BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?

Subject: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Oct 05 - 12:13 AM

Fascinating new theory. Henry Neville as Shakespeare--including a 1602 notebook which belonged to Neville while imprisoned in the Tower. The notebook, according to Brenda James and William Rubenstein (Rubenstein a professor of the University of Wales) "includes background notes for the procession in Henry VIII," 11 years before the play was produced.

Also, as a director of the London Virginia Company, Neville had access to a 20,000 word letter on the 1609 Bermuda shipwreck, a letter which likely formed a major source for The Tempest.

Neville lived c1562-1615.

Other evidence--no time to detail it now.

Anybody heard anything, positive or negative, on this theory?

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Rapparee
Date: 25 Oct 05 - 09:07 AM

I agree with Mark Twain -- Shakespeare's works weren't written by William Shakespeare, but by someone else with the same name.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 25 Oct 05 - 09:42 AM

Performed, don't you mean? Weren't published during his lifetime.
Other possibilites are either Shakespeare nicked it from Neville, or more likely, someone attached Shakespeare's name to it to attract the pundits.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: robomatic
Date: 25 Oct 05 - 10:57 AM

Sounds like a campaign to take Shakespeare from the people and give some justification for shabby nobs.

Who would credit a couple of bicycle mechanics with inventing the airplane? Sure it musta been Samuel Langley who ran the Smithsonian Institution.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Oct 05 - 11:26 PM

Well, what's in a name?, as somebody said.


It's certainly a very American attitude to be against aristocracy.   But the fact remains that an aristocracy of talent does exist. And that particularly in previous centuries, education was not universal by a long shot. There is no proof that Shakespeare even attended school--scholars just assume that since there was a school where he was growing up, that he was a student.

He bequeathed no plays--(perhaps writing plays was considered downscale at that time)------but also not even any books.

Whoever wrote the Shakespeare canon shows a detailed knowledge of, among other things, goings on in European courts. It's never been established that Shakespeare ever travelled outside England. Neville was ambassador to France, and travelled widely.

It's not, to use the favorite vernacular of the current US leadership, a "slam-dunk" that Neville was Shakespeare. But it sure is an intriguing theory. I will definitely be buying the book when it comes out--next month I think.

Still waiting for actual evidence against the theory.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 26 Oct 05 - 10:06 AM

Bright people couldn't possibly exist outside the aristocracy, eh?

Here is the The Last Will and Testament of
William Shakspere.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 26 Oct 05 - 11:30 AM

This sort of obfuscation is exactly how Bob Dylan got away with recording loads of Donovan songs, but giving himself the writing credit!

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Rapparee
Date: 26 Oct 05 - 09:45 PM

"Venus and Adonis" was dedicated, in the original, to "Henrie Wriothesley, Earle of Shouthampton" by "William Shakespeare" on April 18, 1593. On May 9, 1594, "The Rape of Lucerce" was dedicated to the same person by "William Shakespeare." (Dates were established "as entered for printing.")

On August 29, 1597, "The Tragedie of King Richard the second. As it hath beene publikely acted by the righ Honourable the Lorde Chamberlaine his Seruants" was entered for publication by Andrew Wise. No author was given to the first edition, but in 1598 the work was twice reprinted with the author listed as "William Shake-speare." On October 20, Wise entered "The Tragedy of King Richard the Third. Containing, His treacherous Plots...." Again, there was no author listed for the first edition, but in the second edition, appearing the following year, the author is listed as "By William Shake-speare."

On February 25, 1598, Wise entered for publication "The historye of Henry the iiij..."; no author given in the 1598 edition, the second edition of 1599 includes "Newly corrected by W. Shake-speare."

On September 7, 1598, Francis Meres entered for publication his "Palladis Tamia: Wit's Treasury." In it, he writes

...As Plautus and Seneca are acounted the best for Comedy and Tragedy among the Latines: so Shakespeare among the English is the most excellent in both kinds for the stage; for Comedy, witnes his Gentlemen of Verona, his Errors, his Loue Labors lost, his Loues labours wonne, his Midsummers night derame, & his Merchant of Venice: for Tragedy his Richard the 2. Richard the 3. Henry the 4. King Iohn, Titus Andronicus and his Romeo and Juliet.

