Anyone who attempts to put a label on any aspect of William Shakespeare\u2019s being is treading on quicksand. His mind was able to empathize with and project any personality (male or female, natural or supernatural, king or gravedigger) and to illuminate any situation of life: business, family, politics, romance and warfare. His life and his works demonstrate that he transcended sexuality without any firm boundaries.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
Shakespeare\u2019s Sonnets<\/em>, first published in 1609, are among the most beautiful expressions of love in the English language and most of them were written and dedicated from Bard to man. No one knows the identity of the beloved young man. The dedication begins: The content of the sonnets is often explicitly homoerotic. For years he circulated \u201chis sugred Sonnets,\u201d according to his contemporary Francis Meres, only \u201camong his private friends\u201d in London. Meres seems keenly aware of queer culture in London then, publishing the rumor that Christopher Marlowe was \u201cstabbed to death by a bawdy serving-man, a rival of his in his lewd love.\u201d Even after the sonnets were published, probably without Shakespeare’s approval, for 170 years they were deliberately misgendered, changing the pronouns from \u201che\u201d to \u201cshe.\u201d In Sonnet 13, he is called \u201cdear my love,\u201d and Sonnet 15 states that the poet is at \u201cwar with Time for love of you.\u201d Sonnet 18 asks \u201cShall I compare thee to a summer\u2019s day? Thou art more lovely and more temperate,\u201d and in Sonnet 20 the narrator refers to the youth as the \u201cmaster-mistress of my passion.\u201d The Bard\u2019s poems evoke sleepless nights, distress and jealousy caused by his love for the young man. Shakespeare\u2019s sexual orientation, like many aspects of his life, has long been the subject of speculation and controversy. In 1954 C.S. Lewis noted that the sonnets are \u201ctoo lover-like for ordinary male friendship,\u201d though not the poetry of \u201cfull-blown pederasty,\u201d and that he:\n\u201cfound no real parallel to such language between friends in the 16th-century literature.\u201d Shakespeare\u2019s plays also contain many homoerotic elements. Antonio\u2019s unexplained sadness in <\/span>The Merchant of Venice <\/em>might be due to unrequited love for his young friend Bassanio. Another Antonio (in <\/span>Twelfth Night<\/em>), is willing to risk all for his companion Sebastian, the identical twin of Viola who, disguised as a man, works for Duke Orsino:<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\u201cI have many enemies in Orsino\u2019s court, Adding to the intrigue, the Duke is in love with Olivia, who has fallen for the transvestite Viola.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n In <\/span>Romeo and Juliet<\/em><\/span> Benvolio, who is clearly in love with Romeo, stands before him and says:<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n“be ruled by me. Forget to think of [Rosalind] \u2026 [Give] liberty unto thine eyes. Examine other beauties.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Benvolio would be the only beauty in sight at that moment. It seems something may have been going on between the two gentlemen of Verona, too.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n In Shakespeare\u2019s time, women were not allowed on stage, so female parts were played by young men, some of them notably accomplished drag performers. This had, no doubt, significant impact on how Shakespeare wrote their roles.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n Shakespeare spent much of his life in London, leaving his wife and children behind in Stratford-upon-Avon. In 1613, as Shakespeare was contemplating retirement to Stratford, he (and three other men who acted as trustees) bought Henry Walker\u2019s Blackfriars Gatehouse for \u00a3140. The large house had long been a well-known refuge for persecuted Catholics. In<\/span> Shakespeare\u2019s Lives<\/em>, Samuel Schoenbaum notes that the deal included:<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\u201c\u2026 elaborate arrangements, calling for trustees and a mortgage [whose] practical effect would be to deprive Shakespeare\u2019s widow of her dower right to a third share for life in this part of the estate; for in a joint tenancy, Chancery would not recognize Anne\u2019s privilege unless her husband had survived the other trustees.