 |
 |
Yes, Kent it was 1593. But the attribution of co-authorship of HVI has quite a long history, with Nashe as possibly the favoured candidate. Taylor argues that his methods can distinguish between someone imitating or influenced by a writer and the 'real thing'. On 24 October 2016 at 22:39, Kent Johnson <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > OK, David, it's a full day of birth and death date errors. Your turn, > here, as Marlowe died in 1593, two years after the supposed collaboration. > > But it doesn't absolve me of my own embarrassing error! And I must thank > Robin for being so gracious about it, when he could have pulled out the > shaming cutlery, I suppose. > > Reading some of the counter-argument against a Marlowe hand, I see that > some are proposing that whoever may have collaborated with "Shakespeare" in > 1591 was probably *imitating* the very popular Marlowe. > > > > >>> David Bircumshaw <[log in to unmask]> > 10/24/16 4:18 PM >>> > Marlowe was only two months older than Shakespeare, Kent. While he was > dead by the end of May 1591 and far beyond care about authorial credits. > > My first reaction, apart from oh no not Gary Taylor again, was to wonder > why the scholars should think that Marlowe would have been involved in > something so thematically unlike his other work. That the earlier two of > the Henry VI plays represent collaborations seems not unlikely, but surely > not with Marlowe. > > I like the idea of Arden of Faversham being early Shakespeare but it has > been aired and rejected often before. From what I have seen though it would > seem that the attribution of the Quarrel scene to him is central to the > whole scholarly argument. > > Interested to see Middleton has a further credit - it is likely he > redacted Macbeth and Measure for Measure for he public stage after > Shakespeare died now it might be that he trimmed another post-mortem. > > It is worth remembered that Greene adapted a phrase from Henry VI iii to > attack WS in his posthumous pamphlet - the 'tygers hart wrapp'd in a > player's hide' jibe depends for its barb to be identified with the 'upstart > Crowe' and only 'Shake-scene'. > > Best > > Dave > > On 24 October 2016 at 21:33, Kent Johnson <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > >> Assuming the computerized analysis is correct and won't go the way of the >> Funeral Elegy, it does seem that with this the Doubt may grow ever more >> Reasonable... >> >> For why would Marlowe, in 1591, a man, it seems, of not a >> little arrogance and vanity, then at the height of his powers and fame, not >> only deign to collaborate with an unknown and lowly 26 year-old actor in >> the writing of a weighty history play, but then let the youngster take all >> the "Shakespearian" credit for it? (Granting the stretch, that is, that >> young Will of Stratford, at 26 years, was then deeply into the writing of >> learned history plays.) >> >> It pushes at the edges of logic. >> >> Much more sense to posit a collaboration between the great Marlowe and >> someone older and better positioned, cloaked in the wings. >> >> >>> Pierre Joris <[log in to unmask]> 10/24/16 1:36 AM >>> >> >> Well, this morning's Gruniad has this: >> >> >> Christopher Marlowe credited as one of Shakespeare's co-writers >> Dramatists to appear jointly on title pages of Henry VI, Parts One, Two >> and Three in the New Oxford Shakespeare after analysis by team of 23 >> academics >> >> The long-held suggestion that Christopher Marlowe was William Shakespeare >> <https://www.theguardian.com/culture/shakespeare> is now widely >> dismissed, along with other authorship theories. But Marlowe is enjoying >> the next best thing – taking centre stage alongside his great Elizabethan >> rival with a credit as co-writer of the three Henry VI plays. >> >> The two dramatists will appear jointly on each of the three title pages >> of the plays within the New Oxford Shakespeare, a landmark project to be >> published by Oxford University Press this month. >> >> Using old-fashioned scholarship and 21st-century computerised tools to >> analyse texts, the edition’s international scholars have contended that >> Shakespeare’s collaboration with other playwrights was far more extensive >> than has been realised until now. >> >> Henry VI, Parts One, Two and Three are among as many as 17 plays that >> they now believe contain writing by other people, sometimes several hands. >> It more than doubles the figure in the previous New Oxford Shakespeare, >> published 30 years ago. >> >> Marlowe’s hand in parts of the Henry VI plays has been suspected since >> the 18th century but this marks the first prominent billing in an edition >> of Shakespeare’s collected works. >> A team of 23 academics from five countries completed the research, headed >> by four professors as general editors: Gary Taylor (Florida State >> University, US) John Jowett (Shakespeare Institute, University of >> Birmingham), Terri Bourus (Indiana University, Indianapolis, US) and >> Gabriel Egan (De Montfort University, Leicester). >> >> Taylor told the Guardian: “The orthodox view was that Shakespeare didn’t >> collaborate at all. When the Oxford Shakespeare in 1986 proposed that eight >> plays of Shakespeare contained writing by other writers, some people were >> outraged. What has happened since 1986 is that the accumulation of new >> scholarship, techniques and resources has made it clear that, in 1986, we >> underestimated the amount of Shakespeare’s work that’s collaborative.” >> >> He said: “In 1986, eight of 39 plays were identified on their title pages >> as collaborative, a little more than 20%. In 2016, 17 of 44 plays are >> identified, a little more than 38%, close to two-fifths.” >> >> Some are said to be collaborations, with Shakespeare apparently working >> side-by-side with other writers, as with Marlowe on Henry VI. Others are >> adaptations, where additions were made to works before their printed >> publication, as with Thomas Middleton, who is now credited for the first >> time on the title page of All’s Well That Ends Well. >> >> Taylor said these editions of the Henry VI plays are the first to >> identify Marlowe as the co-author. “We have been able to verify Marlowe’s >> presence in those three plays strongly and clearly enough,” he added. >> >> The idea that there might be two layers of writing in All’s Well That >> Ends Well goes back to the 19th century, he added: “But we are the first >> edition to have provided detailed empirical evidence … and to have >> concluded that the original layer is entirely by Shakespeare, probably in >> 1605, and the second layer is by Middleton, in the early 1620s,” said >> Taylor. >> >> The findings shed new light on the supposed rivalry between Marlowe and >> Shakespeare. Taylor added: “We can now be confident that they didn’t just >> influence each other, but they worked with each other. Rivals sometimes >> collaborate.” >> >> Publication of the New Oxford Shakespeare’s four volumes, as well as a >> digital edition, is staggered between 27 October and December. It includes >> the complete works in both original and modern spelling and punctuation, >> explanatory notes and essays and an authorship companion, with research in >> attribution studies. >> >> Among texts that have never before been in a complete works of the Bard >> is Arden of Faversham, which was anonymously published in 1592. Now it is >> jointly credited to anonymous and Shakespeare. >> >> Taylor said: “People for centuries have argued about whether Shakespeare >> is in some way connected to that play. We’re identifying it as an early >> collaborative play of Shakespeare’s. We’re identifying him in several of >> the middle scenes. There is very strong, compelling evidence. We have >> provided a lot of new evidence.” >> >> They are yet to identify the other author, but have ruled out previously >> suggested candidates such as Marlowe and Thomas Kyd. >> >> The difficulty is that the majority of plays written in the 1570s and >> 1580s have not survived and are known only from their titles. Much of what >> does survive is anonymous. >> >> Expanding the Shakespeare canon, the new study marks the first time that >> a complete works has included additions to Kyd’s The Spanish Tragedy, >> identifying Shakespeare as the author of the painter’s scene. >> >> Decisions have been swayed by a complex jigsaw of different kinds of >> evidence. The researchers believe that computerised textual analysis is now >> so sophisticated that they can even distinguish between Shakespeare writing >> under Marlowe’s influence and Marlowe writing alone. >> >> One piece of evidence identified five “Shakespeare-plus words”: gentle, >> answer, beseech, spoke, tonight. Taylor explained: “What we mean by >> Shakespeare-plus is that we’ve looked at the frequency of certain words >> which might seem commonplace like ‘tonight’ in all the plays of that early >> period, say up to 1600. Anybody could use any of these words. They’re not >> words that Shakespeare invented. But we can say Shakespeare used ‘tonight’ >> much more often than other playwrights in those 20 years. >> >> “Shakespeare-minus words … are much less likely to appear in a >> Shakespeare play. So, this is a statistical argument … not simply >> statistics about individual words, but combinations of individual words. >> With Marlowe, for example, combinations of words such as ‘glory droopeth’ >> appear to be unique to him in that period. >> >> “Recent studies by specialists already agree that Shakespeare did not >> write the passage where Joan of Arc pleads for help from demonic spirits >> and then is captured by the English [Part One, 5.3, 5.4]. We have added new >> evidence from ‘unique n-grams’: that is, phrases that occur in the passage >> being tested. Marlowe’s works contain many more such parallels than any >> other playwright,” Taylor added. >> >> Other words and phrases identified as commonly occurring in Marlowe works >> include “familiar spirit, cull out, regions under earth, oh hold me, to >> your wonted, see, forsake me, droopeth to, curse, miscreant, ugly, change, >> shape thou, change my shape, suddenly surprise, your dainty, fell and >> enchantress”. >> >> Taylor acknowledges that doubts may be cast on their conclusions: “You >> can’t say anything about Shakespeare without somebody disagreeing with you >> … But our knowledge of the past increases by debate of this kind.” >> Marlowe’s life of myth and mystery >> >> The life of Christopher Marlowe >> <https://www.theguardian.com/culture/marlowe> has long been pored over >> for evidence that he wrote a handful of William Shakepeare’s works. The >> scholar JB Steane said in 1969 there were so many rumours it would be >> absurd to dismiss them all as part of the “Marlowe Myth”. >> >> Few undisputed facts exist about the playwright’s life, but he was >> baptised in Canterbury on 26 February 1564. The son of a shoemaker, Marlowe >> attended the King’s school in Canterbury before being awarded a scholarship >> to Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, where he received his BA degree in >> 1584. >> >> Marlowe took lengthy absences and the university was about to refuse him >> a master’s degree when, in 1587, the Privy Council wrote to compliment his >> “good service” to the Queen on “matters touching the benefit of his >> country”. The letter prompted the theory that he had been a secret agent >> for Elizabeth I’s “spymaster”, Sir Francis Walsingham. >> >> His plays were wildly popular for the brief period that he was on the >> Elizabethan literary scene. Dido, Queen of Carthage is thought to have been >> his first. Tamburlaine the Great, among the first English plays in blank >> verse, was written around 1587; the Jew of Malta, is thought to have been >> written around 1589, and Doctor Faustus was first performed between 1588 >> and 1593. >> >> His death in Deptford in May 1593, aged 29, has provoked years of >> speculation, from the Queen ordering his assassination because of his >> atheism, to his being killed by a love rival. >> >> In 1925, the scholar Leslie Hotson published the coroner’s report in his >> book The Death of Christopher Marlowe. Witnesses testified that he was >> stabbed in the eye during a fight over payment of a bill and died >> instantly. The document did not end speculation, with some supporting the >> theory that Marlowe faked his death and continued to write as Shakespeare. >> >> *Frances Perraudin* >> > > > > -- > David Joseph Bircumshaw > > The Animal Subsides http://www.arrowheadpress.co.uk/books/animal.html > Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/david.bircumshaw > Tumblr: http://zantikus.tumblr.com/ > twitter: http://twitter.com/bucketshave > blog: http://groggydays.blogspot.com/ > -- David Joseph Bircumshaw The Animal Subsides http://www.arrowheadpress.co.uk/books/animal.html Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/david.bircumshaw Tumblr: http://zantikus.tumblr.com/ twitter: http://twitter.com/bucketshave blog: http://groggydays.blogspot.com/