Sonnets hyphen?

[mike thomas]

The sonnets title page has SHAKE-SPEARES

The big book of plays has SHAKESPEARES


question 1: what's with the hyphen in the Sonnets version?

question 2: no apostrophes?

any ideas?

regards

[kelby_lake]

The sonnets title page has SHAKE-SPEARES

The big book of plays has SHAKESPEARES


question 1: what's with the hyphen in the Sonnets version?

question 2: no apostrophes?

any ideas?

regards

Bad spelling, really.

[Beewulf]

Regarding Question 1: Because spelling conventions had not been standardized, typesetters in Shakespeare's day often used their own judgment when putting words into print. Perhaps this typesetter wanted readers to know that Shakespeare's name should be pronounced with two syllables and to know where the syllabic division occurred.

[mike thomas]

thanks for the input folks.

I could accept spelling errors and idiosyncrasies if it were not for certain other strange things. Take for example, Sonnet 23, which says

O let my books be then the eloquence,
And domb presagers of my speaking brest,
Who pleade for loue, and look for recompence,
More then that tonge that more hath more exprest.
O learne to read what silent loue hath writ,

I ask the simple question: what books?

If the Sonnets were published by a pirate (as scholars seem to say), and as the big book wasn't published until 1623 - after WS died, then who's books are these?

It seem the scholars use 'interpretation' yet again and assume that 'book's meant 'looks'.
but this is pure speculation. When it comes to understanding the Sonnets, it seems that most of what has been written is pure speculation.

If we take this sonnet on face value, then the author of this particular sonnet had a number of books completed. If this is true, then it leads to the logical conclusion: As WS had no books published, Sonnet 23 must be the work of another author.

regards

[OrphanPip]

The sonnets were first published in 1609, not after he was dead.

[kelby_lake]

thanks for the input folks.

I could accept spelling errors and idiosyncrasies if it were not for certain other strange things. Take for example, Sonnet 23, which says

O let my books be then the eloquence,
And domb presagers of my speaking brest,
Who pleade for loue, and look for recompence,
More then that tonge that more hath more exprest.
O learne to read what silent loue hath writ,

I ask the simple question: what books?

If the Sonnets were published by a pirate (as scholars seem to say), and as the big book wasn't published until 1623 - after WS died, then who's books are these?

It seem the scholars use 'interpretation' yet again and assume that 'book's meant 'looks'.
but this is pure speculation. When it comes to understanding the Sonnets, it seems that most of what has been written is pure speculation.

If we take this sonnet on face value, then the author of this particular sonnet had a number of books completed. If this is true, then it leads to the logical conclusion: As WS had no books published, Sonnet 23 must be the work of another author.

regards

He could easily be referring to the books he is writing, or will write (remember in his sonnets he has lofty ambitions for his writing)- but poetry is not always 100% truth. It may be part of a fanciful conceit.
Your assertion doesn't prove that Sonnet 23 was written by someone else.