Тёмный

Panel Discussion: Thomas North and Edward de Vere 

Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship
Подписаться 4,8 тыс.
Просмотров 4,3 тыс.
50% 1

A lively panel discussion on the recent Michael Blanding book, “North by Shakespeare,” about Dennis McCarthy’s research on Sir Thomas North, and its relevance to Oxford and the Shakespeare authorship question. Moderated by Bob Meyers, featuring as panelists Bryan H. Wildenthal, Michael Blanding, and Dennis McCarthy.
This talk was presented at the Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship 2021 Annual Conference on Saturday, October 9, 2021, live over Zoom.
For more information, visit shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org
Michael Blanding is an investigative journalist whose work has appeared in the New York Times, Slate, WIRED, the Boston Globe Magazine, and other publications. He is the author of the New York Times bestseller, “The Map Thief: The Gripping Story of an Esteemed Rare-Map Dealer Who Made Millions Stealing Priceless Maps” (Gotham, 2014), and “North by Shakespeare: A Rogue Scholar’s Quest for the Truth Behind the Bard’s Work” (Hachette, 2021), among other books.
Dennis McCarthy is an independent researcher, co-author (with Professor June Schlueter) of “Thomas North’s 1555 Travel Journal: From Italy to Shakespeare” (Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2021), and author of “Here Be Dragons: How the Study of Animal and Plant Distributions Revolutionized Our Views of Life and Earth” (Oxford University Press, 2009), among other books.
A respected journalist at the San Diego Union and the Washington Post, Bob Meyers served for 19 years as president and chief operating officer of the National Press Foundation. He retired in 2014 with the title of President Emeritus. At the Washington Post, he was part of the paper’s Pulitzer Prize-winning Watergate investigation. He later served as director of the Harvard Journalism Fellowship for Advanced Studies in Public Health. As a freelance writer, his work has appeared in Newsweek, Rolling Stone, and Columbia Journalism Review, among others. He is the author of two books, one of which won the American Medical Writers Association Award for Excellence in Biomedical Writing. A member of the SOF Board of Trustees, he edits the popular “How I Became an Oxfordian” essay series on the SOF website. A former member of the Editorial Board of The Oxfordian, he is the new President of the SOF.
Bryan H. Wildenthal, J.D., is Professor of Law Emeritus, Thomas Jefferson School of Law (San Diego), and taught recently as a Visiting Professor at the University of San Diego School of Law. An expert on American constitutional history, he is the author of Native American Sovereignty on Trial (a 2003 textbook on law and history) and has published widely in leading law reviews, including a study of constitutional history cited favorably by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2010 and 2019. An active Oxfordian since 2012, he is the author of the book Early Shakespeare Authorship Doubts (2019). He has served the SOF as Trustee, Secretary, First Vice President, and Website Content Editor. In 2020, along with many SOF colleagues, he played a leading role in organizing the Oxfordian Centennial at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., celebrating the original publication of J. Thomas Looney’s groundbreaking book, “Shakespeare” Identified in Edward de Vere the Seventeenth Earl of Oxford.

Опубликовано:

 

