The non-fiction book "The true Shakespeare, Christopher Marlowe" first published in 2011, (2013 2nd edition) deals with the authorship of William Shakespeare and concludes that Christopher Marlowe must have been the true author of the works of Shakespeare 's
Today's search engines allow the statement that academic (anglistic) or related experts have completely ignored and not yet dealt with the arguments of this non-fiction book up to now (2015) (eg, reviews, essays, objections, reviews, meetings, presentations, edits, seminars, rejections, disapprovals, refutations. How should one interpret this result of a denial the theses of this book by all experts . I see 3 options:
1)Eccentric Author.- Experts feel the thesis as a deformed offspring of a deviant personality best protected by common silence. (e.g. conspiracy theorist)
2) Non-Knowledge eliminates doubts. Since for decades Shakespeare authorship is taboo (and expertise completely deprived of doubt) experts have no longer sufficient basic knowledge to fully deal with the topic
3) A paradigm shift of the authorship theory would mean too great a dismantling of the architects of the academic establishment, and related public media.
Johann Wolfgang Goethe wrote in his "Maximen und Reflexionen (Aus Kunst und Altertum 1826)" : Mit dem Wissen wächst der Zweifel. (J.W.v.Goethe) meaning : "Knowledge increases doubt!" (or "Ignorance decreases doubt")