tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6942147318185235475.post2726405231567341817..comments2024-03-05T10:34:30.182-05:00Comments on The Marlowe-Shakespeare Connection: On Hamlet and reasonable doubt: a question for Alex Jack, pt. 2Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6942147318185235475.post-44214238908058787772009-11-21T21:20:19.814-05:002009-11-21T21:20:19.814-05:00It is very interesting for me to read that post. T...It is very interesting for me to read that post. Thanks for it. I like such topics and everything that is connected to them. I would like to read more on that blog soon.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6942147318185235475.post-46183724096840781282009-07-15T17:09:51.243-04:002009-07-15T17:09:51.243-04:00you must love the iconoclastic vigor of this websi...you must love the iconoclastic vigor of this website; the nerve of Mr. Jack! Good for you, Professor!ParquVCBCnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6942147318185235475.post-87488648442038227192009-06-17T11:12:14.089-04:002009-06-17T11:12:14.089-04:00the Alex Jack interview was a real treat to read.the Alex Jack interview was a real treat to read.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6942147318185235475.post-39384930979856472232009-06-11T14:40:17.885-04:002009-06-11T14:40:17.885-04:00I couldn’t agree with Rachelle more about how Shak...I couldn’t agree with Rachelle more about how Shakespeare has become a secular Christ. English departments have become temples of idolatry, and Wells, Vickers, Greenblatt, and the other Strat luminaries perform the function of high priests. <br /><br />In a query to Part I of my interview, Isabel asked me why I don’t concede that Will Shakespeare was portrayed as a country bumpkin in <em>As You Like It</em> and parodied by Ben Johnson. Like many Marlovians, she was dismayed when I credited Will as co-author in my edition of Marlowe’s <em>Hamlet</em>. <br /><br />In <em>As You Like It</em>, the characterization of Will could be a send up in the way that Kit parodies himself as Christopher Sly in <em>Shrew</em>. And there are other, more endearing references to Will, including some of the 14 instances in Sonnet 135. I think the jury is still out on the question of their relationship.<br /><br />Indeed, Will is such a cipher, it’s clear we really don’t know whether he could read or write (beyond his scrawled signatures), whether he was Catholic or Protestant, and whether he was a loving husband and good father (mostly at a distance in London) or a rake who abandoned his wife and family. Regarding the authorship, none of this really matters. It’s like Martin Luther King. Whatever it says about his moral character, the fact that he cheated on his wife and plagiarized sermons does not diminish his commanding role in the civil rights movement. Similarly, what matters is that Will played his part, however unlettered, and enabled the world’s greatest poetry to be performed and published under his name. <br /><br />In his capacity as an actor and stage manager, it’s not unreasonable to assume that some of Will’s reading of the text, stage directions, and acting shaped and influenced the performances at the Globe, entered theater tradition, and snippets even made it into some of the quartos or the Folio. Was it a major role? Almost certainly not. But he chipped in his 2 pence and he succeeded magnificently. That he was a maltster, may have blackmailed Southampton (or whoever was footing the bills) into arranging a coat of arms or purchasing his silence in return for a big house in Stratford, is beside the point. Yikes, compared to today’s grain speculators, biotech companies, and ethanol developers who highjack whole economies, his hoarding is small change. And don’t forget Kit had some unsavory episodes in his past, including street brawls and a fatal duel. <br /><br />For good or ill, Shakespeare has been forever associated with the plays and poetry performed and published in his name. I see no point in denying the obvious. It’s like saying the Gospels of Mark, Mathew, Luke, and John should all be renamed because New Testament scholarship has shown that their namesakes couldn’t possibly have written them. As a practical matter, I’m interested in seeing that Marlowe gets credit for his starring role. In the absence of finding the holy grail, or manuscripts to the comedies and tragedies signed by Kit, we’re not going to convince the world of Marlowe’s claim by bashing Will, turning him into a Judas, and making him a scapegoat for centuries of Strat domination and bondage. Let’s embrace Will, disarm the critics, and strive to have Marlowe recognized by 2023, the 400th anniversary of the First Folio, as the authorial superstar along with Shakespeare, Peele, Middleton, Wiikens, Fletcher, and other junior co-authors or co-dramatists bringing up the rear.Alex Jacknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6942147318185235475.post-64090115007166037892009-06-10T08:34:35.134-04:002009-06-10T08:34:35.134-04:00Prof. Jack,
I can't thank you enough for your...Prof. Jack,<br /><br />I can't thank you enough for your bold, well-grounded assertions that force us to think outside the box. It's sad how blind (and dare I say fearful?) academia has become to truth; it's all about the money...WyomingEaglenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6942147318185235475.post-57435622868279713182009-06-08T14:50:06.279-04:002009-06-08T14:50:06.279-04:00thanks for the whitgift clue!thanks for the whitgift clue!GlasgowIannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6942147318185235475.post-59461540678605284362009-06-06T15:37:21.869-04:002009-06-06T15:37:21.869-04:00wow!wow!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6942147318185235475.post-22104565412869471902009-06-05T17:23:17.789-04:002009-06-05T17:23:17.789-04:00Again, another great article. Thanks to Carlo for...Again, another great article. Thanks to Carlo for taking the time to do these interviews.<br /><br />I find it highly interesting that the concept of religion is so intricately woven into the lives of Marlowe and his contemporaries, the plays themselves, and even Shakespearean scholarship. In fact, it could be said that Shakespeare is the literary equivalent of Jesus Christ, given the zeal with which Stratfordian "true believers" deny any possibility of alternative authorship--in spite of the huge body of evidence to the contrary.<br /><br />Those of us who entertain ideas about alternative authorship are akin to the "heretics" and "atheists" who challenged orthodoxy in the early Church. Those who have a vested interest in holding on to power and prestige gained through one ideology are always violently opposed to those who espouse challenging ideologies--particularly when those challenges are backed with weighty arguments that raise reasonable doubts in the minds of the average person. I can think of several professors I had back in college--still teaching, mind you--who gained their tenured positions and respected reputations all based upon their orthodox writings within Shakespeare scholarship. These people aren't even the "heavyweights" in the field! Were they to allow and entertain the idea that Marlowe or Oxford or Bacon or Mary Sidney or anyone other than William of Stratford wrote The Works, they'd be out of a job at worst and at least, they'd have a considerable amount of mud on their faces. Now imagine someone like Jonathan Bate entertaining such ideas!<br /><br />Ah, how often Truth is sacrificed on the altars of Human Vanity!Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15810445091795287687noreply@blogger.com