Re: [AlbClub] Shakespeare apo....

                  *** AlbClub Discussion List ***



I pari i Batove,
Bere mire qe e solle ne alb-club ate debatin per Shekspirin, megjithese une kujtoja se ai debat ishte shuar. Ato argumentat jane shume interesante, por kur flasin per Shekspirin, flasin si per nje fshatar te pagdhendur, te pashkolluar. Ndersa bota letrare dhe linguistike kur vlereson Shekspirin ka gjithmone parasysh faktin qe kemi te bejme me nje gjeni. Shume nga argumentat qe permendeshin ne materjalin qe sillje ti, krahasonin potencialin e diturive te nje aristokrati (shkrimtari imagjinar qe qendron prapa fshatarit Shekspir) dhe nje fshatari te rendomte (perseri nje Shekspir imagjinar). Ato dalin ne perfundimin se gjithe ato njohuri, gjithe ate talent mund t'i kete pasur nje aristokrat, por kurrsesi fshatari. Praktikisht, ato njohuri, ate talent, ate bagazh gjuhesor mund ta kete pasur vetem nje gjeni. Pra edhe aristokrat i fshehur pas fshatarit te kete qene, perseri duhet te kete qene gjeni. Por, neqoftese e pranojme qe ka qene gjeni, c'ndryshim do te kishte nese ky gjeni do te ishte aristokrat, apo biri i nje kryeplaku nga nje qyteze angleze (nuk ishte fare fshatar i pagdhendur, jo). 
Hipoteza se prapa Shekspirit mund te kete qene Marlowe me duket shume e dobet, pasi Marlowe ka qene bashkekohes i Shekspirit dhe i te njejtes shtrese shoqerore me te. Nderrimi i emrit nuk sjell asnje ndryshim. Vete ekzistenca e Marlowe flet per nivelin e larte te drames dhe teatrit Elizabetian, mjedis i pershtatshem per daljen e nje gjeniu si Shekspiri. Nga ana tjeter, nuk duhet mohuar fakti qe ne shume raste Shekspiri ka punuar edhe mbi materjale te shkruara me pare nga te tjere - ne drama te tjera, te cilat ai i ngriti ne nivelin qe i njohim ne sot. 
Te gjitha argumentat qe sillen - sidomos ato ne lidhje me Veronen - bazohen te ideja qe e vetmja menyre per njerezit e asaj kohe qe te mesonin per vise te largeta ka qene duke i shkelur keto vende. Te mos harrojme qe Gutenbergu e kishte shpikur shtypshkronjen afro 120 vjet perpara se te lindte Shekspiri. Pra mund te thuhet se ne ate kohe duhet te kete pasur ca libra verdalle. Por edhe perpara shtypshkronjes njerezit kane pasur libra dhe kane pasur mundesi te lexojne e te marrin informacion per vende te largeta e te aferta. Nuk eshte ndonje cudi qe Shekspiri t'i kete bazuar dramat e tij ne informacione te marra nga shkrime te te tjereve. 
Sidoqofte, une u futa ne kete diskutim jo se e pretendoj te jap mendime shterruese, por sa per ta gjalleruar pak kete diskutim interesant, pasi vertet, lista ka rene ne letargji dhe vec disa fletushkave propagandistike per rreziqet e kapitalizmit, ca thirrjeve vulgare per te vrare, dhe vajtimeve per fatin e keq te marijuanes nuk po lexojme gje. 
Ben

Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 13:11:03 -0700
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [AlbClub] Shakspear apo....

