Come Back to Shapiro S Preface to Contested Wiil Story in the Preface, Which Reboots Approaches
Come back to Shapiro’s preface to Contested WiIl—story in the preface, which reboots—approaches fraud—more likely poetic license or self-delusion. The “I had in my hands” moment is the crucial hting, the moment of pure-presence, of defreerral and suspense followed my retrieval and recognition told, narrated as an autobiographical anecdotes about archival research, the same kind of episode one finds in mysteries (like Possession) and detective fiction. The only problem is that the forgery had already been detected in 2003, and in an Oxfordian journal at that. In the TLS, Shapiro acknowledges that essay. But not in the book, both published the same year. Shapiro has to draw the line in two places by publishing different accounts of the same evidence in different places. Deconstuct fiction and historicism in criticism while keeping the linein place in detective fiction. Author’s note to The Shakespeare Secret. Mutual interest in drawing and redrawing the line.
Generative model—Will in the World as a novel and the novels Greenblatt cites just like other novelizations of Elizabeth and Shakespeare, Elizabeth and Bacon, Elizabeth and Oxford presented as historical fact.
It is to be noted that, that this great Critic also has omitted one circumstance; which is, that the Inscription with the Name of Shakespeare was intended to be placed on the Marble Scroll to which he points with this hand; instead of which it is now placed behind his back, and that specimen of an Edition is put on the Scroll, which Shakespeare hath great reason to point at. ANON.
Pope Alexander. The Dunciad. In The Poems of Alexander Pope: A Reduced Version of the Twickenham Text Ed. John Butt (New Haven: Yale UP, 1961), 720.
UseInterred by their Bones, one of the novels mentioned both by Hammon and by Roger Chartier in his book on Cardenio, mentions Oxford is caught up not only in the lost manuscript but in the authorship controversy. It even gets into the Shakespeare was a secret Catholic argument, trained by Jesuits, and has the translator of Don Quixote also misattributed. The Jesuit brother actually translated it and it published it under his brother’s name. (I confess that’s all I can say about the book because I found it unreadable. I have already wasted enough years on Shakespeare. I’m afraid I just don’t have world enough and time. I can already hear time’s winged chariots coming to bring through the iron gates of life. Seize the day seizure of the day
Division between first name and last, loss of referent of Will—two Wills, one Wiliam Shelton, the other William Shakespeare.
In Interred with their bones, Bacon, Oxford, William Stanley, Mary Sidney, Countess of Pembroke, and Shakespeare were all in on it, though it’s unclear the extent to which some were patrons who commissioned works or whether they wrote it.
Cardenio dropped from FF because of the Howards, who burned down the Globe after it was performed.
KJVand the final scene of the Book of Eli
KJV is the magnum opus in Interred with their Bones, psalm 46. Cardenio is found, and it begins with a Cervantes and Quixote frame.
end of Book of Eli as analogue
to Hamlet editing to make a point about dictation--what the end
reconstructs is a fantasy of recovery and transmission of a lost text
via a dictation that gets transcribed by hand. The lost Book of the
reassembled library, which even includes Shakespeare, is recovered
through a mediatized, theological model of transmission which posits a
voice at the and as the origin (of a remembered, interiorized text
that is forgotten to be such and is restaged as purified
exteriorization and transmission from a speaker's voice to a
listener's hand, like those Renaissance paintings of
apostles--Matthew?--taking dictation form Jesus). The giveaway or
symptom lies in the latent pun in the film's title. The Book . . . of
Eli (the Book that Eli owns a copy of, namely, the Bible), but also
the Book of Eli as in the Book Eli wrote or spoke, the latest
prophetic installment, a Re-(Te)st(at)ement of the New in the form of
the Old, as in Book of Job, etc). A strangely post- or non-messianic
theology of the testament as statement recorded at the prophet's
deathbed. Eli's body becomes messianic--wounded, dying while
dictating, then dead--sacrificed to recover the book as corpus (Eli
begins at the beginning, with Genesis, but the montage of him
dictating does not end with him reciting the Book of Revelations).
