shakespeare's "real" identity?

Question

I am a fanatical reader. Full on bibliophile. I study english literature at A level and take an active interest in the course.

But who gives a toss about Shakespeare's real identity? Isn't it enough we have to force feed kids this drivel and make them hate it at an early age, removing any joy we may have derived from it later in life?

And, yes, i am aware this comment will be met with much tutting and clucking from the learned scholars and stroke their beards and say "whats to be done with this impudent teenager?"

But honestly. Isn't anyone else sick to their *** of hearing this sh!t all the time?

Answer 1

Well hurrah for you Dominic J - the important thing is indeed the literature and not the identity of the person who wrote it and I applaud you for recognising this.

I'm not sure that this makes any difference to your argument about force-feeding it to kids. I hated Shakespeare when I was younger for exactly this reason and it would have made no difference to me if it was written by a Catholic bloke with a Brummie accent, Roger Bacon, or Uncle Tom Cobbly - I thought it was boring irrelevant crap.

I guess I could fall into the "learned scholar" bracket having studied literature to Masters, but I'm not stroking my beard in disapproval. What I will say however is that, when you continue your studies further into degree levels you will find that it becomes much more interesting (and essential) to start putting the identity, character and circumstances of the author into a historical context to help understand how these factors influenced his writing.

I still don't care who actually wrote Shakespeare's works, I now appreciate them for the undoubted masterpieces of literature they are - but to understand them better, it is essential to understand the mind of the author.

Answer 2

Supposedly William Shakespeare's real name is Edward de Vere. There is some evidence supporting that but, not a great deal. I guess people really want to know who the author of these plays was. However, looking into this further it seems like Mr. Shakespeare had some help from other writing his plays. I don't think he deserves full credit. But, whatever right. I was like you. I hated Shakespeare in middle school and high school and even in college. However after a I graduated college I got into acting and let me tell you, acting out Shakespeare is a lot more fun then reading it. In fact it is meant to be acted out and not to be read that is why it is a play and not a novel. I never understood that in school. Why read it?? Let's divide the class into parts and lets play it out. His writting makes a lot more sense when you act it then just reading it. Plus it is way more fun. I hope this helps.

Answer 3

I know someone who is convinced without a doubt that Shakespeare is Francis Bacon and I must admit, I try to steer her off the topic. But the notion of Shakespeare being Christopher Marlow (as well argued out by Calvin Hoffman in his book "The Man who was Shakespeare" is intriguing. Not only does it suggest that Marlow had access to a large library and all kinds of Italian inspiration for plots, but it also introduces another slant, in that Marlow was homosexual. What if the sonnet to the Dark Lady was, in fact, addressed to a dark young man? Was it easier for Marlow to write plays for an all male cast? This book is a fascinating read, by the way. Do try to get hold of it.

Answer 4

Well... When you plant seeds, things grow later on, not ever immediately.

I am weird, probably because I am a poet myself (or a wanna be poet at best) I took to His writings like they were manna from heaven the very first time I read them. They were borning and tedious but they opened the doors in my life to trying hard to get through things that are tedious and streach your brain cells a little.

Maybe it's because I picked them up on my own and there never was a teacher or a school (because no one in mine ever gave a rats as*s.) I picked these things up on my own and I loved them from the very first moment I read them. It felt like I was reading something I had read a thousand times that was lost for years and I had just found again...

Willy nilly opened up the doors to language and history to me. I started getting into Chaucer and studying old English speech (with it's dipthongs and all those other cool sounding words.)

I think that might just be your problem with Shakespheare. Put down the teacher that ever felt the need to actually force feed you his writings and not the writer they chose to impose upon you.

You have got to carefully organize your rebellion and use it to your benefit, not your detriment. Be open to it and DECIDE to re read it on your own and call a spade a spade. Your teachers are the as*sholes... not the material they shoved down your throat.

I intorduced my kids to Shakespheare very young. Although it breaks my heart that although they are excellent at it, but dislike reading in general (probably because I pushed in my excitement too) they always loved hearing the Tempest the best. Now, when they get to High School, it wont be a chore or as daunting as it is for the other kids.

I think the problem is, it shoudn't be something that is ever sprung on you all at once... It should be changed in the curriculum and introduced in the form of childrens books early on, like I did with mine.

I love King Lear myself.

"One could abandon writing
for the slow-burning signals
of the great, to be instead
their ideal reader, ruminative
voracious, making the love of masterpieces
superior to attempting
to repeat or out do them,
and be the greatest reader in all the world."

-Derek Walcot, "Volcano."

Answer 5

Shakespeare Real Identity

Answer 6

His real name was WAGGLEDAGGER,but he changed it.

Answer 7

i heard he has only one testicle