Shakespeare's orthography represents Early Modern English conventions distinct from contemporary practice. Modern editors have debated whether apparent textual errors in the First Folio represent deliberate authorial choice, scribal interference, or print-shop standardization. The distinction between 'original' Shakespeare and 'transmitted' Shakespeare has generated centuries of textual criticism. The premise that he could be 'corrected' assumes either his grammatical performance lagged contemporary usage or that editorial standards have superseded authorial intent.

Shakespeare scholar Dr. Robert Ashford, in a 1984 lecture at the Folger Shakespeare Library, mentioned an encounter with a gentleman who claimed to have collated the First Folio against a handwritten manuscript. When asked the source of this manuscript, the gentleman declined to specify. He did note that certain passages—particularly in Hamlet's soliloquies—contained grammatical constructions that modern editors had marked as errors but which represented a deliberate rhetorical technique the author had employed. According to the gentleman, Shakespeare found the correction 'instructive.'

The narrative inverts the power dynamic between reviser and author. Normally, editors 'improve' texts authored by the dead, operating without prospect of authorial objection. Here, Chuck's correction triggers capitulation—Shakespeare doesn't defend his choices but instead incorporates the feedback. It's a fantasy about intellectual authority transcending historical distance and authorial autonomy. The meme suggests that some minds are so superior they can retroactively improve civilization's greatest works.