Who else but Bacon could have been Shakespeare is questioned but heavily in his favour, but unresolved? Who else but Bacon could have been behind a fully functioning Shakspere, a genius like Bacon? this perhaps a better proposition?
Secondly, I value Bacon because his personal story has enriched my understanding even my life on several fronts a man of such acceptable intellectual even spiritual prowess (as I value Marcus Aurelius and Plato, Christ and Shankara), of strengths and weaknesses, a man of great aims, for mankind; his words and actions only a part of the picture we perceive; just as we have an incomplete picture of the man who became Shakespeare.
And as we might posit: the Authorship question - should we better leave well alone, in what we have thus found, by this Year 2004? As in Britain, where we realise that the stripping of mystique and majesty from The Royal Family, while seen as necessary in the light of honesty above all of the last few decades, has left us at the mercy of un-philosophic and undisciplined movements in the populace (including the emotional, powerful Tabloids?)
Thirdly, hope springs eternal: is there a Holy Grail as far as (proof of) the man Shakspere/Shakespeare is concerned? I do hope so, as I and millions around the World can't wait for the Major Feature Film to follow !
ps: Re the total audience Will's plays might have been seen and heard by? In the years say 1588 to say 1616, his death?
I'm interested, because I'm seeking views regarding an article which will explore the depth of his influence on the then Elizabethan-Jacobean first-second generation theatre-goers. 1588-1616. Why is a million or more bums on seats for Shakespeare play performances (including repeating attendees) too high a total? It could be realistically 300,000 but maybe 2 million?