national real estate consulting firm. He lives in Evanston, Illinois.
......................................................
Who is Shakespeare?, September 19, 2006
Reviewer: K. Richardson "artgirl32" (Memphis, Tennessee)
.
I had the pleasure of meeting the author on September 18, 2006 at Davis
Kidd in Memphis. Although I have not read the book yet, I know it will
be intellectual treat.I have been a Shakespeare lover for years but
never really gave too much concern as to his true identity. Now that I
have met the author and had a chance to hear what he thought of the
whole matter, I will admit that it does deserve some looking into.I
know that there are people out there who could care less about
Shakespeare's true identity (we have his work, isn't that enough?)
Their point is valid but still the revealing of the Bard's true
identity would give us more of an insight into the mind of a literary
genius.
......................................................
Fascinating and comprehensive, February 18, 2006
Reviewer: Sauropod (Tucson, AZ)
William Farina covers all of Shakespeare's generally acknowledged plays
(except The Two Noble Kinsmen), as well as his two major narrative
poems and the Sonnets, in this extensively researched, consistently
illuminating book. He draws innumerable connections between Edward de
Vere and the source materials of Shakespeare's works, and shows the
clear parallels between de Vere's life and the lives of Shakespeare's
most autobiographical protagonists.
.
Although I've read most of the principal Oxfordian works, I still found
myself learning something new on almost every page. The author has
synthesized a vast amount of material in a brisk, readable form.
Discussion of each play is more or less self-contained, allowing one to
read the book selectively.
.
Naturally, even Oxfordian readers will take issue with some of Farina's
interpretations. I disagree with his analysis of the Sonnets, for
instance. To me, a more compelling theory is the one put forward in
Hank Whittemore's recently published book, The Monument (which also has
implications for Venus and Adonis). But this is a quibble.
.
Overall, De Vere as Shakespeare is an excellent resource, recommended
for anyone interested in the authorship question.
--------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
[ fuh-REE-nuh ] Made from CEREAL grains, farina is a bland-tasting
flour or meal that, when cooked in boiling water, makes a hot breakfast
cereal. It's very easily digested and rich in protein.
> About the Author
> A life-long Shakespeare hobbyist, William Farina is an executive with a
>
> national real estate consulting firm. He lives in Evanston, Illinois.
I've going to believe a house seller when it comes to Shakespeare. NOT!
That should be I'm going to believe a house seller when it comes to
Shakespeare. NOT!
--Bob G.
I haven't read his book, but I've heard him speak a couple of times and
found him pretty interesting.
L.
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
> Has anyone read Bill Farina?
But Art -- "Fariña" is Spanish for "manioc flour." On the other
hand,
"maniac flower" is an apt designation for your collected h.l.a.s.
effusions,
Art, so perhaps your post is not as pointless as it appears.
> ----------------------------------------------
> De Vere As Shakespeare: An Oxfordian Reading of the Canon (Paperback)
> by William Farina, Felicia Hardison Londre (Foreword)
> (2 customer reviews)
> ----------------------------------------------
> Editorial Reviews
> .
> The question may be met with chagrin by traditionalists, but the
> identity of the Bard is not definitely decided. During the 20th
> century, Edward de Vere, the most flamboyant
Is that initial letter a long "s"? If so, "slam-boy-ant" is not a
bad
nonce-word for Oxford, in view of his reputed relationship with Orazio
Cogno.
> of the courtier poets, a
> man of the theater and literary patron, became the leading candidate
> for an alternative Shakespeare.
...for those who prefer an alternative to reality.
> This text presents the controversial
> argument for de Vere s authorship of the plays and poems attributed to
> Shakespeare, offering the available historical evidence and moreover
> the literary evidence to be found within the works. Divided into
> sections on the comedies and romances, the histories and the tragedies
> and poems, this fresh study closely analyzes each of the 39 plays and
> the sonnets in light of the Oxfordian authorship theory. The vagaries
> surrounding Shakespeare, including the lack of information about him
> during his lifetime, especially relating to the lost years of
> 1585 1592, are also analyzed, to further the question of Shakespeare s
> true identity and the theory of de Vere as the real Bard.
> .
> About the Author
> A life-long Shakespeare hobbyist, William Farina is an executive with a
>
> national real estate consulting firm. He lives in Evanston, Illinois.
> ......................................................
> Who is Shakespeare?, September 19, 2006
> Reviewer: K. Richardson "artgirl32" (Memphis, Tennessee)
"Artgirl32"? Is that your sister, Art? Or your daughter? Your
condition
may have a hereditary component.
