Stalking Shakespeare: A Memoir of Madness, Murder, and My Search for the Poet Beneath the Paint

by Lee Durkee

*Winner of the 2024 Mississippi Institute of Arts & Letters Award for Life Writing* “A wickedly entertaining” (The New York Times) detective story that chronicles one Mississippi man’s relentless search for an authentic portrait of William Shakespeare.Following his divorce, down-and-out writer and Mississippi exile Lee Durkee holed himself up in a Vermont fishing shack and fell prey to a decades-long obsession with Shakespearian portraiture. It began with a simple despite the prevalence of popular portraits, no one really knows what Shakespeare looked like. That the Bard of Avon has gotten progressively handsomer in modern depictions seems only to reinforce this point. “Intensely readable…with bust-out laughing moments” (Garden & Gun), Stalking Shakespeare is Durkee’s fascinating memoir about a hobby gone awry, the 400-year-old myriad portraits attached to the famous playwright, and Durkee’s own unrelenting search for a lost picture of the Bard painted from real life. As Durkee becomes better at beguiling curators into testing their paintings with X-ray and infrared technologies, we get a front-row seat to the captivating mysteries—and unsolved murders—surrounding the various portraits rumored to depict Shakespeare. Whisking us backward in time through layers of paint and into the pages of obscure books on the Elizabethans, Durkee travels from Vermont to Tokyo to Mississippi to DC and ultimately to London to confront the stuffy curators forever protecting the Bard’s image. For his part, Durkee is the adversary they didn’t know they had—a self-described dilettante with nothing to lose, the “Dan Brown of Elizabethan portraiture.” A bizarre and surprisingly moving blend of biography, art history, and madness, Stalking Shakespeare is a “gripping, poignant, and enjoyable” (The Washington Post) journey that will forever change the way you look at one of history’s greatest cultural and literary icons.

Genres: Nonfiction, History, Memoir, Shakespeare, Biography, Art, Literature

263 pages, Kindle Edition

Published April 18, 2023

About the author

Lee Durkee's novel THE LAST TAXI DRIVER (Tin House Books) was named a Best Book of the Year in three countries in 2021. He is also the author of the novel RIDES OF THE MIDWAY (WW Norton, 2001). His memoir STALKING SHAKESPEARE, which chronicles his hilarious and irreverent two decade obsession with finding lost portraits of William Shakespeare, will be released by Scribner Books in April 2023. His stories and essays have appeared in Harper’s Magazine, The Sun, The Oxford American, Zoetrope, Garden & Gun, Tin House, & Mississippi Noir. He lives in North Mississippi.

Reviews

[Theresa (mysteries.and.mayhem) · Rating 3 out of 5]

Stalking Shakespeare by Lee Durkee was an impulse pick for me. The art history aspect caught my attention and had me curious. The personal bits of the book were entertaining! Durkee goes through a divorce and finds himself obsessed with finding an original painting of William Shakespeare. His wry sense of humor shines throughout the book and kept me reading. However, the details about the different portraits he obsesses over get very deep into the weeds. I learned quite a bit about the art of the Elizabethan era. I also learned about the fashion of the era, the history of the era, the politics of the era, etc., etc. There was a LOT of information. That almost lost me. But Durkee's humor would draw me back in. If the history books I had in high school were this entertaining, I might have learned a bit more back in the day!

The humor saved the book. If you're an Elizabethan era history buff, or a die hard Shakespeare fan, this book may be more your speed. I didn't hate it, but it wasn't a favorite either. I ended up giving Stalking Shakespeare three out of five stars.

I received an advance review copy for free, and I am leaving this review voluntarily.

[Melanie Lang · Rating 5 out of 5]

Stalking Shakespeare reads like fiction with fantastic storytelling. What could have been a boring topic if you are not familiar with The Bard, was spellbinding, drawing you into Lee Durkee's sometimes obsessive search. I found myself stopping to consider the facts and details as if I was the detective alongside "Detective Durkee." By setting this up as a memoir, I was given just enough personal information to see not only a vulnerable side to the author, but one I can connect to while providing the backstory to understand why Shakespeare and why now. Without such buildup, the audience wouldn't become invested. So once you begin reading, you're hooked to the end. Well-written, interesting, and clever! I will recommend this to my teacher friends in the English Department.

[G.M. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Shakespeare always inspires a sort of mania in his fans (including me) because so little is known about him. I can't wait to read this book. Very positive review in today's Washington Post so I rushed to download it as my London read.

[Dana · Rating 1 out of 5]

DNF at just under 50% which is sad because there were some interesting bits in there. But I truly dgaf about the author inserting his personal narrative and inner thoughts. Was he worried the book wouldn’t be long enough without reminding us every other page that he lives in Vermont and it’s cold and he has adhd and likes pop tarts? I can’t. And his conspiracy theories. I imagine the all museum workers rolling their eyes any time they must have received another email from him. I am inspired to read another book on the topic, just not from him.

[Francis M. Prensa · Rating 2 out of 5]

This authors obsessiveness about Shakespeare and this painting, like he said “the uglier the better” was too funny. It reads as fiction, quirky as hell, I couldn’t stop laughing. Being that I don’t have knowledge in art history and the Shakespeare Era it was sometimes hard to follow through without having to stop and google things. I was googling A LOT. This book was not for me, even though I appreciated the humor of it all. Thanks Netgalley for giving me the opportunity to read this book.

[Sean · Rating 4 out of 5]

I like Lee Durkee. He is almost a Hunter S. Thompson of the Velvet Ditch that is Oxford, Mississippi. Some of the reviews of his work lead me to believe that not everyone digs what he is doing. Especially some who are looking for a somewhat in-depth dive into who was or who was not William Shakespeare. I say “somewhat,” because my knowledge of Bill is limited to whatever I read in high school 30 years ago, the Paltrow movie, and the all-too-frequent JEOPARDY category. All that said: the book sent me to Google frequently…but feel I learned nothing more than what I knew before I started. I was also reminded that I’m glad I doing have an adderal addiction. That’s the three star review. Extra star for all of the Oxford (Mississippi, not the other one) mentions. City Grocery. Gertrude Ford. Ace Atkins. Joey Lauren Adams. Square Books. William Faulkner. Larry Brown. Ajax. I can’t help it. That’s my thing. Fun read. Until the Epilogue. Way too long and meandering and I did not finish it.

[Beth · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was enticed by this at a bookstore and took it out of the library but sadly it wasn’t really for me. That’s not to say it’s a bad book - I think the right person would find it to be all the glorious adjectives it was blurbed with in the back - but it didn’t hit me right. Maybe partly it was that I was interested in the history tidbits and at the end of the day this was actually a book about the author, not the history. And maybe I was just being a grump about the author himself, who, again, I think would appeal to lots of readers. For me I just kept coming up against this portrait (ironically) of the author as a certain kind of Guy Writer, the kind who wears his somewhat antisocial behavior and terrible drinking habits and Adderall consumption with pride as a badge of honor. I just wasn’t quite sure what I was supposed to make of him as a character in his own book (and I know, he wouldn’t care that I was grossed out that he got hung over and threw up in the garden of the Folger Library, because he’s a Guy Writer, but sorry, I was grossed out). There was also a particular effect of the way he talked about these obscure people and storylines that I think was supposed to communicate his particular obsession-fueled experience, but just left me vaguely annoyed and craving real history. Again, just personal taste … but not really my book.

[Jill Elizabeth · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very interesting story conceptually. Durkee's voice is wry and witty and snarky and very engaging. That said, without an absolute obsession of the type the author experienced, it is a slow-going read as a whole simply because it is so detailed. His quest is so involved and so much of the story lies in the minutiae that, if you are not personally obsessed with, can start to feel monotonous and difficult to slog through after a while.

