Who was Shakespeare really?
So it’s Friday, and that means it’s opening night for a few good movies coming our way. One that maybe of particular interest to literary nerds is the movie Anonymous. The film is a semi-biographical flick, or in the words of its director Roland Emmerich it’s a “political thriller” about literary great – who is practically upheld as a genius – William Shakespeare. Given that it’s suppose to be a thriller it’s obvious this isn’t some poetic ode to Shakespeare. Instead, it examines and exposes – as only as Hollywood can – Shakespeare as a mere ghostwriter looking for some sort of political fame.
I came upon the trailer a few weeks ago and my mouth was left wide open. I have studied literature, including British lit in high school, but I wasn’t a lit major in college or went hardcore with the studies. I was given the watered down hero of a genius version Shakespeare, that included breaking down the language and interpreting the plays. My lord, breaking down Romeo & Juliet, Hamlet and Macbeth was a chore! So imagine my surprise when I saw questions being raised in the trailer such as “Who was he?” and “Was he just a ghostwriter or was he a genius?” My eyes popped out of my sockets. My naive self thought these were fairly new allegations until I read yesterday’s AP wire article New Shakespeare Film Ruffles Academic Feathers.
Apparently the debate on whether or not Shakespeare wrote his earlier works has been going on for years, with some (the Oxfordians) believing that the actual author was the Earl of Oxford, Edward de Vere. Then there are others (the Stratfordians – presumable named after the birth place of Shakespeare) that firmly believe that Shakespeare is the original author.
However, critics of the film aren’t so much mad or disturbed by the accusations or the debate. They are “ruffled” by the fact that Hollywood has seemed to tarnish a great literary’s image by allegedly including factual errors. According to the AP article, Anonymous not only suggests that Shakespeare was a fraud as a writer, but he was politically hungry.
“Emmerich’s film goes further, pitting the story of Shakespeare in a political context involving a fight for succession using the plays as propaganda.
But perhaps the best thought on the situation comes from the actor Mark Rylance.
“This anger about the film is bizarre, because Shakespeare has always been a mystery. It’s not like Emmerich is the first person to question this. Sigmund Freud, Mark Twain, many others have. And even if we knew the answer, it would still be a mystery how one person did this, how he had a greater vocabulary than anyone else. But once you really look at the man from Stratford, the mystery gets larger, because, what we know of him just doesn’t correspond to a writer’s life,” Rylance told the Associate Press via a telephone interview.
Mahoganie: Musings East of the Anacostia River 
Posted on October 28, 2011
0