| 
|
This piece is part of a larger section called 'Short takes'.
To see all of that section, click on these lines.
Literary works not severed from their human source
I just plain disagree with Joanna Bratten's idea that the effort to discover the true identity of Shakespeare is "an unnecessary invasion into the mysterious anonymity of the poet." I do not think that it is wise to deliberately sever an author's works from his biography. If one of the goals of literary criticism is to study human nature, aren't works that are "judged on their merits alone" less valuable than those that are attached to real live human beings? It seems to me that if we are content to study the anonymous works alone we will learn as much about an oak tree as we can gather from a pile of its dead branches.
Justine (Franzonello, '93) Schmiesing
Related Articles:
• What if Shakspere wasn't Shakespeare?, Kathleen van Schaijik (III,6)
• Oxford gaining on Shakspere, Kathleen van Schaijik (IV,7)
• Why I reject the Shakespearean 'heresies', Robert Englert (V,1)
• What matters the identity or the sexual orientation of 'Shakespeare'?, Joanna K. M. Bratten (V,2)
• Literary works not severed from their human source, Justine Schmiesing (V,3)
• The 'Stratford man' and the Shakespearean canon: no match at all, Kathleen van Schaijik (V,3)
• The Shakespeare issue: a response from a literature student, John Doman (V,6)
• Kathleen van Schaijik replies to John Doman on Shakespeare, Kathleen van Schaijik (V,6)
• Shakespeare and the Catholic question, Glen Cascino (V,8)
By the same author:
• The Catholic Church and the Little Green Man, (II,5)
• The ivory tower of campus life, (II,6)
• They're ba-a-ack, (III,6)
• Noticing the attractiveness of modesty among FUS women, (IV,6)
• Literary works not severed from their human source, (V,3)
[back to top]
© The University Concourse, November 10, 1999
|
