lias Shakespeare" is the book that anti-Stratfordians point to as the best explanation of why someone else must have written all of the works attributed to a gentleman with the initials W.S. Joseph Sobran is sure that William Shakespeare can't have written them because... well he just can't have, so there. Mr. Shakespeare wasn't well traveled enough or rich enough to have been to all the places he described in his work, so he can't have written any of it. Sobran is a clever and insistent arguer, but he is not convincing here. The fact that the Earl of Oxford died in 1604 and that are references in several plays to subsequent events is just too much to gloss over, and Sobran's excuses do not hold water. Like many revisionist histories this book is interesting reading, but it is more an extended literary conspiracy theory than an anything else. I have yet to see any work claiming that P.J. O'Rourke wrote all the newspaper columns attributed to Joseph Sobran, but I guess I will only have to wait.

-back to the bookliste-