The corpus has a dying breath—film finishes before dictation can end. So prophetic mode is tuned out, or turned off. Or a new prophet / disciple houses the old book under a new title. Gary Oldman thinks it’s a kind of magical book—he’s a bit like Caliban.
Miguel Y William
Elena Anaya, et al 1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
Playful and enjoyable February 3, 2012
ByJuan Vaquer-Castrodad
Format:DVD
This is a clever and playful Spanish film, in the spirit of "Shakespeare in Love", about a fantasy encounter between a beautiful and lively young Spanish woman (Elena Anaya) in 16th century Castille who, while living in England with her family and her nursemaid (Geraldine Chaplin), had met and fallen in love with a young William Shakespeare (Will Kemp). Back in Castille after becoming engaged to a much older Duke (Josep Pou), she meets Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra (Juan Galiardo), the future author of Don Quixote, a war hero who fought in the famous Battle of Lepanto under the old Duke. Cervantes has now turned tax collector after becoming disenchanted with writing because of the indifferent public reaction to his early comedies. Her old flame William Shakespeare then also turns up in Castille trying to win back his former lover and a pleasant comedy ensues between the three characters. The story is playful, involving her passion and admiration for the writing of both famous authors, her love for the young and handsome Shakespeare and enthrallment with the serious and older Cervantes, and the resulting entanglement between all of them and the Duke. The acting is first rate, the script cleverly mixes historic details with fantasy, the plot is enjoyable and pleasant. The period settings and costumes are excellent and the directing is very good. I found it enjoyable and decided to buy it, but wouldn't recommend you do so unless you enjoy the period, the settings and the language. The movie is spoken mostly in Spanish with some English dialogue, particularly in the sequences involving Shakespeare.
Out Source Studies
Jean Rae Baxter, Looking for Cardenio (title echoes Al Pacino’s Looking for Richard). Turns out that the mss is a forgery (209), and the forged mss is based on Middleton’s The Witch, posthumously published for the first time in 1778. Only one mss copy in the Bodleian. See pp. 252-54
Possibly the compilers of the First Folio could not find a manuscript from which to print it. That might well have been the case if the prompt copy had perished in the fire that destroyed the Globe Theatre in 1613. Or perhaps the compilers rejected Cardenio as they rejected Pericles, as not entirely Shakespeare’s work. Whatever the reason, they had not included Cardenio. 215-16.
See outlines her theory p. 216
Mss as mummified,190
“My theory is, somebody four hundred years ago took an obscure play, doctored the text, and tried to pass it off as Shakespeare’s lost play.
Who was the real author?” Sebastian certainly was persistent . .
I don’t know, but I intend to find out.” 250
Now what? Playing literary detective, I had solved the first half of the mystery. But—to use the language of crime fiction—I still didn’t know “Who done it.” Nor did I anticipate that I could ever learn the name of the man behind the fraud. People like him . . . leave no imprint behind. 253-54.
King’s College Chief Archivist has checked the record,” said Mrs. Cohen. “A clergyman, the Reverend Cadwaller Simpson, presented the manuscript in question as a gift to the College . . .” She glanced at the document on her desk. “The date was November 7, 1862. By the early 1900s, King’s College had lost track of the manuscript. 260-61
Mss preservation p. 261;193-95.
But where did the play come from? Who did write it? What was its title before the scam artist stole it? If I managed to uncover the identity of the real author, my discovery could result in an interesting book that might help me to another university position. 214-15
Shakespeare as w/underwriter / undertaker.
Murder mystery by J. L. Carrell’s The Shakespeare Secret (2007), 133
Jean Rae Baxter Looking for Cardenio (20008)
David Nokes The Nightingale Papers (2005), 132
Jpaser Fforde, Lost in a Good Book (2002), sci-fi, 131
Gregory Doran Shakespeare's Lost Play: In Search of Cardenio [Paperback]
In addition to the Arden edition of Cardenio, Gary Taylor’s reconstruction, Sort of Shakespeare
See the Anonymous DVD at the bottom right page for Doran's Cardenio book and Shapiro’s Contested Will.
