Intriguing Shakespeare Author Mystery
Perhaps unavoidably, history is filled with mysteries, both recent and in the
distant past. A great example of this fact in the literary world has revolved
around the actual authorship of Shakespeare’s plays, a topic that has been
fictionalized into the new movie Anonymous, as Lisa Pease explains.
By Lisa Pease
The film Anonymous deals with a longstanding debate many people have never heard
about: the question of who wrote the plays of William Shakespeare. While the
answer seems obvious, numerous scholars have concluded the answer is anything
but.
Some of the many notables who have challenged the notion that the barely
educated Shakespeare wrote those brilliant works, filled with literary and
cultural allusions, include Sigmund Freud, Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain), Charlie
Chaplin, Orson Wells, famed Shakespearean actor Derek Jacobi, Malcolm X, Helen
Keller, James Joyce, and Lewis Lapham, among others.
Some of the issues raised include these: Shakespeare’s plays display a vast and
in-depth array of learning that his grade-school education could not have
provided. Fourteen of Shakespeare’s plays take place in Italy, but William
Shakespeare never went to Italy. Most of his plays deal with the intrigues of
the nobles, but Shakespeare was a commoner.
In addition, not a single document has ever surfaced written in Shakespeare’s
own hand, an oddity shared only by his contemporary Christopher Marlowe, who
some have speculated wrote Shakespeare’s plays after faking his own death. Yet
numerous handwriting samples exist for many of their lesser-known
contemporaries.
Early theorists thought perhaps the learned Sir Francis Bacon or poet Ben
Johnson might have written the works under the name of Will Shakespeare. One
late 19th century theory posited that the name Shakespeare was used for a
collective of writers that included Marlowe, Bacon, and others.
Another theory favored around the turn of the previous century was that William
Stanley, the Sixth Earl of Derby, wrote the Bard’s words.
The theory the movie is based on, however, is one of the current mainstream
theories regarding the authorship question.
In 1920, an English schoolmaster named John Looney set out to try to uncover
Shakespeare’s true identity. He made lists of allusions and references in
Shakespeare’s work and then tried to map them to one of Shakespeare’s
contemporaries. He found a remarkable fit in the Earl of Oxford, Edward de Vere.
De Vere had been a child prodigy who developed a serious interest in the arts
and wrote several poems under his own name. He attended college and was
surrounded by a bevy of tutors. He lived inside the Court bubble for a good
portion of his life, and saw the intrigues of the nobles up close.
He lived in Italy for two years. He was stationed in Scotland for a couple of
years. He studied law at a place known for mounting dramatic productions. And on
and on.
Naturally, there are rebuttals to these theories. While the dating of
Shakespeare plays is an inexact science overall, those who think Shakespeare
wrote his own plays have a strong argument in The Tempest, which seems to be
based in part on a famous shipwreck that happened after de Vere died.
The film will not decide the issue for you. It simply presents its own theory,
fictionalized, of course, of what might have happened.
The film is bookended by a contemporary device, reminding the audience that what
follows is itself a play, a story, and not history or documentary. And with that
context firmly in place, the wild ride through Elizabethan history, arts and
politics, and the intersection thereof, begins.
The story shifts back and forth between the older de Vere and his younger self,
with key points in his life and English history highlighted. The story is
breathtaking in its intricacy, a delicious, hearty meal of Elizabethan era
intrigue.
The story centers around the period where Queen Elizabeth was nearing the end of
her life and the question of succession was on everyone’s mind. But the tangled
history of Britain’s monarchy provided no easy answers. Add to this mix a few
more theories about incest and secret descendants and you have a storyline that
roils like a witch’s brew.
Although the film is graced with the talented Rhys Ifands as Edward de Vere,
Vanessa Redgrave as the so-called “Virgin Queen” and Edward Hogg as the Queen’s
trusted advisor Robert Cecil, among others, the real star of this film is the
story.
Billed as a “political thriller,” it’s an adventure in alternative history one
won’t soon forget. Check your skepticism at the door, and open your mind to a
fascinating tale of Shakespearean proportions.
The film also celebrates the sheer force of words from both a positive and
negative point. Words can be used to sway populations and even royals to action.
Words can also be used to malign and betray.
Those who wield words well have tremendous advantage, then and now, as the film
itself demonstrates. The people I saw the film with were mostly unfamiliar with
the authorship controversy. On the way out, many expressed a newfound curiosity
about the matter.
Lastly, the film is both an homage to and a warning about following one’s
passions. In the end, our passions define us, for better and for worse.
As a postscript, V for Vendetta fans might note that the Gunpowder plot of the
“Remember, Remember the Fifth of November” rhyme happened just four years after
these events and contained some of the participants from the Essex Rebellion, a
key event in Anonymous. The plot was foiled by the same Robert Cecil, reminding
us that history is one long through-line, no matter where you enter it.
Lisa Pease is a writer who has examined issues ranging from the Kennedy
assassination to voting irregularities in recent U.S. elections.