You know Shakespeare. Or you thought you did.
You love his writing, so it's got to hurt to see all the evidence that exists in support of the idea that good ol' Willy Shakes wasn't the man you thought he was.
You can ignore me when I tell you that it wasn't Shakespeare who wrote Shakespeare, but Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford.
You can refuse to accept the valid evidence that deposes him, and all very nearly conclusive evidence that puts Oxford in his place.
But then you would be claiming that a man with illiterate parents and illiterate children (which means, by the way, that were are uneducated), who never owned a book, and, that's right, never continued past a grammar school education, composed what is arguably the greatest literature in the English language. The odds are that he was barely literate, if at all, and, let's be honest, how many grammar-school-educated people do you know who could have written anything even remotely as masterful as Romeo & Juliet or Macbeth? Coming out of grammar school, children can barely write about their summer vacations, let alone compose plays in iambic pentameter.
Oh, and don't forget that he never traveled to the foreign lands of which he allegedly wrote, or even left Merry Old England.
And then there's Oxford. The case for him is based on such circumstantial evidence as a thorough education. And travels to foreign places like Italy. And a homosexual affair with the man to whom the sonnets are supposed to be addressed. But then there's the Geneva Bible. This was a heavily annoted Bible that de Vere owned, and over 250 of its marks appear as Biblical allusions in the Shakespearean works.
So you can deny logic in favor of tradition, but then you'd be missing out on the opportunity to look at the literature as something other than a miracle of uncanny genius. You could look at it as great literature that anyone, with the proper education, could have composed.
And then you wouldn't feel like such a useless ignoramus when you're trying to translate Hamlet to real English.
5 comments:
I think the way you have synthesized your information is really good. I can tell all your research has come together into a strong argument. Well done! Your research paper will be very intriguing, especially with the matter at hand. You will really appeal to the English teachers. One question, the way you informally address the audience in this blog, will that be the way you address the research paper or is that just for the blog?
Don't worry, Jaime, it's just for the blog!
whoaaa you got up in my grill... nice job
I really have no other comments because your paper rocks.
Actually, I don't think you need to define illiterate in your paper, especially not in they way you did (it was a little condescending). No offense.
Good luck!!!
I wasn't actually planning to define it in my actual essay, I was just trying to be really offensive in my rant! And thanks!
p.s. loooovin' the I.D. pic.
Post a Comment