I must confess I skimmed at times, jumping to his color commentary after getting a grounding in each new attempt at finding the *real* Shakespeare. It helped. Still, despite the slow-going, it was very interesting story and a very full journey, and one worth the time...

Thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for my obligation-free review copy.

[Eric Vivier · Rating 2 out of 5]

"There was no feel or respect for history," Durkee says of his visit to the Tower of London, without any apparent irony. The same should be said of his memoir of conspiratorial portrait examination, which begins with a desire to behold an authentic painting of his hero, Shakespeare, and ends with the theory that the stubbornly successful statesman Sir Robert Cecil orchestrated a cover-up of the greatest collaborative authorship scandal in history: a team of writers including (but apparently not limited to) the Earl of Oxford Edward de Vere, Thomas Nashe, Fulke Greville, and the Countess of Pembroke Mary Sidney collectively wrote the plays commonly attributed to that sordid businessman from Stratford. (Cecil's apparently cover-up is apparently why none of Shakespeare's contemporaries doubted his authorship of the plays and poems attributed to him, or why the "authorship question" was not raised until hundred of years after his death.) There is just so much bad history here, from Durkee's willingness to repeat Catholic libels about Queen Elizabeth and the Cecils without question to his account of the theatrical milieu of the period to his sweeping generalizations about Elizabethan tastes, hobbies, and preoccupations.

Durkee's saving grace for most of the book is his awareness that he is spinning a yarn out of conspiracy theories, though his "shark tank theory of truth," introduced in the book's final pages, seems to suggest that there is an uncomfortable earnestness to this whole thing: he really does seem convinced that he can uncover some kind of truth about Shakespeare by examining portraits of him. But instead of proving that we can't know "who wrote Shakespeare" - which is the truth that Durkee ultimately arrives at - he really just proves that we can't learn anything about Shakespeare by examining the details of the paintings that purport to depict him. I could have told him that from the start.

[Poptartk · Rating 3 out of 5]

Really a 3.5, but rounded down. Why? Well...

I was intrigued by the premise of the book, even though I have to admit that I didn't really see the same things in the portraits on display within that Durkee was describing. I really wanted to see more of the x-ray evidence and underpainting, although I realize that was probably due to either legal issues about reproducing the images or the cost of reproduction, or probably both. That said, I learned a few things about Shakespeare scholarship and Elizabethan politics I never even had an inkling about, such as Neoplatonism... even though I have two degrees in English lit (albeit my interests were more re Chaucer than the Bard). As a memoir, the author's account of his life during those particular years struck me as a kind of fascinating train wreck—both horrifying and darkly hilarious, often both at the same time.

Still, I'm interested now in reading some of his fiction, just for balance. And don't get me wrong. This is book is well worth reading if you have any interest in the topic. He's definitely inspired me to revisit the "Is Shakespeare Dead" section of Mark Twain's autobiography.

[Trevor Seigler · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lee Durkee falls down a rabbit hole of obsession when he starts to ponder why the world's most famous literary figure never looks the same in any of the many portraits that exist, and that provides us with a mostly entertaining look at Elizabethan portraiture, intrigue, and conspiracy theories concerning the authorship of William Shakespeare's plays and poems. Though I don't buy all of his assertions regarding the Bard, I did find Durkee to be an engaging tour guide through the webs of Shakespeare lore that he encounters along the way. This is definitely a unique book among the many penned about Shakespeare, it won't be to everyone's taste but I think it will find its audience.

[Elizabeth Bell · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fascinating peek into obsession--and obsession over a topic that fascinates me too. I came away with a less than rosy opinion of the Folger Shakespeare Library (whose theatre, exhibits, and garden I've visited several times though I haven't used the library part) but I loved picturing the author there. I particularly liked the Epilogue and I agree with Durkee: we will never know who really wrote the words attributed to Shakespeare (since the quest for an authentic portrait of him ultimately leads to the authorship question).

