humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare

Authorial Voice Crack'd:
Oxfordian Falsehood on Display

DAY TWO
Lynne Hunkers Down

On Feb 27, 7:43=A0am, "Ms. Mouse" wrote:

> I actually hadn't read what you'd written, Greg. Forgive me for not
> reading every single post on hlas.

Have you read the page
http://www.shakespearefellowship.org/Reviews/StritmatterAppleton.htm ?
It is corrupt.

> Roger knows as well as you and I do who marries Audrey.

I have evidence Roger does not who marries Audrey .
http://www.shakespearefellowship.org/Reviews/StritmatterAppleton.htm

But if he does know, why is he surely outright lying on his page?

> In his dissertation he wrote: "Possession is nine tenths of the law,

That is meaningless.
What could it mean to us?
What does it mean to Roger or you?
It is not a law. What is he talking about? Why are you repeating it?

Possession of filthy lies to honor Oxford is 100% of your credibility
gone.

Why? Just so Roger can take cheap shots at Shakespeare?

Your website is a public nuisance, Lynne. It misinforms by lying about
Touchstone, Audrey, and Will. Take it down or meet me here tomorrow.

> Touchstone possesses Audrey..." In addition he's seen the play several
> times--once with me, I believe--he has read it often, and we both
> watched the Branagh movie, awful though it was, at the SAA
> Conference.

I say Roger doesn't know and that if he does, he lies.

Change the site. I demand it. You will comply.

> He's simply made a slip here, as we all do oftentimes. I'll alert him
> to it when I speak to him.

This is DAY TWO of the Shakespeare Fellowship misinformation campaign
being asked to retract the words as they are wholly dishonest. Get on
it, young lady.

> A little charity here would not go amiss.

Your fellowship is determined to defame Shakespeare, it is written
into your mission, so your charity idea needs to start at home.

Roger doesn't make "slips" in Shakespeare's behalf.

Your website lies in order to hurt Shakespeare, and you will change
your site or this discussion is permanent.

> Mistakes are made often, by
> both sides.

You sound like Rumsfeld telling us orphanages have to be blown up to
hunt your own chosen enemy.

The website is dishonest, Lynne, not mistaken.

You are foolishly placating when you need damage control,
explanation, retraction, and a good lesson in fair reporting.

> I can point to many Stratfordian gaffes, but I try not to
> do so unless pushed.

Let me explain to the Shakespeare Fellowship that Authorial Voice is
the HOLY GRAIL of this entire study.

He who discovers/defines Authorial Voice is revealing Shakespeare
personally and intimately. It is not a casual exercise. And to see
Roger employ blatant dishonesty to achieve his goal is sickening.

Why did you go along with it?

Your website is abominable, Lynne, and you are aware of it, so take it
down. Don't wait for tomorrow.

> With regard to what Peter says about Mary Q of S as opposed to Mary
> Tudor, that was a really unfortunate mistake that had been picked up
> in the first small printing for the committee--I know because I was
> the one who picked it up--and corrected. Somehow in error it found its
> way back into the main printing. This kind of thing happens all the
> time, as I know from my own publications. I do hope Peter realises
> that to my knowledge, four of the five members of Roger's Dissertation
> Committee were Stratfordians, yet not one of them saw or pointed out
> the error. It was left to me, a non-scholar, a non-academic, and an
> Oxfordian, to do so.
>
> Best wishes,
> Mouse

Roger has no business ever speaking of Authorial Voice again. He blew
it with this insulting machination that YOU condone by leaving it up
for many years..

You will change your site whether it is against "your will" or not.
Do it today, Lynne, not tomorrow.

May I remind you how quickly and graciously Ross and Kathman repaired
their site when shown that the court of James was anywhere royal
business took place. They had worded it to lead to believe it meant
the Stratfordian Will was summoned to the court in London which was
not necessarily so. They repaierd the problem in hours, not days.

Stay vigilant, HLAS.
The Shakespeare Fellowship will not get away with this.
Their dishonest website will be fixed and soon.
Greg Reynolds
+ + + + +

For the record, here is the offensive wording on Roger's site that
uses falsehood to elevate Oxford as authorial voice:

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.

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