Talk:Willie Hughes

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Shakespeare Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakespeare, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of William Shakespeare on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShakespeareWikipedia:WikiProject ShakespeareTemplate:WikiProject ShakespeareShakespeare articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

What exactly is the purpose of this page? Does Wikipedia normally include biographical entries for fictional persons? At least the page on Queequeg mentions the most important thing about him, that he is a "fictional personage."

What evidence is there that "Willie Hughes" ever existed? None.

So, at the very least, this page should begin by mentioning that he is a "fictional personage." I am quite aware that Willie Hughes has become some sort of a reality to the community of gay scholars, simply through repetition and echoing. But it remains a fact that the dedication to "Mr. W.H." was written by the publisher, not Shakespeare. And -- something never mentioned in this article -- the word "will" meant "prick" or "cock" in conversations about sex. The "smutty" sonnets need to be re-read with clarity -- they are all about one or more pricks inhabiting the same pussy. To be sure, Shakespeare plays on his own name ("Will")... but the other "will" in this game belonged to the passionate, bisexual Harry Risley ("Henry Wriothesley").

Perhaps, one fine day, people will wake up to the fact that the Sonnets describe a situation much more interesting, much more erotic, and much more devastating than Oscar Wilde's little fairy-tale -- which clearly reflected Oscar's tastes much more than they did Shakespeare's! Oscar would have loved a delicate, golden-haired young man. Well, more than that: Oscar did indeed fall in love with a delicate, golden-haired young man, Bosie.

The evidence that Shakespeare did the same?

There is NONE. JaafarAbuTarab 14:35, 06 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to miss the point. "William Hughes" is not a fictional character. He does not appear in Wilde's story at all. He is a postulated historical figure constructed by Thomas Tyrrwitt from reading the sonnets. Wilde's story explores this idea of a postulated figure, and plays on the question of the relationship between historical reconstruction and wish-fulfilment. But the fact remains that Hughes has been postulated as real, just as other figures referred to obliquely in lterature or under pseudonyms have been. Paul B 19:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]