The essays in this collection look at Shakespeare's plays and poems from an Oxfordian perspective (i.e., that the true Shakespeare was Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford). The particular Oxfordian perspective held in common by all the contributors is that Shakespeare was always telling the story of his life and involvement in the Elizabethan Court and its politics, especially the red-hot politics of sucession (who would follow Elizabeth?) that engulfed the English nation in the final years of Elizabeth's reign. Yet, even as he expounded on these political issues of his day, his most profound writing was about his own story, the story of a man who had "laid great bases for eternity," but who also knew that, in the end, he himself would be erased from history.… (more)
There is a narrow focus in the collected essays in A Poet's Rage, one that looks at not just the overall Oxfordian point of view (that Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford, was Shakespeare), but that, within the Oxfordian POV, the theory that the entire Shakespeare authorship problem is tied up with the subtext of nearly all of Shakespeare's writing, namely the right to be the monarch (and how to get there), and in Elizabethan England, the right to follow Elizabeth in the line of succession. This in known in Oxfordian circles as the Prince Tudor theory, so named because it centers on the theory that Queen Elizabeth did have children (unacknowledged) in her lifetime, and that such "bastard" children theoretically had a blood claim on the throne.