Did William Shakespeare really write all of those plays? Mere proposition of said query's relative validity is more often than not met with confused looks, pretentious stares and general disdain for even entertaining such edgy ideas. Yet, are the plays not too worldly and wordy for a middle-class man to have composed completely by himself - even an actor who owned his own theater, the Globe; as Shakespeare, the man, most certainly did (any way you tell it)? Does it take anything away from these great works to consider for a moment or two that perhaps there was at least some outside influence on the texts to these plays, many of which are often cited as the finest literary works in the English language - and a legitimate theory given the fact co-authorship was even admitted at the time insofar as PERICLES, TIMON OF ATHENS and others are concerned. The case of the authorship of Shakespeare's plays has been a hot-button topic amongst critics, scholars and many in academe for centuries - and it even reached the Supreme Court in 1987 - and it is only now, with the worldwide release of ANONYMOUS, that these issues are being taken on in a dramatically compelling and filmatic way - played out much like the plays of intrigue and betrayal amongst kings and queens that we have come to love so much from Shakespeare's works. At the end of the day - or, should I say, at the end of the play - does it really matter as long as what you have witnessed onstage or onscreen spoke to you in a special, memorable way? Does knowing the identity of the author really matter as long as the plays enacted have an affect? Such are only a few of the many controversial questions being posed by the filmmakers behind the new film ANONYMOUS, opening in movie theaters nationwide on October 28, foremost among them being the director of the film himself, Roland Emmerich, and the screenwriter, John Orloff, who have been trying to get this project off of the ground for the better part of a decade. Tales of stolen authorial identity are as old and oft-told as many of the Bard's greatest hits, so it should come as no surprise that ANONYMOUS manages to present the facts as entertainingly as the plays presented within it undoubtedly are. After all, the battle of the Oxfordians versus the Stratfordians has a certain royal Shakespearean ring to it, does it not? Let the battle royal(e) begin.
Writ Large On The Big Screen
In 1987, U.S. Supreme Court Justice
John Paul Stevens was quoted by screenwriter John Orloff himself in an open letter in the Wall Street Journal - in response to the decision upheld by Supreme Court Justices
John Paul Stevens, Harry Blackmun and
WilLiam Brennan that had "ruled unanimously in favor of Shakespeare and against the Earl of Oxford," - in a depiction of his disbelief in the traditional theories of Stratfordians: "I have lingering concerns…. You can't help but have these gnawing doubts that this great author may perhaps have been someone else…. I would tend to draw the inference that the author of these plays was a nobleman…. And I would say, also – perhaps departing from my colleagues – that I am persuaded that, if the author was not the man from Stratford, then there is a high probability that it was Edward de Vere." And so goes Orloff's modus operandi for creating a screenplay exploring this idea, then-titled THE SOUL OF THE AGE. Finding a co-patriot in director Emmerich, who took Orloff's script ostensibly about "jealousy" and "genius" (as he said in a 2009 interview) and imbued it with his own ideas about political succession - a pressing issue to the actual Edward de Vere given his incestuous relationship with soon-to-be Queen Elizabeth I - they then proceeded to make their lofty, controversial dream a movie reality. Essentially, Emmerich apparently added the historical elements reminiscent of HENRY IV, HENRY V, JULIUS CAESER and the great history plays and married them with the drama, sexuality and bloodshed of HAMLET, OTHELLO, MACBETH and the tragedies Orloff took as his original inspiration. The conflagration of the two yields a modern-day meta-Shakespeare play adaptation all its own - giving new meaning to meta by focusing predominantly on the actual authorship aspect itself and how the three men who wrote the plays were not credited and credit in the annals of history then went to solely the actor who co-owned the theater they originally played in,
William Shakespeare. Of course, Strafordians and Oxfordians mostly agree on the issue of authorship as far as certain works in the Shakespearean canon are concerned - the aforementioned PERICLES and TIMON OF ATHENS having the largest cited contributions (that of
Ben Jonson) of the currently credited dual-authored plays, though there are blank verse sequences in many plays that even Stratfordian critics still argue over for more than understandable reasons. Yet, again, we are forced to ponder: if the power of the words still ring true and the stories being told still are relatable and the metaphors and themes are still applicable to our lives today, then does who gets the credit really have that significant of an impact on our experience of the play and the message we can take from it? And, furthermore, all of the men who others are claiming may have written the texts are hundreds of years gone - dead and buried - so is it merely a matter of semantics? Or, is it about history and the need to get the facts right, once and for all - if such a thing is even possible (I doubt it)? As ANONYMOUS makes quite blatantly clear, it is in daring to ask the question that we often find ourselves sinking faster and deeper in our argument with others than if we outright claim something straight out - so, if for that alone, Emmerich and Orloff are to be commended for managing to get this daring work of art on a screen at all and sticking to their unsheathed swords. The fact that the creatives have managed to design and and enact such a complex and yet engrossing - and totally modern - manner of presenting this treacherously touchy topic in a dramatically intriguing way is another of the major boons for ANONYMOUS as solid entertainment - if not much, much more. While some Stratfordians will surely never be swayed, the Oxfordians clearly have the uphill battle and far fewer men with which to fight. The gloves are definitely off.
