| Author |
|
Mark Haslett
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6850
|
| Posted: 04 May 2025 at 8:06pm | IP Logged | 1
|
post reply
|
|
Excellent distinction, Michael- I’m happy to be corrected.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Steven Brake
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 January 2016
Posts: 685
|
| Posted: 04 May 2025 at 8:55pm | IP Logged | 2
|
post reply
|
|
Michael Penn wrote: Anybody would wish that the kind of direct evidence that exists for contemporaries of Shakespeare also existed for the author.
SB replied: What kind of direct evidence is there for Shakespeare's contemporaries but lacking for him?
And what about "Hand D" in the manuscript of Sir Thomas More?
Michael Penn wrote: To be succinct: it's not impossible that Stratford Will was Shakespeare. For Stratfordians, that's good enough.
SB replied: It's the generally accepted opinion of virtually everyone that the William Shakespeare who died in Stratford Upon Avon in 1616 and the William Shakespeare described as being the author of the plays in the First Folio in 1623 were one and the same.
Michael Penn wrote: For doubters, it's not.
SB replied: Doubters can doubt all they want. But if they want to overturn the overwhelming consensus that the William Shakespeare who died in Stratford Upon Avon in 1616 and the William Shakespeare described as being the author of the plays in the First Folio in 1623 were one and the same, they'll have to provide evidence or compelling arguments. To date, they've done neither.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Steven Brake
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 January 2016
Posts: 685
|
| Posted: 04 May 2025 at 9:06pm | IP Logged | 3
|
post reply
|
|
JB wrote: When De Vere died, those who were making money off his work—without his consent—set about creating a name to go with the Work. Will Shaksper, already having demonstrated himself not at all shy about exploiting works he did not own, steps in to put a face to the name. The First Folio is published, using the name for the first time on a major publication.
SB replied: In his Palladis Tamia, published in 1598, Frances Meres named Shakespeare as the author of a dozen plays. He also separately praises De Vere as an author, making it difficult to see how the former could be some sort of "front" for the latter, or even why one would be necessary.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mark Haslett
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6850
|
| Posted: 05 May 2025 at 2:09am | IP Logged | 4
|
post reply
|
|
JB: If my memory survives a hundred years, how much more blending might
there be?
**
Great point.
Shouts of “You must be crazy if you don’t think Byrne drew Byrne” will be
used to settle all arguments.
It seems like the entire Stratford thesis rests on the idea that 2 people
cannot exist at the same time and work in the same field and have the same
name.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Petter Myhr Ness
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 02 July 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 4012
|
| Posted: 05 May 2025 at 8:59am | IP Logged | 5
|
post reply
|
|
SB replied: In his Palladis Tamia, published in 1598, Frances Meres named Shakespeare as the author of a dozen plays.--
And omitted quite a few plays.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Scott Gray
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 August 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 53
|
| Posted: 05 May 2025 at 10:51am | IP Logged | 6
|
post reply
|
|
The biggest problem with Edward de Vere being William Shakespeare is that William Shakespeare was the greatest writer in the history of the English language and Edward de Vere was... not.
A few of his poems have survived. They're rubbish.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 134254
|
| Posted: 05 May 2025 at 10:52am | IP Logged | 7
|
post reply
|
|
Again, does “Shakespeare” mean Shaksper?We all know Mark Twain wrote HUCKLEBERRY FINN. Does that make Mark Twain a real person?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Scott Gray
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 August 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 53
|
| Posted: 05 May 2025 at 10:58am | IP Logged | 8
|
post reply
|
|
JB wrote: We all know Mark Twain wrote HUCKLEBERRY FINN. Does that make Mark Twain a real person?
*******************
Well, we all know that Mark Twain was a pen-name for Samuel Clemens.
If Shakespeare was also a pen-name, who was the actual writer?
I'm afraid "somebody else" isn't an acceptable answer.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 134254
|
| Posted: 05 May 2025 at 11:42am | IP Logged | 9
|
post reply
|
|
Coming in a little late, Scott?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Scott Gray
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 August 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 53
|
| Posted: 05 May 2025 at 11:49am | IP Logged | 10
|
post reply
|
|
I've read this whole thread, and also a previous one on this forum.
Is it really too much to ask for a name?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Penn
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 April 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 12878
|
| Posted: 05 May 2025 at 12:16pm | IP Logged | 11
|
post reply
|
|
QUOTE:
| Is it really too much to ask for a name? |
|
|
No. In a way, it remains the greatest challenge for doubters.
The flipside is that piecing together how Shaksper was Shakespeare is the non-doubters' greatest challenge -- and that remains even if one does not doubt in the slightest.
The entire debate is really about putting pieces together, but it's tougher than a jigsaw puzzle, which at least has the complete picture on the box.
The key difference is that non-doubters begin with the picture of Shaksper is Shakespeare and doubters begin with no picture.
Doubters argue that beginning with no picture is the more honest way to proceed -- no assumptions.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mark Haslett
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6850
|
| Posted: 05 May 2025 at 12:17pm | IP Logged | 12
|
post reply
|
|
Scott: A few of his poems have survived. They're rubbish.
**
This is not really a logical or evidence based argument to make. The poems
that survive were written when Oxford was young.
One might ask: How do they compare with what “Shakespeare” wrote when
he was young? The man from Stratford never wrote anything when he was
young, that we know of.
One might ask: What kind of poetry would we expect from a young
Shakespeare? Oxford’s surviving juvenile poetry Is all excellent for a young
man and contains ocassional brilliance- several of his works are good
enough to be found in the canon - either directly or by reference.
So you may not like Oxford’s work, Scott. But “Shakespeare”, whoever he
was, sure did.
As to Oxford’s ability in his adulthood, his letters on even boring subjects
are riddled with Shakespearean metaphor and word choice. High instances
of words used rarely in the canon also appear in Oxford’s letters. These
correlations do not prove he was Shakespeare, but they demolish the idea
that his writing proves he couldn’t be.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
