Filthy Shakespeare (the Atheist)

One argument that has been given against a female writer being responsible for the Shakespeare plays is the presence of so much profanity and perversity, which is generally the expertise of men and their fertile imaginations. The profusion of this type of material in Shakespeare is treated, ironically enough, by the female author Pauline Kiernan in her (2006) book, "Filthy Shakespeare: Shakespeare's Most Outrageous Sexual Puns".

I've heard a number of female stand-up comedians, and they can be pretty raunchy! Queen Elizabeth obviously enjoyed risqu humor as well, even if she wasn't its primary spearhead. In fact, many of the original Shakespeare plays were originally much more obscene. Elizabethan Era plays such as Hamlet and Othello were first cleaned up after the Abuse Act of 1607 and sporadically ever since.

I think the bawdy, naughty element of Shakespeare actually argues more against a devoted Catholic or Jewish ghost-writer than it does a female. Candid expressions of humanity seem instead to be more consistent with a group (of male and female writers) that assumed a more Atheistic philosophy in the neo-Athens of Elizabethan London.

Prudish thinking was also not considered to be in the country's best interest. Although Elizabeth might want to frighten lusty young ladies from chasing after foreign lords, she could ill-afford to discourage sex and population growth in a plague and war ravaged England. Neither could she warrant any type of faith that suppressed initiative and innovation. It was healthy doubt and the courage to experiment that fueled the technical and scientific revolution of ancient Greece. And know-how was now the best weapon in England's arsenal against the Holy Roman Empire and the Axis of her own loyal minions.

More "Filthy Shakespeare Links":

Is it possible to look too hard for sexual innuendo? Joe Atwill didn't think so in his study of the Biblical book of Philemon, and I had a very hard time disagreeing with him!