At various times, "A Midsummer Night's Dream," "The Merchant of Venice," "The Merry Wives of Windsor," "The Tragical History of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark" and others were entered for publication with in inclusion of a phrase such as "by William Shake-speare".

I think that the contemporary evidence is quite good, actually, that William Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon wrote the plays he's generally credited with writing.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: robomatic
Date: 26 Oct 05 - 09:57 PM

Samuel Johnson was not of the aristocracy, and was to a large extent self taught, yet in one of his earliest jobs he was given the 'gist' of Parliamentary debates and then 'reconstituted' the dialogue for publication. Many men of high social standing were only too happy to let it be understood that they had really spoken so well for their causes.

And I am 'minded of an elderly Englishman I met many years ago, who'd received a turn of the century 'gentleman's' education prior to the First World War. He was of the opinion that it was rot and had spoiled him from useful pursuits.

So I come to my 'American' attitude from good English sources.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Rapparee
Date: 26 Oct 05 - 10:04 PM

Oh, and Billy Shakespeare was a true gentleman as he was able to claim the arms granted to his father, John Shakespeare, as his own by inheritance.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Oct 05 - 10:48 PM

Why no plays or even books bequeathed?

He could be bright and very successful as an impresario and possibly an actor, and still not be author of those plays.

It seems to me likely that a spectacular command of the language was necessary in order to write them--and that presupposes an excellent education. The parallel with innate mechanical ability (as in the Wrights) does not hold.

I'm very curious to know what evidence is in the book by Brenda James and William Rubenstein (which I understand has a Forward by the artistic director of the Globe Theater-- (presumably the one in London).

Is your mind closed?

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Peace
Date: 26 Oct 05 - 10:50 PM

My mind ain't closed but the book ain't open yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Oct 05 - 11:05 PM

Fair enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: GUEST,Scaramouche
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 09:31 AM

Haven't seen any evidence for Neville being Shakespeare, just supposition.
It's the usual snobbery. Shakespeare was an actor, he put together plays from various sources, the most important thing was to get something on stage. Could always have had them polished up, you know.
Intimate information? What do you think friends and contacts are for.
Books do disappear, or Shakespeare might have sold them.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Rapparee
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 09:38 AM

No, my mind isn't closed, but it will take a lot to convince me -- as it should. The man's contemporaries said he wrote the plays, sonnets, and poems and I suspect that they should know. It would be quite a remarkable conspiracy to keep something like that secret among so many for so long.

And yes, it does strike me as a bit snobbish to assume that Shakespeare (whose early life is pretty much unaccounted for) was uneducated and untravelled.

But I will read the book and see what evidence there is.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: BaldEagle2
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 10:11 AM

I read that in the late 1500's, the 17th Earl of Oxford wrote exquisite sonnets up until his 21st birthday and never, apparently, wrote another word after that event.

In his day, members of the aristocracy simply did not write poems, plays or other forms of non-fiction.    (I don't know if it was actually illegal, but those Brits would know the code and never disobey it).

And it would seem from details in the plays, that Bill Shakespear knew an awful lot about the history of the Earl of Oxford and his family, but very little indeed about his own life.

Now, if the good Earl was writing lots of stuff which he couldn't himself publish, he would need a front man to act as some sort of surrogate.

Which would explain why an ill-educated ingrate got the credit and the real author was happy to continue writing without upsetting the establishment.

This link gateway to MASSES of shakespeare stuff explains it far better than I ever could.

Here's just one example of many, many tantalising hints:

" ... every word doth almost tell my name ..." Sonnet 76

This line much more sense if the writer of the line was deVere (17th Earl of Oxford), for then the word EVERy and the name dEVERe have sufficient matching letters to be close enough to almost tell the name.

I think you will be amazed at the number of distinguished members of the literary and academic world who now accept that deVere did indeed write most of the plays and sonnets attributed to Bill.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: GUEST,litchick
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 10:13 AM

Mark Rylance, former (by the way) artistic director of Shakespeare's Globe, putting his name to such a publication by no means adds to it's credence since he is not a scholar of literature or history.

