About a Bard.

The unorthodox and peculiar use of language in Shakespeare's plays has been one of the endearing mysteries in a plethora of myth and lore surrounding the Bard, his legacy amount to much more than what we think we know. For a man of his historical stature there are numerous gaps in our knowledge, and more than enough to arouse suspicions and question the official account of his life and the time that he lived. Some of the controversy is intentional and may well be due to a ruse by the Bard himself, who is known for using subterfuge in his plots, and his use of perspective in "The Globe" theatre that he built to his own bespoke design, not only to showcase his productions and gone skills of his craft, but a public stage to voice his disgust, stoke the unrest of the disinherited public, voice his concerns with the deplorable and dire living conditions of the poor, and make fun of the waste and excess of the royal court and his entourage, in front of their peers and the audience attending. By using current examples f the rumoured  he performance , , the gap between upper and lower social classes, and state of society social conditions of t society  general populace facilitate a but to empower the poorest of the poor with lso to  specifications that he used to blame and shame the excessive gluttony and waste of the gentry and upper classes, calling them to task, exposing the guilty and heckling the pretentious and scandalous behaviour of the gentry. The outeage and uproar of these subplotscalling to task the nobles who were guilty in front of their peers that often caused outrage among the paupers and poor who only payed a pittance for admission. For the price of a standing room only ticket the plays gave the embattled and scorned members at the brunt of the social inequalities rife at the time Shakespeareof social decrepit attend for rom the squandering the tasThikept the Pony Express abuzz with with social gossip, kept   in attendance.  changing the performances upper class   of the designed staging of his screenplays of the Globe theatre ehe baffling, complex, and multilayered characters he is known for the wouldn't  and world renowned plays.  While most of the controversy over his legacy and significance, much of the controversy  who ae the author is of his body of work remains clouding his legacy   sHidden from common knowledge the lifetime of accomplishment by Shakespeare remain eclipsed by the sheer marvel of his artistic genius.

 

Contrary to popular knowledge his peculiar dialect and unique use of the spoken word is a unwitting artefact of the sequence of learning the rote, then practicing the scenes, and only commiting the play to paper after completing a successful run of its performance on stage. The methodology provided forq a uninterrupted production of plays by performing one play while they practiced the rote of roles from the forthcoming play scheduled and the simultaneous post production transcript in a style that reflects the dialogue as enacted. Rather than the traditional way of following a script with proprietary dialogues the well recognised linguistic anomaly that characterize a typical Shakespeare play is the result of the post production transcripts recoded by the actors themselves after the fact, and as such refutes the accolades we usually attribute  to the famous playwrite's body of work. The evidence further support the alledged controversy over the authorship of Shakespeare's plays, and the unusual use of the English language featured the performance and dialogue of the actors who had performed in the play. Rather than the traditional format where a actor enacts a written script, the contents of Shakespeare's plays reflect the rhythm and flow of prior accomplished performance and the dialogue as it featured in the stage production. The unconventional means of writing further explains his lack of stage directions

, acting guidance and production notes is limited to to the actors performing his play and his peer's, that his dialogue was never penned by Shakespeare himself. Less of a mystery than a lack of context, the evidence at hand is congruent with a unconventional approach to the writing tradition where the actors who played the roles wrote the plays after the fact from memory. 

Transcribed by word of mouth and after the performance they had crafted by practice, and the providence of his literary legacy may well be eclipsed by the provenance of a legacy that transcends the endearing myth that contest the glory of his memory.

What many people fail to fathom is that his destinctive dialog is a dialect that differs from colloquial English at the time of it's inception. The reason for the mysterious dialect has nothing to do with Shakespeare's style of writing but is a byproduct of post production transcripts by the actors who played the various roles on stage. At first glance it seems to question whole 'literary genius' claim and it would if the accolade wad based on the dialect of his prose. It lacks in the laud and acclaim of the actors who served in his troop and their magnificent artistic ability, nor hail his legacy as the Father of the Actor's Guild, and none of the above mentioned allude to the fact that he was a master of perspective, a gifted inventor and a expert in illusion and deception. In the strict definition of the term, Shakespeare was by all accounts not the revered playwright we believe he was, but rather the resplendent Bard he was.

To fully fathom hos illustrious legacy require a appreciation of the nature of storytelling, the art of performance, and a understanding of the confluence vested in a script crafted to entangle the intent of mutual relevance. Honed by a common interest, and shared on the stage as a expression of the entrainment intended amount to a provenance beyond belief, and self apparent proof of the principles of flow, entrainment and periodicity, and uncontested evidence of the manifest nature ofa relevance shared intent. 

 

Life is but a stage for us to play the act we choose to share with those who wanton bask in the reward of mutual presence shared intent in mutual sense and relevance.

