Surprise, surprise, A Shakespeare academic, beholden to the multbillion dollar Shakespeare industry comes out against Edward de Vere. If there is any conspiracy in this case, it is the collusion of the academic establishment and the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust to stifle discussion on a serious and complex subject. Is it possible that Mr. Shapiro is concerned about his reputation and perhaps even his livelihood?
The Stratfordians have only three arguments repeated endlessly by their parrots in the news media who it seems are averse to thinking for themselves.
1) Oxfordians think that only an aristocrat could have written the plays.
Wrong. The accusation that Oxfordians are snobs is old and tired and obscures the real issues. This debate is not who could have, should have, or would have written the plays, but about who did. It is a question of evidence and any individual with an open mind willing to do some research will find it very clear that Edward de Vere is the author of the Shakespeare canon.
2) Oxford died in 1604 so he could not have written plays published years later?
Wrong. Dates of performance or of publication do not tell us the date of composition. Since we do not have the manuscripts, dating of the plays is conjecture and supposition. The astute professors and Stratfordian directors cannot explain why Shake-speare did not edit his own plays for publication during his years of retirement.
The Sonnets were published in 1609, while Shake-speare was alive, yet the Dedication refers to the author as “ever-living” — which means that the author is dead, but his works are still immortal.
3) There is a ton of evidence proving that Shakespeare was the man from Stratford.
Wrong. There isn't a shred of evidence that ever connected the author Shake-speare to William of Stratford. During his lifetime, no one, repeat no one has ever claimed to have met the man. Supposed records either refer to non-literary court records about the Stratford man’s legal problems or they refer to the author by his pen name, “William Shakespeare."
One must have a sense of curiosity, true open-mindedness, respect for evidence and the capacity to think critically when appropriating this issue. That is apparently lacking in this so-called Shakespeare "expert.” Mr. Shapiro ascribes everything to imagination as if a person's life experiences could just be thrown out of the window when writing plays and poems of depth and complexity filled with passion and humanity.
Concluding that a man who had little or no education, whose children were illiterate, who never left any writing other than six unreadable signatures with his name spelled differently in each one, who never traveled outside of London, who spent much time and effort engaging in petty lawsuits, who could not read books in French, Italian, or Spanish yet used untranslated material as his source material, who never left any books in his will, who left no letters, no correspondence, who did not elicit a single eulogy at his death was the greatest writer in the English language is not "imagination". It is fantasy.