Elizabeth Winkler on How Doubting Shakespeare Became the Biggest Taboo in Literature 

Wow. She calls herself a journalist but what a scholar! Her answer to your question about what they thought about the bard in the 18th century took us on a tour of British cultural history from 1709 forward. Her analysis about the role of identity was spot on, so speaketh my inner Brit. Thank you. This video, her book give me the odd feeling Oxfordians are closer to their goal even if you are up against centuries of British hierarchical identity. We were up against that in 1776-didn’t stop us. Appreciate your work, thanks.

BUY THIS BOOK! I'm 200 pages in and it's fantastic. Ms. Winkler has a great way of synthesizing the issues and evidence bearing on the authorship question and her writing is very engaging, witty and laugh out loud funny - WHILE she is making deeply researched points! 5 STARS

No, Elizabeth, never say you were foolish to write this book! This is the best Christmas present an author could ever give to their public!

One of the best interviews with Winkler I've seen. Journalist to journalist--that brings out several new dimensions to what Elizabeth shares. Not all interviewers have finished reading her book before speaking with her. It was delightful to see her reaction to learning Mr. Meyers was re-reading it!

Great interview. Very interested in hearing what Elizabeth will discover about Nabokov and the authorship question. He seems to have left a complicated record of his thought on the matter, but I think it might've been woven into a number of his literary works, including Pale Fire.

Journalist to journalist, it was enjoyable to watch them bond.

Great discussion. I had to do a double take because I was initially aware of Ms. Winkler’s upcoming book from her sister’s YT channel. The Winkler family is multitalented! It takes great courage to poke the hornet’s nest of the authorship question. It’s caused horrible arguments in my own family, like declaring “grandpa was a bastard” at the Thanksgiving dinner table.

Outstanding conversation about a complex and fascinating mystery. I'm glad Elizabeth sees the crazy humor of the whole controversy.

Stritmatter was a graduate student of mine, and I found his arguments fascinating-when he got back from an early visit to the Folger, where he unearthed DeVere's personal Bible complete with underlinings and marginal notes in DeVere's hand.

A great talent! Thanks for producing this interview Bob et al.

The book is wonderful. It IS amusing. It feels like a mystery. The structure is satisfying, alternating between her visits to museums and landmarks, interviews, and academic historical discussion. I'm in my 60s and astounded to know only now that there is such a question and that I took Shakespeare's identity for granted. That in itself smacks of 'conspiracy'.

For me DeVere is the most likely candidate however I'm open to all lines of research. The one irrevocable conclusion I've reached is that the Stratford man didn't write the works, (or anything else as far as I can tell). Why are Stratfordians so 'dug in"? Imagine as an English Lit. / Shakespeare scholar spending your entire professional life within the traditional paradigm and then being told it's all a lie. No disrespect intended, but the proposal must be as earth-shattering as if a devout Christian were told " they found the body". A life's work built on a myth? That's a lot to swallow. Then there is the Shakespeare industry from birthplace to books to coffee cups. If I give any credence to the possibility my tourist site and merchandise is suddenly rendered worthless. Yeah, a person might get a little irrational given the stakes.

Great interview! The series gets better and better. And having heard Elizabeth speak or be interviewed in several different contexts, this was so far an exemplary interview in every way.

All the real interesting topics are the ones that can't be discussed freely in academia. The Shakespearean authorship is just one of many subjects you aren't allowed to question, - try as a biologist to question Darwin, or as a physicist to doubt the big bang, or as a medical student to question germ theory of disease, or as a musicologist to suggest that music from the 19th century is played way to fast because the metronome marks are interpreted wrongly. All these fascinating subject are being explored by brilliant people outside academia because knowledge within the universities becomes solidified like concrete, and in almost all fields you end up with paradigms which cannot be questioned without your career being destroyed. Academia worldwide is dead, the real science and investigation will soon prosper outside the universities.

What a marvelous interview, thanks to both of you!

Fascinating discussion. Next stop, Amazon.

Really interested in a book on Shakepeare and Italy!!!

Thanks, just bought it for Kindle. I've read a bunch of books arguing for a specific true author; I'm looking forward to a good overview of the history and how it can become immoral to ask a simple question.

I suspect that what stunned the Great Gurus of Shakespearean authorship about Elizabeth Winkler were two factors: (1) The fact that she's so young, and (2) the fact that she isn't and makes no claim to being a Shakespeare scholar. The latter is measured in pounds (lbs.): How many books and how many articles have you written about Shakespeare, meaning, if you don't have the poundage [baggage?] how dare you ask ME, the so-and-so-and-so of Shakespearian scholarship your silly, childish, ignorant & heretical questions? The great thing about Elizabeth Winkler is that she's an iconoclast of unproven beliefs and myths. I'm looking forward to reading her book exactly for the reasons the Scholars derided. She is so NOT conceited and so NOT full of herself, that I expect to enjoy the book tremendously. Great interview.

Very interesting discussion, many thanks!

I fully agree with Winkler's high regard for Janet Malcolm, especially "The Silent Woman"--that book, run in its entirety in The New Yorker, impressed me in much the same way Charlton Ogburn's "The Mysterious William Shakespeare" struck me in late 1984.

