In an account of the first 30 years of Shakespeare's life, Eric Sams controverts all orthodox editions, biographics and reference books. He reveals how, in conventional Shakespeare scholarship, the playwright's youth has been concealed within a web of elaborate literary theories which misrepresent his life and work, and reject, ignore, or misdate his early plays. Pioneering a revolution in our understanding of the early years, Sams exposes the gulf between received opinion and documented fact. Shakespeare, he carefully shows, was a disadvantaged country boy from an illiterate Catholic background, removed from school at the age of about 13 to help on the family farm. Far from being a late developer, he was a husband and father at 18, and an actor and writer of popular plays soon afterwards. Sams traces the impact of Shakespeare's upbringing in the language and imagery of his early comedies, histories and tragedies, not only those of the Folio editions but others, including the so-called "Bad Quartos", widely but wrongly assumed to have been the result of "memorial reconstruction by actors". Through detailed textual analysis, he argues compellingly against the established view that Shakespeare wrote nothing until his middle twenties, nor revised his own work.
| |||||||||||||||
Book Description
Editorial Reviews
From Library Journal
Sams, who edited Shakespeare's Lost Play: Edmund Ironside (St. Martin's, 1986), which he identified as a Shakespearean play, tosses a grenade into the polite world of Shakespearean scholarship in this polemical book. His premise is that modern biographers and textual scholars have misled everyone regarding the facts about Shakespeare's life and works. Basing his claims on documentary data about Shakespeare dating from 1509 to 1594, Sams argues that early biographical information is more reliable than the theories of modern scholars. He also argues that Shakespeare was successful in the London theater years earlier than conventional scholarship asserts, and that he regularly revised his work. Sams claims that "memorial construction" (the orthodox view that the Bad Quartos are corrupt texts reconstructed by rogue actors) is bizarre fantasy for which there is no evidence, instead insisting that the Bad Quartos are early versions of Shakespeare's plays that he later revised. If Sams is right, the dating of the entire canon will have to be revised. This book is sure to provoke heated debate in academic circles; the general reader will be fascinated, too.
Bryan Aubrey, Fairfield, Ia.
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc.
Bryan Aubrey, Fairfield, Ia.
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
8 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Gooch, Bryan N.S.,
By A Customer
This review is from: The Real Shakespeare: Retrieving the Early Years, 1564-1594 (Hardcover)
1.Eric Sams' The Real Shakespeare constitutes a determined attempt to
reconstruct the early part of the playwright's life. It shows Shakespeare not as
a late developer but as an early starter who assiduously revised his work and
who, in fact, was responsible for early dramas, including apparent source
texts, not usually accepted as part of the conventional canon. Clearly the result
of much work and contemplation of extant records and other details, The Real
Shakespeare looks initially at biographical issues: a Roman Catholic
Shakespeare leaves school, probably at the age of thirteen, to help with family
farm chores, becomes involved (as a clerk) with the legal profession (hence
the character of his hand-writing), marries Anne Hathaway (already pregnant),
and departs soon after for London to escape the consequences (whipping, at
the least) of poaching deer owned by the influential, anti-catholic Sir Thomas
Lacy. In London, Sams asserts, Shakespeare makes his connection with the
Shoreditch Theatre, working his way up the proverbial ladder as ostler,
call-boy, prompter and soon becomes a Queen's Man far earlier than
Schoenbaum et al. are inclined to allow (58).
2.Biographical issues, however, cannot be detached from literary matters (which
particularly dominate the second part of the book), and Sams, in looking at the
Bard's young life, also takes into account the work and comments of
contemporaries (e.g., Marlowe, Greene, Nashe, Spenser, et al.), the
Parnassus plays, and Willobie his Avisa (1594) before turning to the Sonnets,
the association with the 3rd Earl of Southampton, and the problem of the
dedication in the first edition. He then moves to a consideration of the "early
style" and ascription of both the 1589 and 1603 (Q1) Hamlet to
Shakespeare, as well as A Shrew (c.1588), The Troublesome Reign of King
John (c.1588), the first part of the Contention...(1594), and The True
Tragedies of Richard... (1595); also offered as possible candidates for
canonical authority are Faire Em and Locrine (of which there is, indeed, pace
Sams, p.166, a modern edition). Attention is also given to bad quartos and the
matter of memorial reconstruction, source-plays, derivative plays, dating,
"collaboration," so-called "stylometry," and handwriting (a script, Sams
suggests, of a law clerk suggesting links to the hand of Edmund Ironside
[c.1588]). Curiously, for this strongly argued book, which contends in a
detailed way with the conclusions of much twentieth-century scholarship
(references to contrary opinion are carefully included), there is no concluding
chapter, and the reader is left to pull the threads together. However, by way of
addendum, Sams provides a section headed "The Documents 1500-1594,"
205 biographical details and citations in chronological order, which under-pin
especially the reconstruction of the early (Schoenbaum's "lost") years; and a
bibliography (with + and * marks denoting items which support or counter
Sam's arguments). An index concludes the volume.
3.It is always important to review evidence for conventional knowledge, to
challenge the validity of accepted views, and to suggest plausible solutions to
bothersome problems. Yet, at times, the greater wisdom, unfortunately, lies in
uncertainty, in being sure of what one can and cannot know, and in
Shakespearean scholarship, the fields of speculation are rather broad. Given
the available documentation, many readers will find some of Sams' arguments,
while intriguing, still unconvincing and will prefer to rest with the more cautious
approach of Schoenbaun, Vickers, Wells, and others. The academic
community has not blindly or wilfully rejected solid evidence, and should not
be reproached for what might appear, to some critics, to be tradition-bound
precepts or unduly conservative empiricism.
