- Hardcover: 208 pages
- Publisher: Greenwood Press; annotated edition edition (30 Sep 1994)
- Language English
- ISBN-10: 0275948501
- ISBN-13: 978-0275948504
- Product Dimensions: 2.2 x 1.5 x 0.2 cm
- Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
- Amazon Bestsellers Rank: 693,049 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- See Complete Table of Contents
Shakespeare--Who Was He?
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle .
Learn more
| ||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know you can trade in your old books for an Amazon.co.uk Gift Card to spend on the things you want? Plus, get an extra £5 Gift Certificate when you trade in books worth £10 or more before June 30, 2012. Visit the Books Trade-In Store for more details. |
Product details |
More About the Author
Product Description
Review
"In a clear, concise, eminently readable style, Whalen takes the reader on a most entertaining and instructive tour of the great debate. Much has been written on the Shakespeare authorship question, but Whalen's brisk summary of it should lead to a much wider understanding of the surprisingly strong case for Oxford and the shaky foundation under the pedestal of the Bard of Avon."-From the Foreword by Ambassador Paul H. Nitze
Product Description
William Shakespeare is the only literary figure whose very identity is a matter of long-standing and continuing dispute. Was he really the glover's son from Stratford-on-Avon? Or was he someone else writing under the pseudonym William Shakespeare? Interest is growing now that a consensus has formed for Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, as the leading candidate. This book claims that Oxford, a recognised poet, playwright and patron of acting companies, has eclipsed Bacon, Marlowe and all the other candidates. The Oxfordian challenge is now being covered in scholarly books, in articles in magazines such as "The New Yorker" and "Atlantic Monthly" and on television, including an hour-long PBS "Frontline" programme. The issue has even been debated in a moot court before three justices of the Supreme Court - with an intriguing outcome. Whalen's book aims to provide a readable summary for the general reader, one that analyses the main arguments for both the man from Stratford-on-Avon and the Earl of Oxford. His conclusion? He argues that the case for Oxford is much more persuasive. Oxford's life in general, and in its particulars, is mirrored throughout the works of Shakespeare in many striking ways, particularly in "Hamlet", the most autobiographical of the plays. Many who have examined the case for Oxford have had their appreciation of Shakespeare transformed and enriched. This book should be interesting reading for those who love Shakespeare and want to know more about why the authorship controversy persists. The main narrative is supplemented by endnotes, appendixes, and a bibliography.
Inside This Book
(Learn More)
First Sentence
A difficult dilemma confronts biographers who tell the story of the glove maker's son from Stratford-on-Avon who is supposed to have become the world's greatest poet and dramatist. Read the first page
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
A difficult dilemma confronts biographers who tell the story of the glove maker's son from Stratford-on-Avon who is supposed to have become the world's greatest poet and dramatist. Read the first page
Explore More
Concordance
Browse Sample PagesConcordance
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organise and find favourite items. |
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
1 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover
Richard Whalen's highly-acclaimed book is the best summary account of the Authorship Question in print. Whalen is careful to limit his study of the Shakespeare Authorship Controversy to a judicious survey of established facts and reasoned analysis; his concise and conservative assessment of the liklihood that the poems and plays of the great Elizabethan Spear-shaker were pseudonymously composed by Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, rather than Gulielmus Shakspere, an uneducated butcher's apprentice from Stratford-Upon-Avon, is compelling. Accordingly, I commend the work to all who are interested in reviewing the principal tenets of the Authorship Question; this book is a fine introduction to anyone curious about who the unseen writer was who published his plays and poems under the pen name name of "William Shake-speare."
1 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover
Despite some pretence at objectivity, Whalen is clearly an Oxfordian proponent and scants the case for the Stratford man. Even his Oxford case is on the thin side, although much more easily digested than any Ogburn opus.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com:
12 reviews
23 of 28 people found the following review helpful
Shakspere or Oxford?
16 Aug 2002
Format:Hardcover
Many people don't know that there's a controversy over the authorship of the plays. Many of those that know of the issue ask "Why bother? Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare, and that's that." I used to feel that way until I fell in love with the works of Shakespeare in college and wanted to know more about the individual who wrote the plays. Was it Shakspere, the business man from London? or "Shake-speare," a pseudonymn used by the 17th Earl of Oxford, Edward De Vere?
For me, part of the joy of reading the works of Shakespeare was finding out the history behind them. The more I read about the man, the more I found academia didn't know much about him. They had a handle on the times and the events, but not the man. This raised several questions in my mind:
1. Why is there little or no mention of William Shakspere amongst his contemporaries (Jonson, Dryden and Marlowe to name a few)?
