In case you missed John Orloff’s thoughtful response to Professor James Shapiro’s New York Times op-ed piece. Orloff’s response highlights one of the perennial orthodox attacks against the Oxford theory — which Professor Shapiro employs in his New York Times piece — namely that Oxford died in 1604 before 10 or so Shakespeare plays were “written.” This claim of post 1604 composition is at best an educated guess. But it is frequently stated as if it is incontrovertible fact. Like so much of the traditional Stratfordian theory, this post-1604 composition assertion is based on conjecture and assumption. Yes there are some rather convoluted arguments for this assertion, but it’s a far cry from established by hard evidence.
In any event, here’s the link to the Huffington Post followed by a few graphs from Orloff’s article. Enjoy, Matthew
The Shakespeare Authorship Question
As the screenwriter of the upcoming Elizabethan drama Anonymous, I read Columbia Professor James Shapiro’s opinion piece (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/17/opinion/hollywood-dishonors-the-bard.html?_r=1) regarding our film in the NY Times last week with great interest. In it, Mr. Shapiro seemed to take great personal offense at the premise of our film; namely, that the works attributed to the actor William Shakespeare were in fact written by another man, Edward de Vere.
Not only did the NY Times decline to allow me to fully respond, but Mr. Shapiro refuses to be on the same stage with me at Q & A’s following screenings of the film — though he is happy to take questions from audiences as long as I am not present to defend myself or my film.
As the Shakespeare Authorship Question is a rather complex issue, I won’t attempt to prove my case that Shakespeare is not the man responsible for the works attributed to him in this forum.
Again, here’s the link to the full article: