Justice Stevens Renders an Opinion on Who Wrote Shakespeare's Plays

[question everything]

APRIL 18, 2009

Justice Stevens Renders an Opinion on Who Wrote Shakespeare's Plays
It Wasn't the Bard of Avon, He Says; 'Evidence Is Beyond a Reasonable Doubt'
By JESS BRAVIN
WSJ

In his 34 years on the Supreme Court, Justice John Paul Stevens has evolved from idiosyncratic dissenter to influential elder, able to assemble majorities on issues such as war powers and property rights. Now, the court's senior justice could be gaining ground on a case that dates back 400 years: the authorship of Shakespeare's plays. Justice Stevens, who dropped out of graduate study in English to join the Navy in 1941, is an Oxfordian -- that is, he believes the works ascribed to William Shakespeare actually were written by the 17th earl of Oxford, Edward de Vere. Several justices across the court's ideological spectrum say he may be right. This puts much of the court squarely outside mainstream academic opinion, which equates denial of Shakespeare's authorship with the Flat Earth Society.

(snip)

Nonetheless, since the 19th century, some have argued that only a nobleman could have produced writings so replete with intimate depictions of courtly life and exotic settings far beyond England. Dabbling in entertainments was considered undignified, the theory goes, so the author laundered his works through Shakespeare, a member of the Globe Theater's acting troupe. Over the years, various candidates have attracted prominent supporters. Mark Twain is said to have favored Sir Francis Bacon. Malcolm X preferred King James I. De Vere first was advanced in 1918 by an English schoolmaster named J. Thomas Looney. More recently, thanks in part to aggressive lobbying by a contemporary descendant, Charles Vere, Oxford has emerged as a leading alternate author.


The bow-tied, 88-year-old Justice Stevens, who often leads the court's liberal wing, says he became especially interested in Shakespeare when he attended the Chicago World's Fair in 1933, where a replica Globe Theater presented many of the plays. Justice Stevens's father ran the restaurant concession nearby. Justice Stevens didn't start thinking about the authorship question, though, until 1987, when he joined Justices William Brennan and Harry Blackmun in a mock trial on authorship. The panel found insufficient evidence to prove de Vere's claim. Justice Brennan vigorously rejected many Oxfordian premises, finding that "the historical William Shakespeare was not such an ignorant butcher's boy as he has been made out." It was a closer call for the other two justices.

(snip)

All signs pointed to de Vere. Justice Stevens mentions that Lord Burghley, guardian of the young de Vere, is generally accepted as the model for the courtier Polonius in "Hamlet." "Burghley was the No. 1 adviser to the queen," says the justice. "De Vere married daughter, which fits in with Hamlet marrying Polonius's daughter, Ophelia." Shakespeare dedicated two narrative poems to the earl of Southampton, Henry Wriothesley, "who also was a ward of Lord Burghley and grew up in the same household," Justice Stevens says. "The coincidence...is really quite remarkable." He asks, "Why in the world would William Shakespeare, the guy from Stratford, be dedicating these works to this nobleman?"


(snip)

Justice Stevens admits there's a "fringe" element of anti-Shakespearians who spin elaborate but unlikely theories. "I think that's one of the things that hurts the cause -- and the fact that the guy who first came up with de Vere was named Looney," he says. On the other hand, "a lot of people like to think its Shakespeare because...they like to think that a commoner can be such a brilliant writer," he says. "Even though there is no Santa Claus, it's still a wonderful myth." On this issue, Justice Stevens sees eye to eye with his frequent conservative antagonist, Antonin Scalia, who says that as a child he received a monograph propounding de Vere's cause from a family friend.

(snip)


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123998633934729551.html (subscription)

The Supreme Court on the likely author of Shakespeare's plays:
Active Justices
Roberts, Chief Justice No comment.
Stevens Oxford
Scalia Oxford
Kennedy Stratford
Souter "No idea."
Thomas No comment.
Ginsburg "No informed views."*
Breyer Stratford
Alito No comment.

*Justice Ginsburg suggests research into alternate candidate, Florio.
Retired Justices
O'Connor Not Stratford
Blackmun* Oxford
Brennan* Stratford

*Deceased

[Bolo Boffin]

1. A fun topic to kick around.

I'm a Stratford guy, myself. I still think the best alternative is Oxford, but I don't see any reason to displace William Shakespeare from the driver's seat. The "uneducated" and "courtly life" arguments aren't very convincing to me, and there have been a couple of good books showing just how much we actually do know about Shakespeare's life. I particularly recommend A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare: 1599 and Will In The Word.

[pscot]

2. Ben Jonson and John Milton

thought it was Shakespeare, but what the hell did they know. It's amazing the stuff that otherwise rational people can convince themselves of.

[tigereye]

3. I"m still reading a mystery that deals with this topic

Fascinating.


It's called Interred with Their Bones.

[Rob Gregory Browne]

4. Fascinating, But...

...since Shakespeare was writing fiction, much of it based on stories that had been around for years, isn't it possible that he just MADE IT ALL UP? Why would he have to be a nobleman to write the plays? Doesn't hold up, if you ask me.

Sometimes the simple answer is the right one.

[RandomThoughts]

5. If the argument that he must be noble...

Is based on knowledge of details of noble life of the period, that is one thing. But if it is some comment that only nobility could write as he did, then it is that old obsessive self sanctity found in groups.

Many people have to maintain some importance in themselves to justify treating others as lessors.

I would think, that if Shakespeare did not write them, and considering the thought and caliber of the writing, he would have left a set of clues to point to the real writer. One of those things that is clear when you look for it. Also their would not be red hearings, since if he intentionally added such clues, he would avoid sets that would point elsewhere.

It only makes sense.


Edit: Also the article says this about it.

More recently, thanks in part to aggressive lobbying by a contemporary descendant, Charles Vere, Oxford has emerged as a leading alternate author.

If Shakespeare did write the plays, then someone is lobbying for false credit. Quite despicable, if done for personal gain.

Edit2: It also says
"Where are the books? You can't be a scholar of that depth and not have any books in your home," Justice Stevens says. "He never had any correspondence with his contemporaries, he never was shown to be present at any major event

That is simply not true, the mind can do many things, many times reading others works impedes ones own style, as it creates doubt or question, and tries to force a thought to conform to a style and loses its own originality in doing such a thing. I would contend without such correspondences, he would be able to treat writing like Bruce Lee treated martial arts, without the constraint of accepted style or peer criticism, and instead a flow of thought uninterrupted by societal imposed structure and self doubt.

[Rob Gregory Browne]

7. Maybe Will liked hanging out with his actor friends

...and shooting the shit. Maybe his communication was through his plays.

Stevens whole argument is based on speculation and no proof. Good luck finding any.

[RandomThoughts]

6. Who ever wrote this part of the article

On the other hand, "a lot of people like to think its Shakespeare because...they like to think that a commoner can be such a brilliant writer," he says. "Even though there is no Santa Claus, it's still a wonderful myth."

Is making a direct claim that noble men are better then commoners. Their is no other way to read that accept a direct claim that noble means a better person. A disgusting claim, and one with no merit.

[Forrest Greene]

8. The Plays Were All Written By

...Shakespeare, or by someone exactly like him.

[BlueIris]

9. How embarrassing. (For us, as a nation.)

Anti-Stratfordians are about as nutty as it gets in my book. Not to mention that the entire authorship debate is totally irrelevant to a meaningful understanding of the work.

Jesus.