2. Why is the only written documentation referencing Shakspere concern business dealings. For a playwright and poet as prolific as Shakespeare, you'd think someone would have "something". Yet in the centuries since his passing -- little or nothing.
3. How could an outsider (Shakspere) have intimate knowledge of the aristocracy? (i.e.: Burghley/Polonius) There were definite social boundries in Elizabethan times. Oxford (De Vere) was in that inner circle.
These are just a few of the questions readers of Shakespeare have had about the man from Stratford over the years. Mr. Whalen takes several of these questions and condenses them into a neat little volume, making this a wonderful place for someone interested in the authorship controversy to start.
For me, part of the joy of reading the works of Shakespeare was finding out the history behind them. The more I read about the man, the more I found academia didn't know much about him. They had a handle on the times and the events, but not the man. This raised several questions in my mind:
1. Why is there little or no mention of William Shakspere amongst his contemporaries (Jonson, Dryden and Marlowe to name a few)?
2. Why is the only written documentation referencing Shakspere concern business dealings. For a playwright and poet as prolific as Shakespeare, you'd think someone would have "something". Yet in the centuries since his passing -- little or nothing.
3. How could an outsider (Shakspere) have intimate knowledge of the aristocracy? (i.e.: Burghley/Polonius) There were definite social boundries in Elizabethan times. Oxford (De Vere) was in that inner circle.
These are just a few of the questions readers of Shakespeare have had about the man from Stratford over the years. Mr. Whalen takes several of these questions and condenses them into a neat little volume, making this a wonderful place for someone interested in the authorship controversy to start.
23 of 29 people found the following review helpful
Lucid, balanced, thorough
28 Dec 2002
Format:Hardcover
This book is probably the best introduction to the Shakespeare authorship controversy available at the moment. What impressed me most about it was its tone of quiet logic, and its careful, balanced account of the facts and the arguments on both sides. The orthodox Stratfordians are given their due, and their arguments and their objections to the Oxfordian view are discussed in detail. I also liked the way that facts are put into context, rather than just baldly stated.
On the other hand there is a little repetition, and the chapters sometimes give the impression of being written as separate essays, and then tweaked a bit and put into book form. The first half of the book is devoted to the case against William of Stratford, and the second half to the case for Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford.
I'm certainly not a person who is inclined to accept conspiracy theories. As someone who has always loved Shakespeare and is interested in Elizabethan history, I dismissed the alternative authorship theory for many years as a crackpot idea. However, once I actually started reading the details of the arguments in favor of Edward de Vere (and reading other books on the subject besides this one), I soon became convinced. I think that a careful, objective consideration of the evidence shows that it is far more likely that de Vere wrote the plays than that William of Stratford did. The Stratfordian arguments seem labored and clumsy, and based largely on guesswork, while the Oxfordian view fits into place very easly and effortlessly, and has ample factual evidence to support it. For me this has added a whole new level of insight and understanding to the plays and poetry, and a much deeper appreciation and enjoyment of them.
Whalen's book is highly recommended for anyone who wants a good summary of the issues and arguments.
20 of 25 people found the following review helpful
Oxford wins the day in Whalen's well-researched book
5 Jun 2000
Format:Hardcover
Whalen is probably as objective as any doubter to the Stratford man could be. Afterall, there just isn't much documented evidence for the traditional view. Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford is easier to support analytically, because much more is known about him. If you were presented with two cases of evidence for authorship, and knew nothing about the controversy, you would be hard pressed to favor the Stratford on Avon gentleman who bears the same name as the immortal bard. This is the way that Whalen presents the arguments. He tries to let the traditionalists refute the Oxfordians claims, but they don't fare so well. Oxford's life parallel's HAMLET'S in so many ways as to make one believe that Oxford either wrote the plays or was the Stratford man's inspiration.
But the defense of Oxford against Stratfordians isn't without critics. Oxford died in 1604 and that seems too early for some of the authorship, but the records of when these works were written is scant at best.
In the end you have two mounds of evidence and Whalen shows that Oxford's pile outweighs the mainstream pile. I'm not a Shakespearean scholar like those in the fray, but I'd lay 13-5 odds that Oxford wrote these plays based on the research in this book.
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
Listmania!
Look for similar items by category
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
- I am the Author, and I want to comment on my book.
- I am the Publisher, and I want to comment on this book.
|