> I had the pleasure of meeting the author on September 18, 2006 at Davis
> Kidd in Memphis. Although I have not read the book yet,
Reading a review of a book that the reviewer has not read is of
course
entertaining. But when did such a trifle eVER deter an
anti-Stratfordian?
> I know it will
> be intellectual [sic] treat.I have been a Shakespeare lover for years but
> never really gave too much concern as to his true identity.
The style of "artgirl32" is not unlike that of Mr. Streitz.
> Now that I
> have met the author and had a chance to hear what he thought of the
> whole matter, I will admit that it does deserve some looking into.I
> know that there are people out there who could care less about
> Shakespeare's true identity (we have his work, isn't that enough?)
> Their point is valid but still the revealing of the Bard's true
> identity would give us more of an insight into the mind of a literary
> genius.
> ......................................................
> Fascinating and comprehensive, February 18, 2006
> Reviewer: Sauropod (Tucson, AZ)
> William Farina covers all of Shakespeare's generally acknowledged plays
> (except The Two Noble Kinsmen), as well as his two major narrative
> poems and the Sonnets, in this extensively researched, consistently
> illuminating book. He draws innumerable connections between Edward de
> Vere and the source materials of Shakespeare's works, and shows the
> clear parallels between de Vere's life and the lives of Shakespeare's
> most autobiographical protagonists.
How could the reviewer possibly know which were Shakespeare's
"most autobiographical protagonists" without knowing both the author's
identity and his or her biography? This sort of circular "argument," a
venerable staple among anti-Stratfordians, is as curious as it is
amusing.
> Although I've read most of the principal Oxfordian works, I still found
> myself learning something new on almost every page.
That candid admission may reveal as much about the reviewer as
about the book.
> The author has
> synthesized
"Synthesized"? That's actually a good word for what a great many
anti-Stratfordians have done.
> a vast amount of material in a brisk, readable form.
> Discussion of each play is more or less self-contained, allowing one to
> read the book selectively.
> .
> Naturally, even Oxfordian readers will take issue with some of Farina's
> interpretations. I disagree with his analysis of the Sonnets, for
> instance. To me, a more compelling theory is the one put forward in
> Hank Whittemore's recently published book, The Monument
That sentence *certainly* reveals a great deal about the reviewer,
whatever may be the nature of the book under review -- and if, as the
reviewer claims, the analysis of the sonnets is indeed *less* plausible
than that in Whittemore's book, then reading Farina's book is apt to be
a
comedic treat to which readers with a sense of humor can look forward
with eager anticipation.
> > of the courtier poets, a man of the theater and literary patron,
> > became the leading candidate for an alternative Shakespeare.
>
>
nordicskiv2 wrote:
>
> ...for those who prefer an alternative to reality.
------------------------------------------------------
_Cargo Cult Science_ by Richard Feynman
<<During the Middle Ages there were all kinds of crazy ideas, such as
that a piece of of rhinoceros horn would increase potency. Then a
method was discovered for separating the ideas--which was to try one to
see if it worked, and if it didn't work, to eliminate it. This method
became organized, of course, into science. And it developed very well,
so that we are now in the scientific age. It is such a scientific age,
in fact, that we have difficulty in understanding how witch doctors
could ever have existed, when nothing that they proposed ever really
worked--or very little of it did.>>
------------------------------------------------------
_Cogno Cult Science_ by Art Neuendorffer
.
<<During the 18th century there were all kinds of crazy ideas, such as
that an illiterate bumpkin from the boonies wrote Shakespeare. Then a
method was discoVERED for separating such ideas--which was to try one
to see if it worked, and if it didn't work, to eliminate it. This
method became organized, of course, into anti-Stratfordianism. And it
developed VERy well, so that we are now in the anti-Stratfordian age.
We even have difficulty now in understanding how Stratfordians could
EVER have existed, when nothing that they proposed EVER really made any
sense--or VERy little of it did.>>
------------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
> > Art Neuendorffer <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> .
> > > Has anyone read Bill Farina?
> nordicskiv2 wrote:
> .
> <<But Art -- "Fariña" is Spanish for "manioc flour."
> On the other hand, "maniac flower"
> is an apt designation for your collected h.l.a.s. effusions,
> You must be confusing me with Harold Bloom.
Excellent, Art! But if so, you should beware Mr. Streitz --
although
he is no doubt busily engaged in the pursuit of his new career, that of
xenophobic fearmonger, he may still have a spare pig bladder or two in
his...uh...arsenal.
