DOCSLIB.ORG

Who Killed Kit Marlowe? out the Book to a Respectable Size: the by M.J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Who Killed Kit Marlowe? out the Book to a Respectable Size: the by M.J THE OXFORDIAN Volume V 2002 Book Review Who Killed Kit Marlowe? out the book to a respectable size: the by M.J. Trow and Talieson Trow Queen’s Armada speech at Tilbury; Anthony London: Sutton, 2001 Babington’s letter to Robert Poley on the eve of his destruction with its hint of homo- H O S E who have found themselves sexual love (shudder! shudder!); the anec- questioning the mystery that sur- dote about the maid of honor, who, while roundsT the death of the brilliant poet and being seduced by Raleigh, cried out, “Sweet dramatist, Christopher Marlowe, will find Sir Walter, Swisserwasser”! (pant! pant!) this book of interest, as they will any book There are some really sorry mistakes. that takes the question seriously. Unfor- We are informed that the Latin motto on the tunately, despite the promise of the jacket portrait thought by many to be of Marlowe, blurb of a “wholly new and surprising conclu- “Quod me nutruit me destruit” (“That which sion,” in reality what is new is trivial, nourishes me destroys me”), refers to hardly worth the required plunge spying. The author neither knows through a mishmash of facts, nor bothers to find out that this mixed with myths and guesswork popular motto invariably refer- presented as facts, much of it enced some private passion. Or poorly sorted at best and, most do they suggest that Marlowe had annoyingly, backed by few real cita- a private passion for spying? tions. Descriptions are trite and repeti- The first statement in government tive: every mention of Elizabeth is followed agent Baines’s report on Marlowe’s atheism, by the same pejoratives: “black teeth,” “thin that Marlowe held that “the Indians and hair” and “scrawny chest,” as though that many authors of antiquity have assuredly were all there was to be said about the great written above 16 thousand years ago, where- Queen. Every mention of Elizabeth’s Prin- as Adam is proved to have lived within 6 cipal Secretary Francis Walsingham (1572- thousand years. .” is interpreted by Trow to 90) is followed by “the Spymaster,” as though refer to Native Americans, sending him off that were the whole of his occupation. Then on a pointless tangent about the possibility there’s Nicholas Faunt, similarly tagged “the that Raleigh and Harriott saw native rituals homosexual,” as though it were some sort of on their trip to Virginia. Had he been less title, one furthermore with no relevance to focused on “Marlowe the Spy,” it might have his role in the story. Really cheap stuff. occurred to him that, in his Faustian thirst There are the same old quotations, for knowledge, Marlowe had read, or heard repeated, not for any relevance to the thesis, tell, that the wisdom of the ancient Greeks but purely for their allure, or perhaps to flesh came to Greece by way of India, something 174 THE OXFORDIAN Volume V 2002 that, however it may have surprised Baines scenario, that Marlowe was killed in a brawl (and Trow), would hardly surprise antiquari- over the bill for the day at Eleanor Bull’s inn, ans, then or now. as a cover-up. All agree that some powerful higher-up “set up” Marlowe, though they dif- till, we are glad to see that they have fer on who and why. Saddressed to some extent the major prob- Since the Trows haven’t given the mat- lem with Charles Nicholl’s 1992 The Reck- ter enough study to do more than raise the oning, by far the most important book on the question, their book does little more for Marlowe mystery since Leslie Hotson came Marlowe than point the finger where Nicholl up with the actual coroner’s report in 1925. fell short, at Robert Cecil, a solution, how- For some reason, Nicholl was unable to grasp ever, that had already occurred to Curtis the obvious implications of his own Breight (see his Surveillance, Militarism research, offering what is perhaps and Drama of the Elizabethan Era, the weakest of all solutions: that from 1996). It was Robert Cecil it was Essex who had Marlowe who, upon taking over the office murdered. Another and even of Principle Secretary from the less likely solution, that Raleigh