Posted By Mike on November 20, 2011
Guest Post by Michael Dudley*
Anonymous may be garnering praise for its meticulous CGI recreation of Elizabethan London, but few critics can bring themselves to laud it as a film. As was noted in Roger’s earlier post, many film critics – the bulk of whom are surely not Shakespearean scholars themselves – apparently feel compelled to decry the film for its Oxfordian thesis, rather than limiting themselves to critiquing it as a film. Even those who do praise Anonymous as a movie nonetheless must affirm for their readers that they believe it to be hokum. Roger Ebert, for example, wrote, “this [is a] marvelous historical film, which I believe to be profoundly mistaken.” (more…)
Category: Authorship, News, State of the debate |
3 Comments »
Tags:
Posted By hewardwilkinson on November 20, 2011
The Vatican Decrees Shakespeare a Catholic? Really?
My blog post about the Vatican’s coming out for the Catholic Bard thesis and Peter Dickson’s flamboyant response is now available.
Dickson comments:
“Given the report concerning the bombshell announcement and apparent claim by the Vatican’s official newspaper (L’Osservatore Romano), anti-Stratfordians and Oxfordians can never say I did not warn them since 1998 of the importance of the issue of whether the Stratford man was a secret Catholic as many Stratfordians believe. And many of them devoutly hope this ”truth” would help explain why the traditional Bard from Stratford-on-Avon is so mysterious, so elusive when it comes to proving that he really was the great literary figure. The secret Catholic theory which actually goes back to the mid-1800s was in part a response to the anti-Stratfordians.” More.
Dickson’s analysis of the Catholic-Protestant split in Shakespearean studies from the Oxfordian (2003) is available here.
Category: Authorship, News, State of the debate |
No Comments »
Tags: Catholic Bard, Catholic Bard Theory, Earl of Oxford and Catholicism, Peter Dickson, Shakespeare and Catholicism, Shakespeare and the Vatican
Posted By Roger Stritmatter on November 19, 2011
Harvard's Marjorie Garber: "I have remained in dialogue with Oxfordians and others, not because I concur with their opinions but because I do not dismiss them out of hand.”
Many readers will already have heard something about the authorship wiki-wars.
One of the fictions effectively perpetrated on unwitting newbies in these edit battles by the usual gang of diehard orthodoxists is that anything dealing in an intelligent way with the authorship question does not constitute a “reliable source” (is not RS) — apparently because so many academicians are agreed that intelligent discussion of the topic is by definition unreliable.
These wiki-pundits also believe that the issue itself and any alternative theories of authorship, including the Oxfordian one, belong to the venerated Wikipedia category of “fringe theory” — along with the idea that an alien ate your mother and the earth was created in 4004 BC. (more…)
Category: Authorship, News, State of the debate |
17 Comments »
Tags: Marjorie Garber and Shakespeare Authorship Question, Shakespeare and Wikipedia, Shakespeare Authorship question and Wikipedia Wars, Shakespeare's Ghostwriters, Wikipedia Shakespeare wars
Posted By Roger Stritmatter on November 18, 2011
Dr. Michael Delahoyde and his student Leda Zakarias at Washington State University in Pullman, WN, speak out on the authorship question on local news.
Category: News |
3 Comments »
Tags:
Posted By Roger Stritmatter on November 17, 2011
The Ramelli Book Machine: A Renaissance Device for Comparing Passages from Multiple Books.
Understanding Shakespeare’s Bible allusions is not a spectator sport. Test your ability against the experts. Can you pass the Shakespeare Bible Allusion Quiz?
It doesn’t bite, promise….and will not affect your semester grade unless, of course you pass….:)
More on the de Vere Bible annotations.
Category: News |
2 Comments »
Tags:
Loading ...