There's a great article in the New York Times today about Double Falsehood, a play allegedly based on Shakespeare's lost Cardenio. It is perhaps impossible to authenticate the play as Shakespeare's (even in part), and even so it's not regarded as a particularly good play.
I don't have this play on the Shakespeare in a Year schedule, although I do plan to include Edward III, whose claim to Shakespeare authorship is also shaky. What do you think? Should we squeeze in Double Falsehood somewhere?
Friday, March 11, 2011
The Double Falsehood Debate
at 10:23 AM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
By my count, we have time for it. (Even though I'm having to take a little Lenten hiatus - I'll catch back up before we finish. Should still be by the end of June!) We included Marlowe and others. Why not include this one that at least tries to make some claim (however shaky) at being Shakespearian?ReplyDelete