"The very idea that so many people have been suggested as the author of Shakespeares works in itself to me is enough to show that it is a mad idea, it's just crazy !"
In case the click doesn't work try the URL-Adress! Stanley Wells begins at Min.17:00!
Let us make a comparison: Imagine we would know virtually nothing about the artistic background of Mozart. We would essentially derive his artistic biography from his music and we would search for other candidates with the absolutely unique format of the composer. Hardly anyone would expect or assume that there would have been a second candidate of Mozarts exceptionalism at the same time , let alone the number of 86 composer-candidates.! .-
The same applies to Shakespeare! Also Stanley Wells did fall into this trap of an unsurmountable paradox: The number of Shakespeare authorship candidates is not the consequence but the cause of the problem. In Shakespeare's time there was only one absolutely exceptional talent and Genius (Christopher Marlowe). The number of so many candidates could arise only because the exceptional talent was forced and able to conceal his identity throughout his long life with so incredibly numerous initials, alias-names, pen-names, cover-names, pseudonyms, nom de plumes *1) etc. (such as William Shake-speare, Nicholas Breton, Henry Willobie (H. W.),William Clarke W. C., Peter Colse (P. C.), Barnabe Barnes, Bartholomew Griffin (B.G.), Richard Barnfield (R. B.), John Bodenham (J. B.),William Basse (W. B.), Gervase Markham (G. M.), Thomas Shelton (T. S.), Henry Petowe, John Taylor, George Wither, Thomas Heywood, John Davies[twice], Michael Drayton, Thomas Middleton, John Ford and many more.-
As unthinkable and absurd as it may sound, a paradox that apparently contradicts itself and yet alone will lead to a final solution of the seemingly intractable authorship problem.-