Devil of Envy E-Book

Kitter Krebs

• Herausgeber: Books on Demand
• Kategorie: Sachliteratur, Reportagen, Biografien
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 113

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2019

Beschreibung

Who wrote the Shakespeare Works? Thematic readings of the four immortal tragedies, HAMLET, OTHELLO, KING LEAR and MACBETH, in the light of the great renaissance philosopher, Francis Bacon's Essays suggest an answer to this questinon.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Preface

Introduction

Shakspere the actor

Francis Bacon, a likely alternative

Selected Arguments

The Norwegian cryptographer

The Virginia Report

The Northumberland Paper

The Promus of Formularies and Elegancies

The Italian Trace

N.B. Cockburn, the ultimate Proof

Other Arguments

Reasonable Doubt

Presentation of the four great Tragedies

HAMLET – Revenge and envy

The composition of HAMLET

OTHELLO –Jealousy and envy

The composition of OTHELLO

KING LEAR – Love and envy

The composition of KING LEAR

MACBETH – Ambition and envy

The composition of MACBETH

The Alchemy of the Soul

The thematic Correlation between the four great Shakespearean Tragedies and Bacon's Essays

Of Fortune

Of Ambition

Of Youth and Age and of Parents and Children

Of Suspiscion

Of Anger

Of Revenge

Of Death

Of Envy

Conclusion

Conferences at The Globe

Bibliography

Preface

I am sitting here in my study enjoying the vast view over the fields. I feel a sense of meaning and coherence looking back and remembering the first time I started reading about Shakespeare. It is more than fifty years ago.

When I was fourteen, I was on a bus trip with my school in the beautiful Scottish Lake District. We visited the small town, Carlisle, where I in an antique book store found SHAKESPAREAN TRAGEDY, HAMLET, OTHELLO, KING LEAR, MACBETH by A.C. Bradley. When I first started perusing the big old blue book, I was disappointed that it was an analysis of the works I had bought for a sixpence and not the very tragedies, but then I started reading.

That was a pivotal moment for my destiny. I was completely enthralled and engulfed by all the layers of the material, which the old Oxford professor illuminated for me, and of course I felt the urge to dive into the primary sources, the plays themselves. Since then I have been an excited fan of Shakespeare – or rather his works, because so little is actually known about him. During the 19th and the 20th century, several documents and discoveries have emerged about the actor William Shakspere, as he was actually called according to the church record (Pointon, pg. 11), and these discoveries do absolutely not point in the direction that he was in fact the greatest poet ever of the world.

But the works are wonderful. I have loved to delve into the light and playful comedies, the beautiful and subtle poetry of the sonnets, but perhaps the very best for me was the deep insight into the darkest corners of human existence offered by the tragedies.

The material is so vast and rich, that it in itself is wonderful occupation for a lifetime, but in 2008, it got an even deeper dimension for me. I read Erlend Loe's interview book with Petter Amundsen, THE ORGANIST, and here I was convinced that it was worth examining, if it could really be true, that it was not the actor from Stratford-upon-Avon, William Shakspere, who had written what is generally known as The Works of Shakespeare.

I understand very well that there is such a fierce resistance against the recognition that there may be doubt about the authorship. I have myself experienced how hard it is to let go of this wellknown concept of the unpolished diamond from Warwickshire, this raw, unspoiled phenomenon of Nature with a mystical knowledge of world history, tales, and legends of the time. But in the end the myth must yield to the facts.

In Denmark it is hardly acknowledged that there even exists an authorship question. I am a member of a facebookgroup called Danske Shakespeareentusiaster, i.e. Danish Shakespeareenthusiasts, where many an interesting article or qualified debate takes place, but once I put up a reference to the authorshipquestion, my post was censored: The idea that someone other than Shakespeare had written the works was simply too insane!

Several researchers who have delved into the authorship question find many convincing hints, that the real author is Francis Bacon, the great English philosopher of the renaissance. I wanted to familiarize myself with Bacon, so I started to read his enormous work, which includes a collection of Essays. As I read these essays for the first time, it struck me how alike the ideas in what is published as Shakespeare's are to the ideas of Bacon.

The explanation lies right in front of us, and this is the claim of this book: It is the same mind, the same thinker, and poet who is at work. This I shall try to show by comparing the four great tragedies, Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, and Macbeth with relevant extracts from Francis Bacon's Essays.

Read and judge for yourself. Try to keep an open mind. I understand very well, that it is hard to say goodbye to an idol. It was with great sadness when, in the light of present knowledge, I had to realize that the Works of Shakespeare were in fact not written by William Shakspere, but by someone else.

This goodbye was however a hello to an even larger world! The works exist no matter who wrote them, but by being attributed to a great philosopher and falling into place in an even bigger picture, they gain considerably in perspective, meaning, and beauty.

I hope that you, my dear reader, will agree with me. If not after reading this book, then perhaps after diving into the works of some of the brilliant and thorough researchers that I am borrowing from, leaning towards, and am forever indebted to.

I also want to express my gratitude to Marie Keiser-Nielsen for critical comments and inspiring questions.

Introduction

The English Renaissance is a time of great excitement. This is actually the beginning of globalisation. The little European world of the Middle ages greatly expands geographically, culturally, economically, and spiritually. For this there are many reasons. This historical introduction is, in my opinion, a key point for understanding the work of Shakespeare, and furthermore it will hopefully clarify the connections between then and now.

The great renaissance philosopher Francis Bacon summarizes the conditions for the great innovations in three main factors: The compass, gunpowder, and the printing press. The compass, which opened the sea to discovery of new parts of the world. The gun powder made it possible to defeat whomever you encountered. And finally, the printing press which Gutenberg gave us in 1472 meant a significant growth in the spiritual world, in spreading thoughts and ideas.

