Monday, October 11, 2010

" In Defense of Naive Reading"

October 10, 2010, 5:30 PM

In Defense of Naïve Reading

Saturday, August 28, 2010

On the Nature of Evidence

Is there any evidence that Christopher Marlowe may have written the works of Shakespeare? It depends on the kind of evidence. I will say that there is no direct evidence for Marlowe’s authorship of the works of Shakespeare (and lots against him), and plenty of direct evidence for Shakespeare the Stratford shareholder (with little or none against him). However, I would also argue that there is indirect evidence for Marlowe, but agreement on how indirect evidence is interpreted depends on one's perspective and underlying assumptions.

Here's an example which demonstrates my point and also neatly discusses the early play Titus Andronicus, the idea of Shakespeare's apprenticeship, and the extent of the writer's education evident in the texts. In Jonathan Bate's "Shakespeare and Ovid", Bate discusses the adundant evidence of classicism in Titus Andronicus and compares it to similar evidence in Venus and Adonis:

"Muriel Bradrook has convincingly argued that Shakespeare wrote Venus and Adonis partly in response to Greene’s ‘upstart crow’ quip—the Stratford lad decided to show that he could outdo the Oxbridge men in that most sophisticated of genres, the Ovidian erotic narrative. Titus [Andronicus] is also beautified with the feather of classicism—and with a vengeance. If we posit an early date for the play we may consider it as a provocation for Greene; if a later one, as a response to him. . . "

Here's where it gets interesting . . .

"This then, is the additional force of Capell’s point: precisely because Shakespeare had less formal education than certain other dramatists, his play has more display of learning."1

Bate's conclusion may be true, but it is, nonetheless, circular reasoning. Bate illustrates the point that observations are weighed as potential evidence against initial assumptions. For example, I might take Bate's observation as indirect evidence that the writer of Titus had as much--or more--formal education than the other dramatists. But Bate sees it as indirect evidence of exactly the opposite: The fact that Titus is so thoroughly shot through with classicist veins -- not in a way which equals the university educated dramatists, but surpasses them - is interpreted by Bate as a psychological consequence (an inferiority complex?) of Shakespeare having less formal education, not as a natural consequence of its author actually having more formal education.

To paraphrase James Shapiro: in the rock, paper, scissors world of evidence, direct evidence (such as eye-witness testimony) trumps indirect evidence (like finger-prints). Shakespeare's name on the cover pages therefore trumps the presence of Marlowe's literary finger-prints all over the work.2

Daryl Pinksen

1 Bate, Jonathan. 1993. Shakespeare and Ovid. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 102

2 I also regard this observation as possible indirect evidence for Marlowe: "The fingerprints of Tamburlaine are all over the plays that are among Shakespeare’s earliest known ventures as a playwright." (Greenblatt, 2004, p.192). Greenblatt however would regard it as evidence that Shakespeare watched Tamburlaine over and over until he began, consciously and unconsciously, sounding like Marlowe in his own work.

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Shakespeare, poet of nature?

The presumed differences between Shakespeare's work, and the work of the university educated, is a point scholarship is at great pains to address without apparent contradiction.

The work of Shakespeare is full of classical allusions. Yes, we know that large chunks of Ovid and other Roman writers were memorized at the grammar schools. By way of analogy, fourteen year olds today study Shakespeare (let's confine this to the gifted) in and before grade nine. But, it's also studied at the university by twenty year olds. The top students who study Shakespeare in grade nine have a vastly inferior appreciation of the works than the top students who studied the same works at university.

At age fourteen, which was the senior level at the grammar schools, the abstract reasoning centers of the brain have barely switched on, even in the brilliant. It's a question of cognitive maturation, not IQ.

Shakespeare understood Ovid, and the rest of the classical world, at the same depth and breadth as our top university graduates understand Shakespeare, not in the way that our top grade nine graduates understand Shakespeare.

That doesn't mean it's impossible for Shakespeare to have achieved a level of Ovidian scholarship equal to the university elites, it does mean that it is incumbent upon scholars to explain how it "could" have happened, since, we are told, it did.

Friday, August 20, 2010

New Article at the MSC Blog

THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 2010

Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers: Implications for Shakespeare Biographersby Daryl Pinksen

In Malcolm Gladwell’s recent book,Outliers: The Story of Success, the author argues that top-level mastery of any discipline cannot be achieved without sustained and concerted effort, usually from an early age, until something like ten thousand hours of focused practice have been logged. Gladwell’s goal is to expose as Romantic delusion the notion that “outliers,” his word for individuals who achieve world-class mastery, are the outcome of geniuses inevitably rising to the top—often in spite of their environment. In Outliers, Gladwell marshals a chorus of evidence to make his case. (Continue to article)

Saturday, July 10, 2010

Gun Dogs by James Langer

James Langer, my sister's husband, and my good friend, is the recipient of the Gerald Lampert Memorial Award bestowed by the League of Canadian Poets for 'best first book of poetry'. "Gun Dogs" is a superior collection of substantial poems. Well done bro-in-law!

League Awards

THE LEAGUE OF CANADIAN POETS CONGRATULATES THE WINNERS OF THE PAT LOWTHER AND GERALD LAMPERT AWARDS
The winners of the 2010 Pat Lowther and Gerald Lampert Memorial Awards were announced on Saturday. June 12, at a special event at the LCP Poetry Fest and Conference held in Toronto. James Langer is the winner of the Gerald Lampert Memorial Award for the book Gun Dogs (House of Anansi Press).

