I love when my local paper talks about Shakespeare! In this case it’s a spin on the authorship question, but I’m pretty sure that if somebody calls you a “truther” (lumping you in with the idiots who still argue that Obama can’t be president because he’s supposedly not born in this country), they don’t have a high level of respect for your argument. http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/articles/2009/09/25/the_shakespeare_truthers/ This article is a bit different in that it’s mostly about Marlowe. Although we all know that he’s a contender (blah blah, faked his death because of secret agent stuff….) I don’t hear him spoken of in that way very often. Usually it’s all Oxford Oxford Oxford. UPDATE: I mixed up my idiots, they tell me in the comments. The ones that think Obama’s birth certificate is fake are “birthers”. “Truthers” are the ones who think 9/11 was deliberately set up … by Bush. Ok then.
Blech. The arrogance and elitism the pervades every "truther" argument just annoys me to no end.
Actually, it's the "birthers" who say Obama wasn't born in the US. The "truthers" are the ones who say Bush purposely destroyed the Twin Towers.
I especially like the argument that the Pentagon was hit by a missile, because evidently the Black Ops team that staged 9/11 could only arrange to crash _three_ actual airplanes on that day. The fourth was just too much for them to swing, so they punted.
Marlowe's been getting a lot of attention lately–books and "documentaries" and so forth.
One of the things that makes him attractive is that, unlike Oxford, Marlowe was a genius and a poet of the first rank. Any Shakespeare lover is bound to find some real gems in Faustus, Tamburlaine, and Edward II. And some Shakespeare is quite Marlovian in temperment–Richard III in particular.