Er, yes? I've seen how Pterry gently takes the mick out of the "Shakespeare didn't write Shakespeare" crowd. But isn't it possible to do that in many different ways? =) That's what makes writing (and reading) so enjoyable; it may be the same idea (i.e. Shakespeare's importance to humanity), but it's possible to approach the subject differently.
In "Science of Discworld III", Pterry pokes fun at the anti-evolution crowd. But that doesn't mean they've stopped existing.
Just because Pterry did it doesn't mean I can't try. And -- more importantly -- it seems that, as every generation passes, the new generation falls for the same old lies that need to be debunked again and again: not just the anti-Shakespeare crowd, but lies such as racism, Antisemitism, populism etc... which are even more important (and which I'd hoped most people wouldn't have fallen for). =(
BTW, for those of you who like QI and are fascinated by the errata of cartography, may I suggest The Phantom Atlas by Edward Brooke-Hitching? Seriously, this book is a real eye-opener about some of the cartography of yesteryear, with all the myths, the frauds, and the just plain wishful thinking. And you'd be surprised at how recently some were debunked: at least two were only debunked in the 21st Century...
I just finished a reread of Mansfield Park by Jane Austen. I think I may have to find some literary discussions. I can't believe nobody else ever noticed the subtle snark Austen wrote in, about all those frail, weepy heroines of the novels of the day. Anyone else would have focused on the somewhat lurid events of the novel that happen mostly at the end. It reminds me of the SF novels of C.J.Cherryh, in that Cherryh took standard SF pulp short story cliches and wrote three-volume stories which manage to make a believable hard-SF story that allows the cliche to be acceptable.