In 1921, Frank Harris argued that Shakespeare’s art reveals the man: “As it is the object of a general to win battles, so it is the life-work of the artist to show himself to us, and the completeness with which he reveals his own individuality is perhaps the best measure of his own genius.”
Rene Weis agrees. He thinks that he can find out a lot about Shakespeare’s personal life because Shakespeare revealed himself in his sonnets and plays. He finds that Shakespeare had a limp. After all, he refers to limping in the sonnets (“Speak of my lameness, and I straight will halt,” Sonnet 89 – which, as the TLS reviewer points out, suggests that Shakespeare was not lame). And Weis thinks he cast himself in roles – Richard III, the Nurse in Romeo and Juliet, and Edgar in Lear – that required a limp. And Iago, who is not said to limp but who, Othello suspects, has cloven hoofs where his feet should be.
By Weis’s rendering, Shakespeare was as much a moral as a physical cripple. In the TLS reviewer’s summary: “the dramatist, having conducted passionate love affairs with the Earl of Southampton and Emilia Lanier, then indicated the end of that episode in The Merchant of Venice by making Antonio hand Bassanio over to Portia. If this was a private working-out of a personal problem, what followed was anything but private: Shakespeare went on, in Troilus and Cressida, to satirize the relationship of Essex and Southampton in his unsympathetic description of the homosexual Achilles and Patroclus – this, according to Weis’s chronology, at a time when Essex had just been executed and Southampton was under sentence of death in the Tower. He wrote the play, Weis argues, by order of someone in the Government, as part of a policy of discrediting Essex. As if this betrayal were not enough, Shakespeare went on to publish the play in 1608, and then apparently thought he could make it up with his former friend by publishing the still more incriminating Sonnets. He did it for the money, Weis explains. Times were bad.”
Lois Potter, the reviewer, doesn’t buy it. But she notes that if it happened, it would not be surprising that someone might have “commented on his cloven hoof.”
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…