Great question. It's also one of the most frequent questions that I get. I have been teasing the release of a new Thomas North poem for months now, and I will be posting on it soon. It is indeed a "Shakespearean" poem. And once I publish that, I will start discussing the origin of and Shakespeare's role in the poems.
Is it not possible to argue that he original script was by W.S. - based on the work of others, North included - but that the quartos were adaptations for the stage, which begs the question of by whom, of course? At this moment, I think of W.S. as a great poet and adaptor of the work of others, including Kyd and North perhaps. This ties in better with the poems.
Well, a few brilliant people who do know all the evidence for (and accept) Thomas North's authorship of the plays that Shakespeare later adapted do still believe that Shakespeare was the literary genius who was improving North's former texts. But I would reserve judgment till I explain all the poems and sonnets over the next year.
yes, the poems and sonnets are an important remaining question. "first heir of my invention" and so on.
and why did all of the insiders only allude to North as the author behind Shakespeare, when Shakespeare also adapted other authors? and why did nobody ever mention North by name? Was it shameful or a secret?
and did Shakespeare really write all of these adaptations himself? For anti-Stratfordians who believe the guy could hardly write his own name, this is still a tall order.
What about "hand D" in The Booke of Sir Thomas More? Is it Shakespeare, or North, or someone else? They say it has "Shakespeare's poetic style"....
1) Right. Notice Shakespeare's dedication referring to "Venus and Adonis" as the "first heir of my invention" was written in 1593--even though he has already produced the early Italian comedies and English histories. That means he doesn't consider those works as coming from his own invention. 2) The insiders don't just allude to North as the author behind Shakespeare. Groatsworth of Wit includes a letter written to three scholars--Robert Greene, Christopher Marlowe, and Thomas North--imploring them to stop writing plays to the "upstart crow," Shakespeare--as he was getting all the credit for them. For example, the play by Greene that Shakespeare got credit for is Locrine. See also: https://dennismccarthy.substack.com/p/ben-jonson-knew-who-wrote-shakespeares and 3) Ironically, anti-Stratfordians have taken such an extreme position that they have to rationalize away all this info that is so devastating to Shakespeare: They have to ignore the title pages, ignore the bad quartos, ignore all the apocryphal plays, and **ignore all the insults written about Shakespeare while he was alive**--when they actually prove the case against Shakespeare. This intransigence by those who were clearly correct there was something up with authorship question is one of the reasons this mystery has taken 400 years to solve. (Finally, I haven't done a deep dive into Hand D and Sir Thomas More. Brief scans have yet to reveal much North.)
"Well, a few brilliant people who do know all the evidence for (and accept) Thomas North's authorship of the plays that Shakespeare later adapted do still believe that Shakespeare was the literary genius who was improving North's former texts."
Would you care to expound further on this? I am curious as to the backgrounds of these people. Also, I am wondering if their idea of "improving" means a) making them more fit for the tastes of the public stages of London or b) making them into even better literary masterpieces.
You also wrote: "But I would reserve judgment till I explain all the poems and sonnets over the next year."
Again, dying to read your theories on this...especially the sonnets.
Hope you come to California to speak! Please let those of us here that admire your work
I will definitely let you know when I come out there!
Dennis, if W.S. was something of a hack, how do you explain the poems?
Great question. It's also one of the most frequent questions that I get. I have been teasing the release of a new Thomas North poem for months now, and I will be posting on it soon. It is indeed a "Shakespearean" poem. And once I publish that, I will start discussing the origin of and Shakespeare's role in the poems.
Is it not possible to argue that he original script was by W.S. - based on the work of others, North included - but that the quartos were adaptations for the stage, which begs the question of by whom, of course? At this moment, I think of W.S. as a great poet and adaptor of the work of others, including Kyd and North perhaps. This ties in better with the poems.
Well, a few brilliant people who do know all the evidence for (and accept) Thomas North's authorship of the plays that Shakespeare later adapted do still believe that Shakespeare was the literary genius who was improving North's former texts. But I would reserve judgment till I explain all the poems and sonnets over the next year.
yes, the poems and sonnets are an important remaining question. "first heir of my invention" and so on.
and why did all of the insiders only allude to North as the author behind Shakespeare, when Shakespeare also adapted other authors? and why did nobody ever mention North by name? Was it shameful or a secret?
and did Shakespeare really write all of these adaptations himself? For anti-Stratfordians who believe the guy could hardly write his own name, this is still a tall order.
What about "hand D" in The Booke of Sir Thomas More? Is it Shakespeare, or North, or someone else? They say it has "Shakespeare's poetic style"....
1) Right. Notice Shakespeare's dedication referring to "Venus and Adonis" as the "first heir of my invention" was written in 1593--even though he has already produced the early Italian comedies and English histories. That means he doesn't consider those works as coming from his own invention. 2) The insiders don't just allude to North as the author behind Shakespeare. Groatsworth of Wit includes a letter written to three scholars--Robert Greene, Christopher Marlowe, and Thomas North--imploring them to stop writing plays to the "upstart crow," Shakespeare--as he was getting all the credit for them. For example, the play by Greene that Shakespeare got credit for is Locrine. See also: https://dennismccarthy.substack.com/p/ben-jonson-knew-who-wrote-shakespeares and 3) Ironically, anti-Stratfordians have taken such an extreme position that they have to rationalize away all this info that is so devastating to Shakespeare: They have to ignore the title pages, ignore the bad quartos, ignore all the apocryphal plays, and **ignore all the insults written about Shakespeare while he was alive**--when they actually prove the case against Shakespeare. This intransigence by those who were clearly correct there was something up with authorship question is one of the reasons this mystery has taken 400 years to solve. (Finally, I haven't done a deep dive into Hand D and Sir Thomas More. Brief scans have yet to reveal much North.)
Dennis, you wrote:
"Well, a few brilliant people who do know all the evidence for (and accept) Thomas North's authorship of the plays that Shakespeare later adapted do still believe that Shakespeare was the literary genius who was improving North's former texts."
Would you care to expound further on this? I am curious as to the backgrounds of these people. Also, I am wondering if their idea of "improving" means a) making them more fit for the tastes of the public stages of London or b) making them into even better literary masterpieces.
You also wrote: "But I would reserve judgment till I explain all the poems and sonnets over the next year."
Again, dying to read your theories on this...especially the sonnets.
-JDL