recently deceased “Spy-master” had Marlowe murdered to pre- Walsingham, had the motivation, vent him from “telling all” about both personal and official, to get rid the School of Night, is also dismissed by of Marlowe. Marlowe’s plays, with their the Trows, with good reason. bold, underclass heroes, were attracting far Unfortunately they also dismiss out of too much enthusiastic attention from the hand the most interesting scenario yet, that young and the restless of London, a situation proposed originally by Calvin Hoffman in that would have concerned the Cecils and 1955 in The Murder of the Man Who Was other establishment figures whose priorities S h a k e s p e a r e, which holds that Marlowe’s leaned more towards security and stability death was faked. Though it can offer no real than fostering the arts. evidence, Hoffman’s version does account for Unfortunately the Trows diminish their more of the peculiar elements in the story identification of Cecil by including in their than most theories. (It may be that his sce- accusations both the Lord Admiral, Charles nario is disregarded less on its own account Howard, and the Lord Chamberlain, Henry than because its primary purpose is to support Hunsdon. (This must be the “wholly new his theory that Marlowe lived on to create and surprising conclusion” since nothing else the Shakespeare canon while in exile.) is either new or surprising.) All of these writers see the official They are also off-base with the reasons 175 THE OXFORDIAN Volume V 2002 Book Review they give for Marlowe’s elimination. Trow the book that dispells the myth of “Marlowe (senior, I suppose) waxes eloquent––or as the Spy,” an image so ingrained in the psyche close to it as his native limitations allow of the reading public by now that nobody ––over the dangers of free-thought in even bothers to offer proof? In point of fact, Elizabethan England and the consequences “Marlowe the Spy” is an imaginary being of being charged with atheism. True enough. based on an arbitrary interpretation of three That some members of the highly educated incidents, none of them offering any real evi- nobility were themselves guilty of free-think- dence that Marlowe was ever actually hired ing, also true no doubt. But that Marlowe or paid by the government to spy on his “knew too much” about the atheistical free- countrymen, either at home or abroad. thinking of Howard and Hunsdon, things The incident that launched this omni- they feared he might reveal under examina- present spy version of Marlowe’s biography tion by the rest of the Council, won’t hold has been misinterpreted from the very start. water on the face of it, and even if it did, There can be no argument over the fact that, Trow, with his slipshod approach, isn’t up to in the mid-1580s, when he was in his early making the case. Whether or not we come twenties, Marlowe was engaged in some away persuaded of their complicity in activity that occasioned several long Marlowe’s murder, some background on these absences from his studies at Cambridge two important officials, both members of the University; or that when the dons, hearing Privy Council, both relatives of the Queen, rumors that he had gone to Rheims to turn both patrons of important acting companies, Catholic (or to pretend he had) refused to would be a darn sight more interesting than give him his degree, that they were ordered another recitiation of the Queen’s Tilbury to do so by the Privy Council. The problem speech. If anything, it would seem that lies with the interpretation of the Privy Howard, patron of the brilliant actor Edward Council’s order: Alleyn, who brought Marlowe’s heroes to life on the stage, would have been more con- Whereas it was reported that Chris- cerned to protect his author than to destroy topher Morley was determined to have him. If this question ever occurred to Trow gone beyond the seas to Rheims and he shows no sign of it. there to remain, their lordships Although Trow never gets quite as thought good to verify that he had no Gothic as does Charles Nicholl whenever such intent, but that in all his actions the subject of undercover operations arises he had behaved himself orderly and (there should be some limit set on the use of discreetly whereby he had done