28 окт 2021

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 26   
@MundaSquire
@MundaSquire 2 года назад
Fascinating discussion and opens new questions. Might Oxford have borrowed heavily from North, Ovid, and many other works, then reworked them with additions that at the time was enough for attribution? We might be wary of using modern outlook and contemporary ideas of copyright in looking at what went on during the 16th century. If de Vere is bring credited by contemporaries, they might have seen nothing wrong with his reworking or problems about authorship. Just thinking out loud.
@gmaureen
@gmaureen 2 года назад
I'm convinced no one person wrote these plays. I think multiple people simply copied and reworked existing materials. Maybe some worked together (a consortium?) and others worked alone, but the man from Stratford does not deserve credit for these works. He was an actor, but primarily a businessman, so possibly he bought some of theses plays and then sold them on or had them printed for fellow actors. Diana Price brings up really good points: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-GEQNWpo1PSs.html&ab_channel=KeirCutler
@rstritmatter
@rstritmatter 5 месяцев назад
It has long been known that North's Plutarch is a major source for Shakespeare. All that Blanding and McCarthy have done is to repackage that evidence for influence into one of authorship. They're arguments are dead on the vine.
@bertjilk3456
@bertjilk3456 Год назад
There seem to be convincing arguments in favour of several candidates. De Vere, North, Sackville... Could it be that the pseudonym/alonym "William Shakespeare" represented a collective, who all contributed to varying degrees? Co-authorship certainly wasn't unheard of. Perhaps multiple theories are correct...
@SAVANNAHEVENTS
@SAVANNAHEVENTS 11 месяцев назад
Precisely. Maybe one or two working close together? Or one name behind multiple names Either way...its a great way forward for new research.
@seanodonovan5451
@seanodonovan5451 2 года назад
Wonderful! Love the debate format. I would love to see more like this. Congratulations on the book Denis and Michael. It's a great read and an important addition to the subject. Thank you More and more I'm thinking that mad Delia (sic) was right all along. Just, she missed North.
@samansun
@samansun 2 года назад
Let's imagine in four centuries, the name "Penguin Booker" being revered as the greatest writer, whose plumage kept in the Penguinford museum for display.
@beaulah_califa9867
@beaulah_califa9867 2 года назад
Thomas North is this person's best guess but HOW DO THEY NAVIGATE ALL OF THE AFFIRMATIVE EVIDENCE AMASSED BY ALEXANDER WAUGH FOR THE EARL OF DE VERE.
@rstritmatter
@rstritmatter 5 месяцев назад
They ignore it. They're really good at suppressing any competing constructs and in general, it must be said, in over their heads on most of what they claim.
@patricktilton5377
@patricktilton5377 2 года назад
Would North have ever been in a position to bear the Canopy over the Queen, as the Poet who wrote the Sonnets says of himself? And he says it as if that honor didn't mean all that much to him: "Were it aught to me I bore the canopy?" i.e. "Did it mean much to me that I bore the canopy?" etc. Did knights bear Elizabeth's canopy ever? Don't we know for a fact that Oxford DID participate in that ceremonial function? It's little details such as these that make me gravitate towards Oxford and dismiss other rivals for the Bard's laurels. Also, the deciphering of the Sonnets title & dedication pages by Alexander Waugh that have clinched it in Oxford's favor -- beyond ALL doubt, for me anyway. "THESE.SONNETS.ALL.BY.EVER.THE.FORTH.T" ... with the letters spelling out "DE VERE" in an upside-down T-shaped rebus above the word 'FORTH' in that 19-column grid, the 4th 'T', etc. This info regarding North is important, but my hunch is that Oxford knew him and admired his work as a translator so much that North was as important a source to him as Ovid was. Just a side note here, but might not Hamlet's line about being mad north by northwest be some sly reference to North? Or is it merely a reference to England, as seen from somewhere in Denmark -- England being NNW of Elsinore? We Oxfordians have plenty of obsessions with Shakespearean uses of the word 'ever' (etc.), and I can imagine proponents of North-as-Shakespeare would have similar obsessions regarding the word 'north'. And I'm also fond of the interpretation for the title THE WINTER'S TALE being a pun in French, "Le Conte d'Hiver" which sounds just like "Le Compt d' E. Vere" ('The Earl E. Vere"). Clever, CLEVER!!! Oops . . . I did it myself, cuz there's an 'ever' in 'clever'!
@avlasting3507
@avlasting3507 9 месяцев назад
