Scan barcode
sksrenninger's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting and really informative exploration of a topic I had never pondered. THE book to read on the authorship question, apparently! My favorite parts were when he explained how people misinterpret(ed) modern literature and how it is a mistake to view it through a modern lens—wish that section had been a bit longer.
sorinahiggins's review against another edition
4.0
So far, this book is amazing! It purports to be a balanced view of the Shakespeare authorship controversy, and presents the case for Francis Bacon, then the Earl of Oxford, then Shakespeare. The beginning, however, is a remarkable survey of early Shakespeare scholarship (late 1700s), tracing the lines that laid down the kinds of thinking that made the authorship controversy possible. I highly recommend it.
. . .
Now, after finishing this book, I still highly recommend it! It's excellent. It is not unbiased, but a long immersion in postmodernism has taught us that objectivity is impossible anyway. So, it's a lovely, lively survey of (not the authorship question itself, but) WHY people question Shakespeare's authorship. It has a great cast of characters: forgers, lunatics, spiritualists (one guy held seances in which his medium called up Edward de Vere, Francis Bacon, and Shakespeare to get from them the whole story. He did get the whole story of who wrote what, and even got a couple of lousy sonnets out of them. Funny that guys write better when they're alive than when they're dead), philosophers, psychoanalyists (Freud was an Oxfordian), novelists (Mark Twain was, too), feminists, historians, politicians.... It's well-written, quite readable, and (in the end) quite persuasive that Shakespeare of Stratford was the guy after all.
If you're going to go see "Anonymous" (don't know why you'd waste your money, really), read this first!
. . .
Now, after finishing this book, I still highly recommend it! It's excellent. It is not unbiased, but a long immersion in postmodernism has taught us that objectivity is impossible anyway. So, it's a lovely, lively survey of (not the authorship question itself, but) WHY people question Shakespeare's authorship. It has a great cast of characters: forgers, lunatics, spiritualists (one guy held seances in which his medium called up Edward de Vere, Francis Bacon, and Shakespeare to get from them the whole story. He did get the whole story of who wrote what, and even got a couple of lousy sonnets out of them. Funny that guys write better when they're alive than when they're dead), philosophers, psychoanalyists (Freud was an Oxfordian), novelists (Mark Twain was, too), feminists, historians, politicians.... It's well-written, quite readable, and (in the end) quite persuasive that Shakespeare of Stratford was the guy after all.
If you're going to go see "Anonymous" (don't know why you'd waste your money, really), read this first!
annecrisp's review against another edition
I'm not in the mood for this book right now.
nightchough's review against another edition
4.0
Read this after seeing "Anonymous" which left me vaguely irritated. I had already read Shapiro's year in the life of Shakespeare book, and enjoyed it, so I was curious to see what he had to say about all the anti-Stratfordian hoohah.
I liked this book more than I expected to. Shapiro's biographies of the major proponents are quite interesting. He demonstrates the utter lack of positive evidence and gives credible motivation for why people would promote these theories.
I liked this book more than I expected to. Shapiro's biographies of the major proponents are quite interesting. He demonstrates the utter lack of positive evidence and gives credible motivation for why people would promote these theories.
fossen's review against another edition
4.0
Really quite a fascinating book. Really, authorship is not the issue here as much as the issues that underly it: class and the sense of self, the role of autobiography in the writing life, the sense of modernity. A compelling look at the people and concepts that have driven the authorship debate, with a final solid defense of the man from Stratford.
berlinbibliophile's review against another edition
4.0
I've wanted to reread this book for the longest time, and I was absolutely right to do so. This is, of course, not an academic work, but it explains the different positions of the authorship question well, and Shapiro never descends to name calling, even if some things he describes are clearly ridiculous, like the Prince Tudor theory. I also really appreciate that he goes over the case for Shakespeare rather than just the cases against the other theories. I am more convinced of my Stratfordian beliefs than ever.