A Writer In Disquise

Shakespeare does not exist!

Amanda

Mrs. Hart

Research Paper

7 May 2010

A Writer in Disguise

   Why would a famous writer like Shakespeare want to hide their identity? There are many other candidates that fit Shakespeare. The grave of William Shakespeare proves that he could not have written these magnificent pieces of writing. There is no hard evidence proving that he ever existed. Nobody knows Shakespeare’s date of birth, because it is unknown. He lacked in his education, for he only went to grammar school for four years. Shakespeare’s family never even referred to him as a play writer. Among all things, William Shakespeare did not exist, because there are other possible candidates, no real hard evidence that Shakespeare existed, and the back ground does not fit. 
    First off, there are other candidates that could possibly be Shakespeare. One possible candidate would be Queen Elizabeth, for she was a very noble woman of her time and back then woman were not able to write poetry. One quote states, “In the case of Queen Elizabeth, the argument is that it is improper for a woman to write poetry, and therefore she served as a patron for Shakespeare in order to ghost-write his works”(Wheeler). Women were also more concerned about others opinions, such as appearances and outlooks. This article states, “It arises because communication is much more important for the survival of a woman than it is for a man”(Sloan). It is possible Queen Elizabeth hid her identity so she would not have to face her fears of other peoples criticism. Another possible candidate would be De Vere, because he was dated to be around at the time of Shakespeare’s works. Sloan clearly states, “The speaker in the sonnets was a middle-aged man obsessed with his own mortality, yet Shakespeare was in his thirties when he “supposedly” wrote them”(Sloan). If De Vere was really around at this time then he could very well be the writer of these magnificent pieces. De Vere would also have been about the right age to have authored one of the Sonnets. Another article states, “Oxfordians date the Sonnets between 1593 and 1603; since de Vere died in 1604; he would have been about the right age”(Sloan). De Vere could very well be Shakespeare, because there is evidence that he was around during the time of the Sonnets. One does not truly know for sure who exactly wrote Shakespeare’s work, but between Queen Elizabeth and De Vere its obvious one of them did.
    Second of all, there is no real hard evidence proving that Shakespeare ever existed. On his birth certificate there are six signatures and his name was not spelled Shakespeare. Hill clearly states, “On Shakespeare’s birth certificate his name is spelled “Shaksper,” and six signatures undisputed to be authentic are all spelled differently”(Hill). If this is true then Shakespeare is just another writer in disguise, for his name is spelled differently. Also, the signatures on his birth certificate are written terribly, which makes those of his family more illiterate than those of other noble writers. Another quote states, “Moreover, those six signatures are written in a horrible, virtually illegible scribble-one appearing much closer to that of an illiterate than to that of the most renowned writer ever”(Hill). Shakespeare was just as illiterate as his family, so he could not have been able to write such advanced plays. There were also other written accounts proving that he did not exist, for no one every remembered seeing him. Sloan states, ”Not one document exists giving evidence of anyone ever seeing him”(Sloan). If not one document exist then nor does he, for there are no documents to prove he did. Plus there are no originals that have survived, which makes it easier to say that he did not exist. This quote says, “Originals of none of his manuscripts have survived”(Sloan). If there is no record of information stating Shakespeare wrote these plays then it must have been another writer hiding their identity. It is hard to believe that he ever existed, because there is no hard evidence in proving he did, and none of his pieces survived, which is odd for he was supposedly quite famous.
     Finally, Shakespeare’s background does not fit. It is funny that one believes Shakespeare was this famous writer, because his family never referred to him as one. One quote says, “Not even his own family ever referred to him as a famous playwright”(Sloan). Shakespeare’s family referred to him as more of a gentleman, because that is what he truly wanted to be. Also, how can a man such as Shakespeare be able to write such magnificent pieces of writing when he only went to grammar school for four years? Another quote clearly states, “His plays have a depth and magnitude so great that only a university-educated man of high status could have”(Sloan). It is not possible that Shakespeare wrote all these pieces of writing, for it would have been too advanced for him. A man who has lacked in education would not have the knowledge to write such advanced pieces of work. There is not enough background information to prove that Shakespeare was the real author of these extraordinary pieces of literature.
    To sum it all up, Shakespeare did not exist, because there are other possible candidates, no real hard evidence, and the background information does not fit. There are so many candidates that could be the real Shakespeare, but De Vere and Queen Elizabeth are the most likely to be the real Shakespeare. Also, there is very little hard evidence in proving that he even existed, for his date of birth is unknown and the signatures on his birth certificate are illiterate. There is not enough background information on his life to prove that he ever even existed or not. Shakespeare’s family was very illiterate and never referred to him as a play writer, but a gentleman. Shakespeare lacked in his education, for he only went to grammar school for four years. It is hard to believe that Shakespeare could very well be just another writer in disguise. One will never truly know if he ever existed or not for Shakespeare was the only one who truly knew.

