The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 29.0138 Friday, 16 February 2018
From: Ian Steere <
Date: February 16, 2018 at 7:25:28 AM EST
Subject: TLS letter regarding Mr WH
Geoffrey Caveney’s theory (SHAKSPER, February 15, 2018) has been aired at least once before on SHAKSPER - in February 2015. There were two respondents (including me) who pointed to what we saw as significant obstacles to his argument. I don’t recall any other development of the debate. Here is an extract from what I wrote then:
...[this] theory, summarized in the article posted by Hardy (SHAKSPER, February 2) is essentially a variant on the flawed William Hall proposition originated by Sidney Lee.
Like the latter, Caveney interprets “begetter” as “procurer”, a stretch of English unsupported by the literature of the time. Like Lee, he is unable to find evidence to support possession of the manuscript poems by his WH. Each takes Thorpe’s address to represent a tribute to WH, though that which is unambiguously wished for the latter is confined to “all happiness”. And neither takes account of Thorpe’s position as an experienced publisher, who would have known that some of the content of the poems would (as corroborated by history) be distasteful to the public.
Caveney’s interpretation is further compromised by the anonymity, opaqueness and brevity of what he postulates to have been a memorial tribute to the recently deceased William Holme....
Anyone interested may read the full narrative at shaksper.net/archive-Feb2015.
Ian Steere.