her the word “seamy” in books like this), there’s Majesty good service & deserved to be still way too much negative mystique here. rewarded for his faithful dealing. Their When (oh, when) will someone give us lordships’ request was that the rumor 176 Who Killed Kit Marlowe? THE OXFORDIAN Volume V 2002 thereof should be allayed by all possi- Even less likely is the accompanying charge ble means, and that he should be fur- that he was a closet Catholic. If Marlowe thered in the degree he was to take this was a Catholic activist, then somebody else next Commencement; because it was penned Dr. Faustus and The Massacre at not her Majesty’s pleasure that anyone Paris. employed as he had been in matters Spook hunters ignore the importance of touching the benefit of his country the final sentence of the Privy Council mes- should be defamed by those that are sage: “it was not her Majesty’s pleasure that ignorant in th’offices he went about.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fall 2005 Shakespeare Matters Page 1
    Fall 2005 Shakespeare Matters page 1 5:1 "Let me not to the marriage of true minds admit impediments..." Fall 2005 Falstaff in the Low Countries By Robert Detobel n his book Monstrous Adversary1 Prof. Alan Nelson has Oxford boast of his par ticipation in the battle of Bommel dur- Iing his visit to the Low Countries in the summer 1574. Nelson’s statement, my article shows, results from a double error. First he has failed to note the basic difference which existed between a battle and a siege in the Low Countries since 1573; second, and more James Newcomb, Fellowship member and Oregon Shakespeare Festival leading man, importantly, Nelson did not perceive (per- with Mark Anderson (right), winner of the 2005 Oxfordian of the Year Award. Newcomb haps because he did not want to) that Oxford’s stars this OSF season as a wickedly energetic Richard III. tale about his great feats was a Baron Münchhausen’s tall tale and was clearly so intended. More properly spoken it was a OSF, SF, and SOS Join Forces in “Falstaffiade, ” as will appear in the second part in which we observe the similarities between Oxford’s tale and Falstaff’s tales. Historic Conference (Continued on page 4) By Howard Schumann he first ever jointly sponsored conference of The Shakespeare Fellowship and The Shakespeare Oxford Society was a “breakthrough” and an important step in piercing the “bastion of orthodoxy” regarding the Shakespeare Tauthorship issue, according to James Newcomb, the Oregon ShakespeareFestival (OSF) actor who portrayed the villainous King Richard in the OSF’s magnificent production of Richard III.
    [Show full text]
  • Rrhe Sha Speare 9\Fiws{Etter
    rrheSha�speare 9\fiws{etter Vo I.38:No.3 "What llewsfi'olll Oxford? Do thesejllsts alld triUlllphs hold?" Richard II 5.2 Summer 2002 Stylometrics and the This Strange Eventful History Funeral ElegyAffair Oxford, Shakespeare, and The Seven Ages of Man By Robert Brazil and Wayne Shore By Christopher Paul tylometrics refers to a growing body of "All the world's a stage" begins one of miseries of human life in much the same S techniques for analyzing written the most famous of Shakespeare's manner as Jaques, in a book which names material assisted by numerical analysis. monologues, the "Seven Ages of Man" the Earl of Oxford on the title page. Stylometrics has been applied in making speech voiced by the acerbic courtier Let us first begin with a briefoverview and refuting attributions of authorship. Jaques in As YO liLike It, Act 2, scene 7. of the origins ofJaques' speech. [Printed Comparative study ofEliza bethan texts As Jaques continues, he dryly and in full on page 15.] The iconography of began after concordances of Shakespeare entertainingly catalogs the ages, the Ages of Man was quite diverse, and his contemporaries were widely beginning with the mew ling infant, often evidencing conflation with the published in the early 20th Century. But it fo llowed by the whining school-boy, Ages of the World, the planets, the wasnot until the advent ofhome computing the sighing lover, the quarreling Deadly Sins, the days of the week, the that these databases could be effectively soldier, the prosing justice, the seasons, Fortune's Wheel, the compared with each other.