Then again, if a legendary actor of the Bard such as Sir
Derek Jacobi considers himself a relative Oxfordian - he also acts as the narrator of the film - since, as recently as June, 2010 he is quoted as saying, "I'm on the side of those who do not believe that the man from Stratford-upon-Avon wrote the plays. I think the name was a pseudonym, certainly. [ANONYMOUS] puts the authorship question firmly and squarely on the big screen. It's a very risky thing to do, and obviously the orthodox Stratfordians are going to be apoplectic with rage," - perhaps there is some hope that any of us less than tied to a theory of Shakspesare's true authorship could become a literary rebel ourself. After all, if anybody pushed the boundaries of what entertainment can do and the impact it can have on a collective society, it was whoever authored the plays of
William Shakespeare, and, now, with ANONYMOUS, two modern cultural and intellectual melting-pot-stirrers in the form of
Roland Emmerich and John Orloff and those involved with ANONYMOUS may kindle a special kind of social fire of their own come October 28. As the famous Jacques adage from AS YOU LIKE IT goes, "All the world's a stage," after all - and, what's a worthwhile tragedy, anyway, without a little blood being spilled?
A little bit AMADEUS, with a touch of TIMON OF ATHENS; a dash of DANGEROUS LIASONS and a heaping of HENRY IV: Parts 1 and 2; a generous helping of SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE with a wink to MERCHANT OF VENICE; a bit of BARRY LYNDON and a hint at HAMLET; romance and jealousy ala Romeo & Juliet; Iago-ian sexual intrigue evocative of OTHELLO; maybe even a malicious, macabre moment of murderous violence or two reminiscent of MACBETH; then, all of it collectively taken, shaken, stirred and whipped up into a visual feast only the man behind THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW could possibly conjure up - like THE TEMPEST's Trinculo himself. That is only some of what ANONYMOUS can and could very well be. The possibilities presented by the thesis of ANONYMOUS are endless and explored with some explosive expository elements and a central web of lust, deceit and royalty to wrap itself around you and take you in ever so sinuously - and, in the process, it may also manage to appease fans of straight drama, musical theatre and/or opera, as well. Just like the many plays of Shakespeare, which range from the lowest brothel comedy to the highest royal manners and feature the most innocent, lovable leading players along with the most dastardly, double-handed foes imaginable, ANONYMOUS brings the atmosphere, poetry and political intrigue of William Shakespeare - and, by extension, de Vere - right into the 21st century in a new and innovative way. I hope we are all ready for it - because, let's be totally honest here, would you have really gotten all the beauty, majesty and inherent genius of the plays presented by William Shakespeare were you to be one of the many in the audience at The Globe nearly five-hundred years ago when they premiered? I think not - I know that I certainly would not have. So, now, when you see ANONYMOUS, perhaps you should think about this, too, with all of that in mind - I certainly will be doing as such! In the end, I suppose that is the best advice for how to view ANONYMOUS: Don't will it to be - or Will it to be - just let it happen. And, as to who really wrote the plays? Perhaps like all of the greatest mysteries of the world, we will never, ever know. Or, maybe - just maybe - ANONYMOUS is the answer after all these centuries. We will all find out on October 28, either way.
