Reimagining Judith Shakespeare with Grace Tiffany

Judith Shakespeare’s life is a mystery. While history records her as the younger daughter of William Shakespeare and Anne Hathaway, much of her story remains untold. In her new novel, The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter, author and Shakespeare scholar Grace Tiffany brings Judith to life—filling in the gaps with adventure, resilience, and rebellion.

A sequel to My Father Had a Daughter, this novel follows Judith into later adulthood. No longer the headstrong girl who once fled to London in disguise to challenge her father, she is now a skilled healer and midwife. However, when she is accused of witchcraft, she must escape Stratford and navigate a world where Puritans have closed playhouses, civil war splits England, and even her father’s legacy is at risk.

Tiffany explores how she merged fact and fiction to reimagine Judith’s life. From the real-life scandal that shook her marriage to the theatrical and political disturbances of her time, the author examines what it means to write historical fiction—and how Shakespeare’s life and legacy continue to inspire new stories.

Listen to Shakespeare Unlimited on Apple Podcasts, YouTube Music, Spotify, Soundcloud, or your favorite podcast platform.

Grace Tiffany is a professor of Shakespeare and Renaissance Drama at Western Michigan University, an editor of Shakespeare’s The Tempest, a translator of Jorge Luis Borges’ writings on Shakespeare, and the author of six other novels, including My Father Had a Daughter, a predecessor to The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter.

From the Shakespeare Unlimited podcast. Published March 25, 2025. © Folger Shakespeare Library. All rights reserved. This episode was produced by Matt Frassica. Garland Scott is the executive producer. It was edited by Gail Kern Paster. We had help with web production from Paola García Acuña. Leonor Fernandez edits our transcripts. Final mixing services are provided by Clean Cuts at Three Seas, Inc.

Previous:
Julia Armfield Reimagines King Lear in a Drowning World

[Music in]

FARAH KARIM-COOPER: From the Folger Shakespeare Library, this is Shakespeare Unlimited. I’m Farah Karim-Cooper, the Folger director.

[Music post and fade]

KARIM-COOPER: William Shakespeare and Anne Hathaway had three children: Susanna came first, and then the twins Hamnet and Judith. Hamnet died at age 11, but Judith lived on to the relatively old age of 77.

You might remember the name “Judith Shakespeare” from Virginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own. But Woolf invented that character, who she made Shakespeare’s sister. The historical record doesn’t have much to say about the real Judith Shakespeare.

Into this gappy history steps Grace Tiffany. A Shakespearean and professor of English at Western Michigan University, Tiffany has written two novels about Judith.

The first, My Father Had a Daughter, spans Judith’s childhood and young adulthood. In that novel, Judith becomes furious at her father’s decision to use details from her life in Twelfth Night. She steals away to London in the guise of a boy and talks herself into the role of Viola, before her father finds her out.

In her latest novel, The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter, Tiffany jumps ahead in time. Judith, now in her 60s, is an experienced healer and apothecary. But she has to escape Stratford when she’s accused of witchcraft.

Tiffany is also the author of the novels Ariel, a prequel to The Tempest, The Turquoise Ring, which takes place in the world of The Merchant of Venice, and Will, about Judith’s famous dad.

Here’s Grace Tiffany, in conversation with Barbara Bogaev.

——————–

BARBARA BOGAEV: I was wondering if you could read for us to start us off so people get a sense of your Judith Shakespeare. Could you read from just the beginning of your book?

GRACE TIFFANY: Sure, this is the start.

[Grace Tiffany reads a scene from her novel The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter: The Continuing Adventures of Judith Shakespeare (2025)]

All the men of my family died. First my brother, then my grandfather, then Uncle Edmund in London. Then Ned’s brothers Gilbert and Richard at home. My father followed them into the grave. Not a year after that we lost my baby, the son he’d asked me to name for him. That trick brought the babe no luck.

He made his exit between evening and morn, his small body gone first hot as a baking stone and then all cold in the cradle. I remember Quiney’s cry when he touched his cheek in the dawn.

We went on, of course. I gave birth to two more boys, and they lived to be men, but barely. Plague took them both within weeks of each other.

Tom was nineteen and Rich was twenty-one. Now if God wants any more Shakespeare’s, he’ll have to start on the women.

Rich’s and Tom’s deaths fell on us seven years ago. Since then, the world’s turned upside down.

I tell Quiney to shake off his mourning, since had either of our lads survived the pest, they’d like as not have perished three years later in the fighting at Edge Hill.

