The
last post emphasized the debate between Wells and Price on the importance of
the non-existence of a literary paper trail to support the belief in William of
Stratford’s authorship. Noteworthy was the complete absence of acknowledging Price’s
research in the new book Shakespeare Beyond Doubt.
But
if we review the basic elements of the Stratfordian theory of Shakespeare’s
authorship there are some additional points of the story that are fading away.
His
assumed apprenticeship
Not
that all Shakespeare scholars agree on the basics of his assumed path to being
a playwright for the Lord’s Chamberlain’s Men, but one prominent argument is
that, like for other professions, there was an apprentice system that
playwrights evolved through and it’s implied that this was the only way that
Shakespeare’s plays could have made it to the stage. For instance, we find:
“Theater companies were extremely
busy. They would perform around six different plays each week, which
could only be rehearsed a couple of times beforehand. Also, there was no
stage crew like we have today; every member of the company would
have to help make costumes, props and scenery. The Elizabethan acting
profession worked on an apprentice system, making it very hierarchical. Even
Shakespeare would have had to rise up through the ranks.” http://shakespeare.about.com/od/theglobe/a/Th_Expereince.htm
So
this is the story of his professional beginnings. It sounds sort of
reasonable. He could have had a sound grammar school education and then worked
his way up the theatrical ladder. But more than that, there were some ‘lost
years’ that he certainly learned and developed on his own and for his apparent
plan to be a playwright. So we also find this:
“The second period [of lost years]
covers the seven years of Shakespeare's life in which he must have been
perfecting his dramatic skills and collecting sources for the plots of his plays.
"What could such a genius accomplish in this direction during six or eight
years? The histories alone must have required unending hours of labor to
gather facts for the plots and counter-plots of these stories.” and
“…sometime between 1585 and 1592, it is probable that young Shakespeare could
have been recruited by the Leicester's or Queen's men. Whether an acting
troupe recruited Shakespeare in his hometown or he was forced on his own to
travel to London to begin his career, he was nevertheless an established actor
in the great city by the end of
1592.
http://www.shakespeare-online.com/biography/shakespeareactor.html
The
problem with this apprenticeship assumption is that the actual evidence, in his
case, appears to contradict it. According to Irvin Leigh Matus in Shakespeare,
IN FACT, “Shakespeare fits into the pattern of the free-lance playwright
according to his earliest quartos. The title page of the first of his published
plays Titus Andronicus (1594), states that it found its way into the
repertory of three acting companies—those of the Earls of Derby, Pembroke and
Susex.” He provides more evidence regarding Henry VI part 2 and The
Taming of the Shrew and concludes “Clearly, Shakespeare got around until
he began his association with the Chamberlain’s Men some time in 1594 and
thus became the first playwright known to be affiliated exclusively with one
acting company.” So, while not yet with any London theatrical company, he was
reading histories to collect facts for plots. No doubt he also read some
other literature to collect more plot ideas.
Are
we really to believe that, beginning sometime after 1585, he spent years
unknown as an apprenticed actor and then playwright in an “extremely busy”
theater company rehearsing several plays a week while also helping to “make costumes, props and scenery” and then also
spend “unending hours of labor” reading histories, the classics, and an
enormous amount of other literature, and then ‘graduate’ from his
apprenticeship and LEAVE his sponsoring company to be a free-lance playwright
writing first rate plays?
Let’s
compare that scenario (ignoring for now all other circumstantial evidence) with
another in which someone with no need for manual labor, who didn’t wander
around during some lost years, but who, from earliest years, spent a great many
hours as a youth with the best tutors, highest educated gentry and nobility in
London, ready access to many of the most complete libraries, and at least with
many years of tangible connections to the practice of masques and plays, and
who THEN found a way to submit plays to a theatrical company without his/her
name attached.
No comments:
Post a Comment