Alb-clubi, ndofta per merite apo cmerite te Xha-Xhait (kidding here xhaxha) eshte ne suspended mode kete vere. Keshtuqe edhe po hodha ndonje gur, nuk ndodh gje, se s`do ta kete  mendjen njeri...     Para disa vjetesh, pata sjell ne klub nje shkrim mbi Marlowe ne te cilin permendja  se ai ishte autori i nje drame (te humbur) mbi Skenderbeun, dhe se si ky autor e karakter jo i zakonshme mund te kete qene ne fakt  autori i vertete i kryeveprave  te dala nga pena e Shekspirit.     Disa dite me pare diskutimi se kush ishte ne te vertet Shekspiri, diskutim ky qe s`eshte fashitur asnjeher qe nga shek. 19 e ketej, ka dalur perseri ne siperfaqe te diskutimeve. Kesaj radhe, nje grup aktoresh britanike kane vendosur qe ta ndezin debatin deri ne ate pike sa te hidhet nje drite me e plote ne misterin me emrin William Shakespear. Kush ishte ai? Autori i vertete i kryeveprave te mirenjohura te
 letersise qe mbajne emrin e tij, apo nje tregtar gruri dhe sekser tokash, emri i te cilit do te perdoresh ne rastin me te famshem te identitetit  te fshehur/gabuar.     Me poshte do te sjell disa nga opinionet e grupit qe hedh poshte ne menyre kategorike se autori i disa nga veprave te famshme te letersise boterore te te gjitha koherat ishte nje fshatar i vete edukuar nga Stratfordi.     Me shprese se do ta shijoni po aq sa edhe une...               The plays are written from a very aristocratic perspective, unlike the contemporary plays of Marlowe, Ben Jonson, and even Beaumont & Fletcher. This is a matter of simple observation. The lower-class characters in the plays are very often clowns and fools, comic foils for the upper class characters. The whole outlook of the author is aristocratic. It is the author himself who is
 something of a snob, not those who point this out.   It would have been very difficult, if not impossible, for an Elizabethan commoner to obtain the knowledge displayed in the plays - and certainly to have obtained it without leaving even a single item of documentary evidence: a deep technical knowledge of law, detailed contemporary knowledge of several Italian cities, a profound knowledge of the classics, knowledge of contemporary French and Italian literature, knowledge of aristocratic etiquette and protocols of international diplomacy, technical knowledge of falconry, tennis, jousting, medicine, botany, astrology, heraldry, military and naval matters. There is no *time* in William of Stratford's life for him to have obtained all this knowledge, while simultaneously supporting a family, running a business in Stratford, and constantly acting in and writing plays.   It is widely believed that Polonius in Hamlet is based on Lord Burleigh, yet it was unthinkable at
 the time for a commoner to publicly satirize one of the most powerful men in the state with impunity. Likewise if the sonnets are addressed to the Earl of Southhampton, the familiar, even superior tone does not suggest that they were written by a social inferior, or by someone depending on the Earl for patronage.   Unlike every other great author we know, there is no connection whatsoever between the content of the writings of Shakespeare and the life of William of Stratford. Nothing in the plays refers to the life of a working man, a commoner, a businessman in a small village, the efforts of a bright young man to obtain knowledge, the sudden exposure of a provincial to the great playhouses of London, etc
.     (28) In Romeo and Juliet, Act III, Sc. 5, we read, "The county Paris, at St.
Peter's church shall happily make thee there a joyous bride." How did Shakspere know that there was a St. Peter's church in Verona unless he
 had seen it and that this church was quite close to the reputed mansion of the Capulets?   (29) In the same play Act iv, Sc. I, we read, "or shall I come to you at
Evening Mass." The Stratfordians, say that this is a mistake as in Italy, Mass was only celebrated in the morning. On the contrary, at the Cathedral of Verona, Mass was said in the evenings even though it had been expressly forbidden by the Pope. How did Shakspere know this fact if he had never been abroad?   (30) In The Merchant of Venice "Shakespeare" tells us that Portia went to
Padua to seek legal aid for Antonio. Why to Padua? Because Padua had a famous university which granted legal degrees recognised as qualifications for Venetian lawyers. How could Shakspere know this if he had never been abroad?   (31) Portia in this play obtains the help of a lawyer Bellario. The name
Bellario is that of an old Paduan family,
 whose descendants still live there. Why should Shakspere choose the name Bellario for his character if he had never been to Padua!   (32) In Othello "Shakespeare" writes of "The Sagittary." It appears that in
Venice there was a residence for the commanding officers of the Army and Navy and in front of this building were four statues, one of which was the figure of an archer with a drawn bow. The Venetians called this residence "Il Sagittario" (the archer). How could Shakspeare know this if he had never visited Venice?   (33) In The Merchant of Venice is a character "Launcelot Gobbo." The name
Gobbo is a peculiarly Venetian name not found in other cities. How could Shakspere know this if he had never visited Venice?   (34) In the Taming of the Shrew, Act iv, Sc. 3, we read, "Like to a censer
in a barber's shop". A censer was a kind of brazier used by barbers in Southern Italy to
 keep the water hot. How did Shakspere knows this if he had never visited Italy?   (35) In Othello we read, "Forsooth, a great arithmetician one Michael
