History Creator / WilliamShakespeare

30th Nov '16 9:25:09 PM Xtifr
Is there an issue? Send a Message


'''William Shakespeare''' (baptized 26 April 1564, died 23 April 1616[[labelnote:]] {both dates are from the old Julian Calendar, used in England throughout his life translated to the modern calendar, it would be May 6th and May 3rd respectively}[[/labelnote]]), [[SmallReferencePools the only playwright most people can name]], has been a major influence on English language fiction for 400 years. While most only know his plays through PopculturalOsmosis or [[SchoolStudyMedia English class]], the tropes he invented or popularized (to say nothing of a significant portion of the English language) are still with us today.

to:

'''William Shakespeare''' William Shakespeare (baptized 26 April 1564, died 23 April 1616[[labelnote:]] {both dates are from the old Julian Calendar, used in England throughout his life translated to the modern calendar, it would be May 6th and May 3rd respectively}[[/labelnote]]), [[SmallReferencePools the only playwright most people can name]], has been a major influence on English language fiction for 400 years. While most only know his plays through PopculturalOsmosis or [[SchoolStudyMedia English class]], the tropes he invented or popularized (to say nothing of a significant portion of the English language) are still with us today.
28th Oct '16 3:01:49 PM AntoniusMajor
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* CreatorCameo: He played Adam in ''Twelfth Night'' and The Ghost in ''Hamlet''

to:

* CreatorCameo: He most likely played Adam in ''Twelfth Night'' ''As You Like It'' and The Ghost in ''Hamlet''
3rd Oct '16 11:54:44 AM Nightsky
Is there an issue? Send a Message


For most contemporary scholars, this problem has become a quest to find the WordOfGod version of Shakespeare's plays when it seems likely all we really have is the WordOfStPaul at best and the WordOfDante at worst. A lot of the {{Bookworm}} types in there GreatBigLibraryofEverything have been less worried about who The Bard was, and more worried about what was actually written in his own words. While old Bill was alive its hard to tell what publications he might have officially sanctioned, many printed versions during his life-time were shabby bootlegs used as rip-offs by other theater troupes. Contemporary versions of the Swan of Avon's plays rely heavily on the WordOfStPaul via whats called the First Folio, a collection of his plays put together in 1623 by some actor pals from The King's Men. Around the 1700s, editors decided that some of the bootlegs were so top-notch that they must be the WordOfGod and they started mixing them with the First Folio. Since then, scholars have been in an echo chamber debating what can be considered authentically Shakespearean. For example, the ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' we know and love is actually a patchwork of the 1623 Folio and a longer copy published in 1603. Today some editions of ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' and ''Theatre/KingLear'' have include multiple versions of each play in one book, leaving readers to decide their own WordOfDante version to use. Since the National Poet of England didn't have a Xerox to print off an official copy and fax to his agent, any edition of his plays that claim to be straight from the Crow's mouth are, as far as we can be absolutely certain, actually just ascended {{Fanon}} with an academic stamp of approval. To make things even more complicated, almost all publications today have spelling and grammar changes to help modernize the text in order to [[YeOldeButcheredeEnglishe avoid misunderstandings]]. With all these changes in mind it becomes increasingly difficult to decide what counts as Shakespeare and what doesn't. Yet, for all these inconsistencies, the genius of the Immortal Bard is hard to deny; "confusion now hathe made his masterpiece."

to:

