This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle, This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars, This other Eden, demi-paradise, This fortress built by Nature for herself Against infection and the hand of war, This happy breed of men, this little world, This precious stone set in the silver sea, Which serves it in the office of a wall Or as a moat defensive to a house, Against the envy of less happier lands,-- This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England. ~~William Shakespeare, Richard III

Saturday, October 8, 2011

What Would Shakespeare Do?

or rather...did Shakespeare do it?

That is the story driving the upcoming movie by Columbia Pictures Anonymous. The movie looks at the old rumor that William Shakespeare did not write all his famous plays; that he was just the front man for another writer who, for reasons to be revealed in the movie (politically based), wanted to remain anonymous.

You can watch a trailer here.

So what is this old rumor? Basically that the Earl of Oxford, not William Shakespeare, wrote all the plays. Who was the Earl of Oxford? A courtier in Queen Elizabeth I's court. What do I think of this old rumor and the movie based on it? I believe Shakespeare probably did write most of the plays and poems but could certainly have had some help along the way. As for the movie, I'll go watch it because it concerns one of my favorite time periods and historical figures (Queen E) and the idea behind it is certainly intriguing. Besides, the sets and costumes look gorgeous and that's reason enough for me to go see it (I'm always dying for a chance to see this time period on the big screen!).

Does it really matter if Shakespeare worked alone on his plays or not? They are still the wonderful masterpieces whether he wrote them or if someone else wrote them.

Coming to theaters 10/28.


  1. I think the idea persists because the belief that a "commoner" could be brilliant enough to have written the plays is unheard it must have been someone wealthy and educated. I don't believe that for a second. It's commonly known that the plays were performed for and watched by the "common" man. That and coupled with the idea that genius and brilliance is often something that occurs at birth - I don't think Shakespeare's plays had to be written by someone wealthy and educated. What do you think?

  2. I think you make a very good point. Plays were performed mainly for the "common" man so it would make sense that a "common" man would know what would entertain that type of crowd.