Oxford is not known to have been mentioned again in this context. Read David Kathman's summary of the evidence for Shakespeare's hand and judge for yourself. Oxford was thus the half-brother of his own son by the queen.
Instead of making specific arguments general principles should be stated. Summarizing the history a bit more would be my only comment there. You can quote a sentence, as the policy shows, from a primary source, but you cannot paraphrase it to make it say what it does not say.
Here are three essays, each exposing an Oxfordian myth and demonstrating that the Oxfordian faith in them has been misplaced. Several editors Dlabot, Crum also noted that clear attribution in-text should be used. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation.
Tudor Aristocrats and the Mythical "Stigma of Print" Oxfordians claim that Edward de Vere could not have been named as the author of Shakespeare's works because doing so would have violated the Elizabethan social code, which prohibited aristocrats from having works published under their own names.
One Crum also mentioned that in any case, "how" to use the site should be discussed by the article editors. Read The Survival of Manuscripts by Giles Dawson and Laetitia Kennedy-Skipton taken from their book Elizabethan Handwriting for the opinion of two scholars who spent decades examining documents from Shakespeare's era.
But there is nothing the slightest bit suspicious about the absence of Shakespeare's manuscripts, since virtually no playhouse manuscripts from that era have survived at all. There is no reason to think he believed he was "nearing death" when the sonnets were written.
Also, read David Kathman's post to the humanities. This is OR argument unless cited to a researcher who actually argues this.
Matus points out the weaknesses of the Oxfordian case, and also argues that the Oxfordian approach to the play seeks to diminish its power as a work of art, reducing a profound exploration of the deepest issues that concern us as people to a petty expression of pique.
In The Verse Forms of Shakespeare and OxfordTerry Ross looks at this issue in detail and shows how badly Oxfordians have distorted the facts in an attempt to exaggerate Oxford's similarity to Shakespeare and his role in the history of English poetry.
There is no cited support for the specific listed sonnets, which are in any case misrepresented for example sonnet two starts, "When forty winters shall beseige thy brow No, I think we have all mentioned this stuff - even Mr.
We need enough detail to explain what the article is about, and the point of this discussion is not to make it as compact as possible. May does concede that there was for a time a "stigma of verse" among the early Tudor aristocrats, "but even this inhibition dissolved during the reign of Elizabeth until anyone, of whatever exalted standing in society, might issue a sonnet or play without fear of losing status.
I also like the way Nishidani rearranged the introduction where the anti-Strat material came before any of the Strat stance.
Monsarrat "A Funeral Elegy: He argued that the child was given the name William Hugheswho became an actor under the stage-name "William Shakespeare". Playgoers, consistently called the "mob" throughout, are foolish and empty-headed, easily pleased and easily moved.
The rest of the edits are to the body of the text, which is not, I presume, subject to prior consensus, judging by the edit history to date. However, a close examination of Puttenham's work shows that Oxfordians have relied on doctored evidence, and that Puttenham's actual words contradict the Oxfordian claim.
Kennedy on Shaksper, but it was not until that the case for Ford was generally considered to be stronger than the case for Shakespeare.
We might still be living the feudal dream. Spielmann's detailed discussion of the monumentand his demonstrations of the many errors and inconsistencies to be found in seventeenth-century engravings.
Was the Earl of Oxford the True Shakespeare. The Frontline TV show contains a passage in which the unnamed narrator asserts that "Several sonnets speak of old age and imminent death. Time and space do not allow us to present the arguments over the poem's authorship here but we can provide the text of the Funeral Elegy itself.
Now that we have a pretty good picture on how these editors feel, I think we can continue working on the article and decide how and when to use the website back on the article talk page. From this, Oxfordians have decided that Benson must not have thought that Shakespeare was really Shakespeare.
He also outlines a fifty year history of Oxfordians parroting and even embellishing the myth without their ever checking to see whether it was true. Have We All Been Played.
It does not say never to use it. Despite the somewhat esoteric subject matter, and the often acrimonious debate on both sides of the issue, interest in the authorship question continues to grow, particularly among independent scholars, theatre professionals and a small minority of academics.
It does not get into specifics on either side, does not disparage either side and reads pretty well.
The official blog for the movie offers links to the Shakespeare authorship page, so it's only fair that we repay the favor. But the devil is in the detail, as they say!. Talk:Shakespeare authorship question/Archive 9 Jump to navigation the works traditionally attributed to William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon were actually written by another writer or group of writers. "The Shakespeare authorship question is the ongoing debate about whether the works traditionally attributed to William.
This webpage is for Dr. Wheeler's literature students, and it offers introductory survey information concerning the literature of classical China, classical Rome, classical Greece, the Bible as Literature, medieval literature, Renaissance literature, and genre studies.
This particular page focuses on the question of whether or not Shakespeare was the author of the plays commonly attributed to him. The Independent Fundamental Baptist church could gun control holds some fundamental things to hold true be a debate as to whether devere is an aristocrat or writer defined as a cult given themes of selfishness in arthur clarkes novel childhoods end the multiple definitions of a cult and the characteristics of the IFB Archives and past articles.
NARRATOR: It is just that fascination with Shakespeare the writer that makes us turn to Shakespeare the man, with some puzzlement. Who was the man who wrote the most sublime poetry in the English. English - Alphistian Dictionary. A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q-R S T U-V W Y-Z. A. a(an) - an abandon - upasderas.
ability - kaneste. able - kan. abort - abortere. In this post, I address some of the broader issues involved in the Shakespeare authorship debate, and try to articulate the major reasons why I find the Oxfordian approach fundamentally flawed.
the author of Shakespeare's plays must have been a well-educated aristocrat, and William Shakespeare of Stratford could not possibly have had the.A debate as to whether devere is an aristocrat or writer