I read her book the day it was officially released. Being already educated on the subject, I found it to be a perfect combination of facts already known and her personal input as an investigative journalist. If you have not read yet any of the great books out there on the Shakespeare authorship, this has everything you need to know on the side of truth. If you did, her book will give you access to places you must know about in order to form an educated opinion, and to people on both sides of the debate she brilliantly interviewed. I highly recommend Elizabeth's "Shakespeare Was a Woman - and Other Heresies." This is what real investigative journalism looks like.

What a beautiful, fascinating journalist! Great interview! Thank you. I wish Elizabeth would review my take on Marlowe called "The Malta Theory", and then maybe visit Malta along with Italy for her next article on Shakespeare. The likely connection of Marlowe, Malta, George Sandys, and Virgnia Colony is really a marvelous story just waiting to be told.

30:17 I came here after listening to Ms. Winkler's interview with Chris Hedges because I share her experience. I was not interested in the subject of her focus, Shakespeare, although it was fascinating, and I have been familiar with the issue. I was interested in the deep-seated dogmatism that prevails in academia and the unsettling fact that so many subjects are taboo in academia. My experience relates to unrelated figures. I had serendipitously come into the knowledge that many towering figures in Greek lore never existed. There was no Plato, for instance. "Plato" was not a proper name, but a common noun. There is good evidence for it. The realization makes quite a difference on how we understand the Platonic works. And Plato was only one of many Greek figures who presents the problem. Still, I found the orthodoxy of academics to such questions shocking. I now discuss the subject selectively and with a degree of resignation. Unfortunately, I cannot address it here with brevity.

My favorite "journalist looks at historical figures" is IF Stone's Trial of Socrates. The dogma needs to be shaken up.

I would suggest that in the absence of any proof of who the real Shakespeare was, the one in Stratford upon Avon was a convenience used to attract money into the town under false pretenses. There was an impoverished William Shakespeare living in squalor in London at that time according to the tax records. Was he from the village of Stratford five miles northeast of London? Was there a monument to Shakespeare in this village that may have disappeared during the Civil war? Was his family well off enough to provide the education and then fell into poverty? Is there any tax record of anyone named Shakespeare living in or around the village of Stratford in the fifteen fifty timeframe?

I read Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet in high school. They were narcotic level boring to me. But this whole story is very interesting to me. 60% through this book.

Ever since I read “Is Shakespeare dead” by M.Twain,so many years ago, I have wondered how an illiterate individual could write these classic plays. With that said I ordered your book today and look forward to receiving it and reading it soon. My initial thought when reading, through the years, various commentaries and critiques that perhaps the Queen was involved in many if not all of the plays. Just my opinion and I am looking forward to reading your book.❤

“Shakespeare was a woman,” “Shakespeare was Bacon,” “Shakespeare was Marlowe,” “Shakespeare was penned by 487 authors.” Muddying the waters will not derail the De Vere express.

To know or not to know about ‘William Shakespeare's..! Is William Shakespeare a pen name, and do we want to delve into the secrets and darker aspects of his past life? Who truly authored Shakespeare's works? Do we wish to uncover the mysteries and shadowy aspects of William Shakespeare's life, or whether he was indeed a pseudonym? Regardless of whether it was Edward De Vere or William Shakespeare himself, the renowned English poet, playwright, and actor remains one of the most significant literary figures in the history of the English language. He is often hailed as 'the world's pre-eminent dramatist.' Among his most celebrated creations are Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, The Tempest, Julius Caesar, King Lear, and A Midsummer Night's Dream, each leaving an enduring impact on global culture. Spanning both comedic and political theater, his contributions have enthralled audiences for over four centuries, and his influence continues to shape contemporary society. This version clarifies that Shakespeare was expressing his views on love and hate rather than trying to make them favor him. “Love me or hate me, both are in my favor. For if you love me I will always be in your heart; if you hate me I will always be in your mind.” William Shakespeare or Edward De Vere…?

Wow--2,000 views in just four weeks!

I wonder how Elizabeth feels about her book being ignored (nor yet reviewed) by her former employer, the Wall Street Journal?

Ms. Winkler, If you want to know the truth about Shakespeare, read my blogs. I live in Fairfax, VA, if you ever want to meet me and my wife over a cup of coffee. Sincerely, The Amazing Mystico.

I don’t know, like, I must be ignorant - forgive my ignorance, that is. How is the published quartos with William Shakespeare written on them, the sonnets published with William Shakespeare written on them - why are these 17th-century publishing companies producing these works with the name William Shakespeare?

"Queen" Elizabeth the First was a man. How else could "she" have demonstrated such clear-eyed leadership and astute political decision-making, apparently unburdened by feminine emotion? And no husband or children? Why are we still saying "Queen Elizabeth" and not recognizing one of England's greatest kings for who he was? And don't get me started on "Jane" Austen. "Jane" was creating complex male characters while the male characters of "her" female contemporaries were largely two-dimensional Gothic villains. What else could explain this discrepancy other than "Jane" really being "James"?

LOL. It's not a "moral problem" -- how histrionic -- merely a minor intellectual one. The majority of people who have examined the evidence conclude that Shakespeare of Stratford wrote the plays, with some assistance from Fletcher, Middleton, and a few others. The burden of proof is on the "doubters" to provide something more than innuendo, wishful thinking, and arguments from silence for any of their multitudinous alternatives.