Shakespeare's Unorthodox Biography by Diana Price - improved audio
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- Diana Price discusses why the Shakespeare Authorship Question is a legitimate academic subject. Her book, "Shakespeare’s Unorthodox Biography: New Evidence of An Authorship Problem," is available on Amazon. This recording was made at an event commemorating the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare of Stratford’s death, and took place on April 24, 2016, at the Berkeley Street Theatre in Toronto, Canada.
![[Limbus Company - Teaser] Season5 - Oblivion](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8anKuEeZLeI/mqdefault.jpg)
Diana Price gave an excellent, clear-headed and laser focused presentation! Very impressive.
Very true!
Diana Price's book "Shakespeare Unorthodox Biography" has convinced me that there is a Shakespeare Authorship Question. After reading her book, I totally agree that William Shakspear of Stratford could not have been the Author of Shakespeare plays.
John Heminges, Henry Condell, and Richard Burbage, three actors of The Lord Chamberlain's Men, a famous acting company that included William Shakespeare, were given money by William Shakespeare of Stratford in his Last Will and Testament in 1616. Two of these actors, John Heminges and Henry Condell, were responsible for having 36 of Shakespeare's plays published in the First Folio in 1623.
Yes, we all know that. And if you listen to Diana Price you'll realize that Shakspere was likely a play broker and not the writer of the works. Shakspere was certainly and actor and a theatre manager but a writer.? No.
If Shakespeare was only a "play broker," then why the eulogy from Ben Jonson in the First Folio that clearly praises him as writer? He states
that "thy writings to be such, /As neither Man, nor Muse, can praise too much." Heminges and Condell also praise Shakespeare as a writer, stating that "he thought, he uttered with that easinesse, that wee have scarse received from him a blot in his papers. But it is not our province, who onely gather his works, and give them you, to praise him." These are "his works" and "his papers" that they are publishing. He is clearly presented as the writer of these works in the First Folio.
@@EndoftheTownProductions There are many problems with the First Folio. The main one being there is no biography of the man from Stratford included. True the dedicatory poems point to the Stratford man, but they are oblique. The theory is seven years after Shakspere's death it was decided to publish the plays, and point at the man from Stratford without ever actually stating who he was. They clearly wished to hide the real author or authors. This is a very old argument. Every aspect has been debated for decades, especially the one you are mentioning. Did you watch all of Diana Price's video? She explains it as well as anyone. Some believe, many more don't. Have a look at my video and see what you think, studio.ruclips.net/user/videohM5FeZlh3D4/analytics/tab-overview/period-default
@@EndoftheTownProductions Jonson's statements can just as easily be read as praising the exceptional work of "William Shakespeare", a pen name shared by a collaboration of writers, none of whom was the Stratford man. A lettered man like Jonson likely knew the truth of, and perhaps shared in, the authorship of these plays. It's entirely plausible that Jonson is writing these lines with a wink, not unlike the same quotation marks you placed around those phrases. The collective author known as William Shakespeare is indeed the author of those collected plays. As you re-read Jonson's lines, hold in your mind that he knows the plays to be of collective authorship, and see if it tracks. Also, perhaps see if that leads to any other exciting possibilities in your thinking about the works.
I think it's important to point out that the Stratford man's gift to them was an unverified interlineation, so we are immediately on suspect ground.
Diana Price is a brilliant writer and an avid and passionate researcher!
This kind lady is a very effective speaker
Just amazing!
I have graduated scenic design, and we had to learn Shakespeare's plays almost by heart. I have always had the feeling that there is something hidden, unseen and this video sheds some light on the questions. Thank you for sharing!
So clear!
Says it all really that those who say william shakespeare wrote the plays tell people to look at the sòurces. Those who say it was the farting tin speculator say 'read my book'
That was a great talk. Most people have no idea Willam Shakespeare's name is on other people's plays.
When someone described WS as "gentle," they must have been describing his social class, no? In the 21st century, if someone were described as gentle, that would definitely pertain to their manner or personality. But in the 16th-17th century, it mostly pertained to social class.
Yes. I believe it has to do with WS getting a coat of arms.
the most amazing fact about this honourable lady (to me) is, that she is interested with great persuasiveness in debunking William of Stratford as the fake Shakespeare (everybody can agree ! ), but does not seek nearly as much force to track down the real poet of Hamlet, King Lear etc. Why not? wouldn't this be the absolutely necessary and compelling second step? In for a penny, in for a pound.
ruclips.net/video/yt6PfgbeP84/видео.html
Completely disagree, as of course does Diana Price. The issue is not who is the real writer, the issue is that a false narrative is being forced on most students and people in general.
@@keircutler let’s agree that we disagree. ruclips.net/video/yt6PfgbeP84/видео.html
Vero nihil verias, says Oxford’s family coat of arms. Nothing truer than the truth. All this time we’ve been fed a lie, believed by many.( kind of like the dt and the trumpkins.)
@@keircutler That is one issue. The other issue is who actually wrote the plays. While I greatly respect Diana Price, both she and you are a hundred years behind in the real discussion, imho, and this is going to become increasingly clear as the Oxfordians continue over the next decades to compile an ever more dense and compelling case corroborating Looney's 1920 identification of Oxford as the real mind behind the works.
@@rstritmatter There are two issues: One, is the traditional story of the man from Stratford writing the works of Shakespeare correct? and two, if it isn’t true which person or group was responsible for creating the works? Everyone has to decide what is important to them. I personally, do not see the value of jumping to question number two while the orthodoxy controls academia and investigating the Shakespeare Authorship question is verboten almost everywhere. In fact, I think jumping to number two helps the orthodoxy change the issue from defending their shaky theory to refuting potential alternate candidates. So no, I completely disagree with you.