> > Art Neuendorffer <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > > ----------------------------------------------
> > > De Vere As Shakespeare: An Oxfordian Reading of the Canon (Paperback)
> > > by William Farina, Felicia Hardison Londre (Foreword)
> > > (2 customer reviews)
> > > ----------------------------------------------
> > > Editorial Reviews
> > > .
> > > The question may be met with chagrin by traditionalists, but the
> > > identity of the Bard is not definitely decided. During the 20th
> > > century, Edward de Vere, the most flamboyant
> > Is that initial letter a long "s"? If so, "slam-boy-ant"
> > is not a bad nonce-word for Oxford,
> > in view of his reputed relationship with Orazio Cogno.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Incognito, a. or adv.
> [It. incognito, masc., incognita, fem., L. incognitus unknown;
> pref. in- not + cognitus known, p. p. of cognoscere: cf. F.
> incognito, fr. {It}.] Without being known; in disguise; in an
> assumed character, or under an assumed title; -- said esp.
> of great personages who sometimes adopt a disguise
> or an assumed character in order to avoid notice.
Perhaps it has escaped your attention, Art, but despite the
superficial
orthographic similarity of the words, there is a significant difference
between
"incognito" and "in Cogno," just as there is a significant difference
between
"neutron" and "neutrino." Oxford may well have in Cogno, but there is
scant
evidence of his putative incognito. But perhaps you're confused by the
fact
that the neutron is a hadron, but what Oxford had was a hardon.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Art Neuendorffer <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > > of the courtier poets, a man of the theater and literary patron,
> > > became the leading candidate for an alternative Shakespeare.
> nordicskiv2 wrote:
> >
> > ...for those who prefer an alternative to reality.
> ------------------------------------------------------
> _Cargo Cult Science_ by Richard Feynman
>
> <<During the Middle Ages there were all kinds of crazy ideas, such as
> that a piece of of rhinoceros horn would increase potency. Then a
> method was discovered for separating the ideas--which was to try one to
> see if it worked, and if it didn't work, to eliminate it. This method
> became organized, of course, into science. And it developed very well,
> so that we are now in the scientific age. It is such a scientific age,
> in fact, that we have difficulty in understanding how witch doctors
> could ever have existed, when nothing that they proposed ever really
> worked--or very little of it did.>>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> _Cogno Cult Science_ by Art Neuendorffer
I fear that you are no Feynman, Art -- Funnyman, yes; Feynman. no.
HoweVER, if it's any consolation, Art, you do a *great* Dan Quayle
imitation! Indeed, Quayle is a linguist after your own heART.
> <<During the 18th century there were all kinds of crazy ideas, such as
> that an illiterate bumpkin from the boonies
Warwickshire was not "the boonies" at the time, Art, _pace_ your
uninformed delusions. You really ought to read the first chapter of
_Ungentle Shakespeare_ -- or at any rate, get someone to read it to
you.
> wrote Shakespeare. Then a
> method was discoVERED for separating such ideas--which was to try one
> to see if it worked,
You mean, via evidentiary expedients like "Agnes a gob," nutcase
Neuendorffer/gangleri numerology, and the sort of brilliant, incisive
"reasoning" that led you to conclude that the name "Peter Gay" *must*
refer to the distinguished Yale scholar of that name, despite
information
clearly identifying the man as an industrial plant manager a quarter
century younger than the eminent historian?
> and if it didn't work, to eliminate it.
Well, certainly your "research" methods are best characterized as
"elimination," in the Crowleyan sense of the word.
> This
> method became organized, of course, into anti-Stratfordianism.
Yes, "elimination" is indeed an appropriate euphemism for the
"method"
of many anti-Stratfordians. You may recall that I have had occasion in
the
past to refer to your failed "anagrams" and similar crank cryptography
as
"vowel movements," Art.
> And it
> developed VERy well, so that we are now in the anti-Stratfordian age.
That's odd -- most of the world, if it is aware of
anti-Stratfordianism at all,
regards the phenomenon as an assortment of deluded cranks on the
lunatic
fringe whose various authorship scenarios are not merely unsupported
and
hopelessly subjective speculation, but are actually mutually
contradictory.
It is hard to imagine how the present could be characterized as the
"anti-Stratfordian age," except perhaps by someone whose connection
with
reality was as tenuous as that of aneuendor...@comicass.nut.
> We even have difficulty now in understanding how Stratfordians could
> EVER have existed, when nothing that they proposed EVER really made any
> sense--or VERy little of it did.>>
Of course, Art -- Virgil as predecessor of Herodotus makes SO much
more
sense!
