humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare

>> Elizabeth wrote:
> > >
> > > Gee, Marlowe has nearly
> > > ten times as many results as Oxford.
.
> Art Neuendorffer wrote:
> >
> > Almost all 62,300 for [sic] "edward de vere" sites
> > present him as an authorship candidate.
> >
> > Only a tiny fraction of "francis bacon" & "christopher marlowe"
> > present them as an [sic] authorship candidate.
.
nordicskiv2 wrote:
>
> Well, of course, Art -- what did you expect? Christopher Marlowe
> was a poet and dramatist of great renown, so naturally most of the
> available information highlights his accomplishments in those areas.
> Only a very small fraction of Marlowe's admirers (most of them on
> the far lunatic fringe) regard him as the possible author of the
> Shakespeare canon; the "tiny fraction" to which you allude comes
> almost entirely from the lunatic fringe with its crackpot conspiracy
> theories.

Well, Peter Farey is an honorary Strat.
.
nordicskiv2 wrote:
>
> By the same token, Francis Bacon was a philosopher and statesman
> of distinction, so naturally most of the available information highlights
> his accomplishments in those areas.

You don't seem to have any problem
with Bacon's reputation as a pederast.

> Only a very small fraction of
> Bacon's admirers (most of them very far out on the lunatic fringe)
> regard him as the possible author of the Shakespeare canon; the
> "tiny fraction" to which you allude comes almost entirely from the
> aforementioned lunatic fringe with its crackpot cryptographic
> "evidence."

> By contrast, Oxford was only a minor court poet capable at best of
> workmanlike craftsmanship; his skill as a playwright cannot be
> reliably assessed, as none of his works in that genre survives.

But it did!

> He
> did not win renown in battle as many of his peers did, nor did he
> exhibit any particular skill in diplomacy, the law, scholarship, or
> other fields of human endeavor. He was not even a successful
> entrepreneur, having failed to secure the tin mining concessions that
> he sought. In fact, were it not for Looney's lunacy, Oxford would
> have been all but forgotten -- he would be at best anthologized as a
> minor Elizabethan court poet. In Oxford's case, the lunatic fringe
> interested in him as possible author of the Shakespeare canon
> constitutes almost the entire contemporary interest in him, apart from
> that of a few professional scholars -- he is not memorable for any
> other reason. Thus it is not in the least surprising that "Almost all
> 62,300 for [sic] "edward de vere" sites present his [sic] as an
> authorship candidate" -- in Oxford's case, almost *all* the
> interest comes from the lunatic fringe.

So called lunatic fringe:
..........................
David McCullough
Sigmund Freud
Derek Jacobi
Robin Williams
Paul H. Nitze
Clifton Fadiman
Justice Harry A. Blackmun
Justice John Paul Stevens
Justice Lewis F. Powell
..........................
Art Neuendorffer