Books such as this can be interesting, if well written, often as background to the period in which the plays were written and produced, but since it would be all but impossible to conclusively prove the authorship one way or another, the argument seems to be rather pointless. The majority of academics agree that the most convincing evidence suggests that William Shakespeare did write most of the work attributed to him, and unfortunately these alternative theories, even the entertaining ones, often turn out to be nothing more than flimsy hypotheses written by academics in order to generate media attention and sales.

Assertions that a person of Shakespeare's social position would be incapable of the "spectacular command of the language" the works demonstrate, are similarly difficult to prove. If Shakespeare was educated, and it is perfectly possible that he was, he would have studied a great deal of classical literature featuring complicated poetic structures and imagery as a matter of course. One must remember that Shakespeare (or whoever) did not write 'highbrow' or 'difficult' texts, he wrote populist material that was enjoyed by many facets of the population at the time, if he were alive today he would probably be writing for Hollywood!

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: BaldEagle2
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 10:52 AM

But, GUEST,litchick, an increasing number of people think that it has been conclusively proven who wrote (a least the majority of) the plays and sonnets.

Do you think that Shakespeare's "retirement" as an author, but not as a producer or actor, occured by sheer coincidence shortly after deVere's death?

Do you accept the view of those scholars who say that Sonnet 6 is clearly addressed to the Earl of Southhampton?   If so, why was Bill writing a sonnet to one of deVere's closest friends, a person who Bill had never met?   

And so on.

(There is masses and masses of stuff like this - no one single piece is conclusive in itself, but the sheer weight of all of them makes, to me, a compelling case).

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: GUEST,Le Scaramouche
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 03:40 PM

Plenty of Elizabethan gentlemen poets. Davies is an example.
Oxford might have grown OUT of writing poems.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: BaldEagle2
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 04:14 PM

Good point, GUEST,Le Scaramouche

Then how about these?

Every Italian town visited by DeVere became the setting of a Shakespearean play, and every Shakespearean play set in an Italian town was one that DeVere had visited.   That is an extraordinary coincidence, isn't it.   Shakespeare never left England in his life.   

OK.   Well, how about the fact that not one single contemporary of Shakespeare ever gave him credit for writing anything.   Not one.   (God, talk about tough audiences).   Even his last will and testament is so badly worded, for a while it was thought that IT had been written by someone else.   But lesser playwrights and poets of the time were lauded and honored - who on earth did our Bill tick off, to get treated so badly?   He got a lot of attention as a producer and as an actor, but never as a writer.   Rather odd, that.

I think the case that Bill didn't write a great deal is just about as solid as it could be. And of all the candidates for those who did write them, DeVere has by far the most compelling "proof".

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Rapparee
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 05:07 PM

BE2, please read what I wrote above (26 Oct 05 - 09:45 PM). Shakespeare's contemporaries most certainly DID credit him with the authorship of both the plays and the poems.

      Romeo and Juliet
      All's Wells That Ends Well
   RaPe of Lucrece
    HAmlet
    MIdsummer Night's Dream
HenRy IV
    TEmpest

Ergo, I wrote Shakespeare's stuff, even though I wasn't born yet. Word games can be played with forever and prove nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 05:14 PM

"In his day, members of the aristocracy simply did not write poems,"

Huh? Where did you come up with that????

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: BaldEagle2
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 05:37 PM

Ah yes - I stand corrected - the aristocracy, per se, did not necessarily use pen-names, and many were noted authors of non-fiction.

But of de Vere:

"A playwright and author of sonnets, he ceased publishing under his own name in 1593–the same year that the name William Shake-speare appeared on a manuscript."

"During the Elizabethan era, writers were imprisoned and mutilated for committing literary excesses or violating political correctness, and many wrote anonymously."

