The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 22.0330  Wednesday, 7 December 2011

[1] From:         Duncan Salkeld < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

     Date:         December 6, 2011 4:59:38 PM EST

     Subject:      RE: SHAKSPER: Bio Sonnets 

[2] From:         Ian Steere < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

     Date:         December 7, 2011 4:12:25 AM EST

     Subject:      Biography in the Sonnets

[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------

From:         Duncan Salkeld < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Date:         December 6, 2011 4:59:38 PM EST

Subject:      RE: SHAKSPER: Bio Sonnets

Brian Nugent gives us some fascinating examples from the Calendar of State Papers (none of them convincing) in order to support his contention that . . .  "Personally I think any references to 'mistress' would have to be Queen Elizabeth because throughout his works he was always careful with correct, polite, aristocratic terminology and that would be it for 'mistress'." So Sonnets 127, 130 and 153 are written to QE1.  Hmmm. It's certainly original.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------

From:         Ian Steere < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Date:         December 7, 2011 4:12:25 AM EST

Subject:      Biography in the Sonnets

To Brian Nugent: You pass by my remarks on the many other Wriothesley indicators and focus on Sonnet 17.

No, I do not say that Sonnet 17 contains a code. I say that there is a not-insignificant probability of a witty play on letters - suggested by Shakespeare's preceding and surrounding remarks. See Wriothesleys Tomb?. I am happy to debate the logic therein with you.

 I have, as it happens, examined various code theories put forward in connection with the Sonnets. None were convincing. Shakespeare loved disguised meanings, but in my opinion he conveyed these with artful wordplay.