Who Wrote Shakespeare? [Paperback]

John Michell (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: July 1, 1999

Was the famous poet and writer really a fraud and plagarist? Was his name really a pseudonym for a well-known contemporary figure? These questions have been debated since the 18th century. The facts about Shakespeare are surprisingly meagre, and contrast puzzlingly with the learned, courtly philosopher revealed in the sonnets and plays. Respected scholars and obsessive eccentrics have put forward many theories, suggesting that the works of Shakespeare were written by Francis Bacon, the Earl of Oxford, or Marlow. This is an investigation of the claims and counter-claims, reading like a series of detective stories. He lays out the evidence and the arguments for the various candidates, not forgetting Shakespeare himself, and provides a drily humorous commentary on the research and prejudices of their champions while adding insights of his own.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Michell, whose books include The New View over Atlantis and a study of Celtic and Norse symbolic landscapes, concedes that no conclusive case has ever been made for Ben Jonson, Francis Bacon or any of the other candidates alleged to have written the plays and poems commonly attributed to William Shakespeare. Yet in this unconvincing piece of shaky scholarship, he finds Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford, "a highly credible candidate," while the case for politician/theatrical patron William Stanley, Earl of Derby, is deemed "plausible on all levels." Worse, Michell endorses the theory that Christopher Marlowe was the principal author of 10 of Shakespeare's plays written before 1593, and he further hypothesizes that Marlowe, having survived his reported murder in 1593, went on to write more of the Bard's plays. Michell also speculates that Bacon secretly supported the production of Shakespeare's dramas. The best aspect of this lame study are the 116 fetching period illustrations.
Copyright 1996 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Product Details

• Paperback: 272 pages
• Publisher: Thames and Hudson (July 1, 1999)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0500281130
• ISBN-13: 978-0500281130
• Product Dimensions: 9.2 x 6.6 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (15 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,429,752 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

21 of 22 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Dive in... but keep your skepticism alert, November 9, 2002

By 

richardpinneau.com (Colorado) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   

This review is from: Who Wrote Shakespeare? (Paperback)

Michell presents one of the liveliest and most wide-ranging surveys of the ''Shakespeare authorship'' question. Refreshingly, his presentation is devoid of the rabies infecting most writers who have already wedded themselves to Stratfordian (orthodox), Baconian, Oxfordian, or Marlovian conclusions. He keeps his sense of humor about the ironies of the arguments, and gives the reader an appreciation of how easy it is for those who only read one viewpoint to feel convinced that their candidate and explanation are the be-all and end-all.

Unfortunately, one volume cannot do justice to all the different data, issues, and perspectives needing consideration. And although there is a considerable bibliography for further study, there are also unkind omissions: Michell makes many statements and interpretations without citing his sources. In the study of Shakespeare it is essential to go back to primary sources, following Hamlet's imperative: Believe none of us! When some of Michell's pronouncements are tracked down, it turns out that they are not established fact but vigorously debated questions.

Nevertheless, Michell's volume is a much better place to start surveying the issues than those of true believers populating much of the Oxfordian, Baconian, and Stratfordian popular ranks. Plus... it's an entertaining, fun read.

20 of 23 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A mystery without a resolution, November 22, 2000

By 

Brian Tung (Marina del Rey, CA USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Who Wrote Shakespeare? (Paperback)

In some ways, the Shakespeare authorship question is not well-formed. Without a doubt, William Shakespeare wrote the works attributed to him. The question, however, remains: Who was Shakespeare? The distinction isn't solely a matter of semantics. There are a few fleeting references to him in London notices of the day which make it clear he was already known in theater circles. However, the dearth of biographical details of the writer of the greatest plays in the English language--and possibly any language--sends some scholars into a flurry of speculation.