"The 1623 First Folio of collected works is dedicated to the young Earl of Southampton, de Vere's son-in-law, with whom he is reputed to have had a homosexual affair."

and of Shakespeare:

"Shakspere died in obscurity and was buried anonymously. Six years after his death in 1616, the first edition of Henry Peacham's The Compleat Gentleman was published, listing the Elizabethan era's greatest poets. Heading the list: Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford. In this and three succeeding editions, there is no mention of Shakespeare by any spelling. Eighteen years after Shakspere's death, an engraved monument in a Stratford church shows him holding what appears to be a sack of grain. A century later, the sack became pen and paper."

Er ... I haven't gone and broken our cut and paste rule have I.   :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Rapparee
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 06:07 PM

Ah...what are your sources?

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: BaldEagle2
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 06:52 PM

I took the quotes from this newsarticle which summarizes the main arguments of the Oxfordian posse.

This source, overview , gives more grist to the mill.

And this one gives the full monty on the topic.

Enjoy.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: John O'L
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 07:04 PM

I thought it was pretty well accepted by most sceptics that all Shakepeare's stuff was written by Christopher Marlowe

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: John O'L
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 10:38 PM

My mistake, it was Francis Bacon after all.

There are three certainties in life:
- Death
- Taxes
- Shakespeare's fraudulence.

In 400 years it will be equally certain that the works of Dylan were all written by a descendant of Shakespeare called Manfred Mann.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Oct 05 - 11:30 PM

Scaramouche--

"Might have sold" ALL the books?

If he was an entrepreneur,-- impresario in this case,--and possibly an actor, this takes a lot of time. So does writing plays. In fact writing plays would be an great occupation for somebody with a lot of leisure time and with an excellent education, including a vast amount of cultural references to draw upon. I've read in fact that that was the general feeling at the time as to the status of being a playwright.

Interesting to know it's the former artistic director of the Globe, not the current one, who wrote the Forward. I knew my information was quite sketchy.

By the way, who is this Davies to whom you refer?

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 11:29 AM

I dunno I think you are the sort of people that that would have given Christopher Robin a strict talking to, and made him understand in no uncertain terms that his Teddy Bear does not talk, or go off and have adventures with Piglet, when he's not looking.

Take it from from me. There was this guy Shakespeare. he wrote plays and poetry. And to this day we have a thatched MacDonalds in Stratford to prove it. American tourists come and video the peole going in and out of Marks and Spencers, cos that's where Anne Hathaway got her knickers from.

Just get into the spirit of the thing!

all the best

al

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: GUEST,Le Scaramouche
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 11:31 AM

I must add, that as a writer of historical fiction, I don't know where people get the silly notion from, that in order to write about a place, you have to visit it.
Writing plays did not take that long, all you really need is a story, which you can cobble together from many sources, a bit of dialogue, a dramatic flair, and hey presto. If an improvisation goes well, you incorporate it.
Shakespeare, to me, at any rate, always felt as if written by an actor.
Elizabethan/Jacobean theatre would have been like cinema in the 1930s.
Selling his books wouldn't have taken that long either!!
Another possibility is that Shakespeare borrowed books from his friends and acquaintances.
The Davies I reffered to, is Sir John Davies, a poet much neglected by scholars.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: greg stephens
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 11:44 AM

BaldEagle2: how do you know Shakespeare never left England in his life? It is perfectly possible that he visited Italy when he was in Europe picking up the Grail and documentary proof of Christ's femaleness, which he then transported to a Scottish chapel; where, incidentally, he stole the script of Macbeth from James VI.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: BaldEagle2
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 12:21 PM

I think the big difference between the authorship of Shakespeare's works and those of Dylan, is that in 400 years no one will give a toss about who wrote Bob's ditties.   I could be wrong, but I am willing to take bets on this one.

But even in those distant future days, there will be some, no doubt, who continue to chant words to the effect of "Of Course Bill Shakespeare Wrote Them Plays - Every Schoolboy Knows That".   This allows them to dismiss any further discussion as being unnecessary.   Furthmore, anyone who disagrees with the chanter is just a stupid conspiracy theory fanatic, right?

