These Variations-on sonnets by Shakespeare capture the real essence of his times

Well, it's disappointing to see Pro pass up every opportunity to explain himself and his thesis coherently: his fragmented use of the English language is nearly as disturbing as his fragmented understanding of English history.He wants to say that the central and definitive nature of Shakespeare's time (the Elizabethan period) was that of some shameless, indiscreet orgy (which is what his "sonnets" evoke). He tries to support this with a source describing the heightened efforts of the church to regulate sexuality at that time. Humorously, this actually runs contrary to his resolution: the fact that England had notably reacted with disdain and prohibition to its own sexuality is actually a consequence of the period's increased interest in chastity and religious purity, not a decreased interest in those things. Pro's interpretation of his own source doesn't even make sense, and he's made no real argument to support the resolution. But independently of this, I've amply shown that his characterization of England during the Elizabethan period is ahistorical and false, [1] but Pro just "plays blind" to this and wastes his round. He refuses to recognize that the central and eponymous figure of that epoch, Queen Elizabeth, designated herself "The Virgin Queen", and defined the era as one which was institutionally fixated on sexual purity and religious devotion. [2, 3] He passes sliently over the fact that the Puritans began rising to prominence in the theological discourse of England, riding that wave of chastity and discipline. The nation was reaching a cultural apex of artistic and literary sophistication now known as the "English Rennaissance". [4] That is the real essence of the Elizabethan era, that is how historians understand the period [4], and that is what a poem would need to capture in order to capture the "real essence" of Shakespeare's time. Yet Pro thinks that his awful Fakespeare "sonnets", such as the following, serve to more truly epitomize the "real essence" of Elizabethan times:"Then if for my fvck , thou my fvck receivest, I cannot blame thee, for my fvck thou usest, But yet be blamed, if thou thy self deceivest By wilful hast of my fvck refusest. I do forgive thy fvckery gentle thief Although thou fvck me into poverty: And yet my fvck knows it is a greater grief To have a dead fvck , than to bear the fvckless injury. Lascivious fvck, in whom all pleasures well shows, Fvck me with zest for we must not be foes." [5]Pro has tried to escape the failure of his sonnets to look anything like Shakespearean poetry by saying that his resolution doesn't claim their success in that respect. Now he's weakly muttering that they somehow capture the 'real essence of the time' anyway, however unshakespearean they are. But the fact is that Shakespeare's poetry did capture the 'real essence of his time'; as the Encyclopedia Britannica notes: "William Shakespeare, poet and dramatist, mirrored the age in verse that lifted the English language to its fullest beauty." [6] Therefore, if one fails to capture Shakespeare in verse, then one fails to capture the "real essence of his times". It really is that simple.Even if the resolution were true, Pro has done nothing to coherently defend it. Vote Con (if you'd like).-------- [1] Viz. this entire debate, and sources.[2] Susan Doran, "Juno Versus Diana: The Treatment of Elizabeth I's Marriage in Plays and Entertainments, 1561–1581," Historical Journal 38 (1995): 257–74 [3] Elizabeth I: A Life, David Loades, pp. 61 [4] English Literature in the Sixteenth Century, Lewis, pp. 1[5] http://www.scribd.com...[6] http://web.archive.org...