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Art Neuendorffer
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
> >>>Art Neuendorffer <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >>>
> >>>>----------------------------------------------
> >>>>De Vere As Shakespeare: An Oxfordian Reading of the Canon (Paperback)
> >>>>by William Farina, Felicia Hardison Londre (Foreword)
> >>>>(2 customer reviews)
> >>>>----------------------------------------------
> >>>>Editorial Reviews
> >>>>.
> >>>>The question may be met with chagrin by traditionalists, but the
> >>>>identity of the Bard is not definitely decided. During the 20th
> >>>>century, Edward de Vere, the most flamboyant
> >>>Is that initial letter a long "s"? If so, "slam-boy-ant"
> >>> is not a bad nonce-word for Oxford,
> >>>in view of his reputed relationship with Orazio Cogno.
> > Art Neuendorffer <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >>-------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>Incognito, a. or adv.
> >>[It. incognito, masc., incognita, fem., L. incognitus unknown;
> >>pref. in- not + cognitus known, p. p. of cognoscere: cf. F.
> >>incognito, fr. {It}.] Without being known; in disguise; in an
> >>assumed character, or under an assumed title; -- said esp.
> >>of great personages who sometimes adopt a disguise
> >>or an assumed character in order to avoid notice.
> nordicskiv2 wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps it has escaped your attention, Art, but despite the
> > superficial
> > orthographic similarity of the words, there is a significant difference
> > between
> > "incognito" and "in Cogno," just as there is a significant difference
> > between
> > "neutron" and "neutrino." Oxford may well have in Cogno, but there is
> > scant
> > evidence of his putative incognito. But perhaps you're confused by the
> > fact
> > that the neutron is a hadron, but what Oxford had was a hardon.
> De Vere may have had a few strange quarks (at least his grandchildren
> did) but no one with so phoney a name as Horatio [sic] Cogno was lepton.
It was *Orazio* Cogno, Art. And Oxford appears to have anticipated
George W. Bush in seVERal ways. For example, Bush advocated "No
chlid left behind," while Oxford favored "No child's behind left."
> >>>Art Neuendorffer <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >>
> >>>>of the courtier poets, a man of the theater and literary patron,
> >>>> became the leading candidate for an alternative Shakespeare.
> >>nordicskiv2 wrote:
> >>
> >>> ...for those who prefer an alternative to reality.
> > Art Neuendorffer <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >>------------------------------------------------------
> >>_Cargo Cult Science_ by Richard Feynman
> >>
> >><<During the Middle Ages there were all kinds of crazy ideas, such as
> >>that a piece of of rhinoceros horn would increase potency. Then a
> >>method was discovered for separating the ideas--which was to try one to
> >>see if it worked, and if it didn't work, to eliminate it. This method
> >>became organized, of course, into science. And it developed very well,
> >>so that we are now in the scientific age. It is such a scientific age,
> >>in fact, that we have difficulty in understanding how witch doctors
> >>could ever have existed, when nothing that they proposed ever really
> >>worked--or very little of it did.>>
> >>------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>_Cogno Cult Science_ by Art Neuendorffer
> nordicskiv2 wrote:
> >
> > I fear that you are no Feynman, Art
> Surely you're joking.
If you're considering entitling your autobiography _Surely You're
Joking,
Mr. Funnyman (Adventures of a Spurious Character)_, then I whole-
heartedly endorse the project, Art, and I will be more than glad to
write an
enthusiastic REView of the book. But permit me to suggest a
significant
improvement: _Surely You're Toking, Mr. Funnyman_.
> > Art Neuendorffer <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >>During the 18th century there were all kinds of crazy ideas,
> >> such as that an illiterate bumpkin from the boonies
> nordicskiv2 wrote:
> >
> > Warwickshire was not "the boonies" at the time, Art,
> Stratford upon Avon was
No, it was not; as I said, get someone to read the first chapter of
_Ungentle Shakespeare_ to you.
> & still is "the boonies."
> > Art Neuendorffer <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >>
> >>wrote Shakespeare. Then a method was discoVERED
> >> for separating such ideas--which was to try one
> >>to see if it worked,
> nordicskiv2 wrote:
> >
> > You mean, via evidentiary expedients like "Agnes a gob,"
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> . (G)rooms (O)f the (B)edchamber.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
[More lunatic logorrhea snipped]
I see that that's exactly what you mean -- you prove my point
_ipso facto_, Art.