Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Episode 4: The Authorship "Question"

It's good to be done with this episode. This business needed to be said, whether it's entertaining or not. You can find it directly here.

Here's an insider preview: The complete document for the podcast! You can see what we skipped and what we kept, and use the links provided to see our sources.

Our next episode is about The Tempest. I hope you listen!

Here's the Link for the Stratford Monument

PS. We're on iTunes now, so definitely go there, subscribe, and rate us up!


  1. Another great one-- this podcast was really interesting. I had heard about the authorship "question" (and been to Stratford-upon-Avon and seen the funerary monument) before, but hadn't looked into it, and this podcast was really cool and informative. Great job, guys!

  2. Well done guys!
    Insightful and entertaining at the same time.

  3. I don't know who wrote Shakespeare but the tone you took throughout the podcast was so off-putting it made me doubt your premise just because you sounded so juvenile. I was waiting for you to declare that anti-Stratfordians have cooties. You said they have bad scholarship but frankly yours did not rock my world. The first rule of good scholarship is to welcome new ideas and debate then with an open mind.

  4. The first rule of good scholarship is to welcome new EVIDENCE with an open mind. Not welcome every crank conspiracy theory with an open mind, that is called gullibility and certainly has nothing to do with scholarship.

  5. Although I enjoy some of your podcasts, I have to agree w/ Roz Calvert's comment above about this one. The juvenile tone you guys take here, the insults you sling, etc, do nothing for anyone other than perhaps your own amusement.

    You do particularly poorly when you address Mark Anderson's work: "I'm sure that the rest of his book is bad scholarship, but I don't have the time to fact check every singe thing he writes." and "I want people to rate his podcast poorly because we're in competition."

    How can you expect to be taken seriously after those statements?

    1. You misunderstood, we don't expect to be taken seriously. Especially our joking suggestion that people rate a different podcast poorly.

      I don't remember making any insults, but if they were unfounded, I apologize for them. The world is cold enough already without people attacking each other.

      I stand behind the claim that since some of Mark Anderson's book is bad scholarship, the rest probably is too. It's possible the part that I read and fact-checked is the only inaccurate portion, but I doubt it.

      Thanks for your more positive comments on other episodes!