For most contemporary scholars, this problem has become a quest to find the WordOfGod version of Shakespeare's plays when it seems likely all we really have is the WordOfStPaul at best and the WordOfDante at worst. A lot of the {{Bookworm}} types in there their GreatBigLibraryofEverything have been less worried about who The Bard was, and more worried about what was actually written in his own words. While old Bill was alive its hard to tell what publications he might have officially sanctioned, sanctioned: many printed versions printed during his life-time were shabby bootlegs used as rip-offs by other theater troupes. troupes (the so-called "Bad Quartos"). Contemporary versions of the Swan of Avon's plays rely heavily on the WordOfStPaul via whats what's called the First Folio, a collection of his plays put together in 1623 by some actor pals from The King's Men. Around the 1700s, editors decided that some of the bootlegs bootleg printed copies were so top-notch that they must good or complete enough to be the WordOfGod WordOfGod, and they started mixing them with the First Folio. Since then, scholars have been in an echo chamber debating what can be considered authentically Shakespearean. For example, the ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' we know and love is actually a patchwork of the 1623 Folio and a longer copy published in 1603. Today some editions of ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' and ''Theatre/KingLear'' have include multiple versions of each play in one book, leaving readers to decide their own WordOfDante version to use. Since the National Poet of England didn't have a Xerox to print off an official copy and fax to his agent, any edition of his plays that claim to be straight from the Upstart Crow's mouth are, as far as we can be absolutely certain, actually just ascended {{Fanon}} with an academic stamp of approval. To make things even more complicated, almost all publications today have spelling and grammar changes to help modernize the text in order to [[YeOldeButcheredeEnglishe avoid misunderstandings]]. With all these changes in mind it becomes increasingly difficult to decide what counts as Shakespeare and what doesn't. Yet, for all these inconsistencies, the genius of the Immortal Bard is hard to deny; "confusion now hathe made his masterpiece."
2nd Oct '16 10:06:52 AM gemmabeta2
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* MissingEpisode: Records indicate that Shakespeare wrote plays entitled ''The History of Cardenio'' and ''Love Labour's Won'' (which is probably a sequel or something along those lines to ''Love's Labour's Lost''). Unfortunately, no copies of them are known to exist. An 18th-century play called ''Double Falsehood'' is thought to be a rewrite of ''Cardenio'' and was included in the Arden Shakespeare series in 2010. Arden credited the work to Shakespeare, John Fletcher (who appears to have collaborated with Shakespeare on the play or rewrote the play from Shakespeare's original script), and Lewis Theobald (a Restoration dramatist who claims to have "discovered" the play, and probably also rewrote the play to be closer to contemporary tastes). A study published in 2015 confirmed this.

to:

* MissingEpisode: Records indicate that Shakespeare wrote plays entitled ''The History of Cardenio'' and ''Love Labour's Won'' (which is probably a sequel or something along those lines to ''Love's Labour's Lost''). Unfortunately, no copies of them are known to exist. An 18th-century play called ''Double Falsehood'' is thought to be a rewrite of ''Cardenio'' and was included in the Arden Shakespeare series in 2010. Arden credited the work to Shakespeare, John Fletcher (who appears to have collaborated with Shakespeare on the play or rewrote the play from Shakespeare's original script), and Lewis Theobald (a Restoration dramatist who claims to have "discovered" the play, and probably also rewrote further edited the play to be closer make it more palatable to his contemporary tastes).audiences). A study published in 2015 confirmed this.
17th Sep '16 11:13:38 AM xXNoMoreXsXx
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

**Many modern readers are often shocked to hear that theatre was as low-brow a form of entertainment as it was in its day. When you consider that watching a Shakespeare play was basically the equivalent to watching The Hangover at its time it makes more sense.
19th Aug '16 12:28:30 AM Az_Tech341
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* PurpleProse: Sonnet 130 ("My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun") satirizes the tendency of other poets to make overwrought, faux-profound similes.

to:

* PurpleProse: Sonnet 130 ("My mistress' mistress's eyes are nothing like the sun") satirizes the tendency of other poets to make overwrought, faux-profound similes.
18th Aug '16 10:10:06 PM pyroclastic
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* PurpleProse: Sonnet 130 ("My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun") satirizes the tendency of other poets to make overwrought, faux-profound similes.
1st Aug '16 9:37:35 PM JulianLapostat
Is there an issue? Send a Message


