Should you waste your time and money on the movie Anonymous?

Does it take a university education to be a great writer?

If yes, then we should cross out quite a few names from our lists, starting with Homer and going onto Shelley, Keats, Austen, the Bronte sisters, Dickens, Eliot (G), Orwell and on and on.  Interestingly, Dan Brown, Danielle Steele and Stephanie Meyer all went to prestigious posh universities.

This brings us to the elephant in the living room, the one name that I have not included in the list. Did the Bard really write the thirty-eight plays that he is credited for? Or was Shakespeare merely a front man for other men of higher birth- such as Francis Bacon and Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford?

So, a man from a humble background and no posh education could not have written about foreign places and historical events. Only an aristocrat, a man of noble birth and education, could have written something as profound as “… the better part of valor is discretion.” It takes an aristo to understand that the plebs of London would only be swayed through bawdy jokes such as : “By my life, this is my lady’s hand: these be her very C’s, her U’s, and her T’s; and thus makes she her great P’s.”

Yes, you have to be quite the cunt to miss the obvious, eh, you Shakespeare lovers?

Who among us would ever disagree that the Romantic poets wrote their own (profound albeit self-indulgent) verses? Would anyone think that Elizabeth Bennet had stolen her wits and disposition from Lady Catherine De Burgh? Would an aristocrat lady write the words of anguish: “Do you think, because I am poor, obscure, plain, and little, I am soulless and heartless?” Would any aristocrat be able to depict the horrors of the poor house in Victorian England?

So why do we keep coming back to this absurd notion that Shakespeare did not write his plays?

We know that he was not an obscure behind-the-scenes figure. He was always credited as the author on stage. He had enjoyed friendships of Ben Jonson and quite possibly Christopher Marlowe- expert playwrights with substantive contribution to Literature themselves. Do you think that these gentlemen of immense ego would have tolerated as a friend someone who had no literary merit and yet claimed such a thing?

A man of humble birth from Stratford, having been married at the age of eighteen, went to London to earn a living. He became an actor and stage manager and began writing his own plays. They were designed to be crowd pleasers- full of dirty jokes and royalty and the most profound of human emotions: love, hate, jealousy and ambition. He made a fortune as a writer of these tales and then went home to enjoy the twilight years of his life in company of his family.

But this story is not enough for those who think that only rich people can accomplish great things. According to these people, Steve Jobs would have been the bastard child of a Rockefeller or a Kennedy. Einstein was probably stealing the work of a Rothschild.

Why not make a movie about those two?

Gilad Shalit’s Return Home

A rare thing happened today: celebration at both Gaza and West Bank and in Israel itself. Sgt. Gilad Shalit has been released after five years in Hamas captivity. This release was brought about after Israel agreed to release over one thousand members of Hamas. Palestinians are cheering at having their loved ones back and the whole of Israel is celebrating the return of their son.

Good news all around, you could say. Hardly.

First of all, the prisoners released under the agreement have all been convicted of violent crimes and attempts at acts of terrorism.  Israel just released a group of people who have gone the extra mile in proving their dedication to its destruction.  In terms of security risk alone this may have been an unacceptable price to pay.

However, the values of the Israeli society, particularly that of its military, are to be considered. No soldier is to be left behind in the field and Israelis would rather have their boy soldier back and face the consequences. The positive optimism of this act may have brought the whole country together.

Secondly, the political ramifications on both sides are going to be formidable. The release of the long held captive has bolstered the position and popularity of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. His hard line stances on the peace process and continuous expansion of the settlements have always been a major obstacle to the peace process. His Likud Party has allied itself with Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu party and together they have taken an uncompromising stand on expanding the settlements on the Occupied Territories. The net result of the prisoner swap may be that the hardliners in Israel gain more political currency.

There is a glimmer of hope in this regard, though. Mr. Netanyahu had always been dismissive of negotiating with the Palestinian Authority. However, his willingness to engage with and pay the price asked by Hamas, the most hardline Palestinian political group is itself a positive sign. If he is willing to incur so much cost in negotiating with Hamas, he may be willing to do business with the PA after all. A surge in popularity may give him the wiggle room to distance himself from Lieberman and other hardliners.

