Bob Meyers - Was It Really William?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.ย. 2024
- Who really wrote as "William Shakespeare"? Journalist Bob Meyers examines the problems with the traditional story.
This talk was presented on October 20, 2019, at the SOF Annual Conference at the Mark Twain House and Museum, Hartford, Connecticut.
Bob Meyers served 19 years as president of the National Press Foundation, and two years as director of its Washington Journalism Center, retiring in 2014. In 1989-93 he directed the Harvard Journalism Fellowship for Advanced Studies in Public Health. Bob is a former reporter for the Washington Post and former editor at the San Diego Union. As a stringer for the Post he worked on the Watergate investigation from Los Angeles, focusing on the “dirty tricks” campaign that was a part of the paper’s Pulitzer Prize winning coverage. As a Post staffer he was nominated twice for the Pulitzer Prize himself. He has written two books, "Like Normal People" and "D.E.S.: The Bitter Pill." "Like Normal People" is the story of his mentally handicapped younger brother and the family’s efforts to help him lead a normal life. It was made into a TV movie in 1979 and nominated for a National Book Award. "D.E.S.: The Bitter Pill" is the story of a widely used anti-miscarriage drug that had enormous social and medical consequences. It received the Award for Excellence in Biomedical Writing from the American Medical Writers Association.
Educated in the New York City public school system and at UCLA, Meyers was awarded an academic fellowship at Harvard’s Center for Health Communication in 1987-88. He is a member of the Fellowship Advisory Board of the Rosalynn Carter Fellowships for Mental Health Journalism. He has lectured at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, Tsinghua University in Beijing, and in Jamaica, Lithuania, Poland and Estonia, among other places.
For more on the Shakespeare Authorship Question, visit shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org.
![Megan Thee Stallion - Neva Play (feat. RM) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpYTyAaTRts/mqdefault.jpg)
That DeVere was Shakespeare to me is obvious. What intrigues me is not that his works were hidden with a pseudonym but the paradox of the queen's generous lifetime stipend combined with his erasure as man of import to the point of a burial lost to history. He was obviously recognized as the genius he was by the queen and his literary contemporaries. My guess is the stipend was compensation for services rendered for Elizabeth, (the Tudor friendly history plays), but what unspeakable scandal or lifestyle rendered him unfit to be honored at his death. To me this paradox is the true mystery.
The Cecil's hated him because he mocked them constantly in his plays (understandable) going public with his name would have given the propaganda game away to the public and the fact his son was a bastard (as well as possible Tudor Prince theories) all meant it was impossible. Plus stigma of print at this time. It all became a weird compromise where the plays would survive but he would be forgotten to history, at least as much as possible.
Good of Bob Meyers to question the "spendthrift" and "hotheaded" accusations against Oxford--the problem of upkeep for estates and the ruinous debts were endemic among Elizabethan earls; but how many earls can claim, like Oxford, that personal bankruptcy accomplished something culturally significant?
Good show, good points.
Brilliant funny informative thank you.
That was great! ❤
From what I understand the real W. Shakespeare was an astute businessman and a shareholder in a theater of performers- perhaps he fulfilled the role of what we today would call a "producer"? I would imagine the different jobs in the theater of the day were not allways clearly defined and probably overlapping as formal and specified education of which we are accustomed to today was rare.
Indeed, it required 'rare' education to write the works of Shakespeare, because many branches of knowledge are treated with expertise and mastery: law, botany, classical literature, history, philosophy, statesmanship, medicine, courtiership, etc. Earl of Oxford had rigorous early education, studied law, and eventually acquired a Masters Degree. He had that *"formal and specified education of which we are accustomed today."* Shakspere of Stratford did not.
Francis Bacon is a scientist, and a philosopher of science, not a man of letters.
Another indication that Bastian Conrad and Calvin Hoffman have shown is that between the literary works of Marlowe and Shakespeare the style and the concerns are identical, not just similar, with hundreds of similarities and parallels in the sentences. In Spain the different styles of Lope de Vega, Tirso, and Calderón are perfectly distinguished.
De Vere was a patron, who did not particularly know Italy, was not homosexual, nor did he suffer from a limp, nor did he have an interest in or knowledge of Catholicism about things that he did have Marlowe.
Now I may be a half-witted grammar school kid, but I can see that Prospero in The Tempest is a blatant characterisation of self confessed alchemist and sorcerer John Dee. So how did Brummie Bill from Stratford, Warwickshire ever get to hear of such nobility, never mind meet such a man. Edward Devere meanwhile was a personal friend of John Dee. Dee being the original 007, was one of Devere's personal tutors and may have taught him a few spy tricks, like how to be invisible and stay anonymous. Devere and Dee collaborated on books together. Now the naysayers will scream: "Ah The Tempest wasn't written until way after Devere died." That doesn't mean anything. It's facile, manuscripts can be published long decades after an author's death. It just means Devere had dedicated supporters willing to continue his legacy, just as there were many enemies (From The Cecils onwards) happy to wipe him from history forever.
It was also published after Shaksper's death 😂 It's honestly the Stratfordian's worst argument.
10:45 didn't need to travel, there was a bar where travelers went?
definitely interesting and funny. loved it.
Was it really William? Of course not. He could barely write his own name. Even Mark Twain knew this.
37:30 Oxford was the Queen's allowed fool
Maybe, but why❓
Why all the tricks to hide the true author?
many reasons. For one being a playwright in those days was considered lowest of the low. There is no doubt Shakespeare did not write these plays not only that but he could not.
Because England at that time we was a military directorship and a person from the ruling elite could easily lose their head by making political enemies. Conversely someone who was too close to the monarchy could be accused of writing political propaganda. Shakespeare was a sort of Danny Dyer of his day and would not have been considered a threat to anyone. The real author of the plays chose Shakespeare for that reason and thank God they did!
That is the question!
@@annmolloy8600 And there are many good answers to it. To add to what has already been said in this thread, the content of the plays, especially the comedies and Hamlet, was political dynamite. Stripping away the real author obscured the dangerous politics.
@@annmolloy8600Stigma of Print and derogeance
If Shakespeare was an actor, then he was literate. How could an illiterate actor learn his lines? The poor quality of handwriting in his late signatures could be nothing more than the result of scrivener's palsy, brought on by a lifetime of constant writing. Of course, this does not imply that he wrote the plays. He may have been the company's copyist, for instance.
An actor in Early Modern England could be functionality or practically literate in that he could read but not necessarily write. When the printing press came in to being the amount of written documents rapidly grew, which engaged more people to learn to read but, to a lesser extent, to write. Google Early Modern England and functional literacy for edification.
they were taught their lines the same way kids are taught. 80% were illiterate during this period.
That would imply he could read but not necessarily write, consistent with a grammar school education at the time.