[Erika · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was such a wild, hilarious, and sad ride. I love the author’s honesty about himself and the way he perceives the world. Filled with lots of fascinating images of bards, this was a great read all around!

[Veronica · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the best and most apt way to learn about art history: through the eyes and mind of a narrator who is charmingly deranged.

[Brittany · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.25

[Lynn Lebo-Planas · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was interesting for a while, but then I struggled to finish it. Maybe I wasn't the target audience, and you need to be a deep Shakespearian affeciado, of which I'm sure there are many.

[Joanne Gass · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a quirky, funny, exasperating book, which ends up, really, nowhere. but, I enjoyed it.

[Cameron Mitchell · Rating 1 out of 5]

On the one hand there's something strangely fascinating about this book. But it's compelling in the same kind of base, voyeuristic way as witnessing a car crash or someone having a psychotic break. In fact, the latter is more or less what this book is. It's much less a book about Shakespeare than it is a memoir of Durkee's mental illness and paranoid obsessions. Which is fine. But it's hard to take the historical and artistic commentary, such as it is, seriously when the author spends so much of the word count talking about his romantic relationships, the shoes he bought for a concert, and his addiction to Adderall, alcohol, and pop tarts. I'd like to say this book doesn't know what it's trying to do or what it wants to be but I don't actually know if that's the case. Several times throughout the latter half, as the half-baked anti-Stratfordian thread comes into focus, I found myself wondering if all the self-reflection and manic theorizing is just there to obfuscate the fact the book isn't actually trying to do anything because it has nothing to say. Durkee doesn't even commit to the idea that Edward de Vere or Fulke Greville might be behind Shakespeare's texts, backtracking in the epilogue to a "nobody knows, man" position. Sure. Nobody knows anything. But that's not a particularly profound insight, and for all his pot shots at academics and curators it's hard not to suspect that Durkee ends up taking this position simply because he doesn't have the intellectual or authorial skills to adequately explicate the ideas he's used as a hook.

I guess the book was very occasionally funny but there's something terminally cringe about a sixty something white man writing "Like it or not, the Globe was a G thang" or "Everywhere you looked, London was beef and bling". I don't know what else to say. I feel as if certain sentences in this book have left me psychologically scarred. Maybe that was the point all along.

[Brie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Stalking Shakespeare: a Memoir of Madness, Murder, and My Search for the Poet Beneath the Pain by Lee Durkee

Thank you to @scribner for the opportunity to read and review this #eARC novel!

This darkly funny and captivating investigative tale follows Durkee’s sometimes drunken and adder all-riddled but always obsessive quest to find a portrait of William Shakespeare painted from life. The premise began fairly simplistically: everyone knows of Shakespeare and an image of him is widely accepted but what did he really look like? And was Shakespeare a man, one man? Etc. This decades long obsessive quest for the portrait lead Durkee all around the world, through many painstaking relationships with curators, and through many conversations with ghosts.

This is unlike anything I’ve read before. A lesser known fact about me is that I picked up an English minor with a focus in British literature “for fun” when in college. One of the courses I enrolled in “for fun” was a course on Shakespeare. It was during that course that for the first time I began to question who actually wrote the works we accredit to Shakespeare. Naturally, this novel pulled me in head first. I was somewhat disappointed that there was no firm conclusion at the end, but that’s kind of the point, right? And looking too hard or for too long can make you literally mad. This tale was as funny and entertaining as it was informative and thorough and I am deeply appreciative of his dedication.

I highly recommend this to those who have a more than slight curiosity of Shakespeare’s identity or those who want to know more.

