[Ansteorra] Bardic PSA- RECALL NOTICE

[mikea]

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:46:39AM -0500, Casey Weed wrote:
> I've now read four different anti-Stratfordian books and skimmed a couple
> others.  All of them to a one use two or three of the same [bad] arguments:
> 
> 1. The Classist Argument- The Glovemaker's Son wasn't smart enough or
> well-bred enough or well-educated enough to have written the plays.  I've
> already picked this one apart but it's essentially an argument from silence
> and so, fallacious from the start.  And we have tons of examples of genius
> coming from the common man elsewhere.  And it's insulting, as you point out.
> 
> 2. The Biopic Argument- You can see elements and incidents from the life of
> [insert conspiratorial candidate here: Oxford, Bacon, Bess, Neville, aliens,
> time travellers, Thad the Gardener] in the plays.  This is a dead argument
> two ways: first, biopic writing styles didn't come about as a style until
> the 18th/19th century.  At a time when an onstage acted sin was still
> considered by most a fairly grave thing and when literature could get you
> killed or excommunicated this makes sense.  "Edmund: A Butler's Story" with
> all it's intimate details and factual links to Blackadder's real life is
> written, mythically but accurately, during the REGENCY.  Secondly, if you
> choose to ignore the stylistic problem biopic writing presents, this sword
> cuts both ways: there are several anecdotes from life and times of the
> Glovemaker's Son that fit very nicely in the plays.  There is a court case
> from Stratford, for instance, recording a drowned cousin of W.S. in a stream
> while picking flowers (Ophelia, anyone?).  This class of argument,
> coincidentally, is often put forth by some decedent of the proposed 'real'
> writer... imagine that.
> 
> 3.  The Cipher Argument- There is a Hidden Code in the writing that uncovers
> the Real Truth.  This is the worst of the hogswallop- mostly founded on
> pseudo-scholarship by a loon named Penn Leary- and it doesn't pass any
> reasonable test.  Basically, you can find "evidence" in any body of writing
> this large that anybody wrote anything.  See:
> http://shakespeareauthorship.com/bacpenl.html and follow the "What else did
> Bacon write?" link.  You'll be happy to know that if you believe Bacon wrote
> the cannon that you can also give him credit on the same grounds for having
> penned Longfellow's Song of Hiawatha, Tarzan of the Apes, and the Federalist
> Papers.
> 
> It's just a sign of our times.  Our culture is having a love affair with
> conspiracy these days and it's become vogue to pick out the icons of an age
> and try to look for fleas in the manes of lions.  The saddest part is
> watching people you admire in another aspect buy into this crap due to the
> absence of training in Rhetoric and Debate coupled with a complete ignorance
> of historical fact.  Sir Derek Jacobi is an actor of amazing talent... who
> fervently believes the Earl of Oxford wrote at least ten plays after his own
> death.  Acting genius; historically illiterate.  Ask any of the people who
> are actual scholars in the field (and I have done this in person or by
> proxy)- Dr. Andrew Gurr (author and leading world scholar on W.S.), Dr.
> James Loehlin (UT Chair, author of 12 books on W.S., runs Shakespeare At
> Winedale), Dr. Joe Stephenson (Chair at Abilene Christian University)- and
> they all react the same way: "Are you kidding me?  Shakespeare the actor,
> the playwright, and the glovemaker's son from Stratford are one and the same
> and no reasonable person who has looked at the evidence thinks otherwise."

Nicely put! Thank you.

As regards "The Cipher Argument": I used, once upon a time, to deal
with codes and ciphers professionally, and my education in this area
of expertise included a discussion of George Fabyan, the Riverbank
Laboratories, and William and Elizabeth Friedman. Fabyan was convinced
that Francis Bacon wrote many, if not all, of the "Shakespeare" plays, and
engaged Elizabeth Smith (later Friedman) to help with the "decipherment"
of texts hidden in the plays. The Friedmans later totally debunked this
thesis in _The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined_, published in 1957. 

I confess myself more than a bit mystified that the book was published
only 54 years ago, but it appears that Elizabeth Friedman had pretty well
assembled the evidence rather earlier, before 1919.

-- 
Mike Andrews        /   Michael Fenwick    Barony of Namron, Ansteorra
mikea at mikea.ath.cx  /   Amateur Extra radio operator W5EGO
Tired old music Laurel; Chirurgeon; SCAdian since AS XI
Listowner, SCA-Laurels