Literally, with all convinced Marlowians I miss some fundamental reflections:
1 A Marlowian Theory cannot exist, i.e. doesn’t make any sense, as long as one does not assume that Marlowe survived.
2 If Marlowe (alias Shakespeare) survived, however, ....
3 .... he must have had a specific biography for his surviving time.(up to 1655?)
4....these life data & experiences must have been reflected in some (many?) ways in texts of himself as of concealed pseudonymous poets, and by no means only in play texts of Shakespeare.
5Can anybody even remotely accept that there is no need for any contextual autobiographical (poetical) evidence and (re)search?
These "contextual" massive autobiographical evidence in fact are the cornerstones of the evidence, of circumstantial evidence and reasoning.
And Marlowian Daryl Pinksen (mirabile dictu!) doesn’t either have heard or ever listened to any line of all Youtube presentations or ever asked the crucial question what Marlowe might have done & written in his long surviving time?
Detailed article of Hungarianpublisher and editor Pal Faklen (Budapest)
As a longtime Marlowian, I recently discovered a more detailed article of the hungarianpublisher and editor Pal Faklen (Budapest) on the Marlowe Shakespeare authorship issue(entitled "The Delayed Resurrection of Marlowe) which I naturally liked very much.
I hope that Pal Faklens essential and amazing arguments will receive (slowly, but at least) a gradual recognitionworld wide.