⭐️⭐️⭐️💫 - 3.5/5

[Cristina · Rating 2 out of 5]

Shakespeare Was Finally Fuckable

Boy, did this start out hilarious and charming and smart and then end up one big annoying flirtation with anti-Stratfordianism for no good reason. At first I was willing to let Durkee play the devil’s advocate (“Shakespeare the Motherfucker” is the best description of the Prince Tudor theory that I have ever heard, period). But even that snark disappeared as Durkee went on a rant on the Ashbourne (long settled as Not Shakespeare), and visibly lost IQ points. I’m saddened and confused. What the hell happened?

Not to mention that Durkee did not cover all the reputed portraits. Some of them, like the Sanders or the Grafton, are quite interesting, both with their own adherents and ugly enough for his liking.

I was also miffed at 1) his in-depth simping for the Flower portrait when a cursory glance at Google confirms it as an 19th-century forgery, and 2) his pet theory that some Folgers skullduggery was involved with Peter Michaels’ murder just as he was X-raying the Ashbourne…only to reveal Michaels’ seedy underworld connections and possible death by honey trap. Bah, humbug.

Shakespeare did love his fools. But he also loved his privacy much more. Maybe Shakespeare should have issued an restraining order against Durkee.

[Jenny · Rating 2 out of 5]

I didn't know anything about this book when I checked it out from the library, but I'm always game for thoughtful, intelligent examinations of Shakespeare.

What I got was a crude, manic, obsessive examination of supposed portraits of Shakespeare that ultimately led to the "Shakespeare isn't Shakespeare" conspiracy. Poorly written and ultimately hugely disappointing. Don't waste your time with this one.

[Melissa · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars
The 1st half is a hallucinatory, drug-addled trip down the rabbit hole of obsession. The 2nd half, in which he claws his way to solid ground, built upon probability and likelihoods, is much more readable.

[Quilla · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very strange, somewhat pointless, mildly entertaining.

[Hayley Lindbeck · Rating 3 out of 5]

A man’s adderall addiction causes him to hallucinate wildly and eventually conclude that Shakespeare did not exist.

[STEPHEN PLETKO!! · Rating 3 out of 5]

XXXXX

WHAT DID SHAKESPEARE LOOK LIKE?

XXXXX

"It's not a pretty story what follows, but it's an honest one. Although my years of exploration have produced a tale filled with sorcerers, demonic possesson, royal scandals, portrait switchery, Adderall addiction, incest, madness, ghosts, shark tanks , and two sordid murders, this was not my intent.

What started off as a dilettante's hobby took over my life during those endless winters I could not abide. Inside the frozen landscape the disgruntled portraits of Will Shakespeare befriended and bewiched me. My research became something magical and demented, intuitive, and haunted."

The above quote (in italics) comes from this strange but strangely readable book by Lee Durkee. He is a novelist, storywriter, and essayist.

Durkee has Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). (ADHD is a mental disorder characterized by excessive amounts of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity.) Durkee also has Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). (OCD is a subclass of anxiety disorders characterized by recurrent and persistent thoughts, ideas, & feelings, and repetitive behavior.) Attempts to resist a compulsion produce mounting tension that's relieved immediately by giving into it. He takes the prescription medication Adderall, AKA Amphetamine Salt Mixture, to manage his mental problems.

This book is about Durkee's search for an authentic portrait of the Bard, William Shakespeare (1564 to 1616). It also touches on "the authorship question." (Note that scholars and academics see no need to question.)

This book does not work as a person trying to find the definitive portrait of Shakespeare simply because it doesn't adequately consider the facts that we have now.

In the four centuries since Shakespeare's death, over two hundred and fifty "authentic" portraits of Shakespeare have turned up in attics, pubs, and warehouses, but unfortunaely, only the Droeshout Engraving (which first appeared on the title page of the First Folio of Shakespeare's plays) and the Janssen Bust (over-looking Shakespeare's grave in Stratford-upon-Avon) have a strong claim to being authentic likenesses.

Shakespeaere's colleague Ben Jonson approved the Droeshout Engaving in his commentary poem found in the First Folio. The Janssen Bust was commissioned by Shakespeare's family who seemed to approve of it since it was never removed.

