In Search of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern 8Th Annual Edward De
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Vol.3:no.3 "Let me not to the marriage of true minds admit impediments..." Spring 2004 In Search of 8th Annual Rosencrantz and Edward de Vere Guildenstern Studies Conference By C. V. Berney surping powers start wars and plot assassinations while two he 2004 edition of the Ed- minor characters participate without affecting or even ward de Vere Studies Con- understanding the historic events taking place around Tference (April 15th to 17th, U Concordia University, Portland, them. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern thus seem to embody the OR) continued in its now well- situation of the average citizen in today’s world, and for some have established tradition of provoca- become the most poignant figures in Hamlet. They are twentieth- tive papers, interesting special century characters trapped in a sixteenth-century drama, a quality events and a full-schedule that Tom Stoppard took as the basis for his 1967 play, Rosencrantz and can leave attendees—like mara- Guildenstern Are Dead. thon runners—tired but deeply Oxfordian scholars have long recognized that most of the satisfied by the event’s conclu- characters in Hamlet can be linked to real-life historical charac- sion. ters: Polonius with Burghley, Gertrude with Elizabeth, Claudius This year the featured event with Leicester, and so forth. Eva Turner Clark provides a list of such for the weekend was a much- identifications, but omits the ill-fated Danish courtiers.1 Is it Edward de Vere Studies Conference anticipated confrontation with possible to find their real-life equivalents? There should be plenty keynote speaker Mark Anderson Prof. Alan Nelson over his 2003 Oxford biography, Monstrous of candidates, since the families Rosenkrantz and Gyldenstierne presented material from his forth- coming 2005 biography of Edward Adversary. A full afternoon was (to use the Danish spellings) were among the most powerful in set aside for the “Interrogation Denmark, and had many members in government and court de Vere, “Shakespeare” by Another Name. of Alan Nelson,” but the 3-part circles. More immediately, how did the author of Hamlet learn of session did not go as expected these real-life Danish names? Several Stratfordian scholars have (Continued on page 8) speculated about this. Their suggested scenarios are discussed News/Commentary below. Scenario 1: the Tycho Connection. In 1938 the indefati- gable orthodox scholar Leslie Hotson published a book entitled The Interrogation of I, William Shakespeare, Do Appoint Thomas Russell, Esquire. This sounds like a quote from Shakespeare’s will, but as the Prof. Alan Nelson indefatigable heterodox scholar Richard Whalen points out,2 it is he most anticipated event at the 8th Annual Edward de Vere not. Hotson identified a Thomas Russell of Strensham as one of Studies Conference unfortunately turned out to be a bit less the overseers of the will of William Shakspere of Stratford, the man Tproductive than expected. Billed as the “Interrogation of to whom the works of Shakespeare are commonly attributed. He Dr. Alan Nelson” in the program, the afternoon-long event was further determined that Russell’s stepson was Leonard Digges divided into three parts: first, a one-on-one examination of Nelson by Dr. R. Thomas Hunter (Bloomfield Hills, Michigan), to be (1588-1635), whose verse “To the Memorie of the deceased Authour followed by questions from a panel of prominent Oxfordians Maister W. Shakespeare” is in the preface to the First Folio and (Richard Whalen, Mark Anderson, Stephanie Hughes, Hank contains the phrase “thy Stratford Moniment,” one of the founda- Whittemore and Bill Farina), and finally by a Q&A session with the tion stones of the Stratfordian attribution. On the basis of this audience of conference attendees. connection, Hotson posits a close friendship between Leonard But the afternoon got off on the wrong foot with Dr. Hunter’s (Continued on page 12) (Continued on page 7) page 2 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004 amateur. Thus, in The Rape of Lucrece, we ral stress? Quite obviously he conceives Letters: encounter lines such as the following, again natural stress in terms of ordinary stress squaring with Oxford’s verse: ‘This help- patterns of spoken English, i.e., indepen- To the Editor: less smoke of words doth me no right.’ By dent of poetry. Excluding contrastive and Nelson’s reasoning, this line is unnatural emphatic stress, a verb-pronoun combina- As professional linguists, we wish to in the precise sense that he claims for tion in English bears relatively stronger point you to one passage that touches on Oxford’s verse, since the iambic stress pat- stress on the verb; accordingly, one says language in Nelson’s recent Monstrous tern is ‘doth ME.’ ‘KISS me,’ not ‘kiss ME.’ By fixating on Adversary. We do so by way of emphasiz- Or turning to A Lover’s Complaint, we iambic pentameter, Nelson is thus noting ing our own profession only because meet with the following example, where a clash between ordinary stress patterns of Nelson condescendingly dismisses Oxfor- ‘made HIM’ is an instance of Nelsonian the spoken language and what results if dians as amateurs, while these passages all unnaturalness: ‘Love lacked a dwelling one strictly adheres to iambic meter. By cogently reveal that he himself exhibits a and made him her place.’ Just so, passing this reasoning, both Oxford and Shake- worse than amateurish approach to com- to Shakespeare’s Venus and Adonis, we speare adopt “unnatural” stress in their prehending the language of Oxford’s po- find the following related example: ‘He poetry and this just goes to show that the etry. Additional linguistic points will be will not manage her, although he mount poetry of Oxford and Shakespeare are en- made at a later date. her.’ By Nelson’s reasoning, the first in- tirely compatible, which is not surprising On page 159 of his recently published stance of ‘her’ is stressed and therefore if Oxford is the man behind the renowned biography of Oxford, Nelson authorita- “unnatural”, whilst the second is not, and mask. tively asserts: “Unnatural stresses occur therefore is natural. In the same vein within Nelson seems unaware of the possibil- not infrequently in Oxford’s poems,” cit- the same narrative poem, we find: ity that a poet may countenance violations ing Oxford’s iambic ‘leads ME’ as “unnatu- of strict iambic meter via trochaic feet, in ral” in contrast to ‘LEADS me,’ and Oxford’s He kisses her, and she by her which case the question of “unnatural” ‘drowns ME’ as “unnatural” versus good will stress is quite beside the point and again ‘DROWNS me.’ Will never rise, so he will kiss her Oxford and Shakespeare emerge divided Has the professional failed to read still. as one. Shakespeare’s sonnets with care? Appar- ently so, for the following lines drawn The first line of this couplet involves a Michael Brame & Galina Popova from Sonnet 133 and Sonnet 143 place Nelsonian “unnatural” stress on the pro- University of Washington Shakespeare squarely in the same league noun ‘her,’ while the second line does not. Seattle, Washington with Oxford. But just what is Nelson’s criterion for natu- 24 April 2004 Sonnet 133: Whoe’er keeps me, let my heart be his guard, Shakespeare Matters Subscriptions to Shakespeare Matters are Sonnet 143: And play the mother’s part, Published quarterly by the $40 per year ($20 for online issues only). Family or institution subscriptions are $60 per kiss me, be kind. The Shakespeare Fellowship year. Patrons of the Fellowship are $75 and up. Send subscription requests to: By Nelson’s fixation on the iambic foot, Editorial Offices P.O. Box 263 The Shakespeare Fellowship we find Shakespeare’s “unnatural” ‘keeps P.O. Box 561 Somerville, MA 02143 ME’ and ‘kiss ME’ in contrast to what Belmont MA 02478 Oxford’s critic considers natural: ‘KEEPS Editor: The purpose of the Shakespeare Fellowship is to promote public awareness and acceptance me’ and ‘KISS me.’ The same point can be William Boyle of the authorship of the Shakespeare Canon by made by altering the pronoun, as we en- Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford (1550- counter examples wherein ‘hast HER,’ ‘love Contributing Editors: 1604), and further to encourage a high level of Mark Anderson, Dr. Charles Berney, scholarly research and publication into all HER,’ and ‘lose THEE’ are “unnatural” feet Charles Boyle, Dr. Felicia Londre, aspects of Shakespeare studies, and also into the Lynne Kositsky, Alex McNeil, history and culture of the Elizabethan era. in Shakespeare’s verse. The Society was founded and incorporated Dr. Anne Pluto, Elisabeth Sears, in 2001 in the State of Massachusetts and is Sonnet 42: That thou hast her, it is Dr. Roger Stritmatter, Richard Whalen, chartered under the membership corporation Hank Whittemore, Dr. Daniel L. Wright. laws of that state. It is a recognized 501(c)(3) not all my grief, nonprofit (Fed ID 04-3578550). Sonnet 42: Thou dost love her, be Phone (Somerville, MA): (617) 628-3411 Dues, grants and contributions are tax- deductible to the extent allowed by law. cause thou know’st I love her, Fax (Somerville, MA): (617) 628-4258 All contents copyright ©2004 Sonnet 42: If I lose thee, my loss is my email: [email protected] The Shakespeare Fellowship love’s gain, Shakespeare Matters welcomes articles, essays, commentary, book reviews, letters and news items. Contributions should be reasonably concise and, when Additional examples confirm Nelson’s appropriate, validated by peer review. The views expressed carelessness, marking him as a bona fide by contributors do not necessarily reflect those of the Fellowship as a literary and educational organization. Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 3 To the Shakespeare Fellowship: From the Editor I am both honored and pleased to have The Debating Game received second place in the 2004 Shakes- pearean Essay Competition (11th/12th In the course of preparing this issue we Burris’s work without mentioning it.