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Not only did he intend to prevent his wife from inheriting his London real estate, Shakespeare left his wife the \u201csecond-best bed\u201d in the will he wrote shortly before his death. No word on where the best bed went. Historians, without basis or precedent, try to convince us that second-best was really the best, because that would be the one they slept in. (This was first proposed in 1848 by James Halliwell-Phillipps, who provided flimsy evidence that has not since been improved.) The bulk of his estate was left to his daughter Susanna and her husband, Dr John Hall. As far as Blackfriars Gatehouse goes, he left the Halls:<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\u201cAll that Messuage or tenemente with thappurtenaunces where-in one John Robinson dwelleth scituat lyeing and being in the blackfriers in London.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n The relationship of John Robinson (b. ca. 1656) with Shakespeare appears to have been more intimate than that of a mere London tenant. As far back as 1598, they were listed just two lines apart in the St. Helens (London) tax records, suggesting they were (or recently had been) close neighbors or lived together in the upscale Bishopsgate neighborhood before relocating\u2014possibly together\u2014possibly to the South Bank near the Globe Theatre (or maybe he used that as an address to divert tax collectors), and eventually to Blackfriars fifteen years later. In between them in the 1598 rolls was John Pryme, likely the well-to-do older (born ca. 1633) man who had brokered the 1579 mortgage for The Theatre, and a resident of St. Helen\u2019s since before Shakespeare was born. It\u2019s tempting to imagine that jolly threesome sharing a household.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n John Robinson\u2019s wealthy and powerful father lived nearby but had partially disowned his eldest son. John Jr. had something of a reputation as a playboy.<\/span> Both Shakespeare and John Robinson the Younger moved out of St. Helen\u2019s around 1600, the year Robinson\u2019s father died and Robinson the Younger lost access to a domicile next-door to his father\u2019s. Robinson contested his father\u2019s will, before and after the old man died. Nearly two decades later, John Robinson (the same man?) was in Stratford to witness the signing of Shakespeare\u2019s will, a pivotal moment shortly before the Bard\u2019s death.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n Scholars have long speculated about why Shakespeare bought Blackfriars Gatehouse, which entailed a substantial mortgage of \u00a360. Was it to provide a pied-a-terre for him to use during visits? An investment to generate rents? Meant to serve as a safe-house for fellow Catholics? The only confirmed motivation is that the purchase provided a place where John Robinson could live after Shakespeare left London. He resided in the Gatehouse during Shakespeare\u2019s lifetime and for years following his passing, as suggested in Shakespeare\u2019s will and likely with the blessings of the Bard\u2019s daughter and heir, Susanna Shakespeare Hall. Perhaps Anne Hathaway held a grudge against John Robinson that motivated Shakespeare to keep the house out of his wife\u2019s control.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n It\u2019s unclear if there were one, two, three or more John Robinsons in Will\u2019s life\u2014it was a common name\u2014but it seems likely there was only one, with whom he had a long-lasting and intimate relationship that began soon after Shakespeare\u2019s arrival in London, and extended beyond Will\u2019s death, as his daughter\u2019s London tenant.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n Shakespeare\u2019s personal life paints the picture of a man who prioritized his career over his marriage, leaving his wife and children behind in Stratford while he pursued a separate existence in London. Anne Hathaway Shakespeare was demonstrably strong, self-sufficient and financially capable, as shown by her management of the Stratford home.<\/span>Shakespeare\u2019s personal life paints the picture of a man who prioritized his career over his marriage, leaving his wife and children behind in Stratford while he pursued a separate existence in London. Anne Hathaway Shakespeare was demonstrably strong, self-sufficient and financially capable, as shown by her management of the Stratford home.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\u201cTo the onlie begetter of these insuing sonnets, Mr. W.H.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\nDo Shakespeare’s plays contain homoerotic elements?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n
Did Shakespeare prevent his wife from controlling his London house?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n
What’s in Shakespeare’s Last Will and Testament?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n
Who was John Robinson?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\nWhy did Shakespeare purchase Blackfriars Gatehouse?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n
Was Shakespeare estranged from his wife?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n