    [Show full text]
  • Could Shakespeare Think Like a Lawyer? How Inheritance Law Issues in Hamlet May Shed Light on the Authorship Question
    University of Miami Law Review Volume 57 Number 2 Article 4 1-1-2003 Could Shakespeare Think Like a Lawyer? How Inheritance Law Issues in Hamlet May Shed Light on the Authorship Question Thomas Regnier Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr Recommended Citation Thomas Regnier, Could Shakespeare Think Like a Lawyer? How Inheritance Law Issues in Hamlet May Shed Light on the Authorship Question, 57 U. Miami L. Rev. 377 (2003) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol57/iss2/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Miami Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMMENT Could Shakespeare Think Like a Lawyer? How Inheritance Law Issues in Hamlet May Shed Light on the Authorship Question Shakespeare couldn't have written Shakespeare's works, for the reason that the man who wrote them was limitlessly familiar with the laws, and the law-courts, and law-proceedings, and lawyer-talk, and lawyer-ways-and if Shakespeare was possessed of the infinitely- divided star-dust that constituted this vast wealth, how did he get it, and where, and when? . [A] man can't handle glibly and easily and comfortably and successfully the argot of a trade at which he has not personally served. He will make mistakes; he will not, and can- not, get the trade-phrasings precisely and exactly right; and the moment he departs, by even a shade, from a common trade-form, the reader who has served that trade will know the writer hasn't.
    [Show full text]
  • Much Ado About Nothing
    SI Nov. Dec 11_SI new design masters 9/27/11 12:43 PM Page 38 Much Ado about Nothing Anti-Stratfordians start with the answer they want and work backward to the evidence—the opposite of good science and scholarship. They reverse the standards of objective inquiry, replacing them with pseudoscience and pseudohistory. ould a mere commoner have been the greatest and most admired play- wright of the English language? In- Cdeed, could a “near-illiterate” have amassed the “encyclopedic” knowledge that fills page after page of plays and poetry attrib- uted to William Shakespeare of Stratford- upon-Avon? Those known as “anti-Strat - fordians” insist the works were penned by another, one more worthy in their estima- tion, as part of an elaborate conspiracy that may even involve secret messages en- crypted in the text. Now, there are serious, scholarly questions relating to Shakespeare’s authorship, as I learned while doing graduate work at the University of Kentucky and teaching an under- graduate course, Survey of English Literature. For a chapter of my dissertation, I investigated the questioned attribution of the play Pericles to see whether it was a collaborative effort (as some scholars suspected, seeing a disparity in style be- tween the first portion, acts I and II, and the remainder) or—as I found, taking an innovative approach—entirely written by Shakespeare (see Nickell 1987, 82–108). How- ever, such literary analysis is quite different from the efforts of the anti-Stratfordians, who are mostly nonacademics and, according to one critic (Keller 2009, 1–9), “pseudo-scholars.” SI Nov.
    [Show full text]
  • Created Shakespeare Columbus’ Landfall, Comet Halley Apparitions, Peary’S fictional Crocker Land
    A Fresh Science­History Journal: Cost­Free to Major Libraries Vol.18 Marlowe 450 2014 Tel 410­889­1414 [email protected] DIO — The InternationalDIOJournal of Scientific History. Deeply funded. Mail costs fully covered. No page charges. Offprints free. • Since 1991 inception, has gone without fee to leading scholars & libraries. • Contributors include world authorities in their respective fields, experts at, e.g., Johns Hopkins University, Cal Tech, Cambridge University, University of London. • Publisher & journal cited (1996 May 9) in New York Times p.1 analysis of his discov­ ery of data exploding Richard Byrd's 1926 North Pole fraud. [DIO vol.4.] Full report co­published by University of Cambridge (2000) and DIO [vol.10], triggering History DIO Channel 2000&2001 recognition of Amundsen's double pole­priority. New photographic proof ending Mt.McKinley fake [DIO vol.7]: cited basis of 1998/11/26 New York Times Science Applied to the Arts p.1 announcement. Nature 2000/11/16 cover article pyramid­orientation theory: DIO­ corrected­recomputed, Nature 2001/8/16. Vindicating DR longtime Neptune­affair charges of planet­theft and filetheft: Scientific American 2004 December credits DIO [vols.2­9]. DIO­opposites mentality explored: NYTimes Science 2009/9/8 [nytimes.com/tierneylab]. • Journal is published primarily for universities' and scientific institutions' collections; among subscribers by request are libraries at: US Naval Observatory, Cal Tech, Cornell, Johns Hopkins, Oxford & Cambridge, Royal Astronomical Society, British Museum, Royal Observatory (Scotland), the Russian State Library, the International Centre for Theoretical Physics (Trieste), and the universities of Chicago, Toronto, London, Munich, Gottingen,¨ Marlowe Copenhagen, Stockholm, Tartu, Amsterdam, Liege,` Ljubljana, Bologna, Canterbury (NZ).
