or seeing all Shakespeare's plays in the hope that you will find Shakespeare as one of the characters or Stratford as one of the places. Shakespeare is in one sense present at every moment in every play. But he is never present in the same way as Falstaff or Lady Macbeth. Nor is he diffused through the play like a gas. [… We], in varying degrees according to our perceptiveness, have 'found Shakespeare' in the plays. […] Now of course this is only an analogy. I am not suggesting at all that the existence of God is as easily established as the existence of Shakespeare. My point is that, if God does exist, He is related to the universe more as an author is related to a play than as one object in the universe is related to another. If God created the universe, He created space-time, which is to the universe as the metre is to a poem or the key is to music. To look for Him as one item within the framework which He Himself invented is nonsensical. If God —such a God as any adult religion believes in— exists, mere movement in space will never bring you any nearer to Him or any farther from Him than you are at this very moment. You can neither reach nor avoid Him by travelling to Alpha Centauri or even to other galaxies. A fish is no more, and no less, in the sea after it has sum a thousand miles than it was when it set out.

C.S. Lewis, "The Seeing Eye"

Galactic Manoeuvre, by Nikolai Nedbailo

[shakespearenews]

Recent developments include a public “mock trial” of Shakespeare at, of all places, Middle Temple. Though the judges came down on Shakespeare’s side, the very notion that his authorship is a matter of debate serves the denialists’ cause. When I queried this with the Middle Temple press office, the event’s organiser angrily revealed himself as a believer that the real Shakespeare was the Earl of Oxford (such people call themselves Oxfordians).

Simon & Schuster has issued a book, Shakespeare Was a Woman and Other Heresies by Elizabeth Winkler, an American journalist. Its genesis is an article Winkler wrote for The Atlantic in 2019 on reasons for doubting the attribution of authorship to Shakespeare from Stratford. Her misconceptions were patiently dismantled by the Columbia scholar James Shapiro in the next issue. Winkler’s book is a farrago of wounded pride, sly insinuation of mystery where there is none, and a feeble grasp of sources, dates and facts...

...This is no time for genteel dialogue. The riot at the US Capitol underlines that baseless conspiracy theories have costs. If, through cynicism or soft-headedness, periodicals and publishers act as accessories, they shame themselves.

[thatgirlonstage]

I think I am mostly relieved but a tiny bit disappointed that Somerton has not, as far as I saw, ever done a video on something Shakespeare-related. Relieved bc I truly don’t have the time or energy to be as angry as it would inevitably make me but a little disappointed just bc I wanted a chance to play spot the plagiarism with a topic where there’s an extremely nonzero chance I would’ve actually read the sources he would be cribbing from

[britneyshakespeare]

[serialreblogger]

Spelling was not standardized in Shakespeare's England

yes this is my point. william "sex jokes" "historical RPF" shakespeare is broadly upheld as the pinnacle of english literature, and zero percent of his works conform to any standardized spelling/grammar system

"shakespeare couldn't spell his own name" is shorthand for "the snobbery of ~english literature & canon~ is both self-contradictory and arbitrary in the extreme." & to me this means that anyone can create whatever they want and be just as good as any shakespearean sonnet. bc the only real qualifier for "good writing" is that somebody cared about the story they were telling, and the only real qualifier for "good reading material" is that someone, somewhere, wants to read it

no gods no kings no earl of oxford only a bunch of plays written in a drama club's groupchat and the people who keep investing them with meaning. there is no magic formula or golden standard. the only thing that gives any art any value is the people who choose to value it

[afterthefeast]

watching upstart crow. gale jumpscare!

[lizziestudieshistory]

Books of 2023 - January

I'm trying something new and writing vague thoughts on the books I've read this month as I've finished them. So if I repeat myself or I ramble (more than usual) then I apologise. Not that anyone reads these anyway 😅

The Winter's Tale by William Shakespeare - pleasantly surprised! I remember not getting on with The Winter's Tale when I first read the play as I found it disjointed. However, this time I really got into the themes and Shakespeare's examination of age/corruption/irrational passions vs. youth/rejuvenation/constancy in love. It's a WEIRD play and it definitely has a confusing plot, however, I did enjoy myself.