However, this book does work as a person with mental disorders attempting to discover an authentic portrait of Shakespeare. I found this book fascinating and even a page-turner when reading it from this perspective.

As you probably guessed, this book has many illustrations (mainly in the form of black and white portraits) in each chapter. It also has a section of color glossy photos. I counted over 30 of them.

There is no table of contents and no index included with this book. Thus, there is no easy access to vital information.

Finally, I did find this book humorous and entertaining. I found Durkee to be a good writer.

In conclusion, if you read this book from the right perspective, you'll probably find it quite interesting.

XXXXX

(2023; prologue; two parts or 20 chapters; epilogue; main narrative 250 pages; acknowledgments; bibliography; additional image credis; about the author)

XXXXX

[Toni · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was funnier than I would have guessed but don't discredit the author's wild approaches at his research, writing, and/or obsession with Elizabethan paintings. Mark Twain would be proud!

Why pick up this book (highly recommend the audiobook it's a doozy) because the author takes the reader on a pictural hunt for Shakespeare with all the "fake and assumed portraits" of Shakespeare - a unique approach to solving the unending quest. Much like Jane Austen, no picture has been done of the author but modern history desperately and continually finds/gives us "glamour shots" of a young, vivacious, and highly "fu*kable" author(s) for our desires to make our gods & goddess as beautiful as we find their novels.

The best commentary, IMHO, is about the Folgers Shakespeare Library/Museum - a glorified gift shop that gives NO access & no fu*ks to the everyday person to research "the common man, humble beginnings, genius, Shakespeare."

You can’t write a bestselling biography called I Don’t Know Who the Hell Wrote Shakespeare and Neither Do You nor can you print up a sellable T-shirt or coffee mug on that theme. But it’s the truth, you don’t know, and neither do you, or you, or you, but as a culture we won’t admit we don’t know who wrote Shakespeare. We desperately want to know. But we don’t. And likely never will.

This is one of the advantages to being a dilettante: the freedom to ask questions experts consider laughable. The dilettante works alone, a solitary figure, no colleagues to shock, no tenure at risk. Not only are we free to ask naive questions, there’s nobody around to tell us how things are supposed to be done. We make up new rules, rig together new methods, and in doing so sidestep familiar pitfalls. We might still lurch into a ditch, but it will be a ditch of our own making and not one already filled with dinted scholars.

I'm glad I own the ebook version and got the audiobook version from the library -highly recommend the audio narrator.

[Reading Our Shelves · Rating 4 out of 5]

Full review at: https://readingourshelves.wordpress.c...

I had never considered that we don’t actually know what William Shakespeare looked like. There are a few popular portraits that are used to portray him, and many that have been assumed to be him over the years, but – while they all depict men of his era, and are similar in some ways – there are discrepancies among them that would indicate they may not be portraits of the same person.

So, who decides if any of these Elizabethan men are or are not William Shakespeare? Apparently, there is a whole world of museum curators, art restorers, and scholars who debate things like this. And often, disagree. And maybe even, sometimes, hide or purposefully misrepresent their findings?

The author, though, is admittedly obsessive. Also an alcoholic, on Adderall, and at times addicted to pain killers. So, while some of these tales are indeed fascinating, we have to ask if he is predisposed to seeing things as “conspiracies.”

Another theory that arises from this world is one that I had heard of before, but didn’t realize was still hotly debated. And that is: was William Shakespeare even real? Obviously, his plays were. But were they written by someone else using a pen name? Or perhaps even by several authors? The various theories on who else might have written his works are peeked into in this book, and make for pretty scandalous reading at times.

I enjoyed this one. Obviously, though, I like a good non-fiction, and have a passing interest in theatre stuff. I feel like it may get too “in the weeds” for a casual reader. It would easily appeal to fans of history, and specifically British and/or art history.

