Shakespeare

[maximus otter]

And Shakespeare came from a secretly Catholic family although as an adult he showed no interest in the religious wars of the period, so there may be more going on.

“Shakespeare and his immediate family were conforming members of the established Church of England.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_William_Shakespeare#Shakespeare's_known_religious_affiliation

maximus otter

 

[Lb8535]

“Shakespeare and his immediate family were conforming members of the established Church of England.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_William_Shakespeare#Shakespeare's_known_religious_affiliation

maximus otter

Absolutely his father was the equivalent of a city councilman and everyone had to be ostensibly, there was no option, it was a state religion. There are however strong hints that all was not as it seemed. Respectable scholarship, try Greenblatt and others. I find the detail persuasive, not that it affected his life - he wanted very much to be a respectable burgher and that meant he was C of E. "However, many scholars have speculated about his personal religious beliefs, based on analysis of the historical record and of his published work, with claims that Shakespeare's family may have had Catholic sympathies and that he himself was a secret Catholic. " (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_William_Shakespeare)

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Some people have decided Shakespeare was a Catholic, others a Protestant, no doubt some have decided he was secretly Jewish and I think there's an outsider "alternative candidate" who is Muslim.

He's a "man shaped hole" (phwoarr) as even Simon Schama, official shill historian for The Birthplace Trust has said. The author(s) and works are a rorschach/mirror for researchers, be they orthodox or heretical.

 

[Lb8535]

I dispute that. You can enjoy any art simply by sitting and listening/watching or whatever. But I at least enjoy it more if I have some context where relevant. Although Shakespeare's religion is of absolutely no interest to me. As far as I can tell from what I know of his life, his main interest was "businessman."

 

[ralfy]

Shakespeare using the original pronunciation:

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Shakespeare using the original pronunciation:

I'm somewhat sceptical of their arguments, perhaps Bill Wagstaff had a midlands accent but we don't know what the late 15th/early 16thC midlands accent sounded like, furthermore, would it have been possible to get the (presumably predominantly London born) actors all using this accent? and would it have been acceptable or even intelligible to the the London audiences?

 

[Ogdred Weary]

I dispute that. You can enjoy any art simply by sitting and listening/watching or whatever. But I at least enjoy it more if I have some context where relevant. Although Shakespeare's religion is of absolutely no interest to me. As far as I can tell from what I know of his life, his main interest was "businessman."

What do you dispute?

 

[Lb8535]

What do you dispute?

The man shaped hole is a good metaphor, but it doesn't affect the argument that he and his family were of a certain religion - not Jewish, not Moslem, and very possibly not C of E. His father's reversals as he was growing up, which may well have been related to the community's knowledge of his religious beliefs, affected how S pursued his adult life. It does make it particularly interesting that an edition of a not terribly popular play has been discovered in the Scottish Catholic College in Rome, which is where this topic originated. Or someone may have just liked S.

 

[Ogdred Weary]

The man shaped hole is a good metaphor, but it doesn't affect the argument that he and his family were of a certain religion - not Jewish, not Moslem, and very possibly not C of E. His father's reversals as he was growing up, which may well have been related to the community's knowledge of his religious beliefs, affected how S pursued his adult life. It does make it particularly interesting that an edition of a not terribly popular play has been discovered in the Scottish Catholic College in Rome, which is where this topic originated. Or someone may have just liked S.

We don't know much about his life, including his religion, I can't see how that does not affect the argument that he was a Catholic. I'm not saying he wasn't, I'm not saying there isn't good reason to suspect that he was, just that it is not certain and he is a relative blank slate onto which people project.

 

[GNC]

Shakespeare was obviously Pastafarian - look at all those Italian plays he wrote.

 

[Lb8535]

We don't know much about his life, including his religion, I can't see how that does not affect the argument that he was a Catholic. I'm not saying he wasn't, I'm not saying there isn't good reason to suspect that he was, just that it is not certain and he is a relative blank slate onto which people project.

