Jonathan Bate has written some interesting things of late. For example, on the topic of exactly WHICH works an educated London theater-lover in the reign of King James I may have believed to have been written by Shakspere, Bate points out (in the introduction to his book William Shakespeare & Others): So, you go along to [the booksellers] in St. Pauls Yard, in search of plays written by William Shakespeare. What will you find? Let us suppose the year is 1608. If you are lucky enough to find and buy copies of every play bearing the name of W. Shakespeare, you will now own eleven plays that will in future years be numbered among his best-known works....but you would also be in possession of The London Prodigal...and A Yorkshire Tragedy [both sold as being acted on the stage by the LCM/KM]....Readers would not have had the slightest reason to question the attribution. After all, the identification of a plays original acting company was as important a mark of authenticity as the playwrights name...If one was a very keen Shakespearean, snouting around for every available text that might be associated with him, one might have also taken a punt on the purchase of a number of plays attributed [on their title pages] to a certain W.S.....The Lamentable Tragedy of Locrine published in 1595 as Newly set forth, overseen and corrected, by W.S....and Thomas Lord Cromwell, published in 1602 as Written by W.S.....they are plays which were plausibly passed off as his [Shakespeares]. Three of the four came from the repertoire of the acting company in which he was a shareholder. He might have commissioned them. He might have polished up the raw scripts. As a key member of the company, he explicitly or implicitly signed them off for performance. He did not, as far as we are aware, disassociate himself or his company from them... Commissioned by him ?? Polished up by him?? Interesting thoughts from one of the worlds leading Stratfordian lights...a man seen by many as a possible successor to Stanley Wells at the SBT. Dont you think ?? Bate then continues: Precisely what role is being claimed for W.S. in relation to The Lamentable Tragedy of Locrine? The phrasing Newly set forth, overseen and corrected by W.S. may suggest that he was not the original playwright. The implication is rather that W.S. revised the play or prepared it for the press, or some combination of these interventions...There is...plenty of evidence that Shakespeare initially made his mark in the London theatre world as a fixer-upper of other mens plays. A fixer-upper of other mens plays ?? An interesting turn of phrase....dont you think ??
Posted on: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 12:55:28 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015