Prediction: The next great wave of Shakespearean criticism, whenever it arrives, will be the work of prosodists.  Continue reading →

The latest entry in the Mary Queen of Scots sweepstakes is an eighty-five-minute breach of taste from the prurient minds of screenwriter Beau Willimon (House of Cards) and first time film director Josie Rourke. Ostensibly from the U.K., this picture has Hollywood’s progressive, not to mention pornographic, gloss spread all over it.

The restoration of The Miseries of Enforced Marriage was inspired by the work of the early 20^th-century literary detective H. Dugdale Sykes (1874?-1932). Having devoured the whole of Elizabethan, Jacobean, and Carolingian drama, he applied his uncanny eye and memory to numerous questions of authorship.

The original incarnation of Macbeth may have been A Tragedie of the King of Scots, as proposed by F. G. Fleay in the early 20^th century. The received text of Macbeth calls for singing and dancing by the weird sisters, increased in number from three to six in the cauldron scene (4.1), very likely a turn for children. There is non-Shakespeare material in the play but was surely revised by Shakespeare at some point in the history of the text, and first published in the Folio. Continue reading →

In the art world, curators and buyers have two principal concerns: Authenticity and provenance. Authenticity and provenance provide empirical evidence: No one is interested in guesswork, or he said she said, particularly when millions of dollars are at stake.  Continue reading →

[It is recommended that you read “Shakespeare at the Red Lion,” prior to the following article.]

How do we deal with the staging differences, as shown in “Shakespeare at the Red Lion,” between The Contention and 2 Henry VI? Continue reading →

It is commonly thought that Queen Elizabeth never condescended to attend a performance in a public theatre. But it appears that she did—at least once. Continue reading →

The controversy continues to swirl around Donald Foster’s attribution of “A Funeral Elegy” to Shakespeare. While many have assailed Foster’s claim, no one has actually disproved it. That is because mere speechifying is a futile business. Foster’s attribution is based on facts reduced to statistics. And it is only upon facts reduced to statistics that his attribution can be exploded.  Continue reading →

The stage directions of The Contention[1] provide some information as to the design and construction of the facility in which it was played. That is, if one is willing to suspend disbelief and assume that the text was performed as received.  Continue reading →

According to E. K. Chambers, “Some anonymous poems have been attributed to Shakespeare. The only one worth consideration is a sonnet prefixed to John Florio’s Second Fruits (1591), which was put forward by W. Minto, Characteristics of English Poets (1885), 371.”[1] There are a number of reasons for rejecting this attribution. But first let us review the poem.  Continue reading →

[This article is intended as a prolegomena to a future piece.]

In 1924, E. K. Chambers delivered his famous lecture “The Disintegration of Shakespeare” before the British Academy. Twenty years later he published the text in Shakespearean Gleanings (1944), a shot heard round the world of Shakespearean criticism, and which eventually became misconstrued.  Continue reading →

Pamphleteer and dramatist Robert Greene was one of the most popular Elizabethan writers. He was certainly England’s first professional journalist. Greene was praised in prose and verse alike, almost as often, though without the hyperbole, as Shakespeare. He was colorful and controversial, notable for his close connection to the London underworld. Several of his works continued to be reprinted long after his death. Today, however, Greene is seldom read outside the university and his plays are rarely, if ever, performed. Continue reading →

While preparing a performance-lecture on the subject of Shakespeare’s Sonnets, I found it necessary to revisit the least admired and read of the poems attributed to our greatest writer. A Lover’s Complaint was included in the first edition of the Sonnets, 1609, and therefore thought to have been written by Shakespeare, not an unreasonable supposition. It is composed of 47 stanzas in rhyme royal, the same measure Shakespeare employed in The Rape of Lucrece. Rhyme royal is a seven-line stanza with the rhyme scheme ABABBCC.  Continue reading →

There are two Shakespeares, one for the study, another for the stage.  Continue reading →

In my article “Solved” I suggest that there may be a family connection between John Walford, the Marlborough clothier sued by John Shakespeare [1], and the Walford family of Stratford. At this point the idea remains speculative.  Continue reading →

[The Court family still flourishes today, and I was happy to give them permission to reprint this article in their newsletter.] Continue reading →

The meeting of the Stratford Corporation, 23 January 1577, marks the beginning of John Shakespeare’s withdrawal from public life. Continue reading →

According to John Aubrey, the dramatist’s father “was a butcher & I have been told heretofore by some of his neighbors, that when he killed a Calfe he would do it in a high style, and make a speech.” The conjecture that John Shakespeare was a butcher has been discounted. That leaves us with the killing of the calf.  Continue reading →

Shakespeare is listed in the Lord Treasurer’s Remembrancer Residuum London accounts (E. 372/444), dated 6 October 1599, and a tax bill of 13s.4d. (13 shillings, four pence) is outstanding. Continue reading →

[The following is a revision of a potboiler designed for June 7, 1994.]

Was Shakespeare a capitalist pig? Is public taste for the horrific in entertainment any different now than it was in Elizabethan England? Aficionadoes of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Friday the 13th, and Nightmare on Elm St. read on.  Continue reading →

Although Nine Days’ Wonder has had four previous editions, no editor has seen fit to include a critical commentary. G. B. Harrison has a summary of Kemp’s pamphlet in Elizabethan Plays and Players, and that is all.  Continue reading →

[From Cox’s Actaeon and Diana, 1656. I have modernized the spelling and punctuation.]  Continue reading →

This music is presented as a curiosity. The title suggests that Kemp may have written, certainly danced, to this tune. But the composer is unknown. It first appears in lute tablature in a collection gathered by John Dowland 1610-15 (Cambridge University Library, MS Dd, ii, II).  Continue reading →

Insertions in the Quarto and Folio texts of the names of the actors, instead of the parts they performed, give us some vital information about the casting of Shakespeare’s plays. Just such an insertion tells us that Will Kemp played the servant, Peter, in Romeo and Juliet. The study of this character provides the key to ascertaining Kemp’s repertoire.  Continue reading →

Time has cast a shadow over Will Kemp’s origin, formative years, and early career. He was born William Kemp, probably in the early to mid 1550’s. We know nothing about his parentage. There were numerous Kemps in the London parish registers at the time. Perhaps he was a Londoner. But since Kemp was as well known for his morris dance as for his clowning, a better guess might be found in Old Meg of Herefordshire (1609):  Continue reading →