Shakespeare's sister: Digital archives reveal insights into unknown sibling(phys.org)
phys.org
Shakespeare's sister: Digital archives reveal insights into unknown sibling
https://phys.org/news/2024-03-shakespeare-sister-digital-archives-reveal.html
35 comments
The quote you give, is a nice example to see how history, historical research, etc has everything to do with setting the scene for the present, and not much to do with the past.
History is a present day activity. It is akin to the background scenery in a play - it provides the context for the present, it sets up our current stories. It's all to do with interpretation, and that is only ever present.
History is a present day activity. It is akin to the background scenery in a play - it provides the context for the present, it sets up our current stories. It's all to do with interpretation, and that is only ever present.
The reigning monarch during much of shakespeare and his sister's life was queen elizabeth - a woman.
Yes, and of course all of the rights and social privileges which applied to the monarchy applied likewise to everyone else, and thus all women during the Elizabethan era were precisely as free as Elizabeth herself.
dagoodnews(1)
And the most famous line from her most famous speech is… ?
“I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a king of England too”
https://www.rmg.co.uk/stories/topics/queen-elizabeth-speech-...
https://www.rmg.co.uk/stories/topics/queen-elizabeth-speech-...
[deleted]
The most famous line from Henry the VIII's speech is?
They didn't give speeches back then because they didn't give a fuck about the public.
They didn't give speeches back then because they didn't give a fuck about the public.
Between Elizabeth I, Catherine Di Medici, Roxalana of Turkey, and Mary Queen of Scots, female rulers were unusually common.
Female writers were unusually rare.
Female writers were unusually rare.
So they found this document, two people saw it, they made a digital copy, and then the original was lost? That seems to be what the linked article is saying, and I can't access the paper.
That seems sketchy as hell.
That seems sketchy as hell.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespears_Sister on the money here.
> on the money here.
Or, maybe not, according to the article. But "Stay" is still an amazing piece of art.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCYaALgW80c
Or, maybe not, according to the article. But "Stay" is still an amazing piece of art.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCYaALgW80c
I was 10 when stay came out but I can still remember the music video clear as day. Only other one from that time I remember that clearly was earth song.
Siobhan Fahey's performance is otherworldly! We named our daughter after her (and a bit after Siobhán Donaghy).
IIRC from an interview with her, the otherworldly performance is something to do with the bottle of vodka she drank while waiting for everyone else to get ready
I know that story. :)
Apparently the band was named after the song by the Smiths, which in turn was named after the essay by Virginia Woolf.
Stay!
dagoodnews(3)
Like all alternative authorship theories, this one is based on a fundamental misunderstanding, that being that "great art" is necessarily biographical or reflects the "soul" of the artist. Once you've made that error, you can trivially point out that Shakespeare wrote about people, places, and situations that the Stratford man wouldn't have been personally familiar with, and then you can pick anyone else you like from the era that you think might match your profile better. This exact process has been used for Bacon, Derby, Oxford, and dozens of other claimants; nobody has offered a truly new argument against Shakespeare for decades.
I recommend the book _Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?_ by James S. Shapiro as the definitive work examining, explaining, and debunking alternative authorship theories. It's thoughtful and well-written, not the dry diatribe one might expect.
I recommend the book _Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?_ by James S. Shapiro as the definitive work examining, explaining, and debunking alternative authorship theories. It's thoughtful and well-written, not the dry diatribe one might expect.
At first I thought you were referring to _Who wrote Shakespeare?_ by John Michell, which I would recommend. They sound like very similar books.
If anyone has read both recently, what are the main differences between them?
If anyone has read both recently, what are the main differences between them?
[deleted]
What is the relevance?
This is a central point also that Woolf makes in _A Room of One's Own_.