Skip to main content

Tom Hunter reports on the UN-birthday party


Dear Oberon,
A warm glow still persists from our Shakespeare UNbirthday party last Thursday, April 23, and it isn’t all from the candles on the UNbirthday cake or from the happy sight of Joy Townsend and Rosey Hunter providing atmosphere in their colorful Elizabethan costumes.

A near full house of celebrants watched as Ron Destro’s  “Who Really Wrote As Shake-speare?”  presented historical and literary reasons to doubt that William Shakspere of Stratford-Upon-Avon wrote the works of William Shakespeare, as well as reasons for Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford as the true author.

The presentation was followed by a series of UNtoasts to Shakspere as the UNauthor and to April 23 as the UNbirthday (it is only a guess as to when Shakspere was born). Since we had neither glasses nor champagne, we imagined them, just as Stratfordians imagine biographical details of their man’s life, which are also in short supply. While we were at it, we imagined that the glasses were crystal and the champagne the finest available. We also remembered Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens whose finding for Edward de Vere had just been published by the Wall Street Journal. We didn't have to imagine Justice Stevens whose years of research and reading are very real and have produced a finding for Edward de Vere "beyond a reasonable doubt."

The program was received most favorably by all who attended, including a group from nearby Oakland Community College’s Adult Learning Institute who responded to the invitation of Oberon members George and Sharon Hunter (yes we are related!).  Spokesperson Del McPherson said that the ALI members were delighted with the program.  Even more gratifying, she has scheduled us to present it as part of her group’s well attended and well respected regular lecture series in October.

Del appreciated that the program presented interesting information about Shakespeare and did not make her or her companions feel pressured one way or another.  She particularly appreciated the idea that the identity of the author truly does matter and that in pursuing the topic, one could expect an even greater understanding and appreciation of Shakespeare.

Interest in the follow-up discussion included reasons why use of a pen-name by Shakespeare might have been desirable or even necessary; the nature of evidence which might have played a role in Justice Stevens’ decision; and Mark Twain’s common sense and insightful insistence that the experience needed to create Shakespeare’s works was sorely lacking from Stratford’s life.

Dr. Richard Joyrich told the group about the Declaration of Reasonable Doubt.  Many attendees appeared interested and took with them copies of the Declaration and directions for signing up.

There was a final toast, of course.  It was to the real Shakespeare whose works will live forever.

I do want to thank all of you who so graciously and generously contributed your time and efforts to making the UNbirthday party a success.  Now we are off to planning a special observance of the 400th anniversary of Shake-speare's Sonnets, published in 1609 by "our ever-living poet."

Thomas Hunter, Ph.D.
Oberon Chair


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Was King Richard III a Control Freak? Science News ... from universities, journals, and other research organizations   Mar. 4, 2013 — University of Leicester psychologists believe Richard III was not a psychopath -- but he may have had control freak tendencies. University of Leicester psychologists have made an analysis of Richard III's character -- aiming to get to the man behind the bones. Professor Mark Lansdale, Head of the University's School of Psychology, and forensic psychologist Dr Julian Boon have put together a psychological analysis of Richard III based on the consensus among historians relating to Richard's experiences and actions. They found that, while there was no evidence for Shakespeare's depiction of Richard III as a psychopath, he may have had "intolerance to uncertainty syndrome" -- which may have manifested in control freak tendencies. The academics presented their findings on Saturday, March 2 at the University

What's a popp'rin' pear?

James Wheaton reported yesterday in the Jackson Citizen Patriot that the Michigan Shakespeare Festival high school tour of Romeo and Juliet was criticized for inappropriate content -- " So me take issue with sexual innuendoes in Michigan Shakespeare Festival’s High School Tour performances of ‘Romeo & Juliet’" : Western [High School] parent Rosie Crowley said she was upset when she heard students laughing about sexual content in the play afterwards. Her son didn’t attend the performance Tuesday because of another commitment, she said.  “I think the theater company should have left out any references that were rated R,” Crowley said. “I would say that I’ve read Shakespeare, and what I was told from the students, I’ve never read anything that bad.”  She said she objected to scenes that involved pelvic thrusting and breast touching and to a line in which Mercutio makes suggestive comments to Romeo after looking up the skirt of a female. The problem with cutting out the naug

Winkler lights the match

by Linda Theil When asked by an interviewer why all the experts disagree with her on the legitimacy of the Shakespeare authorship question, journalist and author Elizabeth Winkler  calmly replied, "You've asked the wrong experts." * With that simple declaration Winkler exploded the topic of Shakespearean authorship forever. Anti-Stratfordians need no smoking gun, no convincing narrative, no reason who, how, when, or why because within the works lies the unassailable argument: Shakespeare's knowledge. Ask the lawyers. Ask the psychologists. Ask the librarians. Ask the historians. Ask the dramaturges. Ask the mathematicians. Ask the Greek scholars. Ask the physicists. Ask the astronomers. Ask the courtiers. Ask the bibliophiles. Ask the Italians. Ask the French. Ask the Russians. Ask the English. Ask everyone. Current academic agreement on a bevy of Shakespearean collaborators springs from an unspoken awareness of how much assistance the Stratfordian presumptive would h