Marlowe and Shakespeare

[MartynH]

I have been aware of the Christopher Marlowe debate for many years. Academics going back many decades have raised many questions about this touchy subject. Well, not touchy to me. However, I was reading a book the other day, published in 2012, and it mentioned this subject, and so I looked it up on the net again. To my amazement I came across an item from 2016 which I have pasted in below. I wonder what others think about this as the implications of just this one play acknowledgment is massive. I can say here in the UK its hardly made a splash, for obvious reasons.

'Oxford University Press has announced that its new edition of the complete works of William Shakespeare will credit Christopher Marlowe as a co-author on the three Henry VI plays. ... Christopher Marlowe is a 16th century British poet and playwright.24 Oct 2016'

[Wich2]

Longer quotes, with more nuance ~

https://www.kpbs.org/news/2016/oct/24/c ... ted-as-co/

Did Will from Avon sometimes base his work on earlier material? Yes.

Were other hands sometimes involved in crafting Shakespeare's plays (including not only other writers, but fellow actors?) Yes.

But this is all old news, known in the man's time. In the main, does it remain accurate to state that, "The plays of William Shakespeare were written by William Shakespeare"?

Also, Yes.

Best,
- Craig

P.S. - Who still points to Marchette Chute's SHAKESPEARE OF LONDON.

[MartynH]

My main point was not that it was old news but it's still not in the mainstream. Furthermore, even if more of this surfaces in the decades to come Shakespeare will still be the sole author in the mainstream. I could give many examples in all sorts of other fields where the evidence has proven the official story not fully correct, but still not in the mainstream, but I won't.

[Wich2]

Martyn -

With genuine respect, I would submit that this topic is fairly mainstream at this point.

At least, as much as any Shakespeare talk is "mainstream"; that depends on how wide that net is thrown. But "The Shakespeare Controversy," or, "The Shakespeare Authorship Controversy," is known well enough to even have those well-worn handles.

With, "Who Really Wrote The Books Of The Bible?", it's the main breeding ground for researchers and scholars who want to upset what they see as hidebound old applecarts with their (many, varied, and conflicting) "Aha! Here is the Secret Knowledge!" pronouncements. (The Books of Moses were even questioned, years ago, with the same techniques used here: "Our computer analysis of all the words used proves he didn't write the Pentateuch!")

Marlowe was Shakespeare. De Vere was Shakespeare. Elizabeth was Shakespeare (?). Even, there was no real "Shakespeare" (!) (Lather-Rinse-Repeat.)

As Chute documents well, theses theories all came about long after The Bard's death - and tellingly, they fly in the face of the contemporary evidence to the contrary that does exist.

Best,
- Craig

[MartynH]

Craig

I can say that here in dear old blighty it's not in the mainstream

regards

[Wich2]

Martyn -

Well, what do you Britishters know about Will from Avon, anyway?

Just funning, of course. But then, like a lot of odd conspiracy theories, this one seems more popular among we Colonials? (John Wilkes Booth survived to old age; Hitler moved to South America; man did not land on the moon, and other such cheese.)

Best,
- Craig