The Quest for Shakespeare (Hardcover)

~ (Author)
Key Phrases: safe with the queen, martyred priest, recusant families, John Shakespeare, William Shakespeare, New York (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Booklist

Clare Asquith’s Shadowplay (2005) argued from cryptic literary evidence that Shakespeare was a Catholic, necessarily clandestine during his era, when to be so entailed huge fines, arrest, and even execution. Eschewing Asquith’s method (merely pointing out a pun in the occasional sonnet), Pearce also concludes that Shakespeare was a Catholic and, indeed, that one must be prejudiced to insist otherwise. The evidence he cites shows that John Shakespeare’s will was based on a Catholic model; that John and son William each left bequests and executorship to Catholics; that Shakespeare’s daughters were named out of the Apocrypha (biblical writings by Catholic, but not Protestant, lights); that Shakespeare bought property that benefited Catholics, including a longtime venue for clandestine masses; that he was married by a Catholic priest miles away from his home parish; and so on and so on. Pearce also argues that Shakespeare’s talent may have led the authorities to wink at his Catholicism, as they did with the gifted composer William Byrd. It helps Pearce that, as usual, he’s a delight to read. --Ray Olson

Product Description

Highly regarded and best-selling literary writer and teacher, Joseph Pearce presents a stimulating and vivid biography of the world's most revered writer that is sure to be controversial. Unabashedly provocative, with scholarship, insight and keen observation, Pearce strives to separate historical fact from fiction about the beloved Bard.

Shakespeare is not only one of the greatest figures in human history, he is also one of the most controversial and one of the most elusive. He is famous and yet almost unknown. Who was he? What were his beliefs? Can we really understand his plays and his poetry if we don't know the man who wrote them?

These are some of the questions that are asked and answered in this gripping and engaging study of the world's greatest ever poet. The Quest for Shakespeare claims that books about the Bard have got him totally wrong. They misread the man and misread the work. The true Shakespeare has eluded the grasp of the critics. Dealing with the facts of Shakespeare's life and times, Pearce's quest leads to the inescapable conclusion that Shakespeare was a believing Catholic living in very anti-Catholic times.

Many of his friends and family were persecuted, and even executed, for their Catholic faith. And yet he seems to have avoided any notable persecution himself. How did he do this? How did he respond to the persecution of his friends and family? What did he say about the dreadful and intolerant times in which he found himself? The Quest for Shakespeare answers these questions in ways that will enlighten and astonish those who love Shakespeare's work, and that will shock and outrage many of his critics. This book is full of surprises for beginner and expert alike.

"Joseph Pearce writes piercingly brilliant books. This is one of them. He usually writes dramatic biographies. This is not one of them. It is not a biography and it is the least dramatic book he has written. But it is also the most important one. To see its importance, try the following thought-experiment. Imagine a book that convincingly proved that Homer was a Jew, or that Milton was a lapsed Catholic, or that Dante was a proto-Protestant. The idea would have far-ranging consequences. It would cast a new light on everything we knew about Homer, or Milton, or Dante. In his next book Pearce will trace the consequences of Shakespeare's Catholicism in his plays. In this book, he proves it historically. I mean proves it. (Pearce would make a formidable lawyer.) The evidence is simply overwhelming."
-- Peter Kreeft, Ph.D., Boston College, Author, Summa of the Summa

"I've long suspected that there was a deep Catholic sensibility in the plays of Shakespeare -- an emphasis on man's powerlessness without grace, yet also an openness to the sacramentality of nature, and to the energetic work of dutiful yet often mistrusted or despised servants. Pearce shows that Shakespeare himself was such a dutiful servant, ever dutiful to the Queen, but to God first. He does not leap to conclusions, but builds a case that is meticulous, reasonable, and convincing."
-- Anthony Esolen, Ph.D., Providence College Professor of Renaissance English

