The many and varied reasons why Shakespeare couldn't be the author of his plays according to Anonymous afns on IMDB.
When the film Anonymous was launched, its message board on the imdb website erupted into conflict of a sort that was previously confined to the Shakespearean backroom. It has subsided over the years since, mainly because the Shakespeareans have been willing to duke it out to the last inconsistency and the Oxfordians have mostly retired to quieter climes.
Some of the high points, disproving Shakespeare's authorship, are listed here.
- His dad left some dung outside the house once (something that has become so much of an obsession with Mr Harris that I am writing a film script on the subject entitled 'Faecal Attraction)
- His house lacked indoor plumbing, central heating and almost certainly no electrical points. In fact, my god, his house is almost like something out of Elizabethan England.
- A satirical manuscript published over 150 years after his death described him as a pimp. To some doubters, this may be like relying for your knowledge of Regency Britain on Blackadder The Third but not to Mr Harris who sees clearly.
- He failed to remember the specific details of a marriage settlement which happened eight years previously, which proves that he wasn't as good at Law as was the Earl of Oxford
- Neither he nor his father were vegetarians (not original to Mr Harris but he endorsed this view).
- He worked for theatres which were little more than brothels and houses of ill repute excepting entirely the theatre companies run by Eddie of Oxford which were all very nice.
- Aubrey's 'Brief Lives' failed to mention Shakespeare except for the bit where it did.
- Someone who wrote a poem somewhere at some time probably didn't write that poem which proves that no-one at any time ever wrote anything under their own name.
- There is no point 9
- The plays are all about unrequited love. We know this because a twentieth century blogger wrote a poem in which Hamlet suffers unrequited love. Only people who suffer unrequited love can write plays about unrequited love and we know Shakespeare didn't suffer from unrequited love because his dad left poo outside the house (see point 1)
- See point 9.
- If Shakespeare wrote Sonnet 20 then that means he was a gayer. If Eddie of Oxford wrote Sonnet 20 then he was just someone who wished his son didn't have a willy so he could give him a good shagging.
- The Oxfordian theory is that the Earl of Oxford used Shakespeare as a 'front' so he could keep his identity hidden. This is almost identical to the beginning of 'The Taming of the Shrew' in which people make a commoner think he is a person of noble birth and everyone is on the joke because both stories feature the word 'deception'.
- The story of The Tempest is totally identical to the story of the Earl of Oxford in that both feature a disgraced nobleman in exile apart from the Tempest
- The story of Hamlet is totally identical to the story of the Earl of Oxford in that both feature a man whose father is murdered by his uncle and who feigns madness to cover up his search for the truth apart from the story of the Earl of Oxford
- The story of Comedy of Errors is totally identical to the story of the Earl of Oxford in that both feature two sets of identical...(That's enough p!sspoor reasons. Ed )
- Because his unique insight into Spencer's Usage enabled him to dismiss the entire evidence of the Prefaces since the word 'moniment' meant something else back then.
- Because you could sail from Verona to Milan on canals that nobody in Italy knew about at the time but were definitely in use for Oxford's visit.
- Because somebody, somewhere said Bohemia once DID have a seacoast and this trumps everything said by Jonson at the time and historians and geographers (and Bohemians) since.
- Because the character Sogliardo is Jonson satirising Shakespeare, whom everybody knew was De Vere so it was even funnier.
- Because nobody agrees on anything, therefore nothing is agreed, therefore nobody can contradict anything I say
- There are two point 22s..
- 22. Told you.
- Because when a character called William turns up in a Forest called Arden claiming to have been born there, this cannot be a reference to someone called William who was born in the Forest of Arden (well nearly - we're talking 100s of yards). It is obviously a reference to belted Earl called Edward who was born in Essex. No other meaning is possible.
- Because if you take the Ashbourne portrait and put on a 20' pole, wave it in an arc of 10 degrees and stand exactly 23 yards away from the base, it looks like an outtake from The Only Way is Essex.
- Because no one dared say that he didn't. Oxford was the Right True Heir, begotten on a Virgin Queen by no living man: the Holy Ghost. This Shakspur fellow was an Upstart Crow, an image hired by the Great Conspiracy to play the Man, and paraded to an adoring mob of pigeons. Anyone who said, "'ello, that's a dead parrot" would be seized by the Elizabethan Stalinist police and secretly hanged, drawn, and thirty-seconded before a crowd of ten thousands. All transcripts of torture and confession, and all records of arrest and execution would be burned at midnight in the Tower and their ashes scattered. All memories would be wiped. (Did I say these were alienElizabethan Stalinists?) Of course, everyone or no one or maybe only Ben Jonson (who wrote about it all the time in code) knew that the clown wasn't Shakespeare. But they didn't dare say so, except when they did, in perfectly obvious yet cunning ciphers. Their silence is proof. By my hand, this eleventh Day of January, in the Year of our Lord Oxford the four Hundredth and Sixty-Third,
- Because the people who say Shakespeare did write Shakespeare's plays are all mean bullies.
- Because Shakespeare of Stratford is BORING!!!!! Yeah, try making a film about him. You can't can you? Cause he's BORING!!!!!!!
DisquscommentSL