humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare

On Mar 17, 5:07=EF=BF=BDam, "Peter Farey" =

wrote:
> Alan Jones wrote:
>
> > The natural sense of "begetter" would seem to be
> > "inspirer". The poet is the "mother" who conceives
> > and brings forth the poem, but its seed was planted
> > by someone else, Mr W.H. =EF=BF=BDHe may be the subject of
> > the poem (though that does stretch the "begetter"
> > metaphor) or more likely the person who suggested
> > an idea or theme.
>
> This is of course the standard line, which ignores
> the very good points that Foster is making against
> such a theory. In fact I have been unable to find any
> attempt to refute the point he makes about the poet
> himself being the "onlie begetter".

MM:
The poet was William Shakespeare, who died in 1623. The "onlie
begetter," is clearly Mr. W. H. I'll leave it to the sagacity of the
readers, if they want to believe Farey's ridiculous theory that
Marlowe faked his death, etc., etc...

I don't care what Foster says, just read the quote. It clearly refers
to Mr. W. H.. Stratfordian theory overwhelmingly defeats
Marlovianism. Course, if anyone wants to go to fantasyland with
Marlovians, they can. :-)

> G. Blakemore
> Evans disagrees but (other than citing the exception
> which Foster himself identified and explained) he
> gives no reason for rejecting it.

MM:
Why don't we just forget these guys and read what was written by T.
T.? Hmmmm?? T. T. makes it clear that Mr. W. H. is the "onlie
begetter."

> I did actually ask
> Dave Kathman (who wrote an item on Mr. W.H. for the
> Oxford DNB) whether he could think of any attempt to
> refute Foster's evidence, but he could recall none
> other than the New Cambridge mention either.

MM:
Now what? More cavalry? Incredible. It's pretty simple, what was
written.

> Even if we ignore his claim that "begetter" in every
> other case means the poet, however,

MM:
Well? What about the timeline? Was Shakespeare dead or alive? Would
you mind telling us that? That would make a lot of difference.

> you appear to be
> forgetting the fact that there are 154 different poems
> (and thus 154 'ideas' or 'themes' to be suggested) in
> all, and no fewer than three different 'subjects'
> addressed in them. 'W.H.', on the other hand, is said
> to be the "onlie begetter".

MM:
His Sonnets had one main theme, Sat Guru Bhakti. Course, he discussed
a lot of versions or branches of it, and even discussed some personal
events, such as the Dark Lady. I would dismiss Mr. Farey's numbers,
154 and 3. Course, if anybody wants to believe them, go ahead.
That's right. W. H. is clearly seen as the "onlie begetter." Is that
tough one, Mr. Farey? :-)

> Incidentally, Foster's explanation of the "onlie" is
> that Thorpe is in fact 'certifying' that they are all
> by Shakespeare.

MM:
Well, there goes my respect for Mr. Foster. The "onlie," is about Mr.
W. H., not about certifying authorship by Shakespeare. Let's get
real.

> My own would be that whereas the
> "Shakespeare" plays were created to some extent by
> both Marlowe *and* Shakespeare the Sonnets are
> exclusively by the former. =EF=BF=BD

MM:
Shakespeare wrote the sonnets and his canon. Marlowe had his own
works. That's mine.

> (Personally, I'd have
> probably given Sonnet 145 to William,

MM:
Incredible. You're only going to give him ONE of his 154 sonnets?

> but I could
> be wrong,

MM:
You're wrong about so many things, IMO.

> or the writer of the 'dedication' may not
> have known it.)

MM:
Well, you just don't have much faith in the dedication. I think it is
right on accurate.

> Peter F.
>
>

Michael Martin