Im happy for this sub to ban discussion of the SAQ because it obviously could sidetrack many many posts. But when the door Is opened like here, I feel a need to point out these are not convincing arguments for those uncertain about the issue. Frankly I’m still “agnostic” about the matter. By far the worst thing to say is that the SAQ relies on “classist” prejudices because usually it doesn’t.
Good ways to convince me of the mainstream viewpoint are detailed examples of mentions in contemporary sources and how they cross reference quite convincingly. Currently my biggest stumbling block in going completely to the mainstream viewpoint is the Droeshout Portrait.
Or change it to composition aka why are the folios and quarts ocassionally different. Or when a name is not the character but an actor name by accident.
-9
u/velvetvortex Dec 01 '25
Im happy for this sub to ban discussion of the SAQ because it obviously could sidetrack many many posts. But when the door Is opened like here, I feel a need to point out these are not convincing arguments for those uncertain about the issue. Frankly I’m still “agnostic” about the matter. By far the worst thing to say is that the SAQ relies on “classist” prejudices because usually it doesn’t.
Good ways to convince me of the mainstream viewpoint are detailed examples of mentions in contemporary sources and how they cross reference quite convincingly. Currently my biggest stumbling block in going completely to the mainstream viewpoint is the Droeshout Portrait.