“Which army,” Quiney says with the ghost of a smile. His question launches a discussion, which turns to a spat, wherein I call him an idol worshipper and he terms me a treasonous windbag. Then I stalk off to weed my herb garden, or to gather herbs and berries in the woods, as I’ve done in all weathers for 35 years.

[End of reading]

BOGAEV: Oh, Grace, thank you so much for that. I get such a sense of who Judith—your Judith Shakespeare—is.

TIFFANY: I say as an American, I’m really conscious that I’m not speaking the Judith Shakespeare as she would have spoken it—and it would really be a mistake for me to try, I think—

BOGAEV: Oh, no, I heard Maggie Smith reading.

TIFFANY: Oh, okay, awesome.

BOGAEV: So, why another novel about Judith Shakespeare?

TIFFANY: Well, she had so much of her life left to go. The real Judith Shakespeare had an amazing lifespan. She was born in 1585, so she lived through the last years of Elizabeth’s reign. She lived through the reign of King James, the reign of King Charles, on through the Civil War and the Interregnum, on into the first couple of years of the Restoration. She was 77 years old when she died. She had most of her life left to live, at the point at which I had stopped her story after the first book, so, I was always thinking there has to be a second part—particularly when so much of that life was lived through such a dramatic time in English history with her countrymen facing off against each other, Parliament taking sides against the Royalists. What would it be like to be Shakespeare’s daughter living through such times? So, I wanted to explore that.

BOGAEV: Yeah, that does seem a gimme, and you’ve anticipated my next question, which is, what do we know for sure about her and her life before we talk about your fictional version of Judith?

TIFFANY: We know some basic facts births or baptisms, deaths, births of children. We know that she was one of three children, Shakespeare had three children. We know that she was a twin, which is interesting and tragic because she lost that twin Hamnet when she was 11 years old. We don’t have any record of how he died. We just know that he died. We can only infer what her reaction to the loss of a person with whom you’ve been a twin for 11 years of your life would have been. We know that she lived on.

As I said, she lived a very long life. She married, a little bit late, I think she was about 30. She married the local vintner Thomas Quiney, family friends of the Shakespeares. There was a bit of scandal surrounding the marriage, not directly related to her, but related to Thomas. So, we know something kind of interesting about that.

BOGAEV: Right, you use that in the book. Someone accused him of leaving her in the lurch and she was pregnant.

TIFFANY: Yes, and he confessed to that, so that he was—and this is part of ecclesiastical record. There was a court known as the “bawdy court”—that’s the slang term for it—where if someone committed some sort of sexual transgression and was publicly charged with it or privately charged with it, or in any case charged with it and found guilty, they were subject to a kind of public penance. And so, this happened to Thomas. He was accused of having impregnated a young woman named Margaret Wheeler and did confess to it. This happened right around the time he had just married Judith, so must have been a rather unpleasant surprise to her.

BOGAEV: What a way to start a marriage.

TIFFANY: Yeah, yeah, it didn’t start off on the right foot exactly. Again, we have no record of her reaction to that, but I can imagine. In any case, it’s sad because the woman and the child both died during her childbirth.

It’s particularly interesting because this was right around the time that Shakespeare died also. He made some adjustments to his will with regard to Thomas and Judith that probably had something to do with worrying that the marriage might not be on the firmest ground, partly because of this and wanting to safeguard her inheritance in the wake of whatever was going to happen as a result of this scandal.

There were a couple of other issues with the marriage, some kind of legalistic stuff that they didn’t do correctly. Their marriage survived all of that, but people talk a lot about Shakespeare’s will and it’s clear that something was changed with regard to Judith at this time that indicates a bit of a suspicion about her new husband, Thomas Quiney.

BOGAEV: Okay, so those are the building blocks that you were working with, which is quite a bit. But you also fill in blanks. You have Judith run away at 14 to London and have an affair with an actor in her father’s troupe at the time. She disguises herself as a boy. Interesting.

She’s also a healer and a surgeon, your Judith. She really is a pistol. I mean, she has her own mind. So, it’s all very fun. I imagine you thinking these things through. What were you drawing on, if not fact, to build this particular portrait?

TIFFANY: Well, it’s nice to have a relatively blank canvas if you’re writing fiction because you do get to imagine a character and there’s not too much around to contradict you.