4.Could Shakespeare have known about ostlers and law-clerks without being an
ostler or a law-clerk? Probably? Did he write Locrine? Almost certainly not
-- given the style, and if he did, why did he not revise it? If Shakespeare was
the dedicated reviser Sams claims that he was, why did he not rework the
questionable scenes in Titus and Pericles? Were all the source plays (e.g.,
King Lear and Famous Victories) really by Shakespeare? Doubt could enter
here. Does revision necessarily or "normally" mean that the resulting work will
manifest two separate styles? No, it does not; though the reference to the
Brahms' piano trio (Op.8) on p.187 is interesting, it does not, I think
sufficiently support the general point. And what is the difference between an
"ordinary" reader of Shakespeare and other kinds of readers (105)? Is one to
infer that academic readers and textual editors lose some sensitivity?
5.Certainly, Sams' The Real Shakespeare will shake the scholarly stage a little,
which is not a bad thing. But I should guess that, when the tremors have
subsided, many -- perhaps most -- of the props will be more or less where
they were before and others, which would be nice to have -- some certainty
about the early years, for instance -- will still be absent.
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Stimulating and intriguing book,
By
This review is from: The Real Shakespeare: Retrieving the Early Years, 1564-1594 (Hardcover)
This book is in large part an attack on the orthodox "Stratfordian" academic 'establishment'; not however from the point of view of someone claiming that a person other than William Shakespeare of Stratford Upon Avon wrote the works of Shakespeare (an impression which the cover picture and title might give at first glance). Rather, Eric Sams accepts that Shakespeare was Shakespeare, so to speak, but claims that the account of the writer's early life and literary development promulgated by 'orthodox" 20th Century British Shakespeare scholars is basically eroneous, and distorted by fashionable, unproved theories. His main claim is that Shakespeare started acting on, and writing for, the stage, much earlier than most modern academics allow, that he wrote plays (and perhaps pamphlets) other than the 'canonical' plays (i.e. those plays included in the First Folio of 1623, plus "Pericles"), and that he frequently revised or rewrote his own plays. In the first few chapters of the book Sams speculates on Shakespeare's early background and upbringing in Stratford. Sams sometimes brings in quotes from the plays to support his view of Shakespeare's early life, and this is perhaps a bit problematic, but on the whole his contentions are pretty convincing, and he persuasively argues that the oral traditions about Shakespeare should be taken seriously, and not simply dismissed as gossip or folk-tales. Sams' main bugbear is probably the 'memorial reconstruction' theory, which holds that the so-called "bad quartos" are the botched piratings of Shakespeare's plays by unscrupulous actors. Sams contends that there is absolutely no evidence for this theory, and instead favours the simpler and more convincing proposition that these "bad quartos" are in fact early versions of these plays by Shakespeare himself, which he later revised. There is much more in this book than I have mentioned above, and it is definitely well worth reading.
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Brilliant, stimulating, revelatory,
By
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Real Shakespeare: Retrieving the Early Years, 1564-1594 (Paperback)
I have nothing to add to the other reviews. I have read this dense, fascinating book about the young Shakespeare at least four times over ten years, and always find something new and stimulating in it. I usually follow up a more recent 'Shakespeare biography" with a re-read of Sams and find it utterly refreshing.
Sams' work is above all a triumph of common sense over the often fancier, hide bound and foolish nonsense published as somehow 'authoritative' about Shakespeare. Sams explicitly attacks the Academic Shakespeare industry where tenured professors and those aspiring to that rank must pay appropriate homage to their canonized predecessors even when they contradict themselves, treat obvious fictions and laughable improbabilities as facts, and repeat, with tendentious accretions of their own, received dogmas about Shakespeare, often with too little attention to what can be discovered about him from documents of his own time. Sams especially loves to mock the 20th century Academicians' disregard for the first written accounts of this renowned author, though their authors were no less distinguished as scholars and were much closer to his culture, his time, and had the advantage of interviewing neighbors and close descendants of his fellows -- who in some cases were distinguished literary men themselves and who would have had little incentive to lie or fabricate. Sams is especially valuable for his examination of "The Parnassus Plays" and "Willobie his Avisa", works which are easily demonstrated to be about a thinly disguised Shakespeare and his circle, including the Earl of Southampton. Moreover, there is good reason to believe "Willobie of Oxford" actually had first hand knowledge of Shakespeare's life, family and friends in Stratford. The similarity of the tale he tells of a poet, his closest friend -- a hugely wealthy, foppish young aristocrat -- and the deceitful woman with whom they both become involved is eerily similar to the supposed story of the Sonnets, providing a pre-echo of some of the preoccupations in that great collection: venereal disease, sexual ambiguity (especially on the part of the aristocrat), the intense closeness, despite the vast difference in station between poet and aristocrat, and the capricious and cruel "dark lady" -- with misogynistic generalizations about women made from her behavior. This provides a likely date for the composition of most of the sonnets, and a far more plausible suggestion of how they came to be published (much later than they were written) than one usually encounters. Sams' understanding of the hardscrabble farming milieu in which Shakespeare was born and raised, of the way life was actually lived by people of his station and background, and his instincts for how great artists tend to make their way in the world (based on his study of other artists from 'improbable' backgrounds who went on to great fame) are invaluable. No one will know "everything" about Shakespeare's daily life or actual personality; and Sams, though sensitive to what must have been his remarkable combination of steely ambition and personal charm, avoids trying to construct a "character", inevitably a fiction. Yet his understanding of how (again) writers and actors actually established themselves in that period, made a living, made useful connections (importantly with wealthy patrons) and indeed, how they also made enemies, puts many aspects of Shakespeare's early career into a persuasive, again, unglamorized or melodramatized context.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
