“Shakespeare was a black woman” - now I’ve heard it all!

The Romans had more sense, even the snakes decided it was a territory to avoid.

The Irish were never conquered by the Romans.

theworriedwell, we are waiting our chance. Already wherever you go in the world you will always find someone Irish. We have nearly taken over the UK, we are strong in North America and Australia. We have even made it to New Zealnad.

This is my truth and I am sticking to it.

Given the probably fate of the occasional albino baby in a tribe of brown people, White Male Supremacy is not always guaranteed.

M0nica

But nowadays the only truth that exists is the individual truth, So if the author of this book thinks Shakespeare was a black woman then she is absolutely right. If I din't. I too am absolutely right.

It means that ClareAB's statement Considering White Male Supremacists have been domination the world forever, I think it's entirely possible

On the other hand looking back through time, there have been empires in all aparts of the world, Chinese, Mongol, Hun's Vikings, Aztec, Inca, many in Afric whose names I do not know. My truth tells me that the current fashion for wwhite empiricists, is , as the measurement of time goes, only a passing phase

All empires regardless of colour, race, religion, or geographical location act in exactly the same way, they conuer, they dominate, the make the conquered people submerge their culture to the dominant culture. Nothing uniquely good or bad about recent empires, they have always acted as empires do.

Whatever your nationality or origins, you come from a group that have had empires in the past or will have empires in he future and they have been and will be no different from any other in imposing their language, culture and religion on their subjected people

I'm Irish I dont know of any empire we've had and can't imagine one in the future. Have you any thoughts about how that might happen.

Love the theory, grumppa perhaps if had run it past your tutors first.....🤣

The Victorians had a fine old time altering Shakespeare texts. Keep any sex or hint of out, changed endings from tragic to happy...

and before then, in the 18th century some plays were changed, I only know the briefest of facts on this so will use Mr Google

In the 17th century, particularly after the Restoration of the monarchy in 1660, Shakespeare's plays were heavily altered to conform to new, more refined, and "realistic" cultural tastes. Following an eighteen-year closure of theaters by the Puritans (1642–1660), theatre companies revived Shakespeare’s works but rewritten them with new characters, restructured plots, added musical spectacles, and updated language to suit contemporary sensibilities.

Its just as well that meanwhile scholars were beavering away finding original texts and working from them!

My point is that Shakespeare has always been in an ever changing landscape.

I so agree about teaching in schools! His work is wonderful!

But also an understanding that his work was and is "up for discussion"

just as we now look at for example EM Forster"A passage to India" or other classic works in a changed way due to new perspectives.

Interesting take on empires MOnica.

Mollygo

Rosie51

Surely if Elizabeth 1 was actually male, Anne Boleyn wouldn't have been executed???

Well Anne Boleyn is about to be played by a male.

As was usually done on the bards day

Rosie51

Surely if Elizabeth 1 was actually male, Anne Boleyn wouldn't have been executed???

Well Anne Boleyn is about to be played by a male.

Well, yes, Rosie! 🤷‍♀️

This all takes me back to the quatercentenary in 1964, when academics such as Hotson and Rowse were busy identifying the dark lady. One evening a college friend and I returned to my room from the Eastgate tavern and decided to resolve the matter ourselves. In no time we had proved to our satisfaction that she was in fact his daughter, Susannah, who had married Dr. John Hall. His incestuous relationship with her was demonstrated by sonnet 2: "... this fair child of mine Shall (S. Hall) count.." and two other lines in particular: sonnet 18, beginning "S. Hall, I compare thee to a summer's day," and the line in Lucrece "But now he throws that shallow habit by", a clear reference to S. Hall's low-cut dress. Our letter to the Sunday Times was, alas, not published.

Surely if Elizabeth 1 was actually male, Anne Boleyn wouldn't have been executed???

Oh well, Allira I saw a theory yesterday that Elizabeth I was actually a man who wore women’s clothing. Evidence for that theory is that she never produced a child. 🤔🙄 🫨

There is a Bassanio among the characters of The Merchant of Venice, I suppose that may be considered to link Shakespeare to Emilia Bassano.

Here's another theory to throw into the mix :

Elizabeth I wrote Shakespeare’s plays -
Conspiracy theorists have proposed that Elizabeth, a gifted wit and writer herself, might have written some or all of Shakespeare’s plays. This argument often has classist origins – many scholars have been reluctant to ascribe some of the greatest works of literature of all time to the son of a glover from Stratford – and is almost certainly false.

Apparently a Myth.

Purplepixie

Hahaha 😝

Not like Glenda Jackson either
(Although she was from Birkenhead)

Vera Duckworth.

Hahaha 😝

Basgetti

Allira

He probably sounded like Ozzy 😁

Probably not. It's a different accent.
As is mine.

Yes, apologies. More like Ozzy than the King though, I expect.

Probably bit more like Gloucestershire back in those days! The accent was different, rural.

I wonder what Queen Elizabeth I sounded like?

Allira

^He probably sounded like Ozzy^ 😁

Probably not. It's a different accent.
As is mine.

Yes, apologies. More like Ozzy than the King though, I expect.

But nowadays the only truth that exists is the individual truth, So if the author of this book thinks Shakespeare was a black woman then she is absolutely right. If I din't. I too am absolutely right.

It means that ClareAB's statement Considering White Male Supremacists have been domination the world forever, I think it's entirely possible

On the other hand looking back through time, there have been empires in all aparts of the world, Chinese, Mongol, Hun's Vikings, Aztec, Inca, many in Afric whose names I do not know. My truth tells me that the current fashion for wwhite empiricists, is , as the measurement of time goes, only a passing phase

All empires regardless of colour, race, religion, or geographical location act in exactly the same way, they conuer, they dominate, the make the conquered people submerge their culture to the dominant culture. Nothing uniquely good or bad about recent empires, they have always acted as empires do.

Whatever your nationality or origins, you come from a group that have had empires in the past or will have empires in he future and they have been and will be no different from any other in imposing their language, culture and religion on their subjected people

I will make a mad guess and say that some of the Posters probably did not enjoy the very popular and successful Regency TV drama Bridgerton.

It must be galling, when only certain 'types' get to frame and/or name your heritage.

Thanks Freya, I had forgotten about Sue's interesting details, from when she was abroad, and had meant to ask about them. Now I can.

👏 🥰