Those events that you refer to her—going off to London and engaging in antics with Shakespeare’s company—you know, this is all fantasy on my part. But I liked the idea—and this was in the first novel—I was intrigued, as a lot of scholars have been, actually, with the fact that Judith was a twin, she lost her twin brother. Shakespeare wrote a couple of plays about twins, in one of which the male twin is thought to have died but is discovered to still be alive—

BOGAEV: You’re talking about Twelfth Night.

TIFFANY: Yes, Twelfth Night. That seemed an interesting set of facts to use to imagine Judith’s response to her brother’s death, the loss of him, as a kind of mourning. She feels guilty about it because in my story she has something to do with the way he died—yeah, accidentally—and she feels both grief-stricken and guilty and her response to that is to try and reconstitute him imaginatively in some way by pretending to be him. She runs off to London, she takes his clothes, and she finds her way onto the stage, the all-male institution of the theater in the 1590s, and then she finds some kind of solace and understanding not just of herself but of her father, through playing the part of this lost twin.

BOGAEV: Did you draw anything from Twelfth Night?

TIFFANY: Oh, lots. In fact, the title—this is, again, the first novel—My Father Had a Daughter comes from a conversation that the hero Viola is having with Count Orsino with whom she’s in love in Twelfth Night. She’s pretending to be a boy as she does in the play but she’s in love with Orsino and she kind of tries to express herself indirectly by saying, “My father had a daughter who was in love with a man.” So, displacing herself from herself.

BOGAEV: Of course, and that’s this wonderful moment where she kind of, and a lot of actor,s get kind of confused with all the genders.

TIFFANY: Yeah, because she’s sort of flirting with him, but in the person of a young man, and she’s asked in that same dialogue, Orsino says, “And what’s her history?” And she says, “A blank.” I love that. I used it as an epigraph for the novel because it’s like, “Yes!” So much of Judith’s history is a blank, and that’s good. It’s a canvas to imagine and to write what I hope is an intriguing story

BOGAEV: Which it is! We should talk about the novel at hand, because she’s a healer. Whhy did you make her a healer?

TIFFANY: Well, she needed something to do for the rest of her life, but—and this is where the slim historical record again comes in—it’s known that her older sister Susanna was married to a physician, Dr. John Hall, and so I thought it would be good for her to get interested in what he was doing. The young woman I created as the character just has all kinds of restless energy and wants to do something. You know, she wants to be out in the world doing something, and so, she ends up in this story getting trained by him and becoming his assistant and then becoming a quite skilled surgeon, apothecary or apothecatrix, and midwife herself.

So that when The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter opens, which is 30 years after the close of the first novel, she’s been living that life in Stratford for many years. She’s also married. She’s been a mother, and as the sort of sad and depressing first paragraph confirms, she’s lost her children. But she’s still a healer, and she puts her skills to work, in this new context of civil war, out on battlefields where she’s called into service.

BOGAEV: Right, it’s with this wonderful, interesting woman that you present here who really speaks her mind, and knows her mind, and is an independent thinker. It’s wonderful to read.

TIFFANY: Thank you.

BOGAEV: The other thing that’s, as you say, really interesting and stands out is that this is a very different world than Shakespeare’s time which we talk about so much on this podcast. Why don’t you remind us how England and also London had changed in those three decades and more about what the political crisis is that propels the action in your plot?

TIFFANY: Well, this took place in the 17th century where England was becoming increasingly puritanical socially, or at least at the political level, the puritan contingent came to dominate Parliament. Their influence resulted in a lot of social reforms. I mean, this had been going on for decades, since Shakespeare’s time, since the late 16th century. But the main thrust of puritan reform had to do with political reform and an attempt to curb the power of the monarch because Charles I was acting in a particularly high-handed way and attempting to govern without consent of Parliament. He suspended it for a long period of time and was trying to tax his subjects directly.

BOGAEV: Right, and then they went to war, Parliament and Charles.

TIFFANY: So, he made the mistake of finally reconvening them. When he reconvened them, they refused to go home and ended up calling up an army and declaring war on Charles or declaring that he had declared war on them. So, they wanted to curb his power more than anything else. But there were also social reforms that these puritan parliament, and also puritanically minded local governments had instituted, and this affects Judith, particularly in London. It affects the world of London in that, playhouses are torn down, or if not torn down, they’re closed. Plays have been not banned outright, but very, very strictly policed. Public entertainments are regulated for—

BOGAEV: Right, forget the bear baiting.

