Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
Shakespeare
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 13, 14, 15  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> General Forteana
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Who wrote the work attributed to Shakespeare?
Mr Shakespeare.
66%
 66%  [ 128 ]
Mr Marlowe.
5%
 5%  [ 10 ]
Mr Bacon.
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Lots of different people.
12%
 12%  [ 24 ]
Someone else entirely.
4%
 4%  [ 9 ]
Aliens.
10%
 10%  [ 21 ]
Total Votes : 192

Author Message
IamSundogOffline
The FTMB member previously known as Sundog
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Total posts: 1790
Location: Right here
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 23-04-2013 20:50    Post subject: Reply with quote

First this evening we have Mr Norman Voles of Gravesend, who claims he wrote all Shakespeare's works. Mr Voles, I understand you claim that you wrote all those plays normally attributed to Shakespeare?

That is correct. I wrote all 'is plays, and me wife and I wrote 'is sonnets.
Back to top
View user's profile 
JamesWhiteheadOffline
Piffle Prospector
Joined: 02 Aug 2001
Total posts: 6206
Location: Manchester, UK
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 12-07-2013 18:10    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Case for John Florio as editor of the Folio Edition Question
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
JamesWhiteheadOffline
Piffle Prospector
Joined: 02 Aug 2001
Total posts: 6206
Location: Manchester, UK
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 10-08-2013 12:56    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another piece from Saul Frampton. This time on John Florio's possible involvement with the Sonnets

Quite a good case on the linguistic front, I think, though there are bound to be objections.

These puzzles seem to draw people in who don't give a hoot about the poetry.

Actively looking for clues in literary texts might energize us for a season and perhaps the universal and the specific need some contact to make sparks. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Pietro_Mercurios
Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 12-10-2013 19:36    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lost work, re-writes, additional scenes, by Shakespeare the jobbing playwright, identified by computer.
Quote:
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2013/oct/12/shakespeare-new-plays

Shakespeare's fingerprints found on three Elizabethan plays

Computer analysis gives the Bard a hand in three late 16th century dramas, says scholar Jonathan Bate

The Observer, Dalya Alberge. 12 October 2013


The hand of William Shakespeare has been identified in scenes or passages in three Elizabethan plays previously believed to have been written by others, following linguistic "fingerprinting" tests and other new research.

Arden of Faversham, The Spanish Tragedy and Mucedorus will now be included in a major edition of collaborative plays bearing the Bard's name. Jonathan Bate, a renowned Shakespeare scholar, said the evidence has convinced him that specific parts within those plays must have had input from Shakespeare.

The three plays will be included in the edition which he is co-editing with other scholars in a collaboration between the Royal Shakespeare Company and Palgrave Macmillan. Plays known as the "Shakespeare Apocrypha" have long intrigued scholars, with claims and counter-claims over whether he could have written dramas beyond the 36 in the First Folio, the edition put together by his fellow actors after his death. Arguments over plays beyond the "authorised" collection have raged since the 18th century. The strengthened evidence will be outlined in the book, William Shakespeare and Others: Collaborative Plays, to be published on 28 October.

Bate, professor of English literature at Oxford University, says the issue is "perhaps the single most significant lacuna in 21st-century Shakespearean scholarship". Advanced computer-assisted analysis of every surviving play of the period has allowed the authors to go "quite a lot further than previous scholars" in establishing Shakespeare's involvement, he said, noting that it presents Shakespeare in a new light – as "reviser, rewriter and collaborator".

Arden of Faversham – which the RSC will stage in spring – is a 1590s domestic tragedy, published anonymously. It tells of a woman from Faversham, Kent, who conspires with her lover to murder her husband, seeking to "wash away this blood" in a manner reminiscent of Lady Macbeth. The book points out that rare words such as "copesmate" (companion), alongside distinctive imagery such as comparing a troubled mind to a muddied fountain, suggest Shakespeare's hand.

"It is a well-known play among aficionados," said Bate, "and there have been many arguments about who wrote it. But our new evidence is that at least one scene – a central encounter between the lovers – is by Shakespeare and that, possibly, Thomas Kyd is the author of other scenes." Kyd is best-known for The Spanish Tragedy, a 1580s revenge drama with later extra scenes which the computer testing now attributes to Shakespeare rather than his rival, Ben Jonson.

"There are some remarkable additional scenes and amazing dialogue about whether it's possible for a painter to portray grief or whether only a poet can produce a portrayal," said Bate.

