Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2005 :: September ::
Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1461  Monday, 5 September 2005

[1] 	From: 	Richard Nathan <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Saturday, 03 Sep 2005 14:28:28 +0000
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT

[2] 	From: 	Ruth Ross <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Saturday, 3 Sep 2005 17:31:43 -0400
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT

[3] 	From: 	Bob Grumman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Saturday, 3 Sep 2005 19:45:23 -0400
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT

[4] 	From: 	William Niederkorn <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Sunday, 04 Sep 2005 19:48:40 -0400
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Richard Nathan <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Saturday, 03 Sep 2005 14:28:28 +0000
Subject: 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT

I did not respond publicly to Mr. Niederkorn's claim that he is not an 
Oxfordian or a Stratfordian, because I assumed Hardy would not permit 
further discussion of the so-called authorship question.  But since 
other responses have been published, I would like to state that Mr. 
Niederkorn's claim reminds me of the claim Bill O'Reilly made on "The 
Daily Show" shortly before the 2004 election, in which O'Reilly claimed 
he had not yet decided whether to vote for George Bush or John Kerry.  I 
submit that Mr. Niederkorn's claims to impartiality are just as much to 
be trusted as Mr. O'Reilly's.

Richard Nathan

[Editor's Note: For the record, I don't consider this thread to be a 
discussion of the so-called authorship question per se. Rather I see it 
as a meta-discussion about writing and critiquing. Having said that I do 
not believe that there is any reason to continue it beyond this digest.]

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Ruth Ross <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Saturday, 3 Sep 2005 17:31:43 -0400
Subject: 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT
Comment: 	RE: SHK 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT

As a professor of mine once said, "If Shakespeare didn't write these 
plays, then someone of the same name did."

Ruth Ross

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Bob Grumman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Saturday, 3 Sep 2005 19:45:23 -0400
Subject: 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT

Dave Kathman wrote:

 >doubtful or factually wrong.  For example, you
 >assert that "Oxford had a close relationship with
 >Southampton" when there is actually no evidence
 >that the two men even knew each other personally.

Much as I hate correcting mine fellow Defender of Shakespeare, Dave 
Kathman, especially after his beautifully devastating reply to Mr. 
Niederkorn, but I believe it would have been more accurate of him to 
have said above, "there is actually no HARD evidence that the two men 
even knew each other personally."  Since Southampton and Oxford were 
both, at different times, wards of Burghley, and since the marriage of 
Southampton to Oxford's daughter was contemplated for several years, and 
since most of the lords of the time probably knew each other personally 
(I think), it's hard for me to believe Oxford didn't know Southampton 
personally.  There's no particular reason to believe he knew him at all 
well, however.

--Bob G.

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		William Niederkorn <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Sunday, 04 Sep 2005 19:48:40 -0400
Subject: 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT
Comment: 	RE: SHK 16.1451 Brian Vickers in TLS, Wm Niederkorn in NYT

Because I know that he does not want the authorship issue discussed 
here, I replied personally to Hardy in response to an incorrect 
statement about me on Shaksper last week. He asked me if the message was 
for him or for the list, and I said it was for him but he was welcome to 
share it. So it was posted. But now there have been further posts 
attacking me and my work.

The purpose of my article in February 2002 was to introduce the Oxford 
theory. In addition to reporting what I had found, I wrote that there 
was formidable opposition to the theory and cited sources that readers 
could turn to -- sufficient balance for the nature of the article.

I ask of those members of the list who are interested, please judge me 
not by the attacks but by reading my articles for yourselves.  I am open 
to any outcome to the debate on the Shakespeare authorship, including 
the possibility that the traditional view has been right all along.

The responses by Herman Gollob and John-Paul Spiro are entirely 
different from those I take exception to above. I agree with Mr. Gollob 
that "Appropriating Shakespeare" is essential, and I agree with Mr. 
Spiro that one can easily appreciate the Shakespeare works without 
thinking about who wrote them. But in answer to his question, "What does 
this controversy add to our reading of the plays?" I would say that 
there are many answers to that, perhaps as many as there are authors, 
scholars, lawyers, actors and others interested in the matter.

_______________________________________________________________
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.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.