TIFFANY: Yeah. I don’t want to pile on Puritans as people do, you know, to just present them or interpret them as a bunch of killjoys who, you know, buzzkillers. There’s definitely that aspect to reformist thinking where they were very much Bible centered and thought that the Bible should be the guide to all to all public and private life. They weren’t against having fun, but they had, kind of, limited ideas of what that fun should be. But what people tend to overlook in discussions with the Puritans is that they were also against some of the crueler aspects of public entertainment. You mentioned the bear baiting. They were outlawed as well as cockfights because they were considered to be not only cruel to animals but to awake depraved sensibilities in the spectators. They sort of had a point, you know, about that.

BOGAEV: Yeah, no doubt.

TIFFANY: And this is the London that Judith finds when she comes back 30 years later. She has to look very hard to find the world that she remembers from her time there in the 1590s. She finds that it’s there, but it’s kind of a London underground at this time.

BOGAEV: Right, and you also make reference at some point to people had burned Shakespeare’s folios in this period.

TIFFANY: I hate to think it really happened, you know, but I imagine that it could have, and it does happen in the story. It’s a galvanizing moment for Judith, or a moment of where she begins to become aware that it may be a little risky to be Shakespeare’s daughter, to have this hereditary connection to a family which originally had such prestige, because now she lives in a world where the social climate is very suspicious of non-biblically forms of entertainment or non-biblical based forms of entertainment, suspicious of stories which invoke the supernatural, all the kinds of things that Shakespeare did all the time on the stage in Macbeth and in plays that involved the gods from Greek mythology. These things are now outlawed as public entertainment, and she’s associated with them by virtue of her family.

She sees, at one point in my story, a neighbor burning a First Folio, which is worth a laborer’s year’s wage, you know, even in her time. She just thinks it’s stupid and disgusting and the neighbor says, ”Oh, well, my wife is making me do this.” She senses a real change in the climate of the town, the social climate—a narrower definition of morality which restricts ideas about what you can do with your imagination. That is upsetting to her and is one reason why she wants to rebel against it as she does.

BOGAEV: Yes, she’s in a real fix. We should explain too that Judith is a midwife, at one point, for a woman whose child gets jaundice and the woman accuses her of witchery or sorcery and Judith skedaddles out of town to avoid trouble. That’s how she gets to London. She figures she’ll be able to apply her trade as a healer and a surgeon but it turns out that it’s not possible anymore. I imagine that’s the case because there are new laws, as you were saying, in London regulating medicine in the mid-17th century.

TIFFANY: What she runs up against is London physicians have instituted laws to arrogate unto themselves the business of medical practice, including—I guess for male doctors it wouldn’t have been midwifery but, you know, assisting in childbirth—and so, it’s difficult for her to obtain, or she doesn’t have, the right licenses. If she did, she could be an assistant. She runs up against this problem and that’s another reason that she has to go underground in order to find work among the prostitutes and the illegal players who are still putting on entertainments in yards and back rooms. That becomes her London experience for the time that she’s there in the course of the novel. She goes to a bunch of places, she ends up in a lot of different environments, before she’s back in Stratford at the end.

BOGAEV: Yeah, that’s a funny Shakespeare easter egg because you have her go back to the Cross Keys, the tavern where her father and the players ostensibly, allegedly hung out. Is there research that says they hung out there? Do we know they hung out?

TIFFANY: At the Cross Keys Inn?

BOGAEV: Yes.

TIFFANY: Well, there’s research that identifies that particular inn as one of the first places in the 16th century where plays were performed even, before and around the same time as the building of the first stationary playhouses, so that’s a real place. Whether it was still standing and still the Cross Keys Inn in 1646, I don’t know. But I decided that it might be and that it might be true to its roots as a rowdy sort of place, more accommodating to various kinds of entertainment than was strictly legally permissible at the time.

BOGAEV: I love that. I mean, this is fiction, and you’re allowed poetic license—

TIFFANY: That’s what I figure.

BOGAEV: You’re giving us a real window into the life of a historical fiction writer. Not everything has to be researched within an inch of its life.

TIFFANY: Yeah, I find that it helps to know as much as you can know and then to go from there. There are certain things that I just wanted to get right, and other things that I didn’t care. The things that I wanted to get historically accurate were specifics having to do with Shakespeare’s family, with identities of children, or of offspring and how old they were when they died but also, the more public things that were going on—major battles, because this does take place during the Civil War, what Charles I was doing at this time, he was actually sequestered in Oxford, which was besieged by Cromwell’s army. I wanted to get that right since there were several sieges of Oxford, I want to make sure I got the right one, and I discovered during my research that there was this very interesting plot to get Charles out of Oxford and help him escape—

BOGAEV: Disguised as a servant.

