On the 'Reading Texts'

Having read all of this and not committed to the essay (which is my first folly; I originally wanted this trip that the texts were read during to be dedicated to its writing), I have realised my severe fault with it. “Is The Two Noble Kinsmen a Conventional Shakespeare Play in Regards to its Authorship and Characters” is a vast question, particularly when I drafted an introduction plan that assimilated authorship into its midst. Shakespeare wrote over thirty plays and I’d be a madwoman to think I’d be able to read them all deeply and provide insightful comments on each one in relation to TNNK. 

Therefore, I might consider changing the question to this: “Is The Two Noble Kinsmen Conventional of Shakespeare’s ‘Late’ Plays in Regards of its Authorship, Characters, Themes, and Narrative”. The authorship segment in particular could not only focus on the dubious nature of the play, but also in its parallels to other Shakespeare collaborations: Nicholson’s essay on Henry VIII would serve as immensely helpful, as would information on the lost collaboration between Shakespeare and Fletcher on Cardenio. The ‘Late’ plays in question would be those I’ve read over the past couple of days (or possibly narrowed down to two, if four proves too much) but comparisons to other Shakespeare plays not in the late category would be employed if they were apt. I worry that changing the question so late might become my downfall, but it is a change desperately needed if my EPQ is going to deliver itself justly.