There is strong circumstantial evidence that The Spanish Tragedy passed to Shakespeare's acting company and that the central character was played by his friend Richard Burbage, for whom he wrote Hamlet and King Lear.

Mucedorus is a 1590s tragi-comedy which Shakespeare's acting company revived in 1610 with extra scenes. Bate said: "At least one of those scenes is, we think, linguistically full of his fingerprints." It uses phrases unique to Shakespeare such as "worthless trunk" (also in Henry V) and "high extolment" (Hamlet) and his famous stage direction, "Exit, pursued by a bear" (The Winter's Tale).

But ultimately, is the writing worthy of Shakespeare? Bate said: "The passages in The Spanish Tragedy genuinely are. That has long been recognised."Another scholar, Stanley Wells, said "Shakespeare was both a great genius and a jobbing playwright. Taking a fresh look at plays that he may have had a hand in doesn't turn them into better plays than we thought they were, but it may well both increase our understanding of his professionalism."

Gregory Doran, the RSC's artistic director, described the new research as "fascinating", although he believes the ultimate test is when words are delivered from actors' mouths. "The plays were much more collaboratively written than we realise. We're suspicious in the theatre – but not in film or telly – of joint authorship," he said.

Commenting on Arden of Faversham, Doran said: "It is an absolutely terrific play. The complexity of the storytelling is brilliant and it does have strokes of absolute genius, so I'm very ready to accept that scholars might think there's Shakespeare's hand in it."

Collaboration between Shakespeare and some of the finest playwrights of period. A busy time for theatre, an amazing time for the English language.
Back to top
View user's profile 
JamesWhiteheadOffline
Piffle Prospector
Joined: 02 Aug 2001
Total posts: 6206
Location: Manchester, UK
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 13-10-2013 01:02    Post subject: Reply with quote

The plays and poems of the period are rich and allusive texts, which always raise more questions than we can possibly answer.

It seems to me genuinely odd that the only question which is likely to make it into today's papers is that of authorship - even when all sides admit we know pretty near damn-all about Shakespeare!

The first two plays used to figure on the reading-list of First Year English Students, though it was usual to disparage Kyd - the nominal author of The Spanish Tragedy - as a crude but effective journeyman, whose work was preparatory to that of the immortal bard.

But let us be thankful that Eng. Lit. merits a column inch or two at all in these dark days. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
rynner2Offline
What a Cad!
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Total posts: 25214
Location: Under the moon
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 28-01-2014 11:39    Post subject: Reply with quote

William Shakespeare, the 'king of infinite space’
Was the Bard a science-fiction writer 200 years before Mary Shelley?
By Dan Falk
8:26PM GMT 27 Jan 2014

Shakespeare spoke of “the inaudible and noiseless foot of time” – but the revelry will likely be quite audible indeed when the playwright’s 450th birthday arrives in April. A major anniversary is a good excuse (as if we needed one) to celebrate his life and legacy. But we may also wonder: after four and a half centuries, can there possibly be anything left to say about Shakespeare that hasn’t already been said?

The genius from Stratford-upon-Avon has worn many hats over the years, with imaginative scholars casting him as a closet Catholic, a mainstream Protestant, an ardent capitalist, a Marxist, a misogynist, a feminist, a homosexual, a legal clerk and a cannabis dealer – yet the words “Shakespeare” and “science” are rarely uttered in the same breath.

A surprise, perhaps, given that he was producing his greatest work just as new ideas about the human body, the Earth and the universe were transforming Western thought. But a re-evaluation is on the horizon. Scholars are examining Shakespeare’s interest in the scientific discoveries of his time – what he knew, when he knew it, and how that knowledge might be reflected in his work.

Take astronomy. The plays are full of references to the Sun, Moon, stars, comets, eclipses and heavenly spheres – but these are usually dismissed as strictly old-school, reflecting the (largely incorrect) ideas of ancient Greek thinkers such as Aristotle and Ptolemy. Although Copernicus had lifted the Earth into the heavens with his revolutionary book in 1543 – 21 years before Shakespeare’s birth – it supposedly took decades for the new cosmology to reach England; and anyway, the idea of a sun-centred universe only became intellectually respectable with the news of Galileo’s telescopic discoveries in 1610. By then, Shakespeare was ready for retirement in Warwickshire.

