If William Shakespeare had been born with a different name such as Fred Smethwick, would he be as well known as he is today?
bobthebandit Thurs 05/06/08 17:16
To subscribe to this question you need to
sign in to the AnswerBank or register
if you are not already a member. All you need is a valid email address to register.
|
|
"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"
|
|
|
Of course he would. It's the writing that's important.
Although that said, I've still had conversations with people who question whether he existed at all, (last time I lend The Shakespeare Secret out) but I think they also think the Da Vinci Code is based on a true story.
|
|
|
Of course he would
China Doll - have you read the Shakespeare book by Bill Bryson? Its very good
|
|
|
Well actually William Shakespeare MAY have been born with a different name, because there is quite a lot of argument about the way his name is actually spelt.
While we have definitive ways of spelling words nowadays, in Elizabethan time spelling was more flexible and even Shakespeare spelt the same word in different ways in his plays
In fact they make a "joke" about this at the begining of the film Shakespeare in Love where Shakespeare himself is seen signing his name on a piece of paper but spelling it many different ways.
You can read more about the spelling of his name here
http://shakespeareauthorship.com/name1.html
|
|
|
Assuming this is a serious question, well it is what you do in your life that makes you famous, not just your name.
If he had been called Smethwick then we would be talking about Smethwick's Hamlet.
Adolf Hitler is only remembered for what he did in his life, if he had been killed in the first world war (he was a soldier) we would never have heard of him.
It is like when people ask (jokingly - I think) why Shakespeare filled his plays full of quotes.
Well of course they were not quotes when he wrote them, they BECAME quotes because of the beauty of the words and their regular use in his plays.
|
|
|
Nothing to do with Shakespeare, but it is about people's names.
The highest mountain in the world is Everest. This is a GREAT name for a mountain, and sums up strength, majesty, power etc.
But it is named after an English surveyor called Sir George Everest who had done a lot of surveying work in India.
But can you imagine if his name had been Sir George Ramsbottom and they had named the mountain after him.
The highest mountain in the world would be Mount Ramsbottom.
That does not have the same ring about it.
|
|
|
no he would not
the same goes for arthur wigglesworth who changed his name to Jesus
|
|
|
it would probably be known as Qomolangma, which is the Chinese name, or Nagamartha, the Nepalese name, and would still be the highest in the world. And William Shaxper, or whatever, would still be well known.
|
|
|
Question Author
Thanks for all the interesting replies. I rather think he would have become quickly forgotten about if he had had a common name.
An analogy of this would be, say perfumes. Who would buy or use Armani or Chanel perfumes, if they had names such as Horricks Odour Water!
|
|
|
No, I've not read that mycats, not heard of it actually (forgive my ignorance), what's it about?
|
|
|
If the Armani or Chanel family hadn't been born with those names, then a perfume by Coco Horlicks, for example, would've been just as acceptable - because there'd have been nothing to compare them against.
|
|
|
and would have smelt nicer, snowy
|
|
|
Cheers Kempie :c)
Does look interesting, might have to order a copy.
|
|
|
ity is really good china doll (and very easy to read lol I was relieved to find)
Hellooooooooo Johnny x x
|
|
|
Shakespeare was a playwright and as such his plays were for watching. At the time he wrote them, they were never intended for reading. When we watch a play being performed we seldom ponder over the name of the playwright.
Harold Pinter isn't a very classic name but he won the nobel prize.
|
|
|
Do you know that even Asimov jumped into the 'did Shakespeare write his own plays' debate? He wrote a short article regarding the use of the phrasing 'stars in their celestial spheres' versus 'each star in its celestial sphere'. It was all to do with the religious connotations and teachings of the day and he came to the conclusion that the less learned Shakespeare wrote the plays as opposed to the more learned Bacon.
|
|
Secured Loans | Free Advertising | Loans | Verizon Ringtones | Quick Collect
