a word from our sponsors
See the new shakespeare.com. This feature, while it still provides useful information, is no longer maintained.
Replies | Post Reply | Shakespeare Queries & Replies From Everyone Else 4.2.97: Top | Help
In every example that you cite, scholars take known facts
about an artist's life and apply them to that artists work in order
to learn more about that work. That is perfectly valid. The Oxfordian
error is try the same trick in the opposite direction: they
take the work of art and try to extrapolate "facts" about the
artist's life from that work, despite the fact that there is
no way of distinguishing between elements in the artist's work
that may be derived from actual experience and those elements
which are the product of his imagination. That is totally invalid.It is equally invalid to apply the biography of Oxford to the
Shakespearian canon, as it a logical nonsense to use the conclusion
that you are hoping to draw as the initial premise of your argument.
I might say that I wish to demonstrate that all politicians are honest
and hardworking. If I then start my argument with the premise "All
politicians are honest and hardworking" and then cite examples of
honest and hardworking politicians (which, statistically, there must
be some somewhere) to back up my argument, I somehow don't think
that I would convince many people.Posted by Thersites on April 15, 1997 at 07:30:30
In Reply to "Bruce, you keep saying that good scholarship dictates" posted by Bill Routhier on April 15, 1997 at 07:07:44
Replies | Post Reply | Shakespeare Queries & Replies From Everyone Else 4.2.97: Top | Help