14 of 23 people found the following review helpful
The simpleton's guide to the Shakespeare authorship question,
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Why Shakespeare WAS Shakespeare (Kindle Singles) (Kindle Edition)
I find it really sad that Stanley Wells, whom I have always admired as an excellent commentator on the works of Shakespeare, seems so badly to have lost the plot. Like 'Shakespeare Bites Back' and 'Shakespeare Beyond Doubt' this is nothing but propaganda. There are good arguments to be made on both sides of this debate, but most of those which counter all of his usual arguments are yet again simply ignored or ridiculed – certainly not refuted. In my opinion, if Prof. Wells had any interest at all in people correctly deciding what the truth is – rather than defending his own preferred version of it – his time would have been better spent contributing more Stratfordian content to Ros Barber's work-in-progress 'Shakespeare: The Evidence'. If I may parody Gabriel Harvey – the convinced Stratfordian and the gullible will take much delight in Wells's 'Why Shakespeare WAS Shakespeare', but 'Shakespeare: the Evidence' has it in it to please the wiser sort.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-1 of 1 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 20 Feb 2014 20:26:45 GMT
Mr. Wells made some statements recently that were somewhat conciliatory toward non-Stratfordian scholarship. It's a shame that that doesn't seem to have seeped into this essay.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›