The Birmingham age-herald., 1920-10-26
M E N, w o M FEN
 A N D T H | N c $


 My boys artless query keeps ringing In my ears and find that I am constantly striving to answer it to my own satis- i faction.
 He himself asked, What's in name?' I can tell him now that he IS dead and cannot make reply that there | is no more than mere fragrance. | Strange is it not that we know so little about the greatest name in literature 1 and this in spite of scholars who have given their lives to turn up something about the little known one they strive to resurrect.
 I have quite a collection of Shakesper- ian and am pretty well up on the works of those who have endeawored to illumi- | nate the obscurity which dwells about eV- erything connected with the life of the great Englshman who shed such lustre on the literature of his country, but the fact remains that in spite of the delvins it has been mighty hard to clothe the skeleton to make it lifelike.
 
 l pass by all the dreary articles and volumes written around the Baconian theory, and confess that 1 am sorry l ever gave so much time to reading such stuff, my only wish being that I had spent the same number of hours to en- toying his immortal productions. If you believe that Bacon wrote them, do not bother me with any proof to substantiate your claims for so far as l an1 judge I have already thrown the case out of court.
 Another thing which I am sure will bring down the condemnation of certain have quit worrying about sthe various have quite worrying about the various editions though at one time l was great ly excited over the matter and was ready to break a lance with any literary gentle man who failed to agree with me that my favorite editor was the prince or Shakespearian commentators. My only wish now is to get set without foot notes, glossary or any other disturoing element to distract my attention from the plays themselves.
 
 I realize that such a confession will put me outside the plane of many learned gentlemen who have devoted years Of pa tient study of reading about Shakespeare instead of reading him. consider such a procedure as TI4oves Labor Lost, or Much Ado o2About Nothing" and so far as [ am concerned what little time there is left for me to read will be given to Shakespeare himself and not to another who is hiding him in mist Of learned trifling over uninteresting scholarship.
 Yes. I'll go a bit further and say that if people would read their Bibles more and less about it, they would know more or it's literary beauty well as it's saving power. I put in score of years in DOT ing over commentaries. If l had spent my life in sticking to the text and letting the authors get at me directly without having to pass through other mems minds, would have been fuller in knowl- edge of the greatest book in the world and far richer in spirit If I wasn't fifty years old. I wouldn't make such admissions. But what is the use of having a chance to have ones say if one can't be free to speak ones mind. I have settled soine things for myself and I am not going to be silent for fear that some one will criticise my exposed positions There is literary dogmatism which is just as deadly as is certain type of theological dogmatism which cries out against any, one. who fails to subscribe to it's announcements.
 
 But who is this fellow Shakespeare? The truth is, outside of what stands in his name, there is mighty little that is sure about his life. I am aware that some one will bob up and ask if haven't read so and sos latest contribution to the subject. may not have given much tune to all the lives, but I know enough about the leading ones to unhesitatingly affirm that they have precious few facts, to go upon but are long on inference and inn aginaton. I am some little romancer my self and can weave a piece or two with out any outside help.
 
 Shakespeare puts the query. Whats in a name-r And we are all acquainted with his example of the rose, but here is an- other question which throw out to those self satisfied Shakespearians who know everything about the right text and the facts of his life: How do you spell his name?" It's a matter of common knowl edge among the students of the great dramatist that the name Shakespeare is extremely widespread and is spelt in variety of ways That of John Shakes peare occurs 166 times in the council book of the .Stratford corporation. and appears to take sixteen different forms (and yet one of the editors of the Advertiser in a recent charming editorial chaffs me bit for having taken the liberty of spelling Chattahoochee three different ways in my story about Barlow knife. put it on the proof reader, but what if did. It's a more difficult word than Shakes peare.)
 The verdict. not altogether unanimous. | of the photographers is to the effect that Shakespeare himself in the extant ex- amples of his signature, always wrote l "Shakepere.' It would seem from this 1 that that fellow. Shakespeare, did not 1 know how to spell his own name. But he l should worry, for Charlemagne who l made a pretty big dent in history could | neither write or read. Any way believe | in allowing a man large liberty in sign ing his own name and even in pronounc-