TIFFANY: Yeah, disguised as one of his own servants. This is historical fact, but it sounds like something from a fiction. I integrated that in my story, that historical fact, and embroidered the episode somewhat so as to involve Judith in it.

BOGAEV: Yes, and in your telling, Judith’s former lover, the actor, way back when from Shakespeare’s troupe, impersonates the King to give the King cover while he disguises himself as a servant and flees. This gives Judith occasion to see a monarch in disguise, without all of its trappings. She does take him for a servant and doesn’t guess what’s going on, at least at first. So, tell me more about writing this scene and how you imagine this very independent-minded woman coming to grips with this huge idea for the time—that the king was just a man, just a guy playing a part like an actor.

TIFFANY: That scene was the hardest one for me to write, the one that I rewrote the most, because it was the most complicated idea that I was trying to clarify for myself. But you’ve essentially stated it: that the King, in his royalty, was playing a role, and that England was no longer buying it. This is also a very Shakespearean idea.

The way I tried to lead Judith to that insight was, she sees a person that she thinks is Charles I and she feels this absolute adulation. She’s in a room, and she sees the king standing there. He’s so regal, and he’s got this aura, and she wants to sink to her knees. She’s surprised at herself, you know, this kind of worshipfulness that she feels for the king of England. Then it turns out it’s actually her actor friend in disguise. She realizes it was entirely a theatrical effect, that there  was no reality to it. Then she sees the actual king, who’s sitting on the other side of the room. He’s just playing cards and just looks like anybody else.

BOGAEV: Yeah, he’s, I think you have her say something like, “Oh, he’s just sitting there. He blows his nose. He coughs. He scratches.”

TIFFANY: Yeah. When he’s not kinging it, then he’s not the king. So, kinging it is a thing that you do. It’s not a thing that you are.

BOGAEV: Right. I imagine you writing that on a 3×5 card and putting it over your desk as you were writing.

TIFFANY: Yeah

BOGAEV: “Kinging it.”

TIFFANY: Yeah, because of course, 50 years before, almost, Shakespeare was onto that idea, onto that phenomenon, was interested and even got into trouble for staging plays which probed too deeply into the underlying flawed humanity of the monarch and exposed royalty as a theatrical performance.

BOGAEV: And yet, it’s still mind blowing these decades later as I was reading that scene, too, I was thinking of another facet of it. It’s Ophelia’s lines, which you reference in your title, The Owl Was Not a Baker’s Daughter. The rest of that goes, “Lord, we know not what we are, but know not what we may be.”

TIFFANY: Yeah.

BOGAEV: That really speaks to the women in this book. There’s Judith and she also has a companion who is a, kind of, Joan of Arc figure, a Protestant, a holy roller. They both are discovered—

TIFFANY: Yeah, and a crazy, little girl that they go along with.

BOGAEV: Right. Possibly unstable, I guess. These women—all these women discover new identities and depths as they face the turn of history. But so does the King—

TIFFANY: So does the King.

BOGAEV: That really comes home in this scene. It really is interesting how it echoes all of Shakespeare, as you say, his history plays, his writings that there are two men.

TIFFANY: And hard to figure out, or impossible, which side Shakespeare found more intriguing, or what his politics were. You really can’t do it, because Shakespeare famously—

BOGAEV: Never shows you what his politics are.

TIFFANY: He’ll demonstrate that theatrical aspect of power, but at the same time he’ll celebrate it, and this is why famously everybody can get whatever meaning they want to out of Shakespeare. But in the course of Judith’s life, she comes to see that aspect of what her father was saying through her real experience with Charles I.

BOGAEV: The title though or the line, The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter, it refers to a legend that Christ transforms a baker’s daughter into an owl after she’s denied him a piece of bread, ight?

TIFFANY: Something like that. It’s this obscure thing that Ophelia says after she’s gone mad—she’s singing and she’s babbling, there’s snatches of old legends that show up and also some bawdy songs—as she’s wandering around the court at Elsinore. I made certain meanings out of it—not so much the legend which is pretty obscure of where it came from—but the identity of Judith’s friend that she becomes very close to over the course of this book. She’s this rather militant, zealous Protestant named Jane who actually is a baker’s daughter, and so, the title has something to do with her and the wisdom that she expresses.

