Matthew's site for Ardor further informs us that he “...graduated from Syracuse University in 2011 with a BA in Philosophy. He obtained a Master’s in English from Lehigh University in 2016.” Regardless, his play will have to survive in the jungles of social networking and the stage.
With this 21st century background there is no need to ask the sources of Gasda's opinion. They are all quite neatly in place.
First, Mr. Gasda needs to stay active. He needs to expand his network, to stay fresh in its mind. In short, he needs to fill space in a media venue with something. The something must be trendy. A prime topic happens to be available. “De Vere Society founder Phoebe Nir,... has memed Oxfordianism into cultural consciousness.” It's a hot topic: memed. A digital venue called COMPACT provides him the present equivalent of column inches.
The Earl of Oxford — who is advanced as the author of the works of Shakespeare by the “Oxfordians” — was wealthy. He was a member of the upper echelons of the cultural and power elite. Gasda's years in the post-modern humanities departments of academia have made it clear to him that western cultural and power elites are the source of all evil. It is a background he and his perspective audience both resoundingly share. To oppose a position of one's identity group is to reduce one's social network, the future availability of successful Kickstarter campaigns and/or venues for one's plays. Already slender profits from his small-press novels and poetry would likely be pared back still further. In light of these factors, he has an audience, a venue and a perspective to all of which he is deeply dedicated.
First Gasda describes the nature of the evil we face replete with proverbial stumbling-block.
The fact that the greatest genius of the English language came from a modest background is a stumbling block to those who believe that only the right kind of elites are capable of guiding our politics and culture.
This is his repackaging of the argument that the ambitious proto-capitalist from Stratford did not have the education necessary in order to write the plays.
His audience generally sharing Gasda's powerful connection with academia, he has chosen to leave the the details of the matter undefined. Education must be complimented, for the highly educated elites among his audience, and the topic swept aside with a convenient post-modern flourish: “It goes without saying that a good education carries countless advantages, but ...”. In fact, his entire yawp will impress the reader with its careful navigation of the shoals of post-modernism.
The inconvenient detail that, like himself and his audience, Oxfordians are generally politically progressive presents a problem that must be skirted.
De Vere has been reborn as a rallying point for, and signifier of, a certain kind of unorthodox conservativism.
The rebellion against the history written by the insidious historical victors is no longer enough to overcome the concomitant support for a member of the cultural elite.
Oxfordians are “identifying” with the wrong candidate.
There is some sort of misrecognition at work here, where people who share something with Shakespeare, the unkempt genius, are unable to recognize that, preferring to see themselves in a pampered aristocrat.
The Earl of Oxford cannot have written the plays because Oxfordians are not aristocrats! How can they fail to see that? They “misrecognize” to sole meaningful piece of evidence. None other is needed therefore none, conveniently, is provided or addressed.
To be honest, Gasda does close with a traditional argument that has served as the last bastion of the Stratford myth for over 100 years.
Shakespeare, whose genius vaulted him past not only the Earl of Oxford, but countless other men with better blood, higher learning, and wider experience.
The myth defies reason because Shakespeare was a genius. Geniuses are not ruled by cause and effect. They go beyond explanation.
He does mention an apprenticeship with “the courts,” in the final paragraph, and does construct a hint of the Stratford man's family life from out of the plays, just for good measure. Of course, there isn't a scintilla of evidence for any of it. Cherry picking from the many thousands of words that constitute the works of Shakespeare virtually every male in England at the time could be provided a biography to fit the tiny number of personal facts that have survived him.
Also at Virtual Grub Street:
Shakespeare CSI: Sir Thomas More, Hand-D. April 22, 2023. “What a glory to have an actual hand-written manuscript from the greatest English writer of all time!”
Edward de Vere Birthday Backgrounder: April 12 (2023). April 7, 2023. "Edward De Vere was born April 12th, in the year 1550, at Hedingham Castle, in Essex, to John De Vere, the 16th Earl of Oxford, and his second wife Margery De Vere (née Golding)."
Edward de Vere in the Lives of his Daughters. February 27, 2023. "At least they take some comfort from their belief that De Vere had no demonstrable relationship with his daughter, the Countess of Montgomery, Susan de Vere."
- Shakespeare’s Character Names: Shylock, Ophelia, etc. July 13, 2021. “The name Ophelia was, by all indications, quite rare in the 16th century.”
A 1572 Oxford Letter and the Player’s Speech in Hamlet. August 11, 2020. “The player’s speech has been a source of consternation among Shakespeare scholars for above 200 years. Why was Aeneas’ tale chosen as the subject?”
- Check out the Shakespeare Authorship Article Index for many more articles and reviews about this fascinating time and about the Shakespeare Authorship Question.
- Check out the Letters Index: Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford for many letters from this fascinating time, some related to the Shakespeare Authorship Question.
No comments:
Post a Comment