Authorship

[Anonymous No.18606601]

Why is this treated like a conspiracy theory? There's no way a pleb who owned few books could have wrote those plays considering all the classical, religious, etc. references. How would he have learned of all of those subjects? To be a stratfordian you have to be delusional

[Anonymous No.18606607]

>every day there's a new thread about Shakespearean authorship
>there's never a thread to actually discuss the plays

[Anonymous No.18606617]

Very, very, VERY hot take. Smoking hot, in fact. I'm blown away. How did your brain get so big, my big brain little buddy?

[Anonymous No.18606620]

>>18606607
Whodunit mysteries are interesting and engaging. Btw are you a stratfordian?

[Anonymous No.18606624]

Their only argument always boils down to “what are you, some kind of elitist?”

[Anonymous No.18606629]

>>18606617
>This is the best stratfordians can do

[Anonymous No.18606642]

>>18606601
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU4ExIB62Gw
he was actually a black jewish woman who believed the new testament was written by the romans

[Anonymous No.18606656]

>>18606601
>decades of secret editions that somehow left zero (0) traces is more believable than a (financially ok) plebeian having basic knowledge of some topics that were 90% of scholarship of his time
The man couldn't even get the basic geography of Italy right.
Meanwhile us "Stratfordians" have material, legal, paper trace and the consensus of contemporaries and those soon after.
I hope you aren't a Vere nigger or a Bacon cuck. At least make it funny and assert he Arab authorship theory.

[Anonymous No.18606686]

https://youtube.com/watch?v=OpFXD07_NYg

[Anonymous No.18606694]

>>18606656
>The man couldn't even get the basic geography of Italy right.
Funny Shakespeare described things in his plays that he only could have known about if he traveled there

[Anonymous No.18606698]

>>18606620
>Whodunit mysteries are interesting and engaging.
Not really, especially not compared to the beauty of Shakespeare's works.
>Btw are you a stratfordian?
I don't care.

[Anonymous No.18606735]

>>18606656

[Anonymous No.18606742]

There are a whole host of mediocre and untalented "educated" people who view Shakespeare's body of work with abject envy. It is hard to take their comments seriously, because they are not coming from a place of healthy skepticism but one of entitled jealousy. Almost like they are owed comparable talent and genius for having read more books, or, I suspect, more Wikipedia pages.

[Anonymous No.18606763]

>>18606698
By discussing authorship you end up discussing the works by proxy so no idea why you're complaining

[Anonymous No.18606769]

>>18606742
>>18606624
Every time

[Anonymous No.18606780]

>>18606763
Arguing about certain geographical inaccuracies (for example) means you're technically "discussing" the content of the plays, but only at a very shallow level. There's no beauty in it.

[Anonymous No.18606787]

>>18606780
You're discussing the sources he used for the plays. It's not shallow. Watch this >>18606686

[Anonymous No.18606851]

>>18606624
>>18606769
It's one thing to be elitist. It's another to doubt based upon no evidence whatsoever and strictly out of jealousy.

[Anonymous No.18607310]

>Macbeth has strong allusions to the gunpowder plot, an event that took place after Oxfords life
>Coriolanus was inspired by the food shortages once again taking place after Oxfords life
NONONONON YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND HE WAS LIKE SO SMART HE PREDICTED THESE FUTURE EVENTS AND WROTE PLAYS THAT FEATURE THOSE THEMES

[Anonymous No.18607673]

>>18606624

There is evidence that Shakespeare was enrolled in a Grammar School, one of the best in the country. Shakespeare's family was not that poor. His father was even mayor of the Stratford for some time, and his mother was from a well-known rural family. It's probable (almost certain) that William went to Grammar School for quite some time, and do you know what they taught at schools that time? The name “Grammar Schools” already says a lot. Yeah, that’s right: grammar, especially Latin grammar. History and the Sciences were hardly a subject of teaching, but Latin and English, figures of speech, rhetoric, oratory, Ovid, Virgil, Seneca, metaphors and similes – that was the main thing kids learned at that time. It is probable that a kind in Elizabethan England schools was having a better education to invest in a poetry career than people on literature courses in University in our own time.

There are several mentions of Shakespeare made by contemporaries, as well as an overtly offensive mention, which portrays a man who has just arrived from the countryside, trying to do all sorts of jobs at once (ie, a very palpable definition of a real person):

"... for there is an upstart Crow, beautified with our feathers, that with his Tygers hart wrapt in a Players hyde, supposes he is able to bomb out a blanke verse as the best of you: and being an absolute Johannes fact totum, is in his own concept the onely Shake-scene in a countrey."

Other poets of great renown had humble origins, such as Marlowe and Ben Jonson.

Many of Shakespeare's published works have his name on the cover.

Shakespeare's plays show the use of Yorkshire dialect and the dialect of the countryside, as well as references to activities typical of the craft of leather craftsmen and the production of gloves, bags and other items that use sheepskin (the profession of Shakespeare's father) .

[Anonymous No.18607682]

>>18607673
>Grammar School for quite some time
he went for 3 years

[Anonymous No.18607706]

>>18606601
I find it interesting how certain nobodies stake their ego on a topic so divorced from their pathetic shut in lives.

[Anonymous No.18607760]

>>18607706
>resorts to ad hom
I can't imagine what it must be like to be a stratfordian

[Anonymous No.18607775]

The authorship question was started by a few butthurt dukes and aristocrats who absolutely seethed and could not stand the fact that the best literary genius of all time was a low class commoner, so they invented this conspiracy theory that he actually was secretly of noble birth in order to cope and make themselves feel validated.

[Anonymous No.18607785]

>>18607775
>>18606624

[Anonymous No.18607837]

>>18606624
The argument comes form the fact that Shakespeare was the man related to the plays, was universally recognized as such in his time and for a long time after, was the physical person to which they were legally related, with physical evidence, and claimed to have written them.
It is the anti-Shakespearian (or anti-"Stratfordian" as they would call themselves) that fail to produce a single piece of evidence. Their entire and only argument is that a commoner couldn't have written them. It is the beginning and end of the controversy. Imagine presenting this sort of argument in a court of law.

[Anonymous No.18607845]

>>18607785

see:

>>18607673