"Joseph Pearce has brought together here a mass of material on the vexed question as to Shakespeare's religious affiliation -- a question which scholars have traditionally tried sedulously to ignore. But it is a question of more than merely neutral historic curiosity. Readers, I feel sure, will be quickly drawn in to the matter. Once again, we owe Mr. Pearce a great debt."
-- Thomas Howard, Ph.D. Author, Dove Descending: T. S. Eliot's Four Quartets

"What more is there to be said about William Shakespeare? Yet the supply of books on the great dramatist is never ending. Now, however, there is a new reason for this supply. The religion of Shakespeare, and specifically his Catholicism, is now recognized as a `hot topic' both in the academic and the publishing world. And now Joseph Pearce, long recognized as a brilliant writer on great English Catholics, has gone back in The Quest for Shakespeare to this greatest of English Catholics, showing precisely how his greatness consists in his hidden Catholicism. This is a book that bodes well to proving a literary masterpiece."
-- Peter Milward, S.J. Author, Shakespeare the Papist

"Pearce writes with historical insight on one hand and poetic imagination on the other. Perhaps our greatest living biographer, Pearce has the uncanny ability to get into the minds, hopes, fears, and motivations of his subjects."
-- Bradley J. Birzer, Ph.D. Author, J. R. R. Tolkien's Sanctifying Myth

"Practicing the best virtues of detective, lawyer, scholar, and storyteller, Joseph Pearce convincingly reconstructs the historical crucible which produced the world's greatest poet. His explication of how Shakespeare was shaped by realities of personal courage, political danger, and eternal sacramental love will unshutter long obscured lamps within the plays and poems for every reader."
-- Gene Fendt, Ph.D., University of Nebraska, Author, Is Hamlet a Christian Drama?

Product Details

• Hardcover: 216 pages
• Publisher: Ignatius Press (April 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1586172247
• ISBN-13: 978-1586172244
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.3 x 1.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 15.2 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (18 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #185,591 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

38 of 44 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Wonderful book, May 5, 2008

By	Stephen Moser - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Joseph Pearce proves Shakespeare's Catholicism with such a resounding slam dunk that it seems pointless to prolong any argument on the issue. Shakespeare was Catholic. Deal with it. It's time now to proceed to a serious discussion of the implications of this fact. And there are plenty of implications.

I believe this book is going to have ramifications beyond even what the author might expect. By that, I mean the way it may affect one on a personal level. For anyone (such as myself) who was born into Protestantism and who has English ancestry, it's very sobering to be reminded by the historical facts presented in this book that not only were all of our English ancestors Catholic, but that, in all likelihood, our families became Protestants due to the considerable pressure of the state, and not by choice. It is also a bit painful when reading the biographical sketches of the various personalities whose lives touched Shakespeare, each of whom responded to the Elizabethan reign of terror in different ways, to consider how each of us may be remembered by future generations.

20 of 24 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars such stuff as dreams are made of , June 14, 2008

By	Kimberley Wilson (VA USA) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

Joseph Pearce has written the most delightful book on Shakespeare I've ever come across. First, because the man is truly a gifted writer and has a sense of humor. Second, because he quickly demolishes the many silly myths and weird theories around Shakespeare's life. He pokes gentle fun at the folks who think Elizabeth I wrote the plays, or Daniel Dafoe, or the Earl of Oxford. Next he puts those who want to use Shakespeare to make their own point about sex and religion in their ignoble places. Then he swiftly goes on to the gist of the book. Did Shakespeare in some form or fashion hang on to his Catholic faith in spite of the terrible persecution of the times?

By looking at the evidence Pearce says yes, probably. His father was a discrete but resolute Catholic, his daughter Susanna was also a recussant. He was married by an ordained priest and lived in a town that was known for being a center of hard headed Catholicism. Like William Byrd he was probably excruciatingly careful--- he'd seen relatives and friends jailed and or killed for being Catholic afterall.

Quest for Shakespeare is quick, clever and charming. I'm so glad I bought it.