But perhaps even more by that second part that you quoted, where Ophelia says, “Lord, we know what we are, but know not what we may be.” You’re right that these various women—there’s two women and a child—they push the envelope of the conventional to say the least in their behavior. Judith does that in her practice as a surgeon, in her independent journeying. Her friend, her zealous, puritan friend Jane, does that in this very extreme way. Then there’s also a kind of prospect for this strange child, who is Jane’s niece, that they travel around the countryside with and nobody quite knows what to make of. What I’m really thinking about with this child, I’m thinking about the theater again.

BOGAEV: I was thinking you were going to write another book about her.

TIFFANY: I am, and she’s headed for the restoration stage. That’s what Pearl was born for. In the new era of the Restoration, the theater is back, and it’s radically transformed. Women can finally show up and play themselves on the stage.

BOGAEV: Oh, Pearl’s going to be great.

TIFFANY: One of the things that Pearl can find that she may be—she could be Cleopatra, and she can be Lady Macbeth, and she can be all of these roles that were played by men before.

BOGAEV: Fantastic. I have to say you have a lot of fun. I had a lot of fun with your vocabulary, and also the Shakespeare quotes, and some Easter eggs throughout the book. Judith muses about her father ending plays with weddings, but he also adds quarrels at the bridal banquet to remind people that it won’t be happily ever after, after all. That’s one thing she thinks about. And you all use words like “addlepate”, which is great. It’s kind of self-explanatory. I don’t even know how to say it. Gallimaufry?

TIFFANY: Gallimaufry, I guess.

BOGAEV: Gallimaufry.

TIFFANY: Sort of like a stew or a hodgepodge.

BOGAEV: Right, just a massive mix of things. How do you think about sprinkling in archaic language into historical fiction?

TIFFANY: Well, it’s one of the most fun things about setting a fiction in the 16th or 17th century is this rich vocabulary, virtually all of which I just get from the primary sources of the writers, if not Shakespeare or Ben Johnson or Philip Sidney or, you know, other people were writing during the Renaissance. These are words that I often, I teach Shakespeare and I underscore them. I write them on the board, and I try to—I urge my students to start using them. I want to bring them back into circulation, you know?

BOGAEV: Gallimaufry! What a gallimaufry I’ve made of this interview.

TIFFANY: Right, and words like “moongandering” and just all kinds of things that we don’t say anymore but could and should. So, I just have fun introducing those terms into the dialogue wherever I can. I don’t think it’s necessary to explain them because usually the context will tell you what they are.

BOGAEV: Well, that’s true. Is there a magic balance, though, so you don’t frustrate readers who don’t have PhDs in Shakespeare?

TIFFANY: I think it’s kind of instinctive. These characters speak in a recognizable way that’s recognizable to moderns, but they need to not sound like us. They need to sound like they are of their time period, and so you have to strike a balance there. Mainly, I find that if you’re writing historical fiction, you just have to watch out for modern terminology and don’t introduce anachronisms—you have to keep more stuff out than you need to worry about putting in—because those are kind of the red flags of, you know, you don’t want to talk about somebody, “Rewinding the conversation in their mind” or something like that. You know, it’s like, “No, that doesn’t work.”

BOGAEV: So, is the story about the young girl Pearl as an adult and actor in Restoration theater next?

TIFFANY: I will write that. I don’t know if it will be the very next thing that I will write, but I know that I will write Pearl’s story.

BOGAEV: Well, I can’t wait.

TIFFANY: Thank you.

BOGAEV: And I really enjoyed talking with you. Thank you.

TIFFANY: I’ve enjoyed talking with you, too. Thank you very much.

——————-

KARIM-COOPER: That was Grace Tiffany, interviewed by Barbara Bogaev.

The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter: The Continuing Adventures of Judith Shakespeare, is out now from Harper books.

This episode was produced by Matt Frassica. Garland Scott is the executive producer. It was edited by Gail Kern Paster. We had technical help from Western Sound Studios at Western Michigan University, and Voice Trax West in Studio City, California. Our web producer is Paola García Acuña. Leonor Fernandez edits our transcripts. Final mixing services provided by Clean Cuts at Three Seas, Inc.

If you’re a fan of Shakespeare Unlimited, please leave us a review wherever you get your podcasts. We’d love to hear from you. While you’re there, be sure to hit “follow” so you get new episodes as soon as they come out.

Shakespeare Unlimited comes to you from the Folger Shakespeare Library. Home to the world’s largest Shakespeare collection, the Folger is dedicated to advancing knowledge and the arts.

The Folger campus on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, is open to the public. Come explore our new exhibition halls or watch a performance in our theater. For more information visit our website, folger.edu.

Until next time, thanks for listening!