[Moonkiszt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely hilarious! Laughed out loud so many times. . .Lee Durkee knows how to turn a phrase inside out, slap some Shakespeare sauce on it, and tell you where in the world and what he was doing as it was being written for your review, Dear Reader. It will knock you out of your studious reading position, for certain. You will plop to the floor cross-legged, skinching your back up to the closest comfy furniture as you did when you pulled out the Mad magazines back in the day. Recommence that read. . .be ready for the next crazy surprise.

All that wrapped around the author's obsession with finding That Last Painting of Shakespeare, Himself, lost in a world of so many portraits of May Be Shakespeares, Probably Is (or Isn't) Shakespeares, without leaving out the Could Be Shakespeares! The writing is smart, quick and clearly the author has Shakespeare chops and is tech savvy. I was pre-conditioned by the actors in my family to staunchly defend the family stand on the Shakespeare Controversy, but once Mr. Durkee started in I could see the problem was deeper and darker than I or my peeps (or most people in the world?!) realized. For that persuasion alone, stars are won. The laughs, even more, and for coming somewhere closer to the truth than anyone wants to accept. . . .HA. 5 star bingo!!

Two truths underlined herein: 1) Again proved is that history IS written by Current Victors (reserving all rights to overwriting Previous Victors, ad infinitum); and, 2) the only real truth ever exists in the Present Moment. . . all else is a translation. . .and we know that can't be a 100% truth, right?

5 stars to the Bard & Mr. Durkee.

*A sincere thank you to Lee Durkee, Scribner, and NetGalley for an ARC to read and independently review.*

[Cynthia Egbert · Rating 3 out of 5]

This one is quite a dizzying ride and I believe that the audience for such a book is not huge. I think you really have to want to dig deep into Shakespeare and the various authorship theories to appreciate what Mr. Durkee is offering here. But, as anyone who knows my would tell you, I adore this sort of thing. Even as I cling to my romantic foundation of being a Stratfordian, I let go of that post now and again to flap in the wind of other theories. At the end of the day, I remain a Stratfordian, but I am willing to make allowances for other possibilities. One note of caution, I began this one as an audiobook, and it is well done and the narrator is great, but after only a little way into the book, I had to purchase a real copy so that I could see all of the portraits that the author was referencing. In the end, I completed it as an amalgamation of audio and reading.

"We tend to project our own culture backward onto history and paint ourselves over dead tribes."

"The possibility crossed my mind, not for the first time that the act of studying Shakespeare over the course of a lifetime might pose severe dangers to mental health. Could rabbit-holing Shakespeare trigger something akin to multiple personality disorder? Could the psyche become an inner Globe filled with too many exits and entrances?"

"It wasn’t that I believed these conspiracies it was that I didn’t disbelieve them as much as I wanted to."

[William de_Rham · Rating 3 out of 5]

This memoir about one man’s obsessive search for a portrait of William Shakespeare painted from life (i.e., sat for by Shakespeare himself) must be one of the odder books I’ve read this year. Perhaps esoteric is the better word. It’s very well written by someone who has painstakingly researched, and knows, his subject. To fully appreciate it, I believe, readers should have a working knowledge of art history, Elizabethan times and culture, Shakespeare’s plays, Neoplatonism, 14th-15th century English portraiture, and the world of museums, galleries, collections, and provenance. Since the work also deals with ADHD, OCD, drug usage, parenting, bartending, and seemingly endless Vermont winters, readers may wish to have some appreciation of these areas too.

Unfortunately, except for some familiarity with Shakespeare’s plays, these are not my areas. Moreover, a lot of the writing, and humor (if humor there be), went over my head. Every so often, a reader will come across a book he or she knows is well done, but with which he or she feels no connection. Such was the case for me with “Stalking Shakespeare.”

My thanks to NetGalley, the author, and the publisher for providing me with an ARC. The foregoing is my independent opinion.