Cassio, a Florentine." If Shakspere had never visited Italy, how did he know that men from Florence were in great demand all over Italy as book-keepers, because the study of mathematics was a speciality of Florence?   (36) In Othello, Act I, Sc. I, we read, "raise some special officer of the
night." How could Shakspere know that in Venice there was a special night police called "Signori di notte" unless he had visited Venice?   (37) If Shakspere had never visited Italy, how is it that the Merchant of
Venice displays an intimate acquaintance not only with the manners and customs of Italy but with the minutest details of domestic life? In Act II of The Taming of the Shrew Gremio gives a complete list of all the goods and gear with
 which his house is stocked including a number of goods never seen in Englewood but only in the palaces of Italian nobles.   (38) How did Shakspere if he had never visited Italy know that in that
country a betrothal of two people is carried out by the father of the girl joining their hands in the presence of two witnesses, as we find in The Taming of the Shrew, Act II, Sc. 2.?   (39) In The Merchant of Venice we find the following---"This night,
methinks, is but the daylight sick. It looks a little paler: 'tis a day such as the day is when the sun is hid." Act. v, Sc. I. In Italy, the light of the moon and stars is almost as yellow as the sunlight in England. How did Shakspere know this if he had never been in Italy?   (40) In The Winter's Tale we read---"The Princesse hearing of her mother's
statue, a peece many yeeres in doing, and now newly perform'd by that rare Italian Master,
 Julio Romano."---Act v, Sc. 2. Here we find Guilio Romano described as a rare sculptor but in Shakspere's time Romano was known in England as a painter and architect only, not as a sculptor. Vasari, however in 1550 and again in 1565, described him as a sculptor--on both occasion in Italian, not in English. This means that "Shakespeare" must either have studied Vasari in the original Italian or else have actually been to Mantua and seen Romano's sculptured works. No evidence exists that Shakspere could read Italian or had ever travelled abroad.   (41) In Shaksperes day, there was at Venice a common ferry at two places,
Fusina and Mestre, the ferries in Venice being called Tragetti. In The Merchant of Venice we find "Unto the tranect, to the common ferry which trades to Venice." The word "tranect" appears to be a misprint for "traject"; presumably the printers would not understand such an uncommon expression as "traject". If Shakspere had not
 personally visited Italy, how did he know that there was such a ferry?   (42) In The Merchant of Venice Portia and Nerissa travel from Belmont
Montebello to Padua and we find in this play the line "For we must travel twenty miles to-day" (Act III, Sc. 4). How did Shakspere if he had never visited Italy, know that the exact distance from Montebello to Padua is twenty miles?   (43) In The Taming of the Shrew Lucentio changes places with his servant
Tranio and in doing so calls himself Cambio. Why should Shakspere use the name Cambio unless he had a good knowledge of the Italian language, because the word Cambio means exchange?   (44) From 1585 to 1600 Correggio's famous picture of Jupiter and Io was in
the palace of the sculptor Leoni at Milan and was on view to travellers. In the Introduction to The Taming of the Shrew we read--"We'11 show thee Io as she was a maid, and how she was
 beguiled and surpris'd as lively painted as the deed was done," which is clearly a reference to Correggio's picture at Milan. How could Shakspere have inserted these words in the play if he had never seen the picture at Milan?   With regard to the last eighteen questions it must be remembered that there were no guide books for the use of travellers in those days, so the author of these plays could not have gathered his local knowledge of Italy from such sources and must have visited Italy in person.          There has never been found any authentic writing of any sort by William Shaksper of Stratford beyond six shaky signatures found affixed to legal documents. Each of these differs from the others and they are all from the end phase of his life: 1612-1616. Three of these signatures are on his will, one is on a deposition in a breach-of-promise case, and two are on real-estate documents. None are related to plays, poetry, or
 publishing.   In his Last Will, no books, papers, or unpublished MSS are mentioned. He did not have a private library of any sort. No books have emerged that bear his signature, bookplate, or any other such identifier. His children inherited no books, not even a family Bible. Dr. John Hall was a prominent physician who married Susanna Shaksper in 1607. He was thus "Shakespeare's son-in-law". Dr. Hall logged every volume in his library, but there was no mention of Shakespeare books, manuscripts or memorabilia. As Susanna and Dr. Hall were the residuary legatees and executives of the estate of William Shaksper, it is incredible that there was not a scrap of material related to the alleged literary career of their dad. Dr. Hall kept a detailed log of patient histories, and anecdotes but he never mentions William Shakespeare. Hall does note that he treated Michael Drayton, the other notable poet of the era from Warwickshire. "Mr. Drayton, an excellent poet, I cured him of
