The Truth behind Shakespeare’s Plays
The odds of someone having read Shakespeare at least once in their life is significantly high. William Shakespeare is known worldwide as a writing icon for his works such as “Romeo and Juliet”, “Macbeth”, and countless others. One impact of Shakespeare’s works is that they are commonly used as a learning tool in many schools nationwide. Students examine hidden meanings behind his literary devices and the Elizabethan era language. Although Shakespeare is regarded as a positive effect in British literature, there is also a negative effect. His works can be easily interpreted by anyone and those differing opinions may lead to discourse.
During the Renaissance era in which Shakespeare’s plays were published, …show more content…
According to the organization dedicated to Shakespeare’s authorship, Shakespeare Authorship, it is listed that the first possibility of another author arose in 1769. “The Life and Adventures of Common Sense” by Herbert Lawrence questioned the possibility that Shakespeare might be a pen name. During the Renaissance era, in which Shakespeare was from, there seemed to be no peculiar activity regarding the authenticity of Shakespeare’s works. Post-industrial point of views of Shakespeare’s authorship began in the 1980’s. In 1985, author Charlton Ogburn, who agreed with the possibility that Edward de Vere could be the possible author, appeared on a PBS television show along with Professor Maurice Charney to support their views of another possible Shakespeare author. The modernization of television and radios helped spread the idea of another possible writer. The debate between many possible authors began to garner attention from television watchers nationwide. From that point forward, the media began to spin the Shakespeare authorship story in many different ways. Numerous documentaries were aired based on the same, single topic, “Who Was Shakespeare?” The media plays upon the doubt of the audience and continues to fuel the suspense. Yet, scholars have time and time disproven the possibility of the author being De Vere or
The odds of someone having read Shakespeare at least once in their life is significantly high. William Shakespeare is known worldwide as a writing icon for his works such as “Romeo and Juliet”, “Macbeth”, and countless others. One impact of Shakespeare’s works is that they are commonly used as a learning tool in many schools nationwide. Students examine hidden meanings behind his literary devices and the Elizabethan era language. Although Shakespeare is regarded as a positive effect in British literature, there is also a negative effect. His works can be easily interpreted by anyone and those differing opinions may lead to discourse.
During the Renaissance era in which Shakespeare’s plays were published, …show more content…
According to the organization dedicated to Shakespeare’s authorship, Shakespeare Authorship, it is listed that the first possibility of another author arose in 1769. “The Life and Adventures of Common Sense” by Herbert Lawrence questioned the possibility that Shakespeare might be a pen name. During the Renaissance era, in which Shakespeare was from, there seemed to be no peculiar activity regarding the authenticity of Shakespeare’s works. Post-industrial point of views of Shakespeare’s authorship began in the 1980’s. In 1985, author Charlton Ogburn, who agreed with the possibility that Edward de Vere could be the possible author, appeared on a PBS television show along with Professor Maurice Charney to support their views of another possible Shakespeare author. The modernization of television and radios helped spread the idea of another possible writer. The debate between many possible authors began to garner attention from television watchers nationwide. From that point forward, the media began to spin the Shakespeare authorship story in many different ways. Numerous documentaries were aired based on the same, single topic, “Who Was Shakespeare?” The media plays upon the doubt of the audience and continues to fuel the suspense. Yet, scholars have time and time disproven the possibility of the author being De Vere or