Topic of Discussion: Was Shakespeare one man, or many?

[Darth_Kitten]

:evilgrin:

[rug]

1. I'll have to check with Aristus before I answer.

[Kajsa]

2. LOL- Good answer!

Aristus is our expert on Shakespeare.

[Darth_Kitten]

3. Bring it on, Aristus!!!!

:evilgrin:

Calling Aristus!!! :D

I personally would like to know his/her opinion. :)

[Aristus]

4. Hi guys!

:hi:

The debate over whether William Shakespeare was an individual writer, or a collaborative force writing under a pseudonym has raged for hundreds of years, with neither side gaining a significant following over the other.

Rather than bore you with a limp, half-baked assessment of the debate, let me recommend to you an excellent book that contains all of the best arguements pro and con on both sides of the divide. The book is "The Friendly Shakespeare" by Norrie Epstein. You can pick it up on Amazon or any bookstore.

Personally, I think Shakespeare was who he seemed to be; A brilliant man from a thriving provincial town who came to London to make his fortune. He acted for wages and wrote as a journeyman playwright until he could afford to purchase an interest in a theater company. His combination of shrewd business maneuvering and his highly popular plays made him a wealthy man. He was able to attain his lifelong dream: Being awarded a coat of arms, and the title 'Gentleman'.

The notions that he was actually someone else in disguise, Ben Jonson, Christopher Marlowe, Francis Bacon, Henry, the Earl of Southampton, or even Queen Elizabeth or King James I are simply ludicrous.

I adhere to this idea forwarded by Leonora Eyre: "The thing about the anti-Stratfordians {people who think Shakespeare is at the center of some massive conspiracy, and didn't really write the plays} is that they really would prefer any crackpot theory rather than the simple idea that Shakespeare really was Shakespeare."

BTW, I'm flattered that you guys thought of me in all this. ;-)

[NNadir]

7. You are, after all, our resident Shakespeare expert.

I love your daily threads. They are a delight. You have a fabulous command of the subject, which we all recognize and appreciate, I think.

I've spent some time thinking on this issue - and of course I cannot know - but it does seem to me that Shakespeare probably was just who he said he was.

That said, one of our greatest writers, Mark Twain, was in the anti-Stratford set.

[Aristus]

8. Thank you for your kind words, NNadir.

As for Mark Twain, I adore the man and his writings, but nobody can be right all the time. Plus, I think his opinions of Stratfordians came out during his final years, when he really became bitter and misanthropic.

[WCGreen]

11. You really should read Will in the World...

A wonderful book, a book that looks for the man by the events in his environs that may have inspired his works...

Incidents like his fathers flirtation with Catholism...

And the change from Protestant to Catholic and back again....

The Plague which struck London forcing the actors out of the city....

And why and when some plays were written and the inspiration that may have laid behind them...

A wonderful read....

It's out in trade now...

[Floogeldy]

5. Bill was a time traveler from the late 22nd century.

He cheated. Okay?

}(

[Aristus]

6. Oh, of course.

That's the most plausible theory I never considered. B-)

:hi: Floogeldy!

[elshiva]

10. Thank you for telling the truth.

:hi:

[leftofthedial]

9. saintly deeds and demon sin

we all are many within one skin