Blog powered by Typepad

« "It's all according to taste . . . | Main | Some of the things you never knew about Condaleezza Rice »

Monday, 11 October 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

You've got the detailed timing wrong, David. "..age of Shakespeare. England was ruled by a claque of nobles surrounding the autocratic queen." The nobles had been complaining ever since her father's time about how they were losing power to the New Men. And they were.

"Daily life was hedged about with religious edicts the most onerous of which..": her edicts were much looser than before - no burning of heretics, only a demand for an appearance of conformity. Unlike her father and her sister, she wasn't a monster. She wasn't a sweetikins either, of course.

"a demand for an appearance of conformity"

Exactly, DM, a mirror image of our own society today - so where's the progress the whig progressives keep wittering on about? The point I was trying to make was that a free-thinker, like Shakespeare, could go about his daily life writing his plays provided that he was discreet with his opinions.

Ah, progress has gone backwards if you compare the Orwellian demands of the Forces of Progress with the Virgin Queen's remark about not wanting a window into men's souls.

The comments to this entry are closed.