Yes and I agree with that, but some things we do know and others are currently under serious study. We do apparently know more than we used to. If his parents were secret Catholics, it had no effect whatsoever on the plays.

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Yes and I agree with that, but some things we do know and others are currently under serious study. We do apparently know more than we used to. If his parents were secret Catholics, it had no effect whatsoever on the plays.

At the risk of being a pedantic arsehole (hello internet!) what do we know that we didn't "used to"? How far back do you want to go? He's been the subject of serious scrutiny for 200 or so years, the vast majority of what there is to discover has been discovered. People are so desperate for new Shakey info that serious academics make serious errors of judgement/flights of fantasy/perhaps more pernicious practice:

https://marlowe-shakespeare.blogspot.com/2009/04/stanley-wells-and-cobbe-portrait-by-ros.html

There was also a rough sketch of some bloke with a beard in costume, several years before this, which was apparently "Shakespeare". Someone supposedly found Bill's Bible though there was nothing to tie him to it.

Some people do find new potential biographical information in the plays, though this doesn't tend to go down to well with the powers that be:

https://www.amazon.com/Shakespeare-Guide-Italy-Retracing-Travels/dp/0062074261

 

[Lb8535]

At the risk of being a pedantic arsehole (hello internet!) what do we know that we didn't "used to"? How far back do you want to go? He's been the subject of serious scrutiny for 200 or so years, the vast majority of what there is to discover has been discovered. People are so desperate for new Shakey info that serious academics make serious errors of judgement/flights of fantasy/perhaps more pernicious practice:

https://marlowe-shakespeare.blogspot.com/2009/04/stanley-wells-and-cobbe-portrait-by-ros.html

There was also a rough sketch of some bloke with a beard in costume, several years before this, which was apparently "Shakespeare". Someone supposedly found Bill's Bible though there was nothing to tie him to it.

Some people do find new potential biographical information in the plays, though this doesn't tend to go down to well with the powers that be:

https://www.amazon.com/Shakespeare-Guide-Italy-Retracing-Travels/dp/0062074261

Try Greenblatt's books, cited above. He seems to know a lot about the social/political/financial culture of the period.

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Try Greenblatt's books, cited above. He seems to know a lot about the social/political/financial culture of the period.

I'd argue that all biographies of Shakespeare are effectively autobiographies, there isn't enough known about the man, so they are all about what we know about the period and written in the conditional tense: could have, would have, may have, we can assume that, it is likely, we have no reason not to believe etc and of course, authors can find what they are looking for.

I'm aware of Greenblatt, thank you for the recommendation but I doubt I'll read it.

 

[Lb8535]

I'd argue that all biographies of Shakespeare are effectively autobiographies, there isn't enough known about the man, so they are all about what we know about the period and written in the conditional tense: could have, would have, may have, we can assume that, it is likely, we have no reason not to believe etc and of course, authors can find what they are looking for.

I'm aware of Greenblatt, thank you for the recommendation but I doubt I'll read it.

Your choice. I find that pulling on one thread - like "Shakespeare" - unravels interesting information about a culture.

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Your choice. I find that pulling on one thread - like "Shakespeare" - unravels interesting information about a culture.

Indeed. I've read a reasonable amount on Shakespeare, including arguments by those that think he isn't the bloke from Stratford: I'm agnostic on this issue. My reading has been rewarding, as I hope anyone else's is for them, I'm no expert but my strongest take away about "the man" is that we simply don't know enough about him to write much and certainly not lengthy, or even brief, book length biographies. Some time ago I enjoyed Bryson's biog, but was struck that despite its brevity, it is mostly not about Shakespeare - its about Elizabethan Stratford, London, theatre etc

 

[ralfy]

I'm somewhat sceptical of their arguments, perhaps Bill Wagstaff had a midlands accent but we don't know what the late 15th/early 16thC midlands accent sounded like, furthermore, would it have been possible to get the (presumably predominantly London born) actors all using this accent? and would it have been acceptable or even intelligible to the the London audiences?