And possiby 800 years of denial by the uneducated and the ill-informed will settle the matter once and for all.   :-)

Meanwhile, anyone want to comment on the sonnet to Queen Elizabeth I that de Vere published in his own name in 1570? It is reputed to be the first 14-liner ever written in the ababcdcdefefgg rhyme schema.   (Bill must, at least, owe the Earl a debt of gratitude - for all of the sonnets he wrote later follow this format).

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 12:25 PM

Call Geraldo in to check this one out.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: greg stephens
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 12:29 PM

So de Vere was a bit of an innovator in sonnet writing. Fine, well done de Vere. But how does that affect the question of who wrote Shakespeare's stuff? Nobody is suggesting that Shakespeare invented sonnets, or plays for that matter. A lot of people believe he was good at it, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: M.Ted
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 12:33 PM

"Shakespeare" has never been much more than a name that was attached to a very diverse group of plays--the information about him is scarce, and, over the years, since we needed him to be much more than we had, speculation filled in all the gaps--Plays, for that matter, are not novels or poetry--they are entertainment, and often, they are an agglomeration of material from a variety of sources--dialog, sketches, and routines, then, as now, were often   created by the performers themselves and interpolated into the plays--

Manuscripts come from all manner of places, and have to be reworked considerably (often without the blessing, or even the knowledge, of the original writer) in order to work on the stage--so who wrote it? Compare it with the question of authorship of hollywood films--in many cases, several teams of writers have reworked the material, and the writing credit is given as per contract, rather than based on who wrote the words finally used--why would it have been different then than now? I doubt that it was--

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: BaldEagle2
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 02:11 PM

Greg is quite right.   No single piece of the jigsaw will ever give a complete picture, and the fact that de Vere was an accomplished poet does not mean he continued writing after 1570.

But there are lots and lots of pieces that seem to fit a certain pattern.

For example, the Geneva Bible is not in itself conclusive.   (the margins of the bible, owned by the de Vere family, were annotated in its margins prior to 1560 with several dozen phrases that later turned up in Shakespeare's plays).   If nothing else, it does seem that our Bill had the opportunity to read it, otherwise the phrases that do match came from another remarkable set of coincidences.   

Another f'rinstance. As a very young man, De Vere adopted a coat of arms in which a lion is shaking a spear.   Sheer happenchance that the second editions of the early plays are attributed to "Shake-Spear" (goddamit - our Bill couldn't even spell his own name correctly the first time round).   The first editions were not signed by anybody.

And so on, and so on, and so on.

(That's the problem with us stupid conspiracy-theory fanatics - there is so much stuff around to encourage us, that we keep making these wild speculations.)

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Donuel
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 02:50 PM

I consider it possible that Shakespear was Neville's beard, particularly after Neville was charged and jailed for trying to overthrow the monarchy. In other words, some of the tradjedies could be Neville. As for the Merchant of Venice, just because Neville was there and William wasn't, doesn't give Neville authorship.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: BaldEagle2
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 03:42 PM

Couldn't agree with you more, Donuel.

But let's get these out of the way, as well:

Upon Oxford's death in 1604 King James had eight Shakespeare plays produced at court as a final tribute.    When Oxford's widow died nine years later a group of Shakespeare plays (fourteen in this case) were produced in tribute.   When Bill died in 1616, they didn't even publish a notice of his death, possibly because he had retired from writing well before his death.   In fact, it was 10 or more years later that people started to realise that they had lost a great author.   

In the first folio, authorship of the plays was attributed by Ben Johnson to "the Bard of Avon."   This is assumed to clearly mean it was our Bill, and only our Bill, what writ them.   However, De Vere's estate at Bilston Hall (at the time he resided there) was bounded by the Avon on one side and the Forest of Arden on the other.

The only "evidence" that Shakespeare was other than a near illiterate ingrate, is that after the Puritans gave up their rule of England, it was then made official that our Bill was the true author of the plays and sonnets.   

(Honest, I am not making any of this up).

Incidentally, on the eight times he actually signed anything, our Bill used a different variation of the spelling of his name: the only consistent thing about them is that the first syllable is always "Shak" and never "Shake".

and so on, and so on, and so on .....

