humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare

Oxfordian Falsehood on Display


DAY ONE

I brought this to your attention yesterday in a thread that was
frequented by a member of the Shakespeare Fellowship [1], yet there
was no response. Worse, there was no explanation/retraction/apology!

What does a Fellow have to do to get some justice around here?

It is one thing to interpret creatively, something else entirely to
misinform and mislead your readers for the sole purpose of maligning
an author. And to abuse that author's own writings and characters to
mischaracterize that author is reprehensible.

I now direct you (again) to an Oxfordian website where outright deceit
is neeed to credit Oxford.

http://www.shakespearefellowship.org/Reviews/StritmatterAppleton.htm

The reviewer of the Appleton book tells us in the Notes section
that...

Martin's sobriquet incidentally furnishes the original for the Puritan
hedge-priest Sir Oliver Martext in As you Like It who performs the
marriage of William to Audrey over the vociferous objections of the
authorial satirist Touchstone, a passage thought by Alex McNeil ("Come
Sweet Audrey, We Must be Married, Or We Must Live in Bawdry,"
unpublished manuscript, presented at the 23rd annual SOS conference in
Newton MA, November 11-14, 1999), among others, to be a satirical
allegory of the alienation of the Shakespeare corpus, symbolized in
the figure of Audrey, to the Stratford William.
+ + +

In this footnote [2], the reviewer, Dr. Roger Stritttmatter, plainly
states that William marries Audrey in As You Like It. And that the
Earl of Oxford as author, in the character of Touchstone, speaks in
the authorial voice.

I don't want a pamphlet war with Roger.
Just that he justify his words or retract them.

Anyone who read or saw As You Like It would know that William DOES
NOT
marry Audrey. In fact, Audrey marries Touchstone!

Roger thought Oxford was making fun of rustic Shakspere.
But Roger did not read or comprehend the play or these characters.
Will the official SF website continue to profess that Touchstone is
the authorial voice?
If so, the true author of Shakespeare voices to us that he marries a
bumpkin.
His clowning days are done and he retires to the country.

Since Roger is dismally mistaken as to who marries, I wonder how he
and the Shakespeare Fellowship will handle this gaping atrocity of a
hatchet job of a mudsling and a slippery grasp of "authorial voice."

Why have no Oxfordians since 1999 known any better to help Roger?

Roger throws this fib into his footnote, the last place an honest
author can clarify and verify.
Not a good spot for an outright lie.

If Roger wants to mislead you to believe Oxford indeed wrote Pasquill
Cavaliero, no qualms there.
When he outright lies us using Shakespeare's own characters to falsely
malign Shakespeare and dishonestly promote Oxford, that is when I say:

"Dr. Stritmatter, TEAR DOWN THIS WEBSITE"

( http://www.shakespearefellowship.org/Reviews/StritmatterAppleton.htm
)

I ask all HLAS to stay vigilant.
We will force the Shakespeare Fellowship to stop this campaign of
deceit.

Greg Reynolds [3]



These are my footnotes; and they they will be helpful footnotes, not
deceitful ones:

1
These are the words of Lynne Kositsky, "Mouse, who belongs to the SF"
who has had every opportunity to disagree with Roger's misleading
account of Touchstone and Audrey and so appears instead to agree with
it.

2
Here is the context of Roger's review that his footnote 2 references:
"The Anglican establishmentwas caught in a trap. For a Bishop to
debate with a pseudonymous satirical rogue like Martin Marprelate [2]
constituted an unacceptable loss of dignity. On the other hand, a
failure to reply allowed Martin's scurrilous rumor-mongering and
heretical theology pass unchallenged. The solution was to hire Thomas
Nashe and some of his friends to rebut Martin with his own undignified
rhetoric. The pamphlet war which ensued was bitter, sometimes verging
on the apocalyptic: Martin's ecclesiastical enemies, who adopted
colorful pseudonyms of their own -Cuthbert Curry-Knave, Marphorius,
and Pasquill Caveliero of England -- threatened him with imminent
death and dismemberment when the pursuivants finally caught up with
him. These ambunctious civil servants threw Martin's satirical wit
right back in his face. In his first pamphlet (figure 1) Pasquill
promised that he had been "dubd for his service at home...for the
clean breaking of his staffe upon Martin's face" and predicted that
Martin would find "no other refuge but to runne into a hole, and die
as he lived, belching" (A2) [3]. The "war of words," as Ms. Appleton
terms it, had been joined."

3
Want to read something funny? Roger tells us that...
"Elizabeth Appleton is a sharp-eyed reader..."
At least he's mastered irony.