30 of 39 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars "The Play's The Thing", May 26, 2008

By	Stanley H. Nemeth (Garden Grove, CA United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

This book consists of three sections, an investigation into the religious allegiance of Shakespeare the man, a proposed theory for the best way to read his works, and an examination of "King Lear" in light of that theory. The first section, unfortunately, is too largely given over to a frankly tiresome rehashing of the conclusions of such recent journalists and scholars as Michael Wood, Peter Milward, Clare Asquith, and Mutschmann and Wentersdorf on Shakespeare and Catholicism. The evidence presented identifies Shakespeare's father and daughter clearly as recusant Catholics, but leaves Shakepeare's own position as a recusant Catholic pretty much a matter of likely supposition to the very end. Supposition, in fact, comes to play so heavy a part in this section of the book that one begins to suspect Pearce's wishes as much as anything else may be the father of his thoughts. Despite his welcome and pretty consistent qualifying, his tone in places resembles the too flat, eager certitude that used to distinguish the teaching style of grade school nuns. Still, I would call this the best part of the book. Pearce's skills as a historian, in my view, far outweigh his strengths later in the book as a literary critic.

Part Two, a proposal on how to read Shakespeare properly, while it convincingly rules the a-historical, post-modern relativists out of court, becomes itself equally preposterous in its claim that "if Shakespeare was a Catholic, or was greatly influenced by the Catholicism of his parents and the persecution that surrounded the practice of Catholicism in his day, it forces us to reread the plays in an entirely new light." This sounds like not much more than a publisher's blurb for Pearce's next book, which is already, I understand, in the planning stages. At the same time, Pearce himself recognizes "the perspective of tradition-oriented critics...[and] the evident clarity of moral vision that they had always perceived in the plays," so perhaps it's not yet necessary for us to toss the Shakespearean criticism of Maynard Mack, John Danby, David Bevington, or C.S.Lewis among others into the furnace after all. Pearce's suggested way of reading is to understand first an author's belief system so as better to discern what must necessarily be present in a specific literary work. Without denying the reality of an author grounded in history and beliefs, I submit that this procedure is to go about things just backwards. It is unfortunately a revival of what the New Critics rightly pilloried many years ago as the "intentional fallacy." They suggested as a much better mode of approach trying to render through close reading the highest possible justice to what the work itself demonstrably or implicitly contained, to be a reader on whom nothing was lost, rather than one so attuned to preconceptions about an author's belief system as to be in danger of reading things not actually present into a specific work of art, while perhaps simultaneously missing what is there.

Part Three, Pearce's reading of "King Lear" as an unlikely variant of the "divine comedy", in my view bypasses exactly what is essential and from a Christian perspective (Catholic, if you will) what in fact makes the tragedy shockingly and unbearably sad. Just as "Beowulf" is a pagan work retold by a Christian author, "Lear" is a work by a Christian author which is set is pre-Christian Britain. Cordelia and Edgar are what some learned Elizabethans would have identified ethically as "natural Christians." Theirs are the charitable works and "nature" upon which grace will later build. However important charitable human behavior is, though, the play argues that it alone is not enough finally to make our lives bearable in this world. What with its contradictory, disputable attitudes toward the gods, the world of "Lear" is a world desperately in need of an actual Redeemer, one who has yet to appear in human history. The play ends in unrelievable sadness, with the King, in an unrecognized prefiguring of the Pieta, holding the broken body of his virtuous child cradled in his arms. This shocking event is Shakespeare's own addition to the traditional tale - help comes by chance just moments too late to save Cordelia, and Lear experiences ultimate misery. If the heartbroken Lear dies of joy imagining his dead daughter is reviving, it's important to remember that he is mistaken in this assumption. In the pre-Christian world of the play, we are indeed the most miserable of creatures - the death of the wonderful Cordelia lacks any meaning deeper than misfortune nor provides any solid ground for patience in similar trials of affliction. If this is Catholic art after all, it is informed, I'd argue, by a much tougher vision than Joseph Pearce with his notion of a "divine comedy" oddly present in its ostensibly pagan world has recognized.