Skip to main content

Delahoyde publishes new edition of TwelfthNight

by Linda Theil


Oberon East/West colleague Dr. Michael Delahoyde, professor of English and Humanities at Washington State University, self-published an Oxfordian-perspective edition of Shakespeare's Twelfth Night in August. Twelfth Night is his second Oxfordian edition, after publishing his Oxfordian edition of Anthony and Cleopatra in 2015.

He talked with us about his work recently.

Oberon: How long have you been working on this edition? Could you tell about your process and research?

Delahoyde:
I began work on this edition shortly after completing Anthony and Cleopatra, typing the play itself eight years ago and then puttering with it by reading every bit of research published that I could absorb, especially everything put forth by Oxfordians from Looney onwards, until Covid gave me the time and imprisonment; then it was full steam ahead.

Oberon: Do you have a favorite note from this edition?

Delahoyde:
My favorite bit — from the intro, not a particular note: The most compelling and surely valid explanation for “M.O.A.I.” (2.5.93), in the false letter read by Malvolio, is that of Alan W. Green, who notes that after puzzling for a time, Malvolio reads the next line in the letter: “If this fall into thy hand, revolve” (2.5.121). The intention here is also unclear, so actors often twirl around pointlessly. To “Be opposite” (2.5.127) literally, however, revolving the letters backwards yields “I.A.O.M.,” which Green points out is the sacred name of God in the Freemasonic and earlier secret-society tradition, indicating a pathway towards much more esoteric and privileged knowledge that Shakespeare seems to have had.

The investigation soon leads to the polymath occultist Dr. John Dee, Queen Elizabeth’s astrologist and expert cryptographer. Dee’s diaries contain a prayer to an angel he claimed to commune with, named IAOM. And Dee indeed “revolves” the letters in his writings, rendering the angel’s name also as AOMI, OMIA, and MIAO. These revelations begin to open up a previously undiscovered world in Shakespeare/Oxford studies. 

Oberon: Did you say you have become addicted to editing Shakespeare? What is that like?


Delahoyde: I have become addicted to this engrossing process of editing Shakespeare: comparing half a dozen responsible editions of the play and the First Folio, down to various choices of punctuation; integrating other editors' notes, with former and new, unpublished, Oxfordian insights. 


I am already at work on Oxfordian editions of The Comedy of Errors, in collaboration with Jennifer Newton who is essentially responsible for the previous two editions, and The Merchant of Venice, which has been persistently and abysmally misunderstood. I am not the only one promoting the project of Oxfordian editions of all the plays and will at some point perhaps conduct a workshop to encourage and enlist all of us to contribute energies towards this significant milestone: The Complete Oxford/Shakespeare Canon.

Resources

Twelfth Night edited by Michael Delahoyde
https://www.amazon.com/Twelfth-Night-Oxfordian-William-Shakespeare/dp/B09F14PJ59/ Independently published, August 2021

"Interview with Richard Whelan about the Oxfordian Shakespeare Series" Oberon weblog April 20, 2011
http://oberonshakespearestudygroup.blogspot.com/2011/04/interview-with-richard-whalen-about.html

"Whalen updates Oxfordian edition of the Scottish play" Oberon weblog February 2013
http://oberonshakespearestudygroup.blogspot.com/2013/02/whalen-updates-oxfordian-edition-of.html

Anthony and Cleopatra edited by Michael Delahoyde
https://www.amazon.com/Anthony-Cleopatra-Oxfordian-Shakespeares-Antony/dp/1517046300 CreateSpace, 2015


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