Skip to comments.Shakespeare: Commuter, Landlord and Tax-Dodger
Posted on 05/18/2013 6:06:13 PM PDT by nickcarraway
They say you should write what you know, but the greatest writer of all completely ignored the world on his doorstep. William Shakespeare set plays in Venice, Rome, Scotland and other locations around the world. Some of his plays revolve around the British Court, but he set almost nothing in the rough-and-tumble of 16th-century London or sleepy Stratford upon Avon, where he spent most of his life.
This is all the more puzzling when, as a new exhibition at the London Metropolitan Archive (LMA) proves, his life was so intimately bound up with the capital.
The show commemorates the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare's title deed. In 1613, he bought a property in Blackfriars for £140, and the document recording it is one of only six that bear his handwriting.
With this amazing piece of paper at its centre, the exhibition explores the history of Shakespeare and London. Its scope ranges from his earliest recorded appearance in the city in 1592 through to the opening of the new Globe Theatre on the South Bank in 1997.
As always with Shakespeare, the details are tantalisingly sketchy. Over the centuries, scholars have tried to flesh out a story on the barest of bones. "A lot of what we have is subjective," says Laurence Ward, the chief archivist at the LMA, "but that's part of what makes it so interesting."
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
He had to be gay.
Wait a minute...
Because he didn’t want to pay ridiculous taxes?
“Well, sure. Most of them were. In fact, all of my ancestors were gay.”
Actually, it takes a string of really good luck to have a bunch of straight ancestors. That’s one of the reasons I think being gay is very selfish.
Yeh. Hate to get serious, but yeh, endless pleasure without progeny or the associated commitments. Selfishness has its virtues, but that isn’t one of them. BTT
|GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach|
Thanks nickcarraway.The show commemorates the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare's title deed. In 1613, he bought a property in Blackfriars for £140, and the document recording it is one of only six that bear his handwriting.And in 1666, the Great Fire incinerated an awful lot of sites and documents. Edward "Ned" Alleyn founded a school which still exists, and a few other players can be traced a little way, but it's amazing that we even have Shakespeare's plays.
He certainly wasn’t gay. The big question is was he bisexual? My guess, and it is only a guess, is that he was not. His supposedly sexually charged sonnets to the fair youth brought absolutely no criticism at the time. This suggests his contemporaries realized the sonnets concerned themselves with platonic love.
Compare these to the sonnets to the Dark Lady. The Dark lady sonnets are pure filth in comparison.
You see...the picture I wanted to post shows Gwynneth’s lovely...er...well...I’ll just say that...http://www.johnspeedie.com/healy/lovely.wav
That movie was extremely disappointing. Just awful. Really bad. David Mamet should have been slapped for that. I’ve read more wit in the tax code.
We are going to have to disagree on that one, my FRiend.
Jack-a-napes!!! Oh, sorry.
Why did he write about the Court and foreign lands and not Stratford? Because the nobleman Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford, was a member of the court, visited foreign lands and did *not* live in Stratford.
This will ignite the usual controversy but the case is overwhelmingly stronger for de Vere than it is for Will of Stratford. I recommend “Shakespeare by Another Name” for a detailed discussion of the issue, written by a scientist who applys pure analytical thinking to the data as it is currently known rather than by a souvenir shop owner in Stratford who has a stake in the controversy (as do most literary scholars who wrote their theses on Will of Stratford).
I have no skin in this game and don’t care who wrote the works; the Oxfordians have the stronger argument at this time.
The reason Shakespeare's plays are set in "foreign lands," or historical periods, was because that was what was considered interesting and worth hearing about. In 1600, hearing what happened in Stratford in 1600 just wasn't an appealing topic. But, apart from some superficial details, all these plays could have been set in London.
Take Hamlet. The author knew a few place names, a few Danish names, the fact Denmark had an elective monarchy. Are there any other details specific to Denmark? I don't know of a single one.
Besides, the way Shakespeare wrote was virtually a fingerprint. Oxford could not write like that.
There are things in the plays that could only have been known to a member of the de Vere family. No possibility that the fellow from Oxford would have known or had any access.
Also, the knowledge of foreign lands is quite a bit deeper than you contend. Certain geographic and specific details were in the plays that could have only been obtained by someone who had actually traveled there.
Authors through their works are also their autobiographers. There’s no hint whatever of any autobiography had the Stratford Will written them.
Applying Occam’s Razor, why would Shakespeare not write about Stratford or even allude to it, or write about the Court and foreign lands? The question answers itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.