Edward de Vere is the Real Shakespeare Essay Example for Free

Edward de Vere is the Real Shakespe are EssayEdward de Vere was an Earl of Oxford. There is an ongoing reflect whether William Shakespeares chat ups were his or these were the creations of Edward de Vere. This debate last outs because literary scholars and historians reject this theory but was supported by theater practitioners and researchers. De Vere, also known as Oxford, was called a playwright and poet but his whole kit and boodle did non survive. Some of his poetry was anonymously published in Arte of slope Poesie in 1589. This was affirm by the informant George Puttenham. Very m all noble gentlemen in the accost that have written commendably and suppressed it again, or else suffered it to be published without their own names to it, as it were a discredit for a gentleman, to seem learned, and to show himself amatory of any good art. (Nelson, 165) Oxford as a dramatist is given proof through the testimony of Francis Meres in Palladis Tamia. He describes his works as the best for comedy. (Whalen, 361). Nonetheless, a few(prenominal) of Oxfords poems and songs are credited to his own name. The dates of these works are uncertain.Most of which are signed Earle of Oxenforde or E. O. When he was alive, Oxford was always in the company of English poets. In 1920, J Thomas loony presented facts that Oxford was the real author of Shakespeares plays. The facts he presented were a. ) Oxfords advanced education and first-hand experience of an aristocrats bearing b. ) the law c. ) the military c. ) theater background d. ) high praise of Oxfords works by his peers and e. ) the countless similarities between Oxfords life and the qualifyting of the plays.Looneys hypothesis was that Oxford published his works under a pseudonym since it was disgraceful for an aristocrat kindred him to be writing plays for public theater. (Nelson, 158). This claim was confirmed by Renaissance scholars. Members of the Tudor aristocracy were recognized as reputable poets but none of them published their works. None of Sir Walter Raleigh, Sir Fulke Greville, Sir Edward Dyer and Sir Philip Sidney published their creations despite their recognition in the aristocratic society. (Whalen, 248). Through the ideas presented by Looney, other writers became notable Oxfordians.Sigmund Freud, Mark Twain, columnist Joseph Sobran, biographer and historian David McCullough and actors Orson Welles, Sir Derek Jacobi, Sir John Gielgud and Jeremy Irons all debate that it was Oxford who wrote these plays. (Lindquist, 23) However, in that respect are gaps on Looneys theory. One is the evidentiary gap such as Oxfords death in 1604. If he were in fact the real author of Shakespeares plays, the he wouldnt have witnessed the wreck of the Sea Venture in Bermuda and the Gunpowder Plot which were said to be the allusions to Shakespeares dramas The Tempest and Macbeth. hence there are writers like Leonard Digges and Ben Jonson who provide concrete evidence that Shakespeare is a reputed poet. (Lindquist, 24) Oxfordians provide proof through the use of modern research that Shakespeare no hourlong published his plays after 1604. Also, Oxfordian biographers Mark Anderson and William Farina showed research which indicate that the publication of Shakespeares plays actually ended in 1604. (Simpson, 34) Aside from Oxford, there are other candidates who are considered to have been the real author of Shakespeares plays and sonnets.These are Chri land upher Marlowe, Francis Bacon and the Earl of Derby. These theories were rejected by academic establishments. Through the ideas and hypothesis of Looney and the Oxfordians, Oxford as the real author of Shakespeares works still stands true. (Nelson, 102) A crucial reasoning of why Oxford is the actual author of Shakespeares works come in the political topography of Hamlet. (Propson, 13) The Denmark in the play is identical with the biography Oxford has been accustomed in. The play is an imaginative presentation of wh at Oxford would have done, based on his other works that were published under a pseudonym.Oxfordians continue to present other arguments with such depth and accurate research to back up their hypothesis and their theories. Oxford mastered the understanding and experience that is evident in Shakespeares plays. Oxfords poems also have the same flow as those of Shakespeares. He explored and developed the stanzaic and metric forms when writing poetry, just like Shakespeare and his sonnets. (Propson, 15) And just like any aristocrat, he was status-conscious and he needed recognition for his success. He was determined to have his way and would have made it sure to have received credit for his plays or his poetry.So why then would he have allowed this to happen if he actually wrote the plays? Scholars who studied Oxford as a man and the possible Shakespeare describe him as a puzzle to his generation. Oxford was eccentric and creative and he showed varying moods, subtle movements and fierc e passions. His words as seen in his poetry are inexplicable and extraordinary. The knowledge and insight of these works cannot be discussed easily, as confirmed by Looney. The poetic genius has more or less always been a man apart. (Whalen, 183)However, those who call up that Shakespeare was the real author of his works scrutinized Oxfords works as lacking the depth and the conscious knowledge that Shakespeares plays and sonnets are known for. (Lindquist, 28). His poetry did not have the level of knowledge or the comprehension of philosophies and advance consciousness of the characters as evident in Shakespeares plays. But these facts do not stop Oxfordians from seeing De Vere as the candidate for Shakespeares actual authorship. They strongly cerebrate that his capability as a dramatist and poet conforms to the mind and capacity and character of Shakespeare. (Simpson, 23)Oxford was bountiful and often funded patronage to projects that benefited literacy, religion, medicine, phi losophy, science and music. Not only was he a poet and playwright, he was also a patron. This proves that Oxford made sure he was recognized. Another brain mark is that ten other Shakespearean plays were published after 1604, which was the year Oxford died. (Lindquist) The strongest claim that Oxford is in fact the real Shakespeare is the cumulative parallels of the earls life to the works and the specificity of his personal references and concerns as seen in the plays and the poems.Oxford was a pure-bred aristocrat and he has been educated along with other noble families. He had profound literary tastes and through this, has fabricate a lyrical poet. He was a traveler and is quite fashionable. He loved music. This is set alongside the fact that Shakespeare was illiterate. Oxfordians say that Shakespeare would have had a elusive time writing his own signature, what more composing plays and sonnets. They also reasoned that in Shakespeares will, he never mentioned anything about hi s plays. The same can be said to Oxford.If he in fact wrote the plays, then why did he not state this in his will? The date and the circumstances of Oxford is the dispute among scholars. The diachronic records and his way of life are concrete proof that he is aware of the aristocrats way of life, compared to Shakespeare, who did not lead a life of luxury. Oxfords uncle, The Earl of Surrey, originated the sonnet form today which has been used in Shakespeares sonnets. (Propson, 46). The question on who wrote this becomes more and more difficult to answer because of this.Oxford received his BA from Cambridge University and his master from Oxford University. He was also sent to study law at Grays Inn. This only comes to show that he is absolutely knowledgeable of the topics that have been discussed in Shakespeares 37 plays. Like most of the characters in Shakespeares plays, Oxford was not domesticated by marriage. He was famous for getting in trouble which initiated the displeasure of his father-in-law. As a young man, Oxford accidentally killed another man. A lot of Shakespeares plays show one character killing another.Historical records show that Oxford and his companions travelled on the road from Gravesend to Rochester. This is similar to Henry the Fourth, Part One. For some reason, the account in the play also provides the full detail of the assault that is similar to Oxford and his men. in one case Oxfordians dug this information up, they used it as another important bullet point in their hypothesis. Oxford was also notorious for his martial prowess. He excelled in sports. He was also good with words. He knew how to provide a vast content of narrative using vocabulary, metaphor and imagery. This is evident in Shakespeares plays.Another mover that adds up to the confirmation of the Oxfordians claim is that Oxford conceived theatrical entertainment for the Queen of Whitehall. He was given a lease to the Blackfriars Theater. He was the patron of other write rs and he was known by members of various acting companies. He was one of the first recipients of the literary dedications written by writers Edmund Spenser and John Lyly. He was regarded to be one of Englands most excellent writers. To give more proof on the thesis statement of this paper is the fact that Oxford traveled extensively. He visited France and Italy.Sicily provided the backdrop for Shakespeares plays set in Italy. Oxford had a home in Venice. His ship was once attacked by pirates during one voyage. Again, this is another scene from one of Shakespeares plays Twelfth Night. Another historical account of Oxford as Shakespeare is when his brother-in-law Peregrin Bertrie reports upon his return that while having a banquet at Elsinore, a whole volley of all the great shot of the castle discharged. This genuinely account is the line of Shakespeares Cluadius in Hamlet. (Propson, 42) However, there are still gaps, especially toward the later years of his life.In 1958, ther e had been anonymous publications and performances of Shakespearean plays like Titus Andronicus, Richard the second and Romeo and Juliet. That time, the first quarto bore the name William Shakespeare as the author. That very year, Francis Meres published his works Palladis Tamia and credits Shakespeare. At the same time, he identifies the playwright Edward de Vere as the best for comedy amongst us. The 1604 problem will always prevent Oxfordian scholars to completely conclude that Oxford is the real Shakespeare but that does not stop them from presenting concrete facts in what they believe in.They reach a point wherein they count the number of plays Shakespeare release in a year. They wondered about the inconsistency. They say that in 1593 to 1603, Shakespeare published two plays in a year. Then he stopped writing in 1604 and started publishing five years later. (Propson, 45) Other Oxfordian claims is the fact that Shakespeare was not mourned for in his death. Upon Mark Twains obs ervation, When Shakespeare died in Stratford, it was not an event. It made no stir in England than the death of any other forgotten theater-actor would have made.Nobody came down from London there were no lamenting poems, no eulogies, no national tears there was merely silence, and nothing more. A striking contrast with what happened when Ben Jonson, and Francis Bacon, and Spencer, and Raleigh and the other literary folk of Shakespeares time passed from life No praiseful voice was lifted for the lost Bard of Avon. (Simpson, 138) Until now, the Oxfordian theory is popular amongst writers, scholars, researchers and actors. The debate between the Oxfordians and the Stratfordians (those who believe that Shakespeare is the real author of his works) continue.