There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
My developed interest in Shakespeare
goes back over thirty years, however, I had ignored the authorship question (did
actor Will from Stratford write the works with his name on them?); assuming it
for the most part improperly motivated. And although aware of the stupendous
world of reference within his writing, which massively exceeds the various
limitations of his country-boy background, and the numerous other anomalies
surrounding his supposed life, I had countered them by acknowledging his genius
as a sufficient explanation.
However, I no longer accept this
argument, as, following some recent study, I now realise that even a genius
still has to have a particular education to allow their art the particular form
of expression it takes. Leaving aside all the other evidences*(and there is a
lot), the actor Will from Stratford did not/could not have had such an
education that his putative works brilliantly reveal – this is, of course, the
authorship mystery. But who then?
Peter
Dawkins in his The Shakespeare Enigma simultaneously demonstrates Will
as clearly not the author, and convincingly argues for Sir Francis Bacon
using Will from Stratford as a mask. This work represents a formidable piece of
lifelong scholarship which is not easily gainsaid, no matter the obvious
objections to this idea that swiftly come to
mind and (as in my case) how much you cherish the idea of a common-stock
Englishman being the world’s greatest literary artist.
The arguments
against Will the Stratford actor as author also involve the most amazing and
clear evidence of cabalistic
and other secret embedded codes within Shakespeare’s works, and particularly
the sonnets. This was something I had no awareness of at all. And its presence
takes my wonder to a whole new level; although, frankly, beyond my ability to understand,
far less appreciate, what exactly is going on, and why Shakespeare (whoever he
is) has included such esoteric mysteries hidden within his work. This level of
thinking (for want of a better term) is so far in advance of mine that I feel
like a child shown advanced calculus.
In addition to Dawkin’s
demonstrations, the exploration of these secret
signs, mathematical patterns and embedded codes within the works is brilliantly
explored by Alan Green, in his books and Bardcast videos. Green’s approach is
somewhat different to Dawkins, although the two are complementary, and
indeed both researchers are friends, rather than rivals. Powered by the love of
Shakespeare’s work, and I suppose the thrill of the chase, Green has mastered
the daunting maths and trigonometry incorporated (yes, it actually is!) and made
himself a formidable cryptologist – all self taught! Both Green and Dawkins,
then, in their relentless intellectual curiosity and search for truth are following
a great British tradition of somewhat eccentric maverick-scholars. Eccentric,
of course, here meant as a respectful nod to their wonderful persistence, quite
devoid of self-interest.
Green too has, of necessity, arrived at a
similar refutation of Will from Stratford as the Shakespeare author, but argues
for the Earl of Oxford, Edward de Vere, with an influence of de Vere’s mentor, the
Elizabethan polymath, Dr Dee; Green’s evidence seems irresistible – at least,
for the sonnets.
However, I’m equally
convinced of Bacon as the real Shakespeare author. So, now I don’t know what to
think! I intuitively sense a single voice in the plays and in the sonnets
(although not necessarily the same in both,
as I understand the plays and poetry being quite different types of literary
endavour), but perhaps that voice has more than one mind? As my understanding
now rests, I cannot see any way beyond a team
effort; certainly they knew each other well. By team effort, I am meaning sharing the same Shakespeare name as their front, and not necessarily directly collaborating on any particular publication. Strangely, years ago I came across
(I cannot remember when or where) just such an argument and considered it so
unlikely, ridiculously so, that I concluded the author of this argument quite
mad. And now me!
Lest you think that
this is written in any sort of disappointment at the Shakespeare mystery being
further compounded, I can assure you that this is not the case. The author is
the same genius he was before, and the beauty and wonder of his work is
unchanged by authorship questions. Whatever the truth of this, beyond doubt
Will Shakespeare**from Stratford is not author Shakespeare. Although Will from Stratford does
have a role in this story, perhaps as a collaborator providing an
actor’s insight, and/or a willing (bribed) mask for the true author who had (or
preferred) to remain hidden. Hiding creative authorship behind a false persona might seem inexplicable to us today, but is perfectly understandable in the febrile, dangerous context of early modern England.
Following up on what
seem to be revealing clues, Alan Green hopes to be able to soon pull back the
curtain and uncover physical evidence of the true author/s. They wanted this –
hence the clues! And somewhere, somehow, all the Shakespeares are smiling.
As an advocate of
Shakespeare studies being incorporated into the primary school curriculum, in
lieu of …[better not say], I had at first considered the authorship question as
a significant complication. However, on further reflection, I now think the
exact opposite. Children love mysteries and puzzles, and complicated
motivations; what is the Shakespeare authorship question but this transposed to
early modern England? And it is, in its essential feature, hardly different
from Enid Blyton’s Secret Seven which enthralled me as a child.
Thusly, I no longer
fear introducing this aspect to children, but look forward to it.
All
things are ready if our minds be so.
What think
ye?
* For me, speaking as a lover of literature
and a parent, what absolutely nails the mystery is that Shakespeare’s daughters
were illiterate. Consider: The world’s greatest literary genius, and an established
gentleman in his hometown, didn’t bother ensuring his children’s literacy! If the
actor Will from Stratford is the author, this is simply inexplicable. ( Note that by Shakespeare's time the claim that there was a cultural prejudice against female literacy is not valid – and certainly so against females with the social standing of Will's daughters)
** Will from Stratford has many different spellings and pronunciations of his surname. The one we know best (Shakespeare) only once turns up on a document, independently of the publications.
PS. I cannot
even begin to here provide a summary of the brilliant work mentioned and so I’m
hoping this essay has made you curious and so will search out Peter and Alan’s
books, and Alan’s podcasts. I should note that I am not dismissing the traditional
view; although I note that some defenders of this position have adopted a
patronising, even sarcastic, attitude to the rival arguments – casting them in
the popular trope of conspiracy theory to better discredit it – but, in fact,
more discredits themselves (looking at you, Shapiro!) in refusing to properly consider the serious
questions posed by the authorship controversy.
A collection
of authorship arguments can be found at the home page of the link below. This
specific link takes you to a page with videos about it and a statement of the
authorship question, which is also read out loud (excellently) by the actor
Michael York, should you prefer to hear it:
No comments:
Post a Comment