What I find interesting is that it might explain half rhymes, among others:

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Shakespeare Authorship Trust webinar, cross reference:

https://forums.forteana.org/index.p...rship-trust-webinar-november-29th-2020.67863/

Late notice but I thought I'd stick a note here as well.

 

[dr wu]

I have read only one book about the Shakespeare 'controversy' but found it fascinating.
From the Guardian article I posted some months ago:
"All we know for certain is that Shaxpere, Shaxberd, or Shakespear, was born in Stratford in 1564, that he was an actor whose name is printed, with the names of his fellow actors, in the collected edition of his plays in 1623. We know that he married Anne Hathaway, and died in 1616, according to legend, on his birthday, St George's Day. The so-called "Stratfordian" case for Shakespeare rests on these, and a few other facts, but basically, that's it."
Do we 'know' any more...facts not guesswork? And if we don't ,why are the Stratfordians so sure he was who they say he was?
I'm not promoting Bacon or Marlowe or De Vere, but it seems that we know so little that it really is up for grabs.

 

[Ogdred Weary]

I have read only one book about the Shakespeare 'controversy' but found it fascinating.
From the Guardian article I posted some months ago:
"All we know for certain is that Shaxpere, Shaxberd, or Shakespear, was born in Stratford in 1564, that he was an actor whose name is printed, with the names of his fellow actors, in the collected edition of his plays in 1623. We know that he married Anne Hathaway, and died in 1616, according to legend, on his birthday, St George's Day. The so-called "Stratfordian" case for Shakespeare rests on these, and a few other facts, but basically, that's it."
Do we 'know' any more...facts not guesswork? And if we don't ,why are the Stratfordians so sure he was who they say he was?
I'm not promoting Bacon or Marlowe or De Vere, but it seems that we know so little that it really is up for grabs.

We know lots of "facts" that are legal and/or business matters, most or all of which do not relate to the theatre or literature. Perhaps he was the Stratford man, in fact, he probably was but his life is largely amystery and the writing of the plays is even more so.

 

[JamesWhitehead]

Cardenio - a lost play by Shakespeare?

I had heard of this adaptation from Cervantes, often in some far-fetched contexts.

This recently-posted Youtube video is sober and sensible, helping us to see the slender threads on which this phantom is dangled.

The samples we have of the text, via Theobald, do not lead me to expect the canon will be stretched to include Cardenio.

See what you think!

 

[Lb8535]

I have read only one book about the Shakespeare 'controversy' but found it fascinating.
From the Guardian article I posted some months ago:
"All we know for certain is that Shaxpere, Shaxberd, or Shakespear, was born in Stratford in 1564, that he was an actor whose name is printed, with the names of his fellow actors, in the collected edition of his plays in 1623. We know that he married Anne Hathaway, and died in 1616, according to legend, on his birthday, St George's Day. The so-called "Stratfordian" case for Shakespeare rests on these, and a few other facts, but basically, that's it."
Do we 'know' any more...facts not guesswork? And if we don't ,why are the Stratfordians so sure he was who they say he was?
I'm not promoting Bacon or Marlowe or De Vere, but it seems that we know so littlehe plays attributed to t that it really is up for grabs.

Actually we do know a good bit more. He wasn't just an actor, he was a partner in his theater companies. He was mentioned with praise (and jealousy) by other authors of the period, and books were printed that list him as the author. Rather than rely on what a Guardian reporter remembers from a college course and turned out in an hour, why not start with say Stephen Greenblatt (Harvard) who writes among other topics on Shakespeare in his social and economic context, with full citations. And I gotta say, the peope who amuse themselves by saying that Marlowe or Bacon wrote plays attributed to Shakespeare have never read either of them. I love Marlowe but it's like saying Stoppard wrote Albee. Wildly different styles and I don't remember running into any plays or blank verse by Bacon, whose essays are very well worth reading.