Author's Note

This is my research paper on Shakespeare. Tell me what you think, please! I have a works cited page, just didnt put it on here.

Reviews

[Shellie]

Very well written paper formed on your own opinion.
But there are technicalities. You have way too much repetition in the case of how long Shakespeare went to school for. I dont really bother thinking about it. I have written 2 shakespearean sonnets and i often read his sonnets so i cant really get into a debate but it looks like a really good paper and theres alot of info about theories etc. But i do recommend you take the repetition out.

[Sarah]

This is very persuasive. I agrees with almost everything except the fact that because Shakespeare only went to 2 years of grammar school made him obviously not that intelligent. Gershwin, the famous composer that wrote many musicals and the famous work rhapsody in blue, dropped out at an early age and didn't have very good musical skills at first but he learned by practicing himself. Another huge example of this is Benjamin Franklin. Franklin only went to school for two years, the way he became so smart was by reading. But besides that hole this is really good :)

[Luna Northstar]

Very interesting. I always loved his works, but to know the one I have always been taught to praise isn't the real mastermind behind these great works... its chilling. How did you come up with all this information. I was never taught this... How long has these theories been around? Well no matter what the answers are, whoever wrote the magnificent pieces that are still read and acted out today was a true virtuoso. You did an excellent job writing this, nicely written, interesting, and is well formatted. Great job. :)

[PaperHearts]

This was really interesting! There were a lot of things in here that I wasn't aware of, and I found reading this really informative and intriguing. You had a solid essay format, which was easy to follow and understand. In a way, I thought that you tended to drag on a little with your points in the mid section, however, your introduction and conclusion were great! :) Good luck!
~PaperHearts

[Scarlet Pulse]

You supported your position with quotes from articles, which you will definitely get points for. The way you wrote it is great. The only thing I would say that you should change is that you repeat yourself a lot throughout the whole paper. I think you already handed it in, but maybe your teacher will let you give it in again. ?? Good job though.

[Daniel Gardner]

I hope they gave you an A on this. If not they should resign as a teacher. Great job. Shakespeare would be proud.

[Angie Diane♥&hea..]

This was a great write and everything. I would have to disagree with this paper though. The only reason is because he did write about romance of a young man and Dark Lady who was supposedly supposed to be his mistress. It was so long ago so of course it couldn't have survived. This is like Beowulf in a way. We don't know who the author of that is at all. Beowulf was written in the Anglo-Saxons time. Which was around Shakespeare's time as well. It was written in Old English. I do believe that Shakespeare was real and even if his family sent him to school you can learn a lot of things in four years. Not every person completes school and they can write something great. Oh the opening for the research paper was not an eyeopener for me though. Good write though. Thanks for sharing. :)

[Cassandra D.]

This was very interesting.
I thought it was pretty well written.
And the information that Tina Kline posted here was also eye catching.

[Tina Kline]

You ask a really good question in this about whether Shakespeare is real or not. I've read in the past he probably was a woman because, as you stated, women were not allowed to write. For a long while that was the only way a woman could get published, posing as a man.

[Satchmo's Gal]

nice paper. Have you ever read 'Shakespeares secrets' ? Its a really good book and I would reccomend looking it up sometime.