Why not Shaksper?

Back again after a too long hiatus.

Why not just accept William Shaksper is the poet/playwright? Because he doesn't fit the profile needed to be the famed author. This fact was recognized by many famous people; Sigmund Freud, Mark Twain, Orson Welles, Leslie Howard, Derek Jacobi, Jeremy Irons, Supreme Court judges, scholars, and more and more since. I recently read a paper by Dr. Micael Delahoyde, Washington State University who quotes from J. Thomas Looney who felt the Stratford myth seemed worse than unsatisfactory. Looney gave a list of traits that had to have been associated with the true author; "recognition of his genius, eccentricity, sensibility, unconventionality, inadequately appreciated, literary recognition, enthusiasm of theater, recognition of his lyric poetry, a superior classical education, feudal connections, aristocratic, connections with Lancastrian supporters, enthusiasm for Italian culture, enthusiasm for aristocratic sport (e.g. falconry), musicality, financial improvidence, ambivalence about women, ambivalence about Catholicism."

There is no factual evidence William Shakespeare’s background would give him any of the above criteria for authorship. He was the son of an illiterate provincial butcher/glove maker with only a basic grammar school education that ended at the age of 13. He married Anne Hathaway at the age of 18 (she was 26) and five months later his daughter Suzanne was born. A year or so later he wife had twins. Shortly after, (Sometime in the 1580’s, he deserted his family to go to London. In London it is reported he held the horses for theater goers,and eventually began acting in a few plays.

There are additional reason why famous and learned men still doubt the possibility of Shakespeare authorship, but the purpose of this blog is to show, if not Shaksper, why not consider a woman. See next post.