Rhythm of War by Brandon Sanderson - an underwhelming reread. Rhythm of War wasn't my favourite to start with and this reread really showed how formulaic sections of this book were (mainly ALL the stuff in Urithiru). I really didn't need another Kaladin fight scene after part one and that's sort of half the book... I did enjoy elements, such as looking at Kaladin's depression and Raboniel, but the vast majority was disappointing.

On the Knocking on the Gate in Macbeth by Thomas de Quincey (essay) - interesting essay I read randomly whilst on a break in the library at uni, it discusses act 2 of Macbeth and how Shakespeare creates an emotional response from the audience with a knock. I don't have much to say tbh...

Shakespearean: On Life and Language in Times of Distress by Robert McCrum - a pointless vanity project that shouldn't have been published. I only continued with this because I bought it and I NEVER buy nonfiction - clearly a rule I need to stick to! The points of interest came from McCrum pulling from other people's work (and citing it badly!!!) either by paraphrasing or directly quoting. I still don't really know what McCrum had to say for himself on the subject of what makes Shakespeare "Shakespeare" or "Shakespearean"... So what was the point? I also found myself disliking McCrum on a personal level, he came across like that unpleasant public schoolboy in your uni class who thinks he's smarter than everyone else, and is slightly sexist... Not a great impression.

Twelfth Night by William Shakespeare - a reread of an old favourite. I found this read very different to my previous experiences, this isn't to say that I didn't enjoy it but I found myself bored with the "B" plotline with Malvolio and Sir Toby Belch... And Olivia wasn't as dazzling as usual... However, I did really enjoy discovering how fabulous Viola is and thinking about late Elizabethan/early Jacobean gender norms and identity. So swings and roundabouts.

A Wizard of Earthsea by Ursula K. Le Guin - I really wasn't expecting to like Earthsea, I'm not sure why but I had a feeling it wasn't going to be for me... I was so wrong! I had a lovely time with this first book. I don't think it's going to be a new all-time favourite series, but it is one I'm going to enjoy picking up every now and again as the mood takes me. Le Guin is a beautiful writer, her prose is lyrical and captivating in a way we rarely see in fantasy. It's simple, elegant, and layered - a child could read Earthsea and yet there is a rich thematic lining to this story that I loved pondering as I read through. The characters and narrative distance did mean I couldn't lose myself in the story as I would with someone like Robin Hobb, but I loved A Wizard of Earthsea in a different way. I'd highly recommend giving it a go if you're interested in classic fantasy!

The Poems by William Shakespeare - I've never tried Shakespeare's poetry before, at least not seriously, you can't go through the British education system without reading sonnet 18 at some point. Poetry usually isn't my thing and I only enjoy epic and narrative poetry...and this is still the case, as this collection proved. I enjoyed Venus and Adonis, and The Rape of Lucrece much more than The Phoenix and Turtle or The Passionate Pilgrim. Both of the longer narrative poems gave me something to think about, usually surrounding the themes of each poem and its historical context. The shorter works I found myself largely indifferent - although The Phoenix and Turtle is very beautiful.

[vifetoile]

Ladies is it feminist praxis to promote Lady Mary Sidney as the true, long-denied author of the works of William Shakespeare?

[drdamiang]

OPPOSITE OF SHAKESPEARE

read everything

write nothing

everybody knows

everything about me

no shares

in anything, brokeass

Professor

done my best

to bash the whole

idea of Imperial

greatness

writer

as god

I am

figure of antithesis

the opposite of Shakespeare

read nothing

wrote everything

greatest writer ever

we know nothing about

[neil-gaiman]

Hello. What are your thoughts on the Shakespeare authorship controversy? You seem like a Stratfordian (or maybe that's wishful thinking)

I think that extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof, and that the idea that Shakespeare had to be an aristocrat rather than a working playwright is founded in snobbery rather than in any kind of realistic estimate of the writing skills of the British aristocracy.