Sunday, July 04, 2010

The LL Book Review

SUNDAY, JULY 04, 2010

The LL Book Review

Review 154: Marlowe’s Ghost by Daryl Pinksen

By Shannon Yarbrough on July 1, 2010

Marlowe’s Ghost: The Blacklisting of the Man who was Shakespeare
by Daryl Pinksen
Copyright © 2008
IUniverse
ISBN: 0595475140
284 Pages
Paperback $20.95

"This is a book authors considering self-publishing should buy as a reference if they want to study technique and layout of the book itself. Pinksen is very deserving of his Writer’s Digest award. I thoroughly enjoyed the book, learned a lot from it, and will definitely be sharing it with others. And as for Marlowe, all preconceived notions I had of Shakespeare, before reading this book, have just been thrown out the window."

Read Full Review at LLBookReview.com

Saturday, May 29, 2010

"Pinksen's Hyperbole"

My reply to a critique of Marlowe's Ghost posted on Humanities.Lit. Authors.Shakespeare.

Hello Robin,


I read your critique of my Writer's Digest excerpt with great interest. I think I owe you some answers.


"Between 1585 and 1593, Christopher Marlowe transformed the face of English drama." Does Mr. Pinksen believe that Marlowe transformed the face of English drama all by himself? Thomas Kyd, John Lyly and Robert Greene were all writing plays between 1585 and 1593. They too help to transform the face of English drama. Marlowe, Kyd, Lyly and Greene laid the foundations. Yes, Christopher Marlowe was the best playwright in the group.


By way of analogy, I could also say that, "Einstein transformed the face of modern physics." Hyperbole? Well, there were plenty of other physicists who contributed to the development of modern physics; Heisenberg, Bohr, Schroedinger, and other illustrious scientists were all making great strides in the first decades of the 20th century. They too helped transform modern physics. I would argue that Marlowe's dominance of his group was as great, or perhaps greater, than Einstein's dominance of his group. Would physicists take issue with my statement about Einstein? Some might, but let's be honest, how would their protestations sound? My statement is not hyperbole, it is informed opinion.


Mr. Pinksen appears to use the term Shakespearean drama in a general sense. Perhaps, he uses it to confuse his readers? Most scholars in the fields of theatre and drama use the term Shakespearean drama to refer to only the plays of William Shakespeare. There are similar terms when referring to specific playwrights of the period. When referring to all the plays of the period, they use Elizabethan, Jacobean, or Caroline drama.


I am not using the term generally. I use the term, as you do, for the Shakespeare plays. Where we differ is that I argue that the Marlowe plays, and the Marlowe plays alone, are a part of that tradition. Marlowe, it can be argued, without hyperbole, created the style of drama which we now know as "Shakespearean." I'm essentially paraphrasing Harold Bloom, among others: "Yet Marlowe, himself a wild original, was Shakespeare’s starting point, curiously difficult for the young Shakespeare to exorcise completely.… And yet that means the strongest writer known to us served a seven-year apprenticeship to Christopher Marlowe." Bloom’s Major Dramatists: Christopher Marlowe. 2002. p.10


Pinksen wonders, "Why are Marlowe’s revolutionary accomplishments largely unknown? " Really? They are known to scholars in the field of theatre and drama. I will grant you they are unknown to the general public.


In 2002 Michael Rubbo toured the streets of Canterbury (Marlowe's hometown, for the uninitiated), and asked people if they knew who Christopher Marlowe was. Most of them did not. To use another physics analogy, if I were to say, "Why are Nikola Tesla's revolutionary accomplishments unknown?" many physicists might object, saying that they know who he is and what he did. But this book, and my hypothetical book about Tesla, was not written to cater to a small number of scholars, it was written for the intelligent general reader. The statement is not hyperbole, it is accurate.


"Because Marlowe’s name has been reviled for four hundred years, his reputation in ruins." Come now, Mr. Pinksen! Who has reviled his name for four hundred years? His plays were published during his lifetime and after. His plays were performed during his lifetime and after. His plays are still performed today. Yes, Doctor Faustus is probably the most performed. On the other hand, from time to time, there are productions of Tamburlaine, Edward II, and even The Jew of Malta.


See my Chapter titled "Vile Esteem" for a litany of denunciations of Christopher Marlowe from 1593 onward. In 1891, a memorial plaque was erected to Marlowe in Canterbury. The original idea had been to place a memorial for him in Poet's Corner of Westminster Abbey (as he richly deserved), but this was ruled out because of opposition rising from those concerned about “Marlowe’s acknowledged life and expressions.” Marlowe's image has been somewhat rehabilitated in the last few decades, but a few token performances of Doctor Faustus does not make up for the trashing his name took after 1593. For the last several centuries Marlowe has been routinely described as a homosexual, pedophilic, blaspheming, treasonous, heretical atheist. In the last few decades, the public has been willing to ignore most of these charges, but this does not erase the past.


Yes, it is unfair to judge a book by a brief excerpt. On the other hand, if Mr. Pinksen is wrong about some basic issue, one is left to wonder about the rest of the book?


Perhaps, instead of assuming I am wrong on these basic issues, you should read the arguments I make to defend them first before rendering judgment? In the two years since I published Marlowe's Ghost, flaws have been pointed out to me, places where I should have qualified statements, removed words, changed wording, etc., if I had it to do over. The book is not perfect, as you will discover should you take the time to read it, but it is very strong. I would be very happy to face your criticisms, and answer any questions, if you decide to read on.


Again, thanks for taking the time to read and comment,


Sincerely,

Daryl Pinksen