The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 15.1801 Friday, 1 October 2004
From: Michael Egan <
Date: Thursday, 30 Sep 2004 08:03:20 -1000
Subject: 15.1791 Eric Sams / Edward III
Comment: Re: SHK 15.1791 Eric Sams / Edward III
Jonathan Hope says he doesn't want to bash Sams, then calls him a
gadfly, infuriating, a man who alternately ignored and rubbished
opposing viewpoints, etc. This is bashing by adjective and adverb, sadly
all too common. I take' rubbishing' to mean that Sams thoroughly
trounced orthodox critics, which he certainly did.
One wonders how much more persuasive the evidence has to get for Marcus
Dahl (what would he accept, I wonder?) For the record, Shakespeare often
and almost typically repeats himself--one of the things Sams shows is
that WS constantly revised. Among the worst features of modern
bardoletry is the assumption that of course another Elizabethan
playwright would just naturally steal from Shakespeare. A third point:
the date of Greene's death clearly rules him out as the author of Edward
III, while his strictures against Shake-scene make it impossible that he
would so openly steal an entire line from the sonnets.
Martin Steward's arch reference to A Funeral Elegy is a cheap shot.
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook,
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.