humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare

On Apr 12, 6:21 pm, Greg Reynolds wrote:
> > Greg Reynolds wrote:
>
> > > Hand me an Oxfordian book or essay and i will scratch out every
> > > conditional phrase (the Oxfordian mainstays such as generally
> > > accepted, known to be, perhaps, leads to believe, could only mean, and
> > > we may ascribe, although no evidence exists ... must have)
>
> > It's like waiting in a traditional Shakespeare bio
> > for the conditional phrase to work.
>
> I just came home from Second Hand Books. i was selling CDs and books
> and had time to wait while they appraised my stuff.
>
> So I went to the Shakespeare section and tried my experiment. In about
> 15 minutes I found it works not only on Oxfordian books, but also on
> Nevillian books!
>
> I pulled down Mark Anderson's book, very handsome and authoritative
> with excellent art and a healthy price tag of 16.98 USD in a second
> hand shop.
>
> And I opened to pages ending in 9, looking for the "conditional words"
> that are the essential structural support of Oxfordianism.
>
> Page "Fluff Words" needed to portray Oxford as Shakespeare
>
> 9 "would have become"
> 19 "sensations that would have struck [Oxford]"
> 29 "would have found"
> 39 "as far as can be determined
> "may well have"
> 49 "may very well have"
> 59 "may often have been"
> 69 "would have been"
> "probably"
> 79 "would" used five times in two paragraphs
> "would certainly have been noted"
> 89 "would have caught glimpses"
> 99 "would have passed"
>
> So, Mark Anderson's writing convinced me he would have less pages if
> he built on fact and not all these outside conditions that he speaks
> for with such authority.
>
> Then I opened "Truth Will Out" by James and Rubinstein. They stake
> their reputations on Henry Neville being the author of Shakespeare's
> poems and plays. Same technique though more extreme (probably because
> when two people work together they each hope the other one knows what
> they're talking about).
>
> i opened to pages ending in 5 and lightly scanned for the "conditional
> words" that are the only visible support for the theory. To wit:
>
> Page "Fluff Words" needed to portray Neville as Shakespeare
>
> 5 "would have received"
> 15 "does seem" "would have had"
> 25 "has also been speculated"
> 35 "is fair to say" "perhaps"
> 45 [sorry, can't make out my note]
> 55 [sorry, can't make out my note]
> 65 "certainly suggest a link"
> 75 "it would of course be"
> 85 "presumably"
> 95 "there is general agrement"
> 105 the first two sentences contain "probably"
> the third sentence contains "apparently"
> the fourth and fifth sentences contain "probably"
> 115 "it is at least plausible"
> 125 "it is thus tempting to assume"
> 135 "may well have been meant"
> 145 "which would probably"
> 155 "would clearly indicate"
> 165 "if this can be said"
> 175 "the inescapable message seems to be"
>
> That concluded my study because my offer was ready.
>
> So you see, it is generally agreed it would of course be presumably
> possible and may well have been the inescapable assumption ENOUGH
> ALREADY #&%@*!
>
> These authors insult those of us who are actually paying attention.
>
> Now for the Class project (and I would like Bob Grumman to help
> supervise this exercise as he is resident neologist and an educator).
>
> We are in need of the word that defines this type of detour/
> distraction employed by antiStratfordians to sidestep the area where
> other authors simply state the facts. I have called them conditional
> words, and fluff words. But certainly there is a more apt word that
> describes the words/phrases, the practice of lulling the reader into a
> feeling he is learning, and the whole letdown of reading endless
> factless books written to hurt Shakespeare.
>
> Submit your ideas here. If you were once Oxfordian just because of
> your lazy reading skills and now see that you were hoodwinked, your
> ideas are most welcome.
>
> Greg Reynolds

OK, how about "wishumentation?" The authors in question clearly WISH
they had DOCUMENTATION to support their claims, so they use weasel
words to give the appearance of documentary support. Hmm, perhaps
"weaselumentation" is better.