But we shouldn’t be so hasty. The Copernican theory attracted early adherents in Britain, beginning with a favourable mention in Robert Recorde’s The Castle of Knowledge in 1556. The first detailed account of the theory by an Englishman came from Thomas Digges, whose book included a diagram of the solar system in which the stars extend outward without limit – a vision of a possibly infinite cosmos.

Shakespeare had multiple connections to the Digges family. For a time they lived a few hundred yards apart in London, and Digges’s son, Leonard, was a fan of the playwright and contributed an introductory verse to the First Folio.

Other science-minded Englishmen were flourishing in Shakespeare’s time. There was Thomas Harriot, for example, who aimed a telescope at the night sky several months before Galileo. And John Dee, who was something like a science adviser to Queen Elizabeth (and who has been suggested as the model for Prospero in The Tempest).

The Italian philosopher and mystic Giordano Bruno travelled to England in the 1580s lecturing on Copernicanism. The curriculum at London’s Gresham College, founded in 1597, included astronomy, geometry and medicine. Francis Bacon’s The Advancement of Learning, championing observation and empirical knowledge, was published in 1605, around the time Shakespeare was working on King Lear. Michel de Montaigne’s sceptical essays had appeared in English two years earlier.

Shakespeare could have seen evidence of the “new astronomy” with his own eyes. In November of 1572, a bright new star appeared in the constellation of Cassiopeia. (We now know it was a supernova, the explosive death of a massive star.) Shakespeare was only eight at the time – but we know Digges made observations of it, as did astronomer Tycho Brahe in Denmark. Today we call it “Tycho’s star”.

Donald Olson of Texas State University has argued that the star observed by Prince Hamlet shining “westward from the pole” was inspired by Shakespeare’s boyhood memory of Tycho’s star – reinforced, perhaps, by a reference to it in Holinshed’s Chronicles 15 years later. (At the very least, Shakespeare would have seen the next supernova, “Kepler’s star”, in 1604.) One might note that Brahe observed the stars from the Danish island of Hven, a stone’s throw from the castle of Elsinore, Shakespeare’s setting for Hamlet.

Astronomer Peter Usher, recently retired from Penn State University, takes the story further, arguing that Hamlet can be read as an allegory of competing cosmological world views. The evil Claudius stands in for his namesake, the ancient astronomer Claudius Ptolemy, while Rosencrantz and Guildenstern represent Brahe, and Prince Hamlet is Thomas Digges. When Hamlet envisions himself as “a king of infinite space”, could Shakespeare be alluding to the new, infinite universe described – for the first time – by his countryman, Digges? Cool

Usher’s proposal strikes most Shakespeare scholars as far-fetched – yet even sceptics do a double-take when they look at Brahe’s coat of arms, noticing that two of Brahe’s relatives were named “Rosencrans” and “Guildensteren”. Shocked

Finally, Shakespeare wasn’t quite ready to retire in 1610. This was the year he wrote Cymbeline – containing, arguably, an even more tantalising allusion to the new cosmology. In this admittedly weird play, Jupiter himself descends from the heavens. Could the four ghosts that dance around the play’s hero represent the planet’s four newly discovered Jovian moons, described by Galileo earlier that year? Usher suspects so – and so does Scott Maisano of the University of Massachusetts in Boston, along with John Pitcher at Oxford, who have each written in support of the idea.

Several well-known Shakespeare scholars concede the playwright was likely aware of the newly emerging picture of the heavens. Jonathan Bate of Oxford points to passages that “may hint of the new heliocentric astronomy”; James Shapiro of Columbia University writes that Shakespeare knew Ptolemaic science “was already discredited by the Copernican revolution”.

When I spoke to him recently, Stephen Greenblatt of Harvard remained agnostic on the question of Shakespeare’s astronomical knowledge, but added that the playwright had a “scientific sensibility” and was “surprisingly alert to, and interested in, the 'scientific naturalism’ of his time”. We sense this, perhaps, in the way that some of his characters speak out against superstition: In King Lear, Edmond dismisses those who blame their misfortune on the heavens as guilty of “the excellent foppery of the world”. In Julius Caesar, Cassius declares: “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings.”