John Michell's book, Who Wrote Shakespeare?, is not outwardly a proponent of any particular line of speculation, but more a compelling survey of the main theories, including the orthodox theory--that the man from Stratford-upon-Avon was the responsible party. To distinguish this man from the famous author, in case they might be different, Michell writes "Shakespeare" only for the author, and "Shakspere" for the man whose supposedly backward upbringing is an inspiration for many "heretics"--those who believe that Shakspere could not have written the plays.

Michell begins by describing the author. Through the incredible breadth and depth of the plays, it becomes clear that Shakespeare had command of a wide range of knowledge--from law to the classics to court life, even to medicine. It seems impossible that any one person could have brought to bear so much learning, but Michell does well by presenting all of the challenges that any budding theorist must contend with. (Later, in fact, Michell devotes one chapter to the group theories, in which the plays were written by more than one person.)

He then proceeds to go through the candidates, one by one, starting with the most obvious one: William Shakspere. The most imposing obstacle that the Stratfordians--as the orthodox contingent is called--must contend with is not Shakspere's learning, for there are many years and details that are missing from his life story and he might have picked up his learning during any of the gaps. No, the most crushing blow is delivered by the legacy of this allegedly intensely literary man, who nonetheless did not teach his youngest daughter to read, and mentioned no books or manuscripts in his will. How, the heritics ask, could the greatest playwright in the history of literature leave his descendants so poor in education?

At this point, the amateur heretic sniffs the kill. But no other candidate for the Shakespeare mantle is safe, either. Everyone is suspect: Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, has the necessary learning, but he died in 1604, long before many of the plays were supposedly written. Francis Bacon lived long enough, to be sure, but the evidence in his favor is not strong.

The most intriguing candidate is Christopher Marlowe. He is known to have had a hand in many of the early Shakespeare plays, works unquestionably written by Marlowe have a style eerily similar (by quantitative metrics) to Shakespeare's, and unlike the other candidates, Marlowe was a professional writer who undoubtedly knew Shakespeare--whoever the latter was. The one problem is a thorny one: the official story is that Marlowe was murdered in 1593, long before even the Earl of Oxford.

However, Marlowe was involved in espionage, and his murder is shrouded in a faint cloud of suspicion. Michell presents the case that Marlowe did not die as was described in documents, but was spirited away to Italy, from where he later returned to write much and possibly most or all of the remaining Shakespeare canon. The narrative is brisk and engaging all throughout the book, but especially here in the cloak-and-dagger Marlovian drama.

In the end, readers expecting an answer to the question will be disappointed, but Michell warns his readers of that periodically. The real prize is a careful, balanced presentation of the facts and conjectures as they have been uncovered and presented throughout history; most anyone who begins this book will know something of the controversy, but rare is the reader who will not gain something of an appreciation for many of the men who would be Shakespeare.

19 of 22 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Will the Real Shakespeare(s) Please Step Forward!, January 30, 2001

By 

sweetmolly (RICHMOND, VA USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Who Wrote Shakespeare? (Paperback)

When it comes to the authorship of Shakespeare's plays and sonnets, the passions run high and the lines are rigid. John Mitchell's "Who Wrote Shakespeare" is a delightful departure. If you are expecting a definitive answer at the conclusion, you will be disappointed. Mr. Mitchell lays out a case for each of the main proponents in clear, non-academic (thank you Lord!) prose. He presents his modest open-minded conclusion, and lets the reader do the same.

The book is for the non-specialist who has a passing knowledge of Shakespeare's work and times. It led this reader many to other books; in other words, I was hooked. It is loaded with illustrations, many of which I'd never seen before. I read Ben Jonson's "Ode to Shakespeare" with fresh eyes. When I kept in mind that Jonson was a satirist, punster and humorist as well as a poet, I saw his Ode as less than straightforward.

Kit Marlowe is a constant thread through Shakespeare's early writing period. As always, Kit is mysterious, elusive and roguish. At the very least, he and Will collaborated and perhaps much more.

If you like a mystery, with as many red herrings as there are clues, this is your book. I don't think you will be disappointed. Grade A