 a certain fever with syrup of violets'.   Shaksper's parents were illiterate. His daughters remained illiterate and uneducated. Judith Shaksper affixed a mark instead of a signature. The Shakespeare plays abound with female characters who read, who discuss philosophy, who are in every way literate. In a household in which erudition and wit would have erupted daily, how could Shakespeare's daughters not be influenced?   There is no record of education for William Shaksper, either elementary or higher. His name does not appear in any College matriculation rolls. How he educated himself, if he did, is a mystery. The profound learning, and familiarity with French, Italian, Latin, and even Greek that emerges in the Shakespeare plays had to come from somewhere.   There is nothing in the contemporary Stratford-on-Avon history to suggest he was a writer. The men of Stratford knew William Shaksper only as a grain dealer and property owner.   The link in Shaksper's
 will, to Hemynge, Burbage, and Condell, is a visible interpolation, an after the fact addition.   This Shaksper's will contains nothing about shares in the Globe or Blackfriars theaters, and his heirs never received any payments, nor sought any.   All of the contemporary allusions to Shake-Speare the writer are enigmatic and in no way refer to the man in Stratford. The only things that indicate that this Stratford man was the dramatist are the posthumous vague assertions in the First Folio introductions and the peculiar inscriptions on the Stratford Monument.   There is nothing contemporary to the relevant time period that show that THIS Shaksper was connected with London theaters. There are but three or four references to a Will Shakespeare as an actor, and they are only in the period of 1598 to 1603. And several key instances have been misstated. Stratford defenders say that the Cast lists for Ben Jonson's Every man in his Humour 1598, show that Shakespeare
 acted in that play. But the cast list doesn't appear in the 1598 quarto, only in the 1616 Collected Workes of Jonson. The same is true for the Sejanus 1603 references; they date from   There are two other recorded transactions that name a Shakespeare as involved financially in the King's men, and in capacity of receipt of cloth. In any case, there is no evidence that Shaksper of Stratford was an actor, or had a reputation as an actor on the London stages, or anywhere else. The few mentions of a Shakespeare involved with the theater are in no way linked, until decades later, to the man from Stratford.   There were no eulogies to Shakespeare in 1616 when Shaksper died. His passing was a non-event, while Philip Sidney had been given a funeral of near-Royal proportions.   Shaksper of Stratford was involved in numerous petty lawsuits, small claims court proceedings that indicate an attachment to money, however small, that is antithetical to the point of view of the
 author of the Shakespeare plays and poems.   When Shaksper died in 1616, there were at least 16 masterpiece plays that had never been published. These plays appeared in print for the first time in the Folio of 1623. Many of these plays were not even performed in the era in which they were allegedly written. If Shaksper "wrote for money", why would Shaksper not exploit the potential market value of his "back catalog" ? If the rights to Shaksper's assets passed to his daughter Susanna, as residuary legatee, why did she never claim any books or manuscripts as a portion of the residuary estate ?   When the Sonnets were published in 1609, Shaksper was alive. He took no action, he received no compensation. The introduction implies that the author is dead. The naughty eroticism and personal revelations do not match Shaksper's lifestyle, and it is unlikely that a living author would permit his private diary of secret thoughts to be issued publicly.   Shaksper's rustic
 Warwickshire lifestyle is made fun of in the plays. There are only scant references to small farm animals, but numerous references to horses, cattle, hawks, and animals familiar to the nobility.   There is no indication that Shaksper left Stratford for London prior to   His wife gave birth to twins that year, and while he may have left in a hurry, all evidence is that he had been "down on the farm" from 1564 to   His sojourn in London after 1585 is mostly conjectural. But allusions and topical references in many of the Shakespeare plays clearly refer to Court intrigues in the 1576 to 1585 time period. There is no way Shaksper could have known about these matters first hand.   There are a number of Shakespeare-like "Apocryphal and Anonymous Plays", that are ruled out of the Shakespeare Canon, because they had a stage history or publication record that doesn't match the dates for Shaksper of Stratford. Some of the apocryphal plays are now being seen to be
 remarkably Shakespearean in language and plotting, but emerged too early for Shaksper to have written them.   There is nothing in Shaksper's biography to indicate sea voyages, knowledge of Italian manners, hawking, jousting, military service, legal training, foreign languages, and the Classics.   The Monument to Shakespeare in the Church at Stratford-on-Avon is not the original monument, which was sketched in the 17th century and shows a man with a sack, not a man writing on a pillow. The wording on the monument is extraordinarily peculiar, and can be shown to reveal that Shaksper was a front man for someone else.   "The retirement" of Shaksper, from London back to Stratford, is roughly coincidental with the name "William Shake-speare" appearing on plays, and the first notices that Shakespeare was the name of a writer of note. The standard story is that Shaksper "commuted" from Warwickshire to London to act in plays, but this is unfeasible and unsupported by