The winner of the situation is clearly Hamas. They have demonstrated that their policy of non-stop violence against Israel has brought more results than the non-violent and cooperative policy of the PLO. They have reason to celebrate today because they have handed their rivals, the Fatah, a crushing political defeat (and this time they did not have to throw them off rooftops).  President Mahmoud Abbas was forced to have the West Bank leader of Hamas, Sheikh Hassan Yousef stand next to him during his speech welcoming back the prisoners. The next election of the Palestinian Authority may not bode well for the peace camp in both Palestine and Israel.

The greatest cause for worry is the small terrorist groups which are being tolerated by Hamas in Gaza. They have already vowed to make more attempts at kidnapping Israeli soldiers. They may be happy in Israel today but by accepting the terms of Hamas, they may have opened a whole new can of worms.

The frail and malnourished condition of Sgt. Shalit may give us a lot of pause as to how Hamas treats its prisoners. In the five years of his captivity, he was not allowed a single visit from the Red Cross- a severe breach of the human rights conventions as well as Geneva conventions. Hamas’ treatment of Palestinian prisoners who are political dissenters is even worse. Yet they may stand to gain the most from these circumstances.

Celebrate if you like, for today has been a rare good day for both sides. But don’t hold your breath for the peace process.

On Occupy Wall Street

It has always cheered me up to note that Thomas Paine's The Rights of Man was written as a direct response to Edmund Burke's derisive criticism of the French Revolution. Burke's reference to the people's revolt in Paris as the 'swinish multitude' was typical of the contempt felt by the ruling class towards the feelings of the poor on whose back they built their fortunes. Paine's passionate defense of the Revolution was the beginning of the intellectual fight back against the reactionary old order.

One could say that the spirit of Burke lives on, especially in the conservative media and its coverage of the Occupy Wall Street movement. The scribes of right-tilting newspapers, magazines and cable TV stations poured scorn over the protesters and questioned their motivations, intentions and even rolled out the old chestnut of questioning their patriotism.

Political classes can get complacent and comfortable and often need a short sharp reminder of who and where their responsibilities lie. However, that is not to say that any political action in protest of the status quo is acceptable.

The movement that calls itself Occupy Wall Street has decided to stage a continuous protest at the Zucotti Park in New York City. They are calling for punitive measures towards the corporations and banks as a response to the downturn of the economy. The protesters are mostly college students, young graduates who are yet to find employment and professional political provocateurs. They are calling for all debt to be forgiven and higher taxes on the wealthy.

However, one thing that stands out to anyone who observes the protests is that they are incoherent and ill informed. The protesters are angry about the prospect of unemployment and a lowering of standards of living- a sentiment well justified given the circumstances. But they demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding of how the economy works.

Their demands are fantastic and impractical: a 99% tax on the billionaires and a total debt forgiveness may sound nice but the consequences would result in the destruction of the global financial system and the subsequent destruction of the world economy. They are protesting but not getting involved with the political process that could bring about real and substantive change.

They say they want change but what they want is their life back. Given a choice between a fundamental political change or a well paid job, they would settle for the latter. They are riling against corporations but are happy to subscribe to technology developed by Apple or AT&T.

The overall mood of this protest is less of anger and more of petulance: a vague sense of being cheated out of the American dream and a feeling of entitlement sans the accompanying responsibility.

We have seen this before: barely had our 44^th President taken the reins of the government did the right wing began the Tea Party movement- a political storm based on the ideas to be found on the right side of Genghis Khan. The 2010 election was a vindication of the idea that if you yell loudly enough, you may get your way with the politicians too spineless to stand up to the political equivalent of bat-shit crazy.

The political left has chosen to imitate the success of the extremists on the right by launching their own version of extremism. Occupy Wall Street is clearly a mirror image of the gun toting, costumed hicks of last year, only with a more festive mood, better songs and topless dancers (an improvement in my opinion). The tea party was the visible reminder of a new political maxim of America: all politics is yokel. The political left is following it up with a aphorism of their own: all politics is petulant.