Why not? The poem, whatever its merits, has very little profit potential as a poem alone, as indeed most individual poems have not, so why not promote VN's reputation no matter what his opinion on the Shakespeare authorship issue may have been.

The article notes three instances in VN's writing that might well be interpreted as questioning Shakespeare's authorship, and then goes on to suggest that he may have self-repressed further discourse on this issue in deference to his professional reputation and his pecuniary and employment needs. This too is plausible, but what goes unmentioned is that the publication of Lolita did secure Nabokov financial independence and he then lived independently for another twenty years or so during which he published little if anything on the topic. Lost interest, or changed his mind? Perhaps someone else's memoirs may reveal something, otherwise all there is is indecipherable silence.

Moreover as far as the Shakespearean authorship issue is concerned, VN's summary opinion, as is the case with anyone else's summary opinion on the issue, ought to be held in secondary standing compared to a well reasoned, well supported, detailed argument that directly addresses the issues. The author's name is of course to be noted, but should be of secondary importance. VN apparently left no such scholarly writings