 

[dr wu]

Actually we do know a good bit more. He wasn't just an actor, he was a partner in his theater companies. He was mentioned with praise (and jealousy) by other authors of the period, and books were printed that list him as the author. Rather than rely on what a Guardian reporter remembers from a college course and turned out in an hour, why not start with say Stephen Greenblatt (Harvard) who writes among other topics on Shakespeare in his social and economic context, with full citations. And I gotta say, the peope who amuse themselves by saying that Marlowe or Bacon wrote plays attributed to Shakespeare have never read either of them. I love Marlowe but it's like saying Stoppard wrote Albee. Wildly different styles and I don't remember running into any plays or blank verse by Bacon, whose essays are very well worth reading.

Thyanks for the info...I'll ck out Greenblatt on Shakespeare.

 

[Lb8535]

Thyanks for the info...I'll ck out Greenblatt on Shakespeare.

Will in the World. Also The World of Christopher Marlowe by David Riggs. And of course, hundreds more...

 

[PeniG]

The people of his own time accepted Shakespeare as the author of the plays, which were considered lowbrow at the time. If he'd been a highbrow he'd have been writing masques for court that nobody'd perform anymore. I have never seen an argument against his authorship which didn't boil down to snobbishness. You don't need a college education, an uppercrust background, or trips abroad to write crowd-pleasing plays. You need a knack for words, theatrical experience (so you don't set your actors and set designers and so on impossible tasks), and willingness to plant your butt in the chair and do the work.

 

[Lb8535]

The people of his own time accepted Shakespeare as the author of the plays, which were considered lowbrow at the time. If he'd been a highbrow he'd have been writing masques for court that nobody'd perform anymore. I have never seen an argument against his authorship which didn't boil down to snobbishness. You don't need a college education, an uppercrust background, or trips abroad to write crowd-pleasing plays. You need a knack for words, theatrical experience (so you don't set your actors and set designers and so on impossible tasks), and willingness to plant your butt in the chair and do the work.

Agree fully, but I do think he was also a literary genius - his work can be not only crowd-pleasing but profound. More than a knack for words. That's why he is still widely performed and studied, while say John Ford who was a real crowd-pleaser is something you grudgingly read in college. The folks who started and carried on the "he couldn't have written them" needed a more productive hobby.

 

[EnolaGaia]

Only foolish snobs don’t believe in William Shakespeare
... The “uneducated” Shakespeare, an actor and theatre manager, who attended neither Oxford nor Cambridge, could not – could he? – have had all the knowledge of Greece and Rome and Italy etc displayed in the plays.

This argument falls flat for three reasons. First, the knowledge isn’t that great. Almost all the stuff in the Roman plays is taken – cribbed, if you like – from North’s translation of Plutarch’s Lives. Indeed, some of the great speeches in Julius Caesar and Antony and Cleopatra are no more than versifications of North’s prose. ...

Speaking of Thomas North ... A newly-published book provides an array of examples suggesting Shakespeare went farther than merely relying on North's historical works and translations as background references. The author examines the clues that many of Shakespeare's entire plays / plots were retellings or re-imaginings of North's own plays (almost entirely lost to history).

Did Shakespeare Base His Masterpieces on Works by an Obscure Elizabethan Playwright?

New research suggests that a long-forgotten playwright might be the source of some of Shakespeare’s most memorable works. As journalist Michael Blanding argues in North by Shakespeare: A Rogue Scholar’s Quest for the Truth Behind the Bard’s Work, Sir Thomas North, who was born nearly 30 years before the Bard, may have penned early versions of All’s Well That Ends Well, Othello, Richard II, A Winter’s Tale, Henry VIII and several other plays later adapted by the better-known dramatist.

North by Shakespeare builds upon extensive research conducted over the course of 15 years by self-educated scholar Dennis McCarthy. Using modern plagiarism software and a sleuth’s keen eye, McCarthy has uncovered numerous examples of phrases written by the Bard that also appear in text attributed to North, a prolific writer, translator, soldier, diplomat and lawyer of his time.