Anothet little known fact about the life of the Bard is his role as 'Father of the 'Actors Guild'. History bears evidence that prior to Shakespeare actors were akin to travelling minstrels that barely made a living from practicing their craft, forcing those who dedicated themselves to the noble art of flow entrainment to live in squalor, and resort to mindless jesting and dumb tomfoolery for a mere tuppence and a laugh. His intention was to establish a permanent physical structure, a homebase where artists come and hone their craft, display their craftsmanship, and exchange ideas on how to collaborate, practice, and train to earn a living wage. With romantic ideals of earning a fair wage for all the actors in England, he set upon the mammoth task of buildingvhis grand vision, his vehicle for mastering the art of entrainment, the theatre he named 'The Globe'. A stage where he was free to say whatever, to whoever, whenever, and however he wanted, and a venue to perform the epic dramas and gripping intrigue he had brewing in his mind. 

Before the Globe actors were considered mere entertainment, forced by circumstance to pander their performance to appease the audience in the expectation of receiving a reward. Much like the present, the world of young master Shakespeare was characterized by glaring social inequity, inequality, appauling poverty, hunger and disease for the working class. While the rich were living lavish lives of luxury, self indulgence and excess the social disparity and vulgar waste by the ruling class was a state of affairs that Shakespeare vehemently opposed. As a performer Shakespeare quickly found that though he had a platform to bring attention to the sorry state of society, the poor were unperturbed by his concern, and the ruling class were insulted by his insolence. With 'The Globe' to serve as a permanent home for the performing arts Shakespeare put his dream to practice and established a platform for the recognition of the Art's, and a stage where they were free to perform without fear of censure or the need to pander to the whim of kings and paupers alike.

The Globe Theatre was constructed to the William Shakespeare's exacting specifications, and most of the plays he wrote was purposely written to be performed on the stage that he purposely designed. Unlike any theatres presently in use 'The Globe' allow for dedicating specific performances to selected audiences. While most of these sub-scripts are sadly lost to current versions of his plays, what presently remain of Shakespeare's original plays are reconstructed storylines without any regard to the side acts that were considered to be an integral part of the performances that Shakespeare staged on the playground of his self-realized imagination.

Widely acknowledged as the best playwright there ever was, few people are aware that Shakespeare staged his plays to three different points of view. One directed at the officials, noblemen and gentry which were seated above the stage looking down on the performance, another for full paying patrons who were positioned such that they could see the stage in it's entirety, and one for the poor and destitute who paid a pittance for standing room only around the foot of the stage. The seating arrangement provided Shakespeare with three different platforms where each stage play a part in the telling of his tale. One that would only be visible in its entirety by the full paying patrons sitting accross from the stage.

'The Pit' was the colloquial way of referring to the 'standing-room-only' space appropriated for the poor and destitute and it afforded Shakespeare with a platform of social criticism where he openly expressed his dismay at the social inequities rife during his day. Out of earshot of any of the seated patrons, the actors that perused the edge of the stage provided the rowdy crowds gathered round with varied eyewitness accounts of what was happening out of their line of sight. These storylines were tailor-made performances with scating social commentry that ridiculed the vulgar habits of nobility, and poked fun at the exorbitant practices of both England and France's fabulous, rich and famous, and Shakespeare conspired their raucus and obnoxious response to coincide to dramatic effect with whatever else was happening on the wider stage.

Whereas some of the performances were obscured from the birds eye view of officials and esteemed members of the court seated above the stage, there were various scenes that Shakespeare reportedly wrote that he specifically tailored for the 'privilaged' audience looming above the actors. Examples of these purposely directed performances still exist in the plays as we know them today, and the soliloquies of Lady Macbeth (out damn spot) and Hamlet (poor Yorik) and the death scene of Romeo and Juliet are generally considered as likely examples of scripted performences directly aimed at this highly selective segment of the attending audience.

The only perspective provided with a unobstructed point of view of the drama unfolding was afforded to the 'Patrons of the Art' as Shakespeare referred to the paying members of the audience. For all intent and practical purpose the current plays attributed to Shakespeare are mere fragments of his genius given the limitations of penning his multilayered performances to a single perspective the plays as they are known today is the only way of relating the convoluted storylines construed by the legendary Bard and his troop.

In addition the multilayered nature of the performances Shakespeare staged at 'The Globe' is undoubtedly responsible for the persistent allegations of dubious authorship, but perfectly plausable if we mind that none of his plays were witten by Shakespeare himself. What we conconsider today as the literary work attributed to 'The Bard' is in fact only the reconstituted scripts of various actors who performed the different parts in his respective plays.

By all accounts and available evidence the life of William Shakespeare exemplifies that of a true genius and master of the arts. One whose accomplishments are unrivalled, and though his body of work are mere fragments of his craft remain worthy of their renowned reputation as literary masterpieces that stand the test of time. The quintessential penmanship of a man we colloquially know as 'The Bard'. In o