Vasco da Gama and Christopher Columbus challenge the seas. The world expands and trading explodes. Luxury arrives in Europe; silks and porcelain from China; tea and spices from India; coffee, tobacco, and potatoes from America. There is plenty of money to be made or lost, which is why a new unproductive middle layer of the social pyramid emerges; solicitors, bankers, tradesmen, and merchants appear in great measure. The beginnings of the modern society take shape.

However, it was also a time where many disputes sprouted; English, Spanish, Dutch and French merchants fight over nautical dominion, the colonies, and all the riches they offer, not just with each other, but also against pirates.

In parallel to this New World Order, a corresponding metaphysical shift emerges. In philosophy, the 1492 translation of Aristotle from Greek to Latin, the lingua franca of the time, meant a significant step towards classic ideals.

Martin Luther puts up his dogmas on the Wittenberg Church door and the nail starts making cracks in the fundament of the Catholic church as the all dominant power in Europe: Together with the fact that its power, its ability, and its right to define the spiritual world order diminishes, a space is left open for both reinvented and new thoughts and ideas to emerge. One main element in this context – I find – is Luther's thoughts of the individual's personal relation to God, not administered by the church, this contributes to the individualisation of the renaissance.

The new order of society, the heliocentric world model gives birth to a new view on man, which is reflected in the arts. The idea of man as an autonomous individual is one of the major changes that renaissance thought brings to life; man's destiny is no longer solely defined by kin or class. As the static feudal society slowly collapses, it is now possible to soar in rank, and make a career as bourgeois society develops.

The church undergoes many radical changes in the 16th century. Henry VIII falls out with the Roman church because he wishes to divorce the Spanish Catholic Queen Catherine of Aragonia. He then marries Anne Boleyn, who was a protestant. The King annexes the vast areas previously owned by the church, and gives out land to his supporters and loyal courtiers.

When Catherine and Henry's daughter Bloody Mary is in power, Catholicism is reinstated with fire and fury.

Mary is succeeded by Anne Boylen's daughter, Elisabeth I, The Virgin Queen, who rules for more than fifty years in a culturally flourishing period. Elizabeth is a great diplomat and well-versed in the art of balancing; she stalls suitors from many countries with charm and promises, and she also finds a balanced way to deal with the church.

After the second English reformation, 1558, much of the nobility secretly continued practicing their Catholic faith. A spirited memento of this are the many priest holes which can be found at English estates, a secret door in the library connected to a tunnel which provided escape for the Catholic priest in case of an unannounced visit by the authorities. The English church might seem quite papal through the eyes of Northern Europeans – the tiara worn by the Arch Bishop of Canterbury etc – but Elizabeth was neither Catholic nor Puritan, she was somewhere in between, where she and her people might survive.

The power of the individual to steer his own fate towards either joy or misery is poignantly reflected in the Elizabethan drama, most beautifully and strongest in what we know as the works of William Shakespeare.

Many of the paradigmatic shifts of the renaissance are as emblematic of today. The sense of a new time dawning is pronounced clearly by Francis Bacon when he talks of "The great Instauration", which he wanted to be "a total reconstruction of sciences, arts, and all human knowledge" (Novum Organum 1620).

We are in a time where individualization reigns, more people live as singles, the selfie stick is everywhere; all values are thrown into the air, and no one knows how or where they might land!

Bacon's understanding of the paradigm shift, which is so much like ours, makes him so very relevant today, as the need for redefining of our values is clear. This is a reason why reading The works of Shakespeare in the light of Bacon's philosophy makes so much sense now.

Shakspere the actor

William Shakspere was born at Stratford-upon-Avon as son of John Shakspere and his wife Mary, born Arden, April 23rd 1564. Time and place can hardly be contested, but the name! A.J. Pointon documents in THE MAN WHO WAS NEVER SHAKESPEARE, that the family name of the famous actor was Shakspere; spelled in a myriad of ways, but never with an "e" after "k" or "ck", making the [ei]-sound appear. The symbolically sounding name is thus a later construction; church records display the whole family as Shakspere.

It is possible, but uncertain whether William Shakspere attended the local school, but we know for a fact that he never got a university degree since he does not appear in neither Cambridge nor Oxford protocols (which have been kept since the 10th century).

In Stratford Shakspere married Anne Hathaway and had a daughter, Susanna, at the age of 18. We do not know much about him until he appears in London around 1592, other than the fact that he fathered twins; Hamnet and Judith. There are countless myths of his life as a poacher, or that he took care of the horses outside the theatres; all undocumented.

There is a vast number of Shakespeare biographies available; for the most part based on more or less qualified probabilities, possible as well as impossible assumptions and pure guess work. See for instance well respected researcher and Stratfordian, Katherine Duncan-Jones: pg. 64: "...could well have been..."; pg. 79: "...Shakespeare may have been..."; pg. 86: "...A possible order of events is as follows..."; pg. 200: "...William may have decided..."

One biographer will quote the other, and thus the assumptions take on a character of truth over time, even though they remain unfounded in facts.

However, legal documents emerged in the ninetieth and twentieth century, showing that Shakspere filed a number of lawsuits to recover small sums of money. He was a money lender. He also hoarded barley and sold it with a profit. He was, like his father incedently, a gifted business man. (Pointon, pg. 52) It seems he even sold his name!

In 1613 Shakspere retires to Stratford, where he stays till his death in 1616. The city makes a buste in his honour where he is depicted with a sack of wool or barley, but later a pen and paper has been added to the monument, (Price, pg. 153). Interestingly, he needed to appear a writer, a poet. Why would it then be so unreasonable to believe him the author of the works which carry his name?