I have given 'old Bill' a bit of a rest in recent times, mostly because I have been taking a bit of a rest, too! However, I am prodded into action by an interesting article by the highly intelligent Daniel Hannan in The Telegraph. In it, he points to the probability, or in his opinion, the certainty, that Shakespeare was bisexual. Well, that's OK with me. Old Bill was, or at least, appears to be from his writings, all things to all Men. I would not be so quick to accept his actual homosexuality because, dammit, of that "all things to all men" characteristic! His imagination took him inside the minds of heroes, cowards, kings, murderers, rebels, refined ladies, tarts and so on and on. However:
Harold Bloom, after a lifetime of studying and teaching the plays, concluded only that “by reading Shakespeare, I can gather that he did not like lawyers, preferred drinking to eating, and evidently lusted after both genders.” To that list, I would tentatively add that he distrusted crowds, had suffered a painful betrayal and hated hedgehogs.
You will need to read Mr. Hannan's original article for an explanation of Shakespeare's alleged dislike of hedgehogs! As for me, I do not give a flying hedgehog whether he was queer or not. I simply remain in awestruck gratitude for him writing those plays which added so much to my life.
What about Robert Morley's view that all of William Shakespeare's plays were written by somebody else with the same name?
Posted by: Diploamd | Sunday, 30 August 2020 at 00:45
There is an obsession amongst current "analysts" of all stripes to discover that someone, male or female, was attracted to the same sex and so bring lustre upon the present assemblage of LBTQI[here add as many letters as you like] adherents parading their sexuality to all and sundry.
Those I knew, including a couple of officers and NCO's, who were that way inclined did not hide it but certainly did not go around shouting it out from the masthead. They were content to be left in peace and those of us who knew them were happy to do so.
I care not a jot if Bill had an irresistable lust for little green lizards or any other sentient being. His writing is what intrigues me.
Posted by: AussieD | Sunday, 30 August 2020 at 00:58
Aye AussieD.
Posted by: JK | Sunday, 30 August 2020 at 01:06
"Old Bill" understood the human condition very well. He was a product of it and a participant.
Posted by: Whitewall | Sunday, 30 August 2020 at 01:09
I can't think of any contemporary person of creative genius who isn't odd for one reason or another. It's probably no stretch to think it's always been that way.
Posted by: Bob | Sunday, 30 August 2020 at 15:54
Bob, I always have had a liking for women since at school. The problem I have now is I can only think about it. I did say to a young woman that I would like to get into her knickers, she replied that there was already an arse hole in there.
Posted by: Glesga | Sunday, 30 August 2020 at 19:16
Glesga,
Women are like street cars. The next one that comes along might not already have an arse hole.
Posted by: Bob | Monday, 31 August 2020 at 14:06
Some people, like Isaac Asimov, have noted that the female characters in Shakespear's plays are usually of above-average intelligence. Does this make him a misanthropist? Should he be banned for not having all characters equally intelligent?
Posted by: Nicholas (Unlicensed Joker) Gray | Thursday, 03 September 2020 at 09:30