The One Thing "He" Possessed and That "She" Did Not

Opportunity. It is a word defined as "a chance for advancement, progress or profit; a favorable circumstance or occasion." When Virginia Woolf used the example of Shakespeare having a sister of the same talent as he in her essay A Room of One's Own, Woolf was attempting to make a very distinct point between the sexes of male and female. Her point was that even if a certain man and women posses the same amount of talent and genius, that because of the opportunities that are available to men and not to women, is the reason why Shakespeare was able to create his masterpieces and why his imaginary sister could never attain the fame that he achieved. Woolf acclaims Shakespeare's fame to his attending of grammar school, his chance to work in theater and meet many influential people and being able to exercise his wit and talent to the masses. However, Shakespeare's imaginary sister didn't have the opportunity to attend school, or to travel and meet people. No, she was condemned to the housework and was scolded at for any attempt she made to read or write. The way Woolf presents this situation, by showing how the "accepted" roles of men and women during Shakespeare's time very much affects what each path their respectful lives take, is a very realistic example of something that could have, and probably did occur. Many would argue that this could not be the case, that Shakespeare's talent was inhuman, some even claim him to be a demigod, and that no one could match his savvy, especially not a woman. But I believe this idea to be based on our biased views and experiences of society, both current and historical. I truly believe that many individuals during Shakespeare's time possessed the potential that he had, both of the male and female sex. However, there is one thing that set Shakespeare apart from the rest. Opportunity. But not only opportunity, because even if those certain individuals who possessed his talent were exposed to what Shakespeare was exposed to, an extremely low percentage, maybe even no one them at all would produce the high level of art that he did. Therefore, it is not simply missed opportunity that is what holds most back, but what one does with that opportunity, how one shapes it and molds it and in turn produces something memorable. So Woolf's argument that someone born with Shakespeare's talent but condemned to their "place" in society could never prosper is valid, however there is no guarantee that if the conditions were perfect, that true works of art would be born, it's up to the individual's use of their experiences and their opportunity if results are to be seen.