The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1933 Wednesday, 23 November 2005
From: William Davis <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 22 Nov 2005 14:29:32 -0500
Subject: Lions and Tigers and Wagers...oh my...
Now that the dust has apparently settled from earlier discussions about
Dr. Elliott's near-wager with Dr. Egan, I wanted to follow up with a few
questions that have been mulling about my brain these last few weeks
about stylometry, and more specifically, about Dr. Elliott's specific
body of research. Dr. Elliott, if you're still out there, I would
appreciate your thoughts.
As I've looked through the information available about the stylistic
markers in Dr. Elliott's tests, I can't help but notice how some of
these stylistic characteristics evolve from Shakespeare's early plays to
the mid and late plays. I assume this would be expected of a writer who
is constantly undergoing shifts in style over the course of a career, so
this doesn't present itself as a problem. But in light of the Dr.
Elliott's wager, and how the measuring stick for his test is a
collection of data representing Shakespeare's "core" plays, plays that
appear to be written mostly at the height of Shakespeare's career, I do
have a few thoughts that come to mind.
To begin, I personally think that stylometry has a place in Shakespeare
studies and that its value has been underestimated. But at the same
time I am very hesitant to endow it as a be-all, end-all solution to the
attribution questions. I think the scope of possibilities still extend
well beyond the data that has been defined as a gold-standard measuring
stick to identify Shakespearean and non-Shakespearean works, and I feel
that we have a long way to go before we can make final pronouncements on
the legitimacy or illegitimacy of a text of unknown authorship based on
stylometry alone. In my own simple way of thinking, here is one
possible scenario to explain why:
Let's imagine for a moment that one of the local Stratford farmers is
plowing through a field, and he stumbles across the cornerstone of an
old building. And as he moves the cornerstone, he finds a box full of
materials which turns out to be a time capsule of sorts, assembled by
the people who lived in Stratford during Shakespeare's lifetime. In
fact, this particular time capsule is dedicated to the students of
Stratford, and inside the box are several manuscripts that contain
samples of student work. The scholars are notified and they scour the
manuscripts, looking for evidence of Shakespeare, but they find nothing
conclusive. However, there is a play in the pile of papers that doesn't
have a title page, and no one knows who the author is. The style, of
course, is immature and certainly not a masterpiece---but nevertheless,
some of the scholars feel that it shows potential, and others even feel
that it might be one of Shakespeare's earliest plays. Now my question
is simply this: if this manuscript were actually a play written by
Shakespeare as a young boy, could the current stylometric measuring
stick be able to accurately identify this text as a Category One Gem?
In my mind, I am not certain that the current test could do this, and
these are just a few of my reasons: to begin, it's well known that
Christopher Marlowe's writing had a significant influence on
Shakespeare's style. And it also appears that a few other writers in
the London scene, to one extent or another, had an influence on
Shakespeare, as well. But what did Shakespeare's writing look like
before he had absorbed those stylistic influences? How many of the
stylometric markers can be attributed to Shakespeare's post-London
arrival, and how many of them predate his entrance into the professional
scene? We may never know. But the trouble I have is the thought of
taking a measuring stick that is based on the plays that Shakespeare
wrote as a well-developed writer, and then applying that measuring stick
to a play that might be something he wrote very early in his career (or
even "pre-career"), and then making final pronouncements as to whether
or not it might be legitimate. (How many of us would readily believe
that our own subconscious style of writing had altered very little from
our ABC days?) In other words, if we use Dr. Elliott's test, an early
Shakespeare play could appear to be---according to Dr. Elliott's
descriptions---a Category Two play, or even a Category Three or Four
play (no pun intended), even though the manuscript might actually be a
pure gold, Category-Immature-One play. I don't think it's inappropriate
to suggest that the London writers, along with the whole London scene,
had a heavy influence on Shakespeare and his writing style. And I think
it's probably safe to assume that his writing patterns and his personal
style experienced some significant and dramatic changes (ok, pun now
intended)---particularly in the early transitional years of the London
experience. To complicate matters further, given his status as a new
writer, I think it would be safe to assume that in the very beginning he
would have had relatively few opportunities to actually write entire
plays by himself, but in the course of paying his dues I believe he
would have been involved in several collaborative works---all of which
would have influenced his writing characteristics, both consciously and
unconsciously.
So I guess some of my questions fall along these lines: if I use Dr.
Elliott's test to try and identify a Category One play of Shakespeare's,
will it only work if it's a play that was written during the height of
Shakespeare's career? Or will it work if applied to anything
Shakespeare wrote at any point in his lifetime? If so, are we certain
we can accomplish this, even if we don't have writing samples from his
earliest years to build a core test for those time periods? At what
point do we start to be certain? Are there cut off dates? Will the
test accurately identify Shakespeare's work in grammar school?
Post-grammar school life in Stratford? The Unknown Years? His earliest
years in London, before he had a chance to absorb the styles of Marlowe,
Kyd, Peele, et al? In other words, is it possible that in the process
of refining the stylometric data that we have today, the information
might only support a test that could identify Shakespeare's writing
within a specific window of time, and potentially disqualify those works
that were written in the fringes of Shakespeare's career and the suburbs
of his style? If not, how do we know, and how can we be sure?
Genuinely interested and non-combatively so,
William Davis
_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook,
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
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.
|