In either case, the "evidence" cited by anti-Stratfordians that Shakespeare's works needed specialized knowledge in [[RenaissanceMan "history, mythology, law, medicine, geography, sailing, and the upper echelons of politics"]] to write so well about these subjects is not borne out by textual studies of the play. The plays are filled with anachronism, historical inaccuracies, propaganda and rumor, as well as quite a few errors in scientific and geographic facts. Moreover, Ben Jonson, Shakespeare's contemporary and friend who wrote the Essay of Dedication for the First Folio, lamented that Shakespeare knew very little Latin and Greek, in other words not someone who was a CunningLinguist by any means, perfectly matching the biographical record. The list of books that Shakespeare mentions in his will align well with the source material for his plays and they were chapbooks writte veracMoreover, Shakespeare borrowed all his plots (as was tradition at the time) and government censorship meant he could not depict contemporary life anyway. Shakespeare's plays are works of artistic genius which means that conventional notions of skill from later eras do not apply. It should also be noted that the authorship debate stems from the fact that there is very little known about Shakespeare's personality, his attitudes and the like. There are no letters or diaries attributed to Shakespeare. However, this attitude stems from the notion of an artist's "personality" which is anachronistic since it was only with UsefulNotes/{{Romanticism}} that the idea of the artist as celebrity came into being.

to:

In either case, the "evidence" cited by anti-Stratfordians that Shakespeare's works needed specialized knowledge in [[RenaissanceMan "history, mythology, law, medicine, geography, sailing, and the upper echelons of politics"]] to write so well about these subjects is not borne out by textual studies of the play. The plays are filled with anachronism, historical inaccuracies, propaganda and rumor, as well as quite a few errors in scientific and geographic facts. Moreover, Ben Jonson, Shakespeare's contemporary and friend who wrote the Essay of Dedication for the First Folio, lamented that Shakespeare knew very little Latin and Greek, in other words not someone who was a CunningLinguist by any means, perfectly matching the biographical record. The list of books that Shakespeare mentions in his will align well with the source material for his plays and they were chapbooks writte veracMoreover, written in vernacular. Moreover, Shakespeare borrowed all his plots (as was tradition at the time) and government censorship meant he could not depict contemporary life anyway. Shakespeare's plays are works of artistic genius which means that conventional notions of skill from later eras do not apply. It should also be noted that the authorship debate stems from the fact that there is very little known about Shakespeare's personality, his attitudes and the like. There are no letters or diaries attributed to Shakespeare. However, this attitude stems from the notion of an artist's "personality" which is anachronistic since it was only with UsefulNotes/{{Romanticism}} that the idea of the artist as celebrity came into being.
16th Jul '16 7:56:03 AM yisfidri
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* CrosscastRole: Any woman in a Shakespeare play as it was originally conceived, since, at the time, all actors were male. This adds an extra layer to a play like ''Much Ado About Nothing'', where a lot of the humor already comes from crossdressing.

to:

* CrosscastRole: Any woman in a Shakespeare play as it was originally conceived, since, at the time, all actors were male. This adds an extra layer to a play like ''Much Ado About Nothing'', ''Theatre/AsYouLikeIt'', where a lot of the humor already comes from crossdressing.



* RecursiveCrossdressing: Companies of actors in Shakespeare's day were entirely composed of men. So any women, such as Portia, Viola, Rosalind, or Julia, who dress up as boys for a disguise, would have been men dressed up as women dressed up as men.

to:

* RecursiveCrossdressing: Companies of actors in Shakespeare's day were entirely composed of men. So any women, such as Portia, Viola, Rosalind, Imogen or Julia, who dress up as boys for a disguise, would have been men dressed up as women dressed up as men.
30th Jun '16 10:08:04 AM Morgenthaler
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* BastardAngst: Comes up often in his works. Edmund from ''Theatre/KingLear'', John from ''Theatre/MuchAdoAboutNothing'' and Philip from ''Theatre/KingJohn'' are often freely labeled "the Bastard" and it causes them much angst.
This list shows the last 10 events of 217. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Creator.WilliamShakespeare