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: GUEST,Le Scaramouche
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 04:25 PM

Why the repeated use of ingrate?
The fact that Shakespeare spelled his name inconsistently, doesn't mean much. Spelling was somewhat cavalier, and would also change according to region and such. Besides which, since when do you need perfect spelling to write plays?

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Donuel
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 04:45 PM

Sure, I use 3 different spellings myself.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: BaldEagle2
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 05:10 PM

Hey, GUEST.Le Scaramouche, I am a SC-TF and am therefore entitled to use facetious insults on those on whom I which to cast aspersions.   :-)

But, I do think your spelling argument has a bit of circularity about it.

Chaucer was fairly inconsistent with his spelling, and it is generally accepted that before 1400 text could be spelt pretty much how you wanted to. (See, we do have some common ground).

But by 1500, spelling (although not in its modern form) had become pretty consistent.   Take Bill's own last will and testament.   In it, the word "give" is spelt "gyve" throughout - it might be different from today's format, but it is always the same in that document.

(Admittedly, there are many people who think Bill didn't actually write the will, but simply dictated it to a lawyer, but that is bye the bye).

However, back to the cirularity: Shakespeare often mis-spelt his name.   Since he was the greatest literary genius of his age, this proves that it was ok to mis-spell your name in those days.   (Can you cite anyone else at all in Elizabethan England who mis-spelled their names?)

Well, ok - may be it was.   May be it was ok to mispell your own name, because you were punching out the phonetics of it.

So why did our Bill always call himself "Shack"-spear - or variations of it, and never ever "Shake" spear?

Perhaps it was the result of some sort of cute lisp.   :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: GUEST,Le Scaramouche (who is cookiless)
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 05:27 PM

Because, perhaps, that might have been how he pronounced it?
I just failed to see why the fact that he was careless about spelling his name is proof of anything.
I think it was rather the last thing on his mind when preparing scenarios.
What a cheap shot ingrate is. Why, because (assuming the Oxford theory is right) de Vere wasn't credited? Seems to beat the purpose of the excersize.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: GUEST,Scaramouche
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 05:29 PM

I mean it rather defeat the purpose.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: BaldEagle2
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 05:34 PM

I shall be away for the next couple of days, and when I return, if this thread is still alive, perhaps we can debate some more.

Have a great weekend.

:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: GUEST,Le Scaramouche
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 06:30 PM

You too.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 07:05 PM

It seems pretty obvious that the plays were written by someone up to his neck in working in the theatre, and written extremely rapidly at that. Not the kind of stuff some amateur aristo hobbyist would be likely to be able to knock out.

An academic education at that period, which probably wouldn't have involved opening a single book in English, just wouldn't have been too relevant, one way or another.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 07:33 PM

maybe but you get the recurrence of episodes from holinshed in the plays, and as I remember from classical texts. And aren't there supposed to be echoes of Seneca in Clarence's and Hasting's speeches before execution in Richard 3.

Why does Shakespeare have to be one thing or the other though.

Take some phenomena like the Beatles. Its very hard to work out where the precise magic was located. Perhaps from a good working class second generation muso like Macca. Perhaps from the poetic urges within the breast of an alienated misfit like Lennon. A truly gifted and divergent thinker on lead guitar like George. Perhaps we are too close historically to work out exactly what happened - certainly nobody has been able to duplicate it since.

Shakespeare is just bloody good fun in the theatre. if it weren't - it would have been forgotten - how ever marvelous the component parts.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: John O'L
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 07:37 PM

What about the inadequacy of the tone-deaf Ringo? Could the magic have been there?

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 08:44 PM

A lot to be said for having tone-deaf drummers, who don't try to play tunes on their drums.
.................................

The important thing for Shakespeare, I'm sure, was having to work in with a bunch of hungry actors and a rowdy crowd of spectators who'd be sure to let him know what worked and what didn't. And pushing him to come up with the goods in a hurry. (That's where the images running through particular plays and driving them along come from, speed and pressure.)

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare: Henry Neville?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 29 Oct 05 - 04:26 AM

absolutely!

we agree on something McGrath!