Tuesday, 4 August 2015

Anonymous

Some decades ago, I was in Portugal as part of an Atlantic Council delegation.
We were entertained by the British Ambassador not at the Embassy but at another very imposing building in the heart of Lisbon.
The Embassy was, at that time, being refitted, so it was not possible for the Ambassador to receive us there.
The building was very beautiful and quite imposing architecturally.
Our host for the evening, highly apologetic for the absence of the Embassy, told us that, as recompence for the loss, he had chosen this imposing establishment as venue.
None present could have been less impressed when the Ambassador outlined it's very colorful history.
Until about a century ago, it had been a high-class Bordello providing discrete entertainment for Portuguese and other noblemen at residence in Lisbon.
At that time I had been reading about the life of William de Vere because M ** whom I knew, was a distant relative.
Before time hopping I will just relate a story from that evening.
Over sherry, a senior Portuguese Minister (who will remain, by me, anonymous) told us the following story:
One night, at about 2.30-3.00 am. the Portuguese Prime Minister was awoken by his Aide- de-Camp to let him know that the British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, was on the telephone requesting to urgently speak with him. For the life of him he could not think why the BPM would chose such an unruly and highly uncivilized hour for parley.
He took the call as courteous as one can be at an hour when other activities are usually more pressing than semantics with a British politician.
It was the time of the Falklands Crisis and Britain urgently needed to use South Atlantic Portuguese territory for refueling en-route.
It was a request to use Portuguese territory both for stopover and refueling.
'Of course you can use our facilities Prime Minister, but tell me this, why has it taken you so long to call?' was the response. [''The Anglo-Portuguese Treaty of 1373 between Portugal and England, is the oldest alliance in the world that is still in force'' and before this telephone call, Britain had never requested from Portugal any assistance nor provision under the terms which it operates for both parties.]
Back to William de Vere.
If you have not already seen the film 'Anonymous' written by John Orloff and directed by Roland Emmerich, I highly recommend it.
Shakespeare is more enigmatic a character than the romantic literature of today portrays and markets him and his works for popular consumption worldwide.
Nowhere in Europe will you find any plaque nor house nor residence with a dedication to William Shakespeare or that he stayed there in passing.
The fact is, Shakespeare never left the confines of the British Isles.
So where then did he amass such wonderful bountiful knowledge about subjects, characters, politics and even short cuts to exotic destinations on the continent, in very fine minute?
It was, as Orloff rightly allures to, either in the 16th century brothels straddling the River Thames or chit chat from mariners in the same whilst on shore leave - themselves having sailed the Seven Seas that, if he did indeed write the works, William Shakespeare got all the material for his masterpieces.
(Shakespeare never gives credits to anyone so we must accept his knowledge as 'self-taught' – or must we?)

Most of Shakespeare's work is 'off-limits' to children below the ages of 11 as most plays are filled with such x-rated material that, if translated into modern language format, such would not be published by many mainstream publication nor media outlets in the United States, if submitted for the first time, today (!)
And now I am coming to the intriguing part of the story:
Orloff's main argument in the film 'Anonymous' is that the plays and sonnets themselves are the work of Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford.
Fortunately his film 'Anonymous' was U.S. released and Emmerich does not really take to heart (nor care about) the British media critical reviews.  If he had, they would not have disappointed. Almost without exception his film met with very frosty acclaim on the English side of the Atlantic. Such was to be expected as he and Orloff had just 'assassinated' an icon of British literature with the upstart inference that, well perhaps Will Shakespeare wasn't quite that saintly enigmatic icon the British have been making him out to be for the past 400 years – indeed perhaps he (or it) is just a very clever (I would even say brilliant) money-spinning deception.
Shakespeare has no pedigree, no legend, and this in itself (as I have always explained to the kids) is the clue or key to solving the mystery.
A bisexual Shakespeare ( Edward de Vere) who spent his life chasing very young boys and girls in the brothels of London (or indeed, in the case of de Vere, exclusively 'procured' – or in today's language 'trafficked' - in the finest of residences on the continent) is not as appealing nor socially (nor financially) acceptable as the very refined educated gentleman with highly conservative civic and deferential values to King, Queen and country, as William Shakespeare is promoted to be, to an international audience, worldwide, by 'the establishment.'

One thing my experience has taught me:the Anglo-Saxons (like many other races) love to hide things - then pretend they never existed(!); the more titillating or controversial they are, the harder a job you'll have discovering the truth.
Emmerich is a genius in his own right so the 'establishment' had some difficulty debunking his production as the work of a 'crank'. If all else fails, just ignore the bugger (!); the film will soon go away – to be forgotten on the 'scrap heap' of undocumented history. This, then, was how the game was played.
Shakespeare is within the holy of holies - the inner sanctum – so fasten your safety belt for a rough ride if thou dare speakest 'au contraire' of 'The Bard' (!)

During the Summer holidays I used to take the kids to the Natural History Museum in Kensington – a short bus ride down the road from where we were based.
There used to be an iconic dinosaur skeleton, affectionately known as 'Dippy', on display in the front podium.
On one occasion when one of the kids remarked how wonderful 'Dippy' 'looked' for his or her age of sixty five million years some smart ass almost spoiled the day with the acerbic remark that it wasn't real, just a fake dinosaur.
My comment was that, whether real or not, I agreed that it certainly looked great for it's age (!); and all was forgiven (!)


©Patrick Emek, 4th August, 2015



The reviews 'Anonymous' received were, for me, highly reminiscent of the reception which Dr Joseph Goldberger had when he proved that Pellagra was a result of diet deficiency. Dr Goldberger was only vindicated a decade after he deceased - too late for the 100 000 victims whose lives were needlessly wasted as a result of racism, pride and bigotry. Few were willing to acknowledge the truth - even with proof - as the cost of implementing reforms were too high for a (mainly)  Southern society convinced that it was a Northern 'conspiracy' against the Southern way of life by an 'outsider' [Dr Goldberger was Jewish, and, even worse for Southern bigots, a New Yorker (!)]



The Bisexuality of Shakespeare's Sonnets and Implications for De Vere's Authorship
Read More: http://guilfordjournals.com/doi/abs/10.1521/prev.2010.97.5.857?journalCode=prev






at