We can focus on this novel since it is so central to Hammon in his introduction. We can also justify attention to these works because they are placed on a continuum with Greenblatt and Mee , Talyor, etc in the Arden intro (same section) and by Chartier. Mentioned summarized, invoked, but not read. The novel triangulates our triangulation of Anonymous , Cardenio, and Oxfordianism (except it is Baconianism in Carrell’s case).
Entre Cervantes y Shakespeare : sendas del Renacimiento = Between Shakespeare and Cervantes : Trails Along the Renaissance
eds. Zenón Luis-Martínez, Luis Gómez Canseco.
Author: Entre Cervantes y Shakespeare: Sendas del Renacimiento (2004: Huelva, Spain) Newark, Del.: Juan de la Cuesta, 2006.
Robin Chapman, Shakespeare's Don Quixote: A Novel in DialogueBook Now Publishing, 2011
Interesting that the title is creates yet another aka for Cardenio and actually misattributes authorship since only Cervantes can rightly be linked with a possessive to Don Quixote. The conjunction of Shakespeare and Don Quixote, both part of a title separated from the author (like film director Baz Luhman is from William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet) is obviously meant to be thought-provoking.
SHAKESPEARE'S DON QUIXOTE recreates what might have been: a lost play presented at Whitehall Palace in 1613. That year Shakespeare's company provided 14 plays for a royal wedding. One was called Cardenio. The original script has never been found but an 18th century version, retitled Double Falsehood, may contain echoes of their work together. Cardenio's story occurs in Don Quixote, Cervantes's universal best-seller, wherein the vexed teenager protagonist encounters the would-be knight errant and his sceptical squire. If Shakespeare's attention was drawn to the story's dramatic potential it seems likely it would have featured Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, since by that time Cervantes's double act was appearing on stage and in carnivals worldwide. Acting upon this hypothesis Robin Chapman's novel plays out today in a theatre of the mind. Among the audience the reader will find the attentive spirits of Shakespeare, Fletcher and Cervantes who soon become involved with each other and in the performance.
Frazier, Harriet C. 2009. A babble of ancestral voices: Shakespeare, Cervantes and Theobald, Jefferson, N.C. : McFarland & Co.,
Roger Chartier, Cardenio Between Cervantes and Shakespeare: The Story of a Lost Play
(Polity Press, 2012)
The Quest for Cardenio: Shakespeare, Fletcher, Cervantes, and the Lost Play
David Carnegie (Editor), Gary Taylor (Editor)
Oxford UP, Sept / November 2012
Shakespeare's Don Quixote: A Novel in Dialogue
Robin Chapman(Author)
Don Quixote itself has a frame narrative—it’s a found text framed as a translation from Arabic, an archive (literally).
A la Borges’ Pierre Menard, Author of Don Quioxote, we have Lewis Theobald, not author of Cardenio.
Greenblatt and Mee’s Cardenio project, and Roger Chartier’s book on Cardenio,
Similar books have been written about Cardenio. Murder mystery by J. L. Carrell’s
Gregory Doran,
These books are books restitution, recovery, and restoration projects that operate through normal bibliographical codes and textual forensics. High tech computer scene when John Hurt demonstrates the “real” truth of the Last Supper and, along with John Hurt, explains the cover up. In Da Vinci Code 2, the archive is where the truth is. It’s more about retribution studies than attribution studies.
The title and subtitle of Doran’s book actually do replace Shakespeare’s name with another. There was a TV show with Michael Wood called In Search of Shakespeare (2003). One of the sequences of that show, directed by Doran, involved a song from Cardenio. See Arden, 332 and “Wood speculates that this is the second song heard originally in The History of Cardenio but dropped by Theobald except in allusion.” 333 As I recall, Woods also gets into the authorship question.
Looking for Richard is also a quest film.
Btw, check this out:
DoubleFalsehood: Third Series (Arden Shakespeare)
William Shakespeare, Brean Hammond
Cardenio entre Cervantes et Shakespeare (French Edition) [Paperback]
Roger Chartier (Author)
Below you can see a translation of the text to be found on the France Culture, French radio website, copied from the book's blurb. This blurb prompted me to buy Roger Chartier's book, "Cardenio, between Cervantès and Shakespeare: The Story of a Lost Play". The book was published a few months ago.
"How to read a text that does not exist, or get an idea of a play whose real author we don’t know and the manuscript of which has been lost? That is the riddle posed by Cardenio--a play performed in England for the first time in 1612 or 1613, and attributed, forty years later, to Shakespeare (and Fletcher). The play is based on a story contained in Don Quixote, a work which began to circulate in the major European countries very soon after publication, to be both translated and adapted for the theater. In England, the novel of Cervantes was known and quoted even before 1612, the year in which it was translated (into English) and inspired Cardenio.
This riddle has a number of facets. It was a time when, thanks chiefly to the invention of printing, differing discourses proliferated and fear of their excesses led to their rarefaction. All pieces of writing were not meant to survive. Plays, which were considered the lowest of the low in the literary hierarchy, very often were not even printed – and the genre adapted well to the ephemeral existence of its works. But, if an author became famous, the subsequent search through the archives inspired the invention of textual relics, restoration of remains damaged by time, and even, at times, to fill in the gaps, forgery.
This is what happened to Cardenio in the eighteenth century. Uncovering the history of this play thus leads to questions about the past status of works now considered part of the literary canon. In this book, the reader rediscovers the malleability of texts, as they are transformed by their translations and adaptations, their migration from one genre to another, and the successive meanings constructed by their audiences. For many readers, Don Quixote was for a long time a collection of stories, suitable to be published separately or to be adapted for the stage, at the expense of the consistency of the eponymous hero's adventures. Shakespeare was a playwright who, like many of his colleagues, often wrote in collaboration, recycled stories borrowed from other writers and at times could not find a publisher for his texts. Roger Chartier illuminates the riddle of a play without a text, but not without an author."<a href="
The Quest for Cardenio: Shakespeare, Fletcher, Cervantes, and the Lost Play [Hardcover]
David Carnegie (Author), Gary Taylor (Author)
Also the library, wonder cabinet scene in Oxford’s house.
How I found Cardenio, Shakespeare's lost play
As a Renaissance scholar, I've been piecing together fragments of a play believed to be part-written by Shakespeare. Now the results are about to go on show
Share 28
Tweet 16
This page has been shared 16 times. View these Tweets.
1
Putting one and one together ... Pippa Nixon and Alex Hassell in the RSC's Cardenio – a different reconstruction – earlier this year. Photograph: Tristram Kenton for the Guardian
In the spring of 1613, the office of the Treasurer of the King's Chamber recorded two separate payments to the King's Men – William Shakespeare's company – for performances of a play called Cardenna or Cardenno. The two records presumably refer to the same play, since it is unlikely that the King's Men had two different plays whose titles differed by only a single letter. Court records almost always abbreviated play titles, and the clerks who wrote these draft accounts were primarily concerned with exactly how much money was paid to whom. Almost all scholars agree that both payments refer to Cardenio.
Cardenio's story, based on a section from Cervantes's masterpiece Don Quixote, is a tragicomedy set in the Spanish mountains, populated by goatherds and shepherds, lovers, madmen and nunneries. Of playwrights known to have been writing for the King's Men in the years 1611–14, only three wrote pastoral tragicomedies: Francis Beaumont, John Fletcher and William Shakespeare.
In 1653 the leading English publisher of plays and poetry, Humphrey Moseley, registered his copyright in a list of 42 plays. Somewhere mid-list is "The History of Cardenio, by Mr Fletcher & Shakespeare". Shakespeare had yet to become English literature's biggest cash cow, and Moseley never published that play (or many others that he registered). Moseley's title-phrase, The History of Cardenio, appears verbatim in the first English translation of Part One of Don Quixote, published in 1612. Since the phrase appears nowhere else in English, the play that Moseley registered must, logically speaking, have dramatised the Cardenio episodes from Cervantes's novel. It's a plausible attribution to Fletcher and Shakespeare.