Skip to main content

Shapiro abandons conditional for indicative, sez GG in NS

By

Germaine Greer hits the ball out of the park in her Oct. 6, 2015 New Statesman review of  James Shapiro's newest Shakespearean biography, 1606: William Shakespeare and the Year of Lear (Simon & Schuster, 2015). Greer says:
"For any writer of an extended narrative the temptation to abandon the conditional for the indicative is almost irresistible and Shapiro has not resisted it."
Greer complains specifically about Shapiro's cavalier attitude toward uncertainties in dating Shakespeare's plays, about unwarranted elaboration of Shakespeare's relationship with London landlady Marie Mountjoy, about inventing the meaning of daughter Susanna's failure to take communion, and other issues. Greer said:
With so little evidence, Shapiro is almost bound to overinterpret it.
. . . 
It is not easy for readers of 1606: William Shakespeare and the Year of Lear to determine when assumption becomes assertion, not least because Shapiro has chosen to provide rather congested endnotes instead of footnotes. This is only too understandable given the blizzard of commentary that surrounds the meagre facts of Shakespeare's life.


 In his continuing anxiety to bolster the Stratfordian perspective following his 2010 book Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?, James Shapiro wrote a three-part series, The King & The Playwright: A Jacobean History that appeared on the BBC in 2012 and is available in DVD as "Shakespeare: the King's Man" on Amazon. This work placed Shakespeare firmly in the rhelm of King James and presumably out-of-reach of any nasty Elizabethan pretenders to The Bard's quill and scroll.

 Shapiro's book on the topic, 1606: William Shakespeare and the Year of Lear (Simon & Schuster, 2015), debuted yesterday to the acclaim expected for the award-winning professor from Columbia U.

 But even Charles Nicholl, in a lavishly positive review in yesterday's Guardian twists himself in knots trying to untangle Shapiro's "novelistic" snarls:
Shapiro demonstrates once again his skill in shaping quantities of research into a brisk and enjoyable narrative. The material is extremely condensed but does not seem so. One could describe certain passages as tending to the 'novelistic' -- a dread word in some adacemic circles -- but animating the historical data is very different from obscuring it with madeup conversations in unevidenced locations.
We say, "Hmmm."

Resources:
http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2015/10/nowhere-man-challenges-tracking-down-shakespeare
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/oct/07/1606-william-shakespeare-and-the-year-of-lear-james-shapiro-review
http://oberonshakespearestudygroup.blogspot.com/2012/04/shapiro-invents-jacobean-shakespeare.html
http://books.simonandschuster.com/The-Year-of-Lear/James-Shapiro/9781416541646
http://www.amazon.com/SHAKESPEARE-KINGS-MAN-James-Shapiro/dp/B00B5DWF18
Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

What's a popp'rin' pear?

By
James Wheaton reported yesterday in the Jackson Citizen Patriot that the Michigan Shakespeare Festival high school tour of Romeo and Juliet was criticized for inappropriate content -- " So me take issue with sexual innuendoes in Michigan Shakespeare Festival’s High School Tour performances of ‘Romeo & Juliet’" : Western [High School] parent Rosie Crowley said she was upset when she heard students laughing about sexual content in the play afterwards. Her son didn’t attend the performance Tuesday because of another commitment, she said.  “I think the theater company should have left out any references that were rated R,” Crowley said. “I would say that I’ve read Shakespeare, and what I was told from the students, I’ve never read anything that bad.”  She said she objected to scenes that involved pelvic thrusting and breast touching and to a line in which Mercutio makes suggestive comments to Romeo after looking up the skirt of a female. The problem with cutting out the naug
Post a Comment
Read more

Winkler lights the match

By
by Linda Theil When asked by an interviewer why all the experts disagree with her on the legitimacy of the Shakespeare authorship question, journalist and author Elizabeth Winkler  calmly replied, "You've asked the wrong experts." * With that simple declaration Winkler exploded the topic of Shakespearean authorship forever. Anti-Stratfordians need no smoking gun, no convincing narrative, no reason who, how, when, or why because within the works lies the unassailable argument: Shakespeare's knowledge. Ask the lawyers. Ask the psychologists. Ask the librarians. Ask the historians. Ask the dramaturges. Ask the mathematicians. Ask the Greek scholars. Ask the physicists. Ask the astronomers. Ask the courtiers. Ask the bibliophiles. Ask the Italians. Ask the French. Ask the Russians. Ask the English. Ask everyone. Current academic agreement on a bevy of Shakespearean collaborators springs from an unspoken awareness of how much assistance the Stratfordian presumptive would h
Read more

Winkler drops the mic

By
Elizabeth Winkler presenting at Shakespearean Authorship Trust virtual event April 22, 2023 by Linda Theil In her new book, Shakespeare Was a Woman and Other Heresies: How Doubting the Bard Became the Biggest Taboo in Literature , Elizabeth Winkler presents a smart, witty, and eminently readable account of one woman's journey through the wonderful world of Stratfordian bullshit. Winkler's new book published by Simon & Schuster, 2023 According to her publisher: "Elizabeth Winkler is a journalist and book critic whose work has appeared in  The Wall Street Journal, The New Yorker, The New Republic, The Times Literary Supplement , and  The Economist,  among other publications. She received her undergraduate degree from Princeton University and her master’s in English literature from Stanford University. Her essay “Was Shakespeare a Woman?”, first published in  The Atlantic , was selected for  The Best American Essays 2020.  She lives in Washington, DC." I've inclu
Read more