    [Show full text]
  • “Prince Tudor” Dilemma: Hip Thesis, Hypothesis, Or Old Wives' Tale?
    THE “PRINCE TUDOR” DILEMMA: Hip Thesis, Hypothesis, or Old Wives’ Tale? Christopher Paul ❦ There was an old woman who lived in a shoe, She had so many children she didn’t know what to do, So she gave them some broth without any bread, Whipped them all soundly and sent them to bed. English Nursery Rhyme ITHIN the study of the Shakespeare authorship question there has long been an argument known as the “Tudor Rose,” or more recently, the “Prince Tudor” theory (“PT” for short). The debate between the Stratfor- dians and the Oxfordians couldn’t be any more abrasive than that between those who advocate PT and those who see it as a deviation which does nothing to resolve the question of whether or not the seventeenth Earl of Oxford wrote the Shakespeare canon. The basic version of PT holds that Edward de Vere was the Queen’s para- mour, or secret husband, and that Henry Wriothesley, third Earl of Southampton, was their illegitimate son, making de Vere the sub rosa King of England (no pun intended) and Wriothesley heir to the throne. This, they hold, “explains” the Sonnets, why de Vere hid his authorship of the Shakespeare canon, and other matters. Sir Francis Bacon was the first candidate for the authorship of the Shakespeare canon. He was also the first to be “explained” by the PT theory, as formally presented in 1910 by Baconian Alfred Dodd.1 In this original version, Bacon was the Queen’s son by Robert Dudley, the Earl of Leicester, to whom she was secretly married.
    [Show full text]
  • This Side Idolatry Ben Jonson, “Fine Grand” and the Droeshout Engraving
    This Side Idolatry Ben Jonson, “Fine Grand” and the Droeshout Engraving In November 1623 Mr. William Shakespeares Comedies, Histories & Tragedies, commonly referred to as the First Folio, was published. The locations “Swan of Avon” and “Stratford Moniment” noted in two separate introductory poems presented the public with the impression that a man from Stratford-Upon-Avon named William Shakspere and the great writer William Shake-speare were one and the same. This notion has endured in spite of the fact that there are no contemporary references that support the theory that the Stratford Man was a writer, nor any proof explaining where, when, or how he would have acquired the vast amount of knowledge that is apparent in the canon. It is the absence of these important pieces of evidence that has led some lovers of Shake-speare’s works to question the traditionally held claim that William Shakspere of Stratford-Upon-Avon was, in fact, the author Shake-speare. In 1920, J. Thomas Looney recognized Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, as the most likely candidate to be the True Author of the Shake-speare canon. Since the Man from Stratford was connected to the theatersi it would not take a great leap of faith to believe he was the similarly named author of some plays performed by these theatre companies. For those who choose to accept this explanation and look no further (particularly at the tremendous amount of education and expansive realm of knowledge that the True Author exhibits in the works), William Shakspere of Stratford-Upon-Avon has become the ultimate self- made man; a genius born in a provincial town who went to London and somehow proceeded to outwit and out-write the talented, educated poets and playwrights of the Elizabethan literary scene.
    [Show full text]
  • GON/4* Founded 1886 a J*
    p VOL. XLIX. No. 166 PRICE 10/- POST FREE : GON/4* Founded 1886 A j* June, 1966 A CONTENTS Editorial 1 Times Literary Supplement Correspondence 11 r *! Obituaries ... 16 The Stratford Tragi-Comedy 19 Shakespeare Dethroned 42 Odd Numbers 108 Bacon’s Reputation ... 123 - Correspondence 139 Shakespeare Quatercentenary Report © Published Periodically LONDON: Published by The Francis Bacon Society Incorporated at Canonbury Tower, Islington, London, N.l, and printed by Lightbowns Ltd., 72 Union Street, Ryde, Isle of Wight. I THE FRANCIS BACON SOCIETY ■ (incorporated) ; Among the Objects for which the Society is established, as expressed in the Memorandum of Association, are the following: 1. To encourage for the benefit of the public, the study of the works of Francis Bacon as philosopher, statesman and poet; also his character, genius and life; his influence on his own and succeeding times, and the tendencies and results ; of his writing. 2. To encourage for the benefit of the public, the general study of the evidence in favour of Francis Bacon’s authorship of the plays commonly ascribed to Shakespeare, and to investigate his connection with other works of the Eliza­ : bethan period. Officers and Council: :■ Hon. President: . Comdr. Martin Pares, R.N. Past Hon. Presidents: . Capt. B. Alexander, m.r.i. Edward D. Johnson, Esq. ; Miss T. Durnino-Lawrence Mrs. Arnold J. C. Stuart l Hon. Vice-Presidents: ) Wilfred Woodward, Esq. Thomas Wright, Esq. Council: ; Noel Fermor, Esq., Chairman T. D. Bokenham, Esq., Vice-Chairman Comdr. Martin Pares, R.N. Nigel Hardy, Esq. J. D. Maconachie, Esq. A. D. Searl, Esq. C. J.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Article
    Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 268–350, 2020 0892-3310/20 RESEARCH ARTICLE Behind The Mask: An Analysis of the Dedication of Shakespeare’s Sonnets and Its Implications for the Shakespeare Authorship Question Peter A. Sturrock Applied Physics Department, Stanford University, Stanford, CA [email protected] Kathleen E. Erickson School of Information, San José State University, San José, CA [email protected] Submitted September 18, 2019; Accepted January 20, 2020; Published June 15, 2020 https://doi.org/10.31275/2020/1672 Creative Commons License CC-BY-NC A shorter version of this paper was given by Peter Sturrock as the Founder’s Lecture on June 7, 2019, at the 38th Annual Meeting of the Society for Scientific Exploration in Broomfield, Colorado. Abstract—There is at present no consensus concerning the true authorship of the monumental literature that we ascribe to “Shakespeare.” Orthodox scholarship attributes this corpus to a man who was born and who died in Stratford-upon-Avon, who spelled his name William Shakspere (or variants thereof, almost all with a short “a”), who could not write his own name consistently, and who may have been illiterate—as were his parents and as were, essentially, his children. For these and other reasons, many alternative candidates have been proposed. At this date, the leading candidate is Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford. We approach the Authorship Issue from a scientific perspective. We frame the key question as that of Secrecy or No Secrecy. According to orthodox scholarship, the Authorship Issue does not involve considerations of secrecy.
    [Show full text]
  • Summer 2000 Page 3
    'the Shakeseeare ]Vewsletter Vo1.36:no.2 "Let me study so, to know the thing I am forbid to knoyv" SlUnmer 2000 An emerging The not ...too- hidden l(ey "crypto-Catholic" to Minerva Britanna theory challenges The Latin phrase ({by the mind 7' Stratfordians shall be seen" may mean just that By Peter W. Dickson By Roger Stritmatter till unbeknownst to many Oxfordians, the Stratfordians are increasingly per­ Na mes are divine notes, and plexed as to how to salvage the incum­ divine notes do 1I0tifiejilfure even ts; bent Bard in the face ofthe growing popular­ so that evellts consequently must ity of the thesis that he was a secret Roman lurk ill names, which only can be Catholic, at least prior to his arrival in Lon­ plyed into by this mysteIJI ... don, and perhaps to the end of his life, William Camden; "Anagrams" consistent with Richard Davies observation in Remaills ConcerningBritannia in the 1670s, that "he dyed a papist." The mere willingness to explore the evi­ inerva Britanna, the 1612 dence fo r the Shakspere family's religious emblem book written and orientation was strongly discouraged or sup­ M·llustrated by Henry pressed for centuries for one simple and Peacham, has long been consid­ quite powerfulreason: the works of Shake­ The title page to Hemy Peacham's Minerva Britanna ered the most sophisticated exem­ speare had become-along with the King (1612) has become one of the more intriguing-and plar of the emblem book tradition James'VersionoftheBible-amajorcultural controversial-artifacts in the authorship mystely. everpublished in England.