Queen Elizabeth I's canopy was borne by six knights. They were Sir Christopher Hatton, Sir Walter Mildmay, Sir Thomas Heneage, Sir Francis Walsingham, Sir James Croft, and Sir William Cecil.
@user-bp7qp6uk9p
@user-bp7qp6uk9p Месяц назад
I think England is more south west of Denmark
@caiolemes7224
@caiolemes7224 2 года назад
This turn the authorship question into such a mess, this is absolutely impossible to solve now hahaha.
@MundaSquire
@MundaSquire 2 года назад
It is confusing, isn't it. I still think authorship strongly points to Oxford but the way the works were put together and finalized may be something we'll never know unless some unexpected evidence pops up.
@sonofculloden2
@sonofculloden2 Год назад
Invention and translation? Arthur Golding translated tons - but is not put forth as an author or is he?
@martacarson5638
@martacarson5638 Месяц назад
Is it possible that Thomas North was a second nom de plume for Edward deVere?
@3dcpsolutions381
@3dcpsolutions381 2 года назад
The words are close but not “the exact same words” as stated. Just read what he puts on the screen. It would be impressive if the words were 100% the same BUT some what the same or similar is not “the exact same words”. I will look at this with an open mind and research it further.
@unramoneur4780
@unramoneur4780 10 месяцев назад
For me, most significant in this debate, Wildenthal repeatedly dismisses McCarthy's sheer volume of identical linguistic fingerprint in every play - there they are on the screen, page after page, every play and he never once indicates comprehension of the overwhelming preponderance of evidence. McCathy's slam-dunk. Was Oxford the middle-man from North to Shakspear/Shakespeare? The key, perhaps, perhaps not, may lie in researching North's and Oxford's relationship. That I havent seen beyond a couple of guesses.
@sonofculloden2
@sonofculloden2 Год назад
More holes in the Stratford man - nonetheless.
@SAVANNAHEVENTS
@SAVANNAHEVENTS 11 месяцев назад
Precisely. Though it seems the Stratford man will eventually give way to multiple authorship in formal working collaborations or a single author or two in partnership. Ironically this whole 'authorship' question and the resulting "Anti-Stratfordians vs The Oxfordians (or even the Northonians)...all roads lead to a small factory or author-ship wherein kindred spirits collaborated and published in more often than not 'Anonymous' circles. The conflict itself will empower Shakespearean studies and scholars on all sides for decades if education survives. Otherwise, there are always the plays and sonnets ..performed live hopefully..whether abridged or anonymous.
@debbieteel9904
@debbieteel9904 2 года назад
But, you all believe that Edward DeVere was the Shakespeare who may have "borrowed" for the plays, but not the Shakspere of Stratford. You still don't believe that Shakspere of Stratford could not have written the plays, sonnets at all?
@josephhewes3923
@josephhewes3923 2 года назад
There are too many holes in the Stratford man's resume. Among many other things, it is absolutely unfathomable that both Shaksper's parents and children were illiterate, and the only thing in Shaksper's own hand (signatures on wills) looks like a man who didn't know how to handle a pen. Shaksper did not write the plays. Period.
@caiolemes7224
@caiolemes7224 2 года назад
He could, but more and more, looks like not by himself. if you studied the subject long enough, is obvious something is not right, doesn't matters if you are stradfordian or oxfordian, no one has a comprehensive historyline that accounts for all the inconsistencies of the publications and it's contents. Unfortunately I've seen disengenuos information on both sides. I try to be open to change my mind, and check everything by myself.
@thomridgeway1438
@thomridgeway1438 7 месяцев назад
Aren't you falling lazily and sloppily into a Stratfordian trap here! North may indeed be a base for the work. He may even have been a victim of plagiarism; but what about the Rosicrucian Masonic codes that Alex Waugh and Roger Stritmayer have made such great emphasis upon? Codes now clearly broken and mathematically way beyond coincidence or chance. Codes and geomatria laid out in the works that directly relate to Dr John Dee as the code devisor and Edward Devere Earl of Oxford as author of the plays and no other. Are you now saying they are pure nonsense like all Stratfordians would? Surely it is these beyond anything else that proves that Oxford is the direct source. It is silently screaming at us!
Далее
Bob Meyers - Was It Really William?
47:04
Просмотров 12 тыс.
Good deed #standoff #meme
00:15
Просмотров 651 тыс.
would you eat this? #shorts
00:23
Просмотров 1,5 млн
James Warren's Shakespeare Revolution
48:06
Просмотров 4,7 тыс.
Robert Sapolsky: The Illusion of Free Will
2:58:34
Просмотров 321 тыс.
Katherine Chiljan - The First Folio Fraud
45:08
Просмотров 19 тыс.