 any evidence.   All attempts at finding relevant material by tracing the Shaksper family have come up empty.   There is nothing to link Shaksper-of-Stratford to the Earl of Southampton, his alleged Patron. The dedications to Southampton in Venus & Adonis and Lucrece show that the author knew him well, and was on close familiar terms. Scholars have turned England upside down to find even a scrap of paper connecting Southampton to the man from Stratford. No such documents have been found.   Although there are plenty of pay-records for other actors of his day, there is no such data for Shaksper. The first notice that a "William Shakespeare" had been an actor comes from the printed quarto Every Man in His Humour, by Ben Jonson in 1598. The Folio of 1623, in part edited by Jonson, also lists "Shakespeare" as an actor in his plays. But the alleged links between the Folio Shakespeare and Shaksper of Stratford, are thin and frayed to the breaking point.   There
 is court testimony from 1615 (the Ostler suit) which includes the statement that the Shakespeare associated with the Globe Theater was dead, and could not testify. Shaksper was still alive in 1615.   It remains unknown where and how Shaksper got the money to buy his large house in Stratford He certainly did not earn it through the theater or publishing.   There is no known link between Shaksper and any of the known writers of his day, except possibly Ben Jonson who tells both sides of the story, by praising Shakes-speare (in the Folio) while slamming Shaksper, as "Sogliardo", the country bumpkin who tries to buy a coat of arms in Every Man Out of His Humor.   Edward Alleyn, a famous Elizabethan actor and theater owner, noted in his diaries the names of all the actors and hired dramatists of his time, and the names of all persons who received money in connection with the production of plays at the Fortune, Blackfriars, and other theaters. Alleyn never even once
 mentions Shaksper.   Henslowe's theatrical diary never mentions Shaksper or Shakespeare, even though he names all of the other famous writers who worked for him at one time including Chapman, Day, Dekker, Drayton, Heywood, Jonson, Marston, Middleton, Munday, Webster and others. He does mention the names of some of the Plays we call Shakespeare's, but they are left anonymous.   The conclusion is that Henslowe never paid a penny to anyone named Shaksper or Shakespeare, and that the source of the Shakespeare plays was rather different than Henslowe's standard stable of paid providers of entertainment. Shaksper allegedly lived in London for more than twenty years. But there are no remembrances of him or anecdotes of encounters with him by the contemporary writers and diarists of the time. How could Shakespeare, the person, be unknown to the intelligentsia of his era? Shakespeare the author seems to have known the most intimate details of the private lives of England's
 aristocracy. If "Shake-speare" knew them, they must have known him; perhaps he was even one of them. Could the ruling class of London have known the Bard by another name ?   William Camden's Britannia, 1610, contains several references to Stratford-on-Avon. But he makes no mention of Shakespeare or Shaksper. Camden certainly knew about the Shakespeare plays, and had praised "Shakespeare" the writer, but in no way connects them or their author with Stratford -on-Avon. Camden's list of "Worthies" for Stratford in 1605 does not mention Shaksper, nor does his "Annals" for the year 1616 mention Shaksper' death. William Camden, a prodigious historian and antiquary, who knew everything and everyone in England, and had even signed off on Shaksper's application for a coat of arms, clearly didn't think that Shaksper was notable, and certainly did not connect him in any way with the writer named Shakespeare.   Michael Drayton's Poly-Olbion, 1613, contains detailed maps and an
 epic poem of all the interesting places in England. His map of Warwickshire does not even include Stratford-on-Avon. Drayton, who hailed from Warwickshire himself, would have known and remembered Shaksper, if the man had been Drayton's inspiration, Shakespeare.   During the English Civil War, an Army surgeon named James Cooke, who found himself stationed at Stratford-on-Avon in 1642, sought out Shakspere's daughter Susanna, who was at that time a widow and known as Mrs. Susanna Hall. He asked her to show him any manuscripts or books that might have belonged to her father. He noted with surprise and disappointment that she had no knowledge of any books or documents, relating to William Shaksper. The only written material was that of Dr. Hall. Susanna herself never learned to read or write. This hardly sounds like the daughter of the greatest reader and writer in history.   The Globe Theater burned to the ground on June 28, 1613, In a published account of the
 disastrous fire, reference is made to Richard Burbage, Henry Condell and other Globe officials but nothing is said about Shaksper.   In a contemporary allusion to the author Shakespeare, fellow writer John Davies refers to Shakespeare as "Our English Terence." The Roman writer named "Terence" was a pseudonym. It is thought that "Terence" was an alternate pen-name of the writer Scipio 
      Need a vacation? Get great deals 
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. 
_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE


____________________________________________________
Alb-Club mailing list: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send email to: [email protected]
http://www.alb-net.com/mailman/listinfo/alb-club