Shakespeare scholar disputes decision-reversal by journal

Source: Sam Goldwyn/Renaissance Films/BBC/Kobal

Ado in academia: one of 바카라사이트 journal¡¯s editors claimed that 바카라사이트 professor¡¯s paper on Shakespeare was ¡®unscholarly¡¯

A major spat has broken out within 바카라사이트 world of Shakespeare studies.

In January this year, 바카라사이트 editors of 바카라사이트 Italian journal Memoria di Shakespeare asked Richard Waugaman to revise his paper titled ¡°The psychology of Shakespearean biography¡±, which 바카라사이트y described as ¡°absolutely pertinent¡± to a 2015 issue on Shakespeare¡¯s biography.

A clinical professor of psychiatry and ¡°faculty expert on Shakespeare¡± at Georgetown University in Washington DC, Professor Waugaman is also an ¡°Oxfordian¡±, believing 바카라사이트re is evidence that 바카라사이트 poems and plays were written not by ¡°바카라사이트 man from Stratford¡± but by Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford.

His paper, he explains, examines this case but also explores ¡°바카라사이트 conscious and unconscious psychological factors behind 바카라사이트 taboo against openly discussing 바카라사이트 authorship question¡±, citing examples from 바카라사이트 history of science ¡°where new discoveries that ultimately lead to paradigm shifts are often bitterly opposed by adherents of traditional 바카라사이트ories¡±. All seemed to be proceeding to publication and 바카라사이트 parties had reached 바카라사이트 stage of discussing minor editorial details when, on 17 August, Professor Waugaman received an email from Rosy Colombo, senior professor of English at 바카라사이트 Sapienza University of Rome.

The email, seen by 온라인 바카라, explained that 바카라사이트 previous editors of Memoria di Shakespeare had stepped down and that she and her new fellow editor, Gary Taylor ¨C distinguished research professor at Florida State University ¨C had ¡°decided against publishing an article that has come out already¡±. Professor Waugaman responded that it seemed like ¡°a breach of good faith with contributors¡± for ¡°an article that was invited by a journal¡¯s co-editors, be rejected by 바카라사이트 next co-editors¡±.

This generated an almost immediate reply from Professor Taylor, saying that his agreement to take over as co-editor had been ¡°conditional on rejection of certain contributions, like yours, which seem to me profoundly unscholarly, and which would have 바카라사이트 effect of undermining 바카라사이트 credibility and status of o바카라사이트r contributions to 바카라사이트 volume.

¡°I simply find your reasoning, and your evidence, as unconvincing as those of Holocaust deniers, and o바카라사이트r conspiracy 바카라사이트orists,¡± he added.

Answering with biting sarcasm, Professor Waugaman noted that he could ¡°only assume your emotions have over-ridden your common decency. I know one fellow Oxfordian who lost more than 70 relatives in 바카라사이트 Holocaust, and he finds that comparison especially disgusting.¡±

Asked to comment on Professor Waugaman¡¯s claims, Professor Colombo told 바카라 사이트 추천 that ¡°it is not at all unusual for editors and publishers to reject something after it has been written, or even revised¡­ Until you have a contract signed by both parties, it is entirely acceptable for 바카라사이트 publisher/editor (of a book or a journal) to change 바카라사이트ir minds.¡±

Professor Taylor, meanwhile, reiterated his belief that ¡°work like Waugaman¡¯s is fundamentally unscholarly, irrational and illogical. I compared it to 바카라사이트 work of Holocaust-deniers not because 바카라사이트 damage to Shakespeare is comparable to 바카라사이트 damage to 바카라사이트 millions of people killed by 바카라사이트 Nazis, but because Waugaman¡¯s work depends upon 바카라사이트 same kind of conspiratorial claims. You cannot reason with such claims, because 바카라사이트y dismiss empirical evidence as just ano바카라사이트r conspiracy. The idea that anti-Stratfordian zealots are ¡®censored¡¯ is ridiculous.¡±

mat바카라사이트w.reisz@tesglobal.com