Skip to main content

Open letter to WNYC's On The Media program re: "On Shakespeare"

By

On the Media podcast April 22, 2016 "On Shakespeare" with James Shapiro 

 Open letter to On The Media from Linda Theil:

Hi, thanks for your show; I love it! 

I would like to comment on your [April 22, 2016] Shakespeare presentation with James Shapiro:

I know you are in the business of bringing truth to light, and you dislike conspiracy theories and ignorance of all kinds, but I would like to point out that perhaps your zeal was inappropriate in the case of the Shapiro interview [re: the Shakespeare authorship controversy].

For one thing, you allowed no one but Shapiro to speak on the topic — so only one viewpoint was allowed. I know this has to do with false equivalence on the part of newscasters, but I think it produced an inaccurate view of the topic.

Secondly, the language used to describe the topic is antagonistic: calling those who are interested in the authorship question “Shakespeare deniers” — a term used several times in the course of the interview — is remniscent of “holocaust deniers” a repugnant term that is vicious and inaccurate. Also the term “anti-Shakespeareans” is prejudicial and inaccurate since anyone who is interested enough in Shakespeare to study this issue is anything but “anti” Shakespeare. Stanley Wells of the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust urged using this term as a substitute for the "anti-Stratfordian" adjective typically used in the discussion.

Third, when Shapiro said that we have more documentation of Shakespeare (implying the Stratford man) than anyone else, Brook correctly asked, “Is that true?” but accepted Shapiro’s “Yes” with no further comment. A respected academic researcher named Diana Price wrote Shakespeare's Unorthodox Biography that counters Shapiro's claim.

Furthermore, Brook allowed Shapiro to ridicule an alternate candidacy based on the assumption that Shakespeare's plays can be reliably dated -- a completely baseless assumption since the dating of the plays is by no means a settled issue.

AND she let Shapiro use his canard from his Contested Will book tour about bestiality with Richard III's horse to besmirch the name of an alternate candidate for the authorship. Really?

You may decide that there is no arguing with a confirmed conspiracy theorist, but I hope you will acknowledge that perhaps in this case you may have chosen a point of view too soon. 

Many thanks again for sharing your work and your talent with your listeners,

Linda Theil

Popular posts from this blog

What's a popp'rin' pear?

By
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
Post a Comment
Read more

Winkler lights the match

By
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
Read more

Dudley nails it to the door

By
Michael Dudley author of The Shakespeare Authorship Question and Philosphy: Knowledge, Rhetoric, Identity (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2023) Michael Dudley views his vocation of librarian at the University of Manitoba with dialectic rigor. "Librarianship has a duty to inform democracy," he said in Kathryn Sharpe's virtual bookclub on April 27, 2024. Dudley discussed his new book The Shakespeare Authorship Question and Philosophy: Knowledge, Rhetoric, Identity published by Cambridge Scholars Publishing last fall. Update 08/21/24 Dudley's book is also available as an ebook from   Google Play . In SAQ and Philosophy Dudley uses the hammer of logic to nail his accusations against the barricaded door of the Shakespeare citadel. "The question of Shakespeare's authorship is a malformed debate practiced in an unethical fashion," Dudley said. When asked why his book is important, Dudley said: "What sets my book apart from others on the authorship quest
Read more