|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:57 pm
I have seen so many books with titles like: "So-and-So, the Man Who Wrote Shakespeare", "Was Shakespeare a Woman?", and "The Truth Behind Shakespeare". I have head many people say that Marlowe wrote the plays acredited to Shakespeare. Each theory has reasons and logic behind (well, most do anyway), yet they are all so different.
I thought it would be an interesting question to pose. Who do you think wrote Shakespeares plays?
I myself believe that Shakespeare wrote the plays acredited to him, but I can understand why others would believe otherwise. Frankly, I'm just glad that the plays were written, whoever did the writting.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 1:00 pm
I am a die-hard Stratfordian, but I have done various research papers dealing with the various anti-Stratfordian camps including the following candidates: Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford; Christopher Marlowe; Sir Francis Bacon; Queen Elizabeth; Sir Henry Neville; Earl of Stanley; and theories that have several of the aforementioned writing the plays together. Most go on the assumption that only a University-trained scholar and/or noble could have written the plays. Poo on that.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 7:07 pm
bardlover Most go on the assumption that only a University-trained scholar and/or noble could have written the plays. Poo on that. I heard that as well, rather disappointing. I was going to do a research paper on the topic but couldn't find enough information. Are there any books you'd reccomend bardlover?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 7:09 pm
Why can't some people accept that you don't have to be extensively schooled/ of a noble birth to be able to write spectacular works of literature? Granted, some different people might have had their hands in his work, or added things (like the witches/ Hecate scene in Macbeth), but I still think that he deserves credit. And THAT'S why this is the Shakespeare guild, NOT the Marlowe Guild.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:20 pm
Moriwa Why can't some people accept that you don't have to be extensively schooled/ of a noble birth to be able to write spectacular works of literature? The idea is that if he was not extensively schooled/of noble birth he would not know of the happenings of noble or know of so many world events and things of that nature, not that the quality of his writing would inherently suffer.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:53 am
I find it amusing that we know so much about history, yet we are still unsure about something as recent as as Shakespeare.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:45 pm
paradoxical bardlover Most go on the assumption that only a University-trained scholar and/or noble could have written the plays. Poo on that. I heard that as well, rather disappointing. I was going to do a research paper on the topic but couldn't find enough information. Are there any books you'd reccomend bardlover? There are many. Shakespeare: The Evidence is a good Stratfordian read, and one of my favorite books about Shakespeare in general. Ian Wilson does a great job of compiling evidence. Shakespeare: The Mystery is anti-Stratfordian about Queen Elizabeth or Marlowe one, I can't remember which. Anyway, it's by Sweet. Who were Shakespeare: the Ultimate Who-dun-it is a Marlovian book by Ron Allen. The internet has many sites, for example www.shakespeare-oxford.com or org one. Oxfordians are very big on publishing works via the internet. Also, the Oxfordians resently relased a book called Shakespeare Revealed or something of the sort. The Truth Will Out is about the Candidacy of Sir Henry Neville.
If you decide to do some research, I could email you my works cited list. Just pm me about it.
Sorry. I thought I had quoted you, but being a mod, I accidently edited your post. stressed
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:47 pm
Shakespeares Girl I find it amusing that we know so much about history, yet we are still unsure about something as recent as as Shakespeare. The Great Fire of London destroyed many documents of the era, plus less emphasis was put on saving things like plays back then. Without Hemmings and Condell, who edited the First Folio of 1623, many plays would have been lost including Macbeth and The Tempest.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:52 pm
I read The Eyre Affair, which had this question as one of the threads through the storyline. I concluded that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare plays, though he did undoubtedly steal some other peoples plays. I like the conclusion they reach in The Eyre Affair too, but I won't give it away for anyone who wants to read the book
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 7:45 pm
Let's just say that some dead person wrote his plays!
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 6:05 pm
Also, there is the fact that he uses imagery of a place exactly as it was. Shakespeare never left his city. It's been agrued that it's too much detail to be a coincidence. bardlover, could I see one of those essays. I would really like to read one. ^_^
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 19, 2007 5:31 pm
people say that an university scholar wrote them, but would a university scholar write such easily understandable, common (no offence), and downright dirty plays?
And besides, he wouldn't have needed so much money, had he been a university scholar, because chances are, he would've been closer to the Queen's court.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 2:42 pm
I read an article recently about this and I have kind of changed my mind and decided it was not the Statford Shakespeare who worte the play.
The main reason is this, Statford Shakespeare's eleven year old son tragically died, but not one of the poems talks about the loss of a child.
Though who did actually write the plays? Who knows. I'm going for the more than one person option.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:36 pm
Dewdew I read an article recently about this and I have kind of changed my mind and decided it was not the Statford Shakespeare who worte the play. The main reason is this, Statford Shakespeare's eleven year old son tragically died, but not one of the poems talks about the loss of a child. Though who did actually write the plays? Who knows. I'm going for the more than one person option. Dewdew, don't let them turn you! Hamlet was written in the year following Shakespeare's death. Also, there is a sonnet...the number escapes me...that speaks of death and lost youth in the light of Shakespeare's son's death. I suggest you watch Michael Wood's documentary In Search of Shakespeare.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:28 pm
i think that this whole notion of "who REALLY wrote shakespeare's plays" is alot of twaddle. as the Bard himself wrote, " it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." there is, in fact, a great deal of info available concerning shakespeare's life, as well as when, where, and how he wrote. didn't the extremely jealous robert greene, a contemporary of the Bard's (and a well-known playwright in his day), refer to him as "this upstart crow, who beautifies himself with our feathers"? the idea that an actor, of all things, could not possibly compose plays of such lyrical beauty, is a direct result of class predjudice. the individuals who have insinuated over the centuries that someone else MUST have written shakespeare's plays did so because they simply could not conceive that anyone born into the merchant class w/ only a few years of formal education could have written w/ such sublime intelligence or creativity. thus, it had to have been an aristocrat like sir philip sydney or a member of the intelligencia, like sir francis bacon. most scholars and critics these days lend little or no credence to such theories. as for the books that are STILL being written on the subject--most people love a mystery, even a prefabricated one. whether or not these authors believe what they're writing, they know there's profit to be had from it. my apologies for rambling but this topic brings to mind many colorful (and heated) debates we had in my college shakespeare courses on the very same subject! redface
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|