The Shakespeare Authorship Coalition has formulated the Declaration of Reasonable Doubt About the Identity of William Shakespeare. It’s a document expressing the bona fide issues with the authorship (not actually the identity of the man named William Shakespeare) to educate people about the discussion and to advocate an open-minded examination. As the last line states, “We hereby declare that the identity of William Shakespeare should, henceforth, be regarded in academia as a legitimate issue for research and publication, and an appropriate topic for instruction and discussion in classrooms.”
As you may well know, the subject of authorship is strictly taboo in most colleges and universities—an odd contradiction in institutions that are supposed to explore and question and teach us to think for ourselves.
sigh.
But you have a chance to change all this! You are encouraged to sign the declaration yourself. If you do it by midnight (London time) on April 21, 2007, you will be on the historical list of initial signers. Your name will go down in history. Go to their web site: www.DoubtAboutWill.org and sign on!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I wish the Coalition the best and I hope their efforts are productive.
ReplyDeleteOne might have wished for a better-written manifesto. Too bad they did not ask Robin to write it!
Although doubters may disagree about who it is we may put in Shakespeare's place as the author (or authors) of most of the plays and the majority of the sonnets considered to be part of the body of work traditionally assigned to Shakespeare, what we have in common, I think, is a curiosity about the person behind the writing who was evidently a writer who intended to elevate the English language and has, as well, lead so many of us to understand the world and ourselves with much more depth, compassion, amazement and fun.
ReplyDeleteBravo to the Shakespeare Authorship Coalition for formulating the Declaration of Reasonable Doubt! I signed up recently and I noticed that I am in company with a lovely cross-section of folks.
After reading Robin Williams' book, "Sweet Swan of Avon: did a woman write Shakespeare?" I am quite convinced that the best candidate is Mary Sidney.
We might say that "doubting" is the first step toward enlightenment; certainly, "doubting" can lead to inquiry. I add my voice to Ms. Williams' in urging people to sign up.
Need a chuckle about the Shakespeare authorship question? You might try the play written by Mark Rylance and John Dove, directed by Rylance and Matthew Warchus with the Composer, Claire van Kampen, starring Mark Rylance and others which is currently being seen in Chichester, England, (14 August - 8 September, 2007).
ReplyDelete"The BIG Secret Live - I am Shakespeare - Webcam Daytime Chat-room Show" is the title of the show which is being billed as "a comedy of Shakespearean identity crisis". I'm going; see you there!
Dear Robin
ReplyDeleteCongratulations on a fine piece of scholarship. We are gradually honing in on the authorship question; and in this you have made a pivotal contribution. The full story is yet to be teased out and when my current article is completed - in which we take a further step forward - I will happily send a copy to your site.
With best wishes
Robert Macklin
I have been thinking about this issue for some time and have been looking at ways to further evidence Ms. Williams's conclusions. The most fecund source comes from a comparison between different texts of the same play, such as the first quarto (published anonymously) and then the later quarto (corrected and augmented by W. Shakespeare). What changes were made and who could have made them? Did Shakespere the actor, take an existing (anonymous)text, and then edit it, and then add his name? If so, did the corrections he added actually improve the text?
ReplyDeleteThe other area which I am exploring, which will provide more definitive evidence, involves something called one's cogniture. Now the cogniture is based upon the recent work of Alvaro, and the cogniture is the mental pattern or matrix by which a person processes and codifies information. People with different cogntitures process information in different ways---and the way they process information can be seen in their writing (if you know how to look for it). Thus, Alvaro and others can read the writing of any author and immediately tell you what their cogniture is. I don't want to go into great detail here, but Shakespere the actor and Mary Sidney had different cognitures, and by looking at the way the plays of Shakespeare are put together (not the content but the conceptual patterning used throughout) one would be able to identify the author's cogniture.
One other clue will help reveal a person's cogniture: almost every source used by Shakespeare was adapted to fit her cogntiture. Thus, in the Merchant of Venice, the source story found a resolution---where the money-lender lost his money. Such a conclusion accords with a certain cogniture. In the play, however, the story was changed and Shylock was destroyed when he was forced to convert---or redeemed, depending on how you want to interpret it. In both cases, however, the change that the author makes to the source story, and the way she feels compelled to change the source story, also reveals her cogniture.
A few decades ago, DNA testing could not be used because the science was not known. Likewise, the science of cogniture is not known at this time and so, only a handful of people can read a text and see the person's cogniture. As this science becomes well-known and commonplace---which might take a century or so---the cogniture of the author in question will be apparent. (The catch here is that there are only 12 major cognitures, so one can only tell the cogniture of the author, but not the author. In this case, however, Shakespere the actor, and Mary Sidney have different cognitures.
More on this later.
JS
unity10@aol.com