The Truth Will Out by Brenda James and William Rubinstein

The question of true identity of person(s) who stand behind Shakespeare's masterpieces is a very interesting and intriguing one - even thought the mainstream opinion still holds opinion that no other that "master from Stratford" wrote them, we now surprisingly little about his life except that he left school at the age of 13, have never travelled abroad and could hardly be expected to know court rituals, astrology and science of the time not to mention detailed description of Italian cities. At his death bed William Shakespeare writes what pieces of furniture to be divided between his family and not one word about literary work.

There are numerous candidates of "real Shakespeare" - mostly aristocrats and people connected to the court, even two women (Emilia Lainer and Mary Sidney) who could have hide behind pseudonym but the most interesting theory is about "group work" where various authors used Shakespeare as front man for their political agenda camouflaged as theatre plays. Now we have newest discovery, forgotten aristocrat Sir Henry Neville who had a gift to see but not be seen in a crowd - Neville was gifted writer but hid behind his diplomatic status and is life actually mirrors Shakespeare's plays closely - for example when plays are happy,Neville enjoyed his court position, when plays were dark Neville was imprisoned in Tower for his role in a political coup. There are many interesting little twists and turns in this book written by Brenda James and William Rubinstein (strangely enough, australian research team came to same conclusion independently) and though it makes sense, I could not shake a feeling that it's all a nitpicking - way too much "if", "possibly" and "must have" to actually convince me. It is true that James and Rubinstein believe passionately in their theory but somehow it just sounds far stretched in lack of concrete proof except guesswork. Yes, Neville travelled to Italy, knew the places Shakespeare describes in detail, spoke fluently foreign languages and had privileged education fitting for someone of his background, however after I finished the book the main impression was that I could be pointed as true Shakespeare if someone puts his mind to it.

Sir Henry Neville (curiously enough, nicknamed "Falstaff") is just one of the many aristocrats supposedly educated enough to have been "real Shakespeare". Its interesting mystery and I am still curious about it but not totally convinced - if you ask me, both versions sound possible. I see no problem with Stratford man showing genuine talent in spite of his background or perhaps someone other hiding behind theatre owner and financing public displays of political propaganda carefully camouflaged. Let's hope some documents will eventually be find and real Shakespeare finally get recognition.