Talk:Dark Lady (Shakespeare)
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
"Lucy Negro" edit
For those who read Uncle G's blog posts:
- Richmond, Hugh (1986). "The Dark Lady as Reformation Mistress". The Kenyon Review, New Series. 8 (2): 91–105.
- Hayden, Lucy Kelly (2007). "Review: Shakespeare and Africa: The Dark Lady of His Sonnets Revamped and Other Africa Related Associations by Robert F. Fleissner". African American Review. 41 (3): 588–589.
- Kemp, Theresa D. (2013). "Shakespeare Among the Courtesans: Prostitution, Literature, and Drama, 1500—1650. Anglo-Italian Renaissance Studies by Duncan Salkeld". Comparative Drama. 47 (3): 396–399.
- Iyengar, Sujata (2001). "Review: Shakespeare and Race: Postcolonial Praxis in the Early Modern Period by Imtiaz Habib". The Sixteenth Century Journal. 32 (2): 615–617.
- Woodson, C. G. (1935). "Some Attitudes in English Literature". The Journal of Negro History. 20 (1): 27–85.
- Foster, Donald W. (1987). "Master W. H., R. I. P.". PMLA. 102 (1): 42–54.
Citing a work of fiction edit
The citation (citation 4 at the time of posting) supporting "Lanier could have written…Macbeth" in the article text comes from Dark Aemilia: A Novel of Shakespeare's Dark Lady. Novels can't be used as citation for something factual, so I've tagged it {{dubious}}. The original source seems to have been Rowse, promoting his famous theory, but I haven't found this yet.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 23:02, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- This material deleted. I was wrong about Rowse, though: he wasn't responsible for this particular flight of fancy, the legitimate prerogative only of novelists.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 15:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Self published source edit
These edits rightly reinforce the point that the preceding theories in that section regarding John Florio's wife, and particularly the one that names her as "Aline", may be spurious. Indeed, the whole section is called "Speculation about the Dark Lady". However the statement that "she wasn't even Samuel Daniel's sister" comes from a self published source, whereas the original reference is to to the authoritative ODNB. Furthermore the whole edit is in an unencyclopedic, informal style presented as a criticism ("the hypothesis suggested above are [sic] mere speculations" and "do not correspond to reality") of the existing material. The place for arguments about content is here, on the talk page, and not in the article itself. Wikipedia is not a forum. Articles should be written in a restrained, formal style. Tagged, pending a possible revert (subject to other editors' views).--217.155.32.221 (talk) 08:13, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
- An editor has replaced the self-published source with a proper WP:RS, but it doesn't support the text—in fact it says the opposite: "[Florio] having married the sister of Samuel Daniel".[1] The other tag was {{editorializing}}, which was also removed without discussion. --217.155.32.221 (talk) 07:09, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
- The same editor has now removed the inconvenient à Wood reference and replaced it with an extract from a peer-reviewed monograph from Professor Carla Rossi of the University of Zurich. Prof Rossi reproduces an extract from 1571 parish register from St James Garlickhythe, recording that "John Florens [a servant to a Frenchman] and Anne Sore sollo were Marryed the Vth of Ffebruary." The same academic work also contains the well-attested marriage in 1617 at St James's Church, Clerkenwell of the translator John Florio, correctly spelt, to Rose Spicer. Albeit this second ceremony was in 1617, and allowing the commonplace variation in spelling at the time, it does seem that two different people are named and that the reference belongs to someone else entirely—{{failed verification}} again.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 09:49, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
- I have at last traced the second reference (reference 19 at the time of posting) supporting the addition. It is accurately transcribed from ‘’Anderson, Robert (1795). The Works of British Poets, Volume IV, p. 115:. However, a modern-day assessment of Dr Anderson (he was a medical practitioner) does not commend him as a reliable source: he is said to be a plagiarist perceived as presenting an “aggressively tendentious” work, according to Professor Smallwood of Birmingham City University School of English.[2] This seems a bit harsh, as Dr Anderson in his day seemed well-regarded as an anthologist, but in this dispute of facts I still prefer ODNB as the more reliable source. Tagging {{Unreliable source?}} and {{Original research}}.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 22:12, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- Recent edits seem to be missing the point of the "Speculation about the Dark Lady" section of the article—it's to list speculations about the Dark Lady rather than picking out the historical reality from the abundant chaff—so it's not necessary to complain that "in reality" the article isn't proving its points. Indeed, the article's lead paragraph warns that this is a "pointless" exercise. Complaining about article content must be on the article's talk page, not in the article itself.
- Unfortunately Burl's modern invention of "Aline Florio" seems to have taken off a bit when his book was eagerly reviewed in many newspapers and in some quarters the Dark Lady is "Aline Florio"—700000 googlehits and counting. The WP article needs to be as clear, definitive and authoritative as possible, to counter this.
- Labelling the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography as an {{Unreliable source?}} doesn't help to resolve the issue and present a coherent article (isn't this our aim?).
- --217.155.32.221 (talk) 08:42, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
- I’ve discovered the ultimate origin of "Daniel marrying Florio’s sister" (or vice versa)—it's open to different interpretations—and added a reference from antiquarian Bolton Corney as to the possible cause of this much-perpetuated confusion. This can replace the material in contention and permit the deletion of some of the disfiguring {{unreliable source?}} tags, particularly the one applied to the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, which is obviously spurious, subject to other contributors’ views.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 08:13, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
- Done.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 09:53, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- I’ve discovered the ultimate origin of "Daniel marrying Florio’s sister" (or vice versa)—it's open to different interpretations—and added a reference from antiquarian Bolton Corney as to the possible cause of this much-perpetuated confusion. This can replace the material in contention and permit the deletion of some of the disfiguring {{unreliable source?}} tags, particularly the one applied to the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, which is obviously spurious, subject to other contributors’ views.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 08:13, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
- I have at last traced the second reference (reference 19 at the time of posting) supporting the addition. It is accurately transcribed from ‘’Anderson, Robert (1795). The Works of British Poets, Volume IV, p. 115:. However, a modern-day assessment of Dr Anderson (he was a medical practitioner) does not commend him as a reliable source: he is said to be a plagiarist perceived as presenting an “aggressively tendentious” work, according to Professor Smallwood of Birmingham City University School of English.[2] This seems a bit harsh, as Dr Anderson in his day seemed well-regarded as an anthologist, but in this dispute of facts I still prefer ODNB as the more reliable source. Tagging {{Unreliable source?}} and {{Original research}}.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 22:12, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- The same editor has now removed the inconvenient à Wood reference and replaced it with an extract from a peer-reviewed monograph from Professor Carla Rossi of the University of Zurich. Prof Rossi reproduces an extract from 1571 parish register from St James Garlickhythe, recording that "John Florens [a servant to a Frenchman] and Anne Sore sollo were Marryed the Vth of Ffebruary." The same academic work also contains the well-attested marriage in 1617 at St James's Church, Clerkenwell of the translator John Florio, correctly spelt, to Rose Spicer. Albeit this second ceremony was in 1617, and allowing the commonplace variation in spelling at the time, it does seem that two different people are named and that the reference belongs to someone else entirely—{{failed verification}} again.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 09:49, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Gay? edit
Years ago when I was doing A-levels, the theory was that the Dark Lady is actually a metaphor for a homosexual lover. I'm surprised the article doesn't mention this. SatansFeminist (talk) 21:18, 12 June 2021 (UTC)