humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare

On Feb 26, 3:59=A0pm, Tom Reedy wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2:43=A0pm, Elizabeth wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 25, 1:23 pm, Tom Reedy wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 25, 2:51 pm, "Ms. Mouse" wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 25, 3:35 pm, Tom Reedy wrote:
>
> > > > > The Shakespeare-Oxford Society (http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/=
) is
> > > > > apparently so full of morons they can't even find a member literat=
e
> > > > > enough to edit their own "journal," The Oxfordian. Instead, they'v=
e
> > > > > chosen Dr. Michael Egan to do the job and take Stephanie Hughes' p=
lace
> > > > > (can anyone *really* replace Stephanie Hughes?).
>
> > > > > Egan, who I suppose would be termed a quasi-Oxfordian by Crowley, =
was
> > > > > lionized by Oxfordians on the Fellowship boards last year for his =
not-
> > > > > very-original theory that Thomas of Woodstock was written by
> > > > > Shakespeare. (Seehttp://www.shakespearefellowship.org/Reviews/jime=
nez.woodstock.htm).
> > > > > He is Scholar in Residence at Brigham Young University, Hawaii.
>
> > > > > Question: is this an upward academic move for someone from Brigham=

> > > > > Young University? If Egan is *not* an Oxfordian, can they still cl=
aim
> > > > > to be a peer-reviewed journal?
>
> > > > > Enquiring minds want to know!
>
> > > > > TR
>
> > > > Egan is neither an Oxfordian nor a Quasi-Oxfordian. He is a
> > > > Stratfordian who believes that "Shakespeare is Shakespeare."
>
> > > > Mouse
>
> > > From the SOS Web site:
>
> > > Welcome to The Oxfordian (ISSN 1521-3641), the PEER REVIEWED (my
> > > emphasis) journal published annually during the summer/fall by the
> > > Shakespeare Oxford Society. The Oxfordian is a professional
> > > publication that features papers providing indepth coverage of issues
> > > of importance to Shakespeare scholars. The Oxfordian welcomes
> > > submission of learned essays on three interrelated topics:
>
> > I think the Oxfordians should reconsider.
> > Egan misspelled 'indepth' It should be
> > in depth or in-depth.
>
> I noticed that also, but that's not Egan's error; that belongs to
> whoever put up that Web page.
>
> Come to think of it, perhaps they do need a Strat, if for no other
> reason than to teach them how to spell.

And afterwards maybe he can teach you too.

Mouse
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Important literary works of the Early Modern Period in English
> > > literature
> > > Shakespeare studies
> > > Shakespeare authorship issues
>
> > See, this is really what creeps me out because
> > every time the Oxfordians write 'Shakespeare'
> > they may mean Shacksper or Oxford.
>
> > That is a blatant propaganda device to
> > conflate the Shakespeare works with
> > Oxford.
>
> > Shame, shame on the Oxfordians.
>
> > > So if Egan isn't an Oxfordian, how can he edit an Oxfordian journal
> > > and it still call itself "peer-reviewed?"
>
> > This is a rhetorical question, right?
>
> No, =A0not at all. I presume what they mean when they write "peer-
> reviewed" is that the material was reviewed by other illiterate SOS
> Oxfordians. If Egan is neither of the two, how can it still be a peer-
> reviewed journal?
>
> TR
>
> - Hide quoted text -
>
>
>
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -