Shakespeare, In Fact

by Irvin Leigh Matus

Argues that a more thorough approach to understanding the Elizabethan period will end the debate over who is the true author of the famous plays, and create a deeper understanding of who Shakespeare was

Genres: Shakespeare

1 pages, Paperback

First published July 1, 1994

Reviews

[Kate · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the book to have if you're surrounded by mouthy anti-Stratfordians who will not leave you alone with their reasons, reasons, reasons why the playwright Shakespeare could not have been that glovemaker's son Will.
It counters most if not all of the favorite arguments with reasonable, detailed historic information. Besides helping you hold your own in any literary arguments you care to (or are forced to) join, it's just plain interesting.
A "must-have" for your Shakespeare shelf.

[Eleanor · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was recommended to me by another Goodreads member after I had abandoned a work of fiction masquerading as fact. It was trying to convince the reader that the works of Shakespeare were really written by the 17th Earl of Oxford, mainly by finding parallels between his life and events in the plays, and of course by telling the reader over and over that Oxford wrote the plays. I had come to the book with an open mind but finished up irritated.

This book is brilliant, forensic in detail and utterly crushing in dealing with the various arguments of those who claim that The Man from Stratford could not possibly have written the works of Shakespeare. It is interesting that the book about Oxford completely fails to mention the existence of Matus's book, but hardly surprising!

If you are interested in the matter, I recommend this book very highly indeed.

[Joseph · Rating 4 out of 5]

Probably best suited for Shakespeare nerds, this oft-cited work examines the various arguments for and against the hypothesis that the Bard's plays were actually written by a number of other people - supposedly including Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe, and/or Edward deVere, Earl of Oxford. What I found most fascinating was the author's discussion of the waxing and waning of Shakespeare's perceived importance to literature over the ages.

[Ed · Rating 3 out of 5]

This isn't a book one would "love to read," as some others on the subject are. This is dry, like a martini, or an African desert, with very few oases in sight. That being said, the data is sound. If I ever become a 12 o'clock scholar, I'll know where to look.