Shakespeare’s was still, to use Carl Sagan’s phrase, “a demon-haunted world” – but machines and mechanistic explanations were on the rise. Shakespeare seems to have had a near obsession with clocks and measurements of time; his characters speak of clocks even when they’re deep in the Forest of Arden. Even more sophisticated than the mechanical clocks were the robot-like “automata” on display in Europe’s royal gardens. Maisano has argued that Shakespeare may have had such devices in mind when he penned the climax to The Winter’s Tale, in which a motionless “statue” springs to life. In fact, Maisano sees the play as a kind of proto-science-fiction – beating Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein by 200 years. Very Happy

Of course, one has to tread carefully. As with the Bible, one can find anything in Shakespeare if one looks hard enough. He was not a scientist, but perhaps he was more conscious of changing conceptions of our world than we imagine. If he were alive today, who knows what he would make of a 14-billion-year-old universe awash with neutrinos, dark energy and Higgs bosons?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/10599438/William-Shakespeare-the-king-of-infinite-space.html
Back to top
View user's profile 
JamesWhiteheadOffline
Piffle Prospector
Joined: 02 Aug 2001
Total posts: 6206
Location: Manchester, UK
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 28-01-2014 19:48    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would guess that we could find equally informed scientific references in Shakespeare's contemporaries. Jonson certainly enjoyed the jargon of every conspiracy against the laity. I would need to delve into the footnotes to see how how up-to-date he was: he certainly viewed the dubious lingo of the alchemists in the light of superior knowledge.

It was an age of discoveries and playwrights prided themselves on reflecting that. The study of the Bard in glorious isolation risks attributing to him everything of the temper and culture of the age, further obscuring his unique qualities. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
rynner2Offline
What a Cad!
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Total posts: 25214
Location: Under the moon
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 28-01-2014 23:09    Post subject: Reply with quote

JamesWhitehead wrote:
It was an age of discoveries and playwrights prided themselves on reflecting that. The study of the Bard in glorious isolation risks attributing to him everything of the temper and culture of the age, further obscuring his unique qualities. Smile

Or perhaps it redresses the balance, countering all those commentators who locked him away as a child of the classical age, all Latin and Greek, and Italian stories, but nothing more.

Why did Shakespeare set Hamlet in Elsinore, "a stone’s throw" from Hven, site of Tycho Brahe's observatory, Uraniborg?
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Tycho_Brahe#Uraniborg
"From this new headquarters, which included apartments for the entertainment of dignitaries as well as a separate observatory for his students, Tycho received royalty from his home country and from around the world, including an eight-day visit from King James VI of Scotland."
(Who, in 1603, became James I of England, so his activities and interests would have been well known in Shakespeare's time.)

By all accounts, Uraniborg was quite palatial, so basing a play about a palace intrigue there seems quite natural.

And then there was "Brahe’s coat of arms" which referred to his relatives “Rosencrans and Guildensteren”, which was news to me!

So perhaps old Will was not just a fuddy-duddy rehashing old tales, but was actually writing a satire on the major scientific dispute of his age. I like to think so, and I like him better for it. Cool
Back to top
View user's profile 
Ronson8Offline
Things can only get better.
Joined: 31 Jul 2001
Total posts: 6300
Location: MK
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 28-01-2014 23:42    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let's not forget that Francis Bacon was a scientist. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile 
JamesWhiteheadOffline
Piffle Prospector
Joined: 02 Aug 2001
Total posts: 6206
Location: Manchester, UK
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 11-04-2014 10:06    Post subject: Reply with quote

An engaging view of Pericles - these days regarded as one of the Bard's weakest plays. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
ramonmercadoOffline
Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003
Total posts: 20641
Location: Dublin
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 11-04-2014 10:28    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ronson8 wrote:
Let's not forget that Francis Bacon was a scientist. Wink


A bit pigheaded though.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Ronson8Offline
Things can only get better.
Joined: 31 Jul 2001
Total posts: 6300
Location: MK
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 11-04-2014 10:46    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh dear, trotter long.
Back to top
View user's profile 
ramonmercadoOffline
Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003
Total posts: 20641
Location: Dublin
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 11-04-2014 11:28    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ronson8 wrote:
Oh dear, trotter long.


You're just a boar.
Back to top
View user's profile 
jimv1Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 10 Aug 2005
Total posts: 3101
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 11-04-2014 17:21    Post subject: Reply with quote

What if The Works of Shakespeare actually are the result of an infinite number of monkeys?
Back to top
View user's profile 
davidplanktonOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 31 Jul 2005
Total posts: 358
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 11-04-2014 18:01    Post subject: Reply with quote

jimv1 wrote:
What if The Works of Shakespeare actually are the result of an infinite number of monkeys?


Doubt it, they didn't have type-writers back then.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> General Forteana All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 13, 14, 15  Next
Page 14 of 15

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group