    [Show full text]
  • Oxford by the Numbers: What Are the Odds That the Earl of Oxford Could Have Written Shakespeare’S Poems and Plays?
    OXFORD BY THE NUMBERS: WHAT ARE THE ODDS THAT THE EARL OF OXFORD COULD HAVE WRITTEN SHAKESPEARE’S POEMS AND PLAYS? WARD E.Y. ELLIOTT AND ROBERT J. VALENZA* Alan Nelson and Steven May, the two leading Oxford documents scholars in the world, have shown that, although many documents connect William Shakspere of Stratford to Shakespeare’s poems and plays, no documents make a similar connection for Oxford. The documents, they say, support Shakespeare, not Oxford. Our internal- evidence stylometric tests provide no support for Oxford. In terms of quantifiable stylistic attributes, Oxford’s verse and Shakespeare’s verse are light years apart. The odds that either could have written the other’s work are much lower than the odds of getting hit by lightning. Several of Shakespeare’s stylistic habits did change during his writing lifetime and continued to change years after Oxford’s death. Oxfordian efforts to fix this problem by conjecturally re-dating the plays twelve years earlier have not helped his case. The re-datings are likewise ill- documented or undocumented, and even if they were substantiated, they would only make Oxford’s stylistic mismatches with early Shakespeare more glaring. Some Oxfordians now concede that Oxford differs from Shakespeare but argue that the differences are developmental, like those between a caterpillar and a butterfly. This argument is neither documented nor plausible. It asks us to believe, without supporting evidence, that at age forty-three, Oxford abruptly changed seven to nine of his previously constant writing habits to match those of Shakespeare and then froze all but four habits again into Shakespeare’s likeness for the rest of his writing days.
    [Show full text]
  • Isabel Vives, William Shakespeare's Mystery, the Theories About His
    GRAU D’ESTUDIS ANGLESOS Treball de Fi de Grau Curs 2017-2018 WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE’S MYSTERY - THE THEORIES ABOUT HIS EXISTENCE - NOM DE L’ESTUDIANT: Isabel Vives Ginard NOM DEL TUTOR: Enric Montforte Rabascall Barcelona, 18 de juny de 2018 ABSTRACT William Shakespeare is known for being one of the most relevant writers in the history of English literature. His ability to write, his vocabulary and his knowledge of the world, among others, have made of his plays a treasure in the world’s literature of all times. His perfection in writing is precisely the reason why critics have questioned over time whether William Shakespeare was the real author of the plays attributed to him. Who was William Shakespeare? Or who was the author writing behind the name of William Shakespeare? Several Anti-Stratfordians, those who deny Shakespeare’s authorship, have suggested their candidates and have explained the reasons why they are totally plausible Shakespeares. Nonetheless, there are critics who remain faithful to the theory that William Shakespeare did exist and that the only real author of the plays attributed to him was Shakespeare himself. This paper focuses on these two points of view about William Shakespeare’s existence, trying to approach the truth about the authorship of Shakespeare’s plays. Key words: Shakespeare, authorship controversy, Anti-Stradfordians, Stratfordians RESUM William Shakespeare és conegut per ser un dels autors més rellevants de la història de la literatura anglesa. La seva habilitat en l’escriptura, el seu vocabulari i el seu coneixement del món, entre d’altres, han fet de les seves obres un tresor de la literatura universal de tots els temps.
    [Show full text]