Beneath His Dignity

Derisive remarks about potential Associate Justice Miers by William Kristol and others remind me of debates over who actually wrote Shakespeare's plays and poetry. The gist of academic arguments about the "real" author of "Hamlet", "Julius Caesar" and other stuff is as follows:

How could a mere player be so wise as to do so well? Surely, the real Shakespeare must have been something other than a plebean thespian. He must have been a club fellow who'd gone to Oxford at the very least, and was a Prince, if not a Prince, a Duke, if not a Duke, an Earl, a pearl of courtly and approved wisdom. What chopined board-trodder could affect so much wisdom, wit, and art -- sheer art -- as is alleged to have been Shakespeare's? It must have been someone more qualified.

These arguments have been presented unsuccessfully since the invention of literary criticism in the 19th century. They are not new in any way, not in research, type and number of proofs, nor in their implausibility. The function of such theses hasn't changed either; it's akin to TV's situation comedies: employment for writers and actors who might otherwise have to schill for an advertising agency. Fact is, we're stuck with the actor as a writer who had time between learning his parts to write such lovely lines as "the quality of mercy is not strained," one that Mrs. Miers seems to have memorized.

Luther