Born in 1535, North was the well-educated, well-traveled son of the 1st Baron North. Because of his translation of the Greek historian Plutarch’s Parallel Lives, North is widely recognized as the inspiration for numerous Shakespeare plays, including Titus Andronicus and Julius Caesar. North may have also written his own plays, some of which may have been produced by Robert Dudley, 1st Earl of Leicester, in an attempt to woo Elizabeth I. Unfortunately, most of North’s works are lost to time—as are countless others from that time period. ...

FULL STORY: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts...rks-obscure-elizabethan-playwright-180977424/

 

[ramonmercado]

Saoirse Ronan as Lady McBeth, I hope it's streamed to cinemas. Although I must admit I like the idea of Macbeth as Horror (and a story of warped love), James MacArdle (Macbeth) doesn't, it sounds like an interesting interpretation.

Four-time Oscar nominee Saoirse Ronan has revealed she looked to the reality star Kim Kardashian for inspiration for her latest role.

The actress is making her UK stage debut as Lady Macbeth in Shakespeare's tragedy at the Almeida Theatre, North London, opposite the Scottish actor James McArdle as Macbeth.

"We keep thinking about Macbeth and Lady Macbeth as like a Kim and Kanye situation," Ronan tells BBC News, "where there have been stages to their success and real kind of highs and lows."

The pair decided to compare Macbeth and Lady Macbeth "to a modern power couple that is professional but also has tenderness and there is so much of their private life that we don't know," Ronan says, referring to Kardashian and her rapper husband Kanye West, who announced they were divorcing earlier this year.

Ronan and McArdle have also decided to call their characters Susan and Neil Macbeth. "It helps," says Ronan, "because this is a domestic tragedy about a couple.

"The tragedy is that these two people who are soul mates and peers and very much partners in every way... when that starts to come apart, what we would hope is that, when people come to see it, that is when the sadness seeps in."

McArdle agrees, saying: "The play has been hijacked by the horror concept, the Halloweeny concept." In director Yaël Farber's production, entitled The Tragedy of Macbeth, it is the relationship between the Macbeths that takes centre stage. "The thing that we wanted more than anything was a functional marriage. A love story," explains McArdle. ...

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-58627498

 

[Frideswide]

Saoirse Ronan as Lady McBeth

Agreed, very interesting idea for a staging.

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Saoirse Ronan as Lady McBeth, I hope it's streamed to cinemas. Although I must admit I like the idea of Macbeth as Horror (and a story of warped love), James MacArdle (Macbeth) doesn't, it sounds like an interesting interpretation.

Four-time Oscar nominee Saoirse Ronan has revealed she looked to the reality star Kim Kardashian for inspiration for her latest role.

The actress is making her UK stage debut as Lady Macbeth in Shakespeare's tragedy at the Almeida Theatre, North London, opposite the Scottish actor James McArdle as Macbeth.

"We keep thinking about Macbeth and Lady Macbeth as like a Kim and Kanye situation," Ronan tells BBC News, "where there have been stages to their success and real kind of highs and lows."

The pair decided to compare Macbeth and Lady Macbeth "to a modern power couple that is professional but also has tenderness and there is so much of their private life that we don't know," Ronan says, referring to Kardashian and her rapper husband Kanye West, who announced they were divorcing earlier this year.

Ronan and McArdle have also decided to call their characters Susan and Neil Macbeth. "It helps," says Ronan, "because this is a domestic tragedy about a couple.

"The tragedy is that these two people who are soul mates and peers and very much partners in every way... when that starts to come apart, what we would hope is that, when people come to see it, that is when the sadness seeps in."

McArdle agrees, saying: "The play has been hijacked by the horror concept, the Halloweeny concept." In director Yaël Farber's production, entitled The Tragedy of Macbeth, it is the relationship between the Macbeths that takes centre stage. "The thing that we wanted more than anything was a functional marriage. A love story," explains McArdle. ...

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-58627498

Did she get a load of silicone injected into her face and bum?