Questions rose about the true authorship of Shakespeare's plays 105 years after he died. Literary critics and scholars began to suggest names like Christopher Marlowe, Edward de Vere and Francis Bacon:they were men that had a more known background; as the real authors of the plays. These ideas came from the fact that there isnt a lot of information about Shakespeare's life and due to the death of contemporary primary sources. Records from the Holy Trinity Church and Stratford government show that there was a William Shakespeare but none of them show he was playwright or an actor.
In 1564, a man was born by the name of William Shakespeare. He was born to a poor family, was given little education, and had no interaction with sophisticated society. Thirty-eight plays and over 150 sonnets are not attributed to this ignorant man. Those who believe that Shakespeare was the author have no definitive proof but instead point to Hamlet’s declaration: "The play’s the thing(Satchell 71)." The true author, however, lies hidden behind he name of Shakespeare. Edward de Vere the premier Earl of Oxford is not only considered a great poet in history, but he may also be the great playwright who concocted the sonnets and plays which are now attributed to William Shakespeare of Stratford, England.
Shakespeare’s plays and sonnets are big contributors to today's literature, but we still don't know the truth about who actually wrote them. There is many conspiracy theories that suggest William Shakespeare didn't actually write his plays, some believe William Stanley, Christopher Marlowe, or Edward de Vere may have have just used William Shakespeare as a pen name. Each theory has good points but they also all have parts that are not possible and don't make sense. What theory is true may never be answered due to the fact that the events happened so many years ago and there isn't much documentation from shakespeare's time.
William Shakespeare has become landmark in English literature. One must be familiar with the early days of English literature in order to comprehend the foundation of much of more modern literature’s basis. Shakespeare’s modern influence is still seen clearly in many ways. The success of Shakespeare’s works helped to set the example for the development of modern dramas and plays. He is also acknowledged for being one of the first writers to use any modern prose in his writings.
Thirdly, he is the father of all western playwrights. Everybody from Ibsen to O'Neil uses techniques and ideas which can be traced back to Shakespeare. Whatever dramatist in whatever language you are required to study, familiarity with Shakespeare can only be an advantage.
Although William Shakespeare is considered to be one of the most revered and well-renowned authors of all time, controversy surrounds the belief that he actually produced his own literary works. Some rumors even go so far as to question the reality of such a one, William Shakespeare, brought on by paralleling the quality of his pieces with his personal background and education. With such farfetched allegations, it persuaded others to peek into the person we all are taught to learn as “Shakespeare”, but who is actually the person behind these genius works of literary promise and enlightenment? To some, Shakespeare is as much accredited to his works as frequently as you see his name placed. To others, Shakespeare is a complex enigma into which we the people are supposed to unravel; the true author behind a falsely-given pseudonym. The debate pertaining to the true authorship of William Shakespeare’s works are still questioned in today’s society.
The impeccable style and craft of Shakespeare’s writing has always been looked upon with great respect, and it continues to serve as an inspiration to writers and thinkers today even as it did when it was being first performed in London. Shakespeare’s modern audience, however, is far less diverse than the one for which he originally wrote. Due to the antiquity of his language, Shakespeare’s modern readership consists mostly of students and intellectuals, whereas in Shakespeare’s own time, his plays were performed in playhouses packed with everyone from royalty to peasants. Because of this, Shakespeare was forced to write on many different levels, the most sophisticated of which appealed to his more elite audience members, while the more straightforward and often more crude of which appealed to his less educated viewers, and the most universal of which still appeals to us.
James, D.G. (Excerpt from a series of lectures delivered in 1965 at University College, London.) The Shakespeare Criticism Volume 8. Gale Research Inc., Detroit. 1989: 429-434.
William Shakespeare was a very talented man known for his various works of literature. His works include poems, plays, and sonnets. His works are then broken down into tragedies, comedies, and histories. Shakespeare left this world centuries ago, but his writings continue to live throughout the world today. He has greatly impacted the world of literature and his existence will forever be remembered.
The study will encompass the compare and contrast of two great writers’ literary works. It will take comprehensive discussion on “Ben Jonson’s The Alchemist” and “William Shakespeare’s The Tempest”. Jonson and Shakespeare were contemporaries with more immediately recognizable common ground between them than difference. They shared the same profession and brought forth their works from the matrix of common intellectual property. They appealed to the same audience and both gained popularity and esteem as accomplished playwrights. At the more social level, they were both 'struggling' artists conscious of the need for patronage and support from their wealthier and more powerful peers. Both Jonson and Shakespeare experienced the trials and thrills of social mobility, as they traversed the rocky ground from humble beginnings to intellectual, professional, and financial independence. All this is quite obvious. Less easy to define and pin down is the palpable difference that seems to have delineated two distinct theoretical and practical paradigms. This was noted by Jonson himself, in his somewhat patronizing critique of Shakespeare's methodology. One gets a clear impression from this passage that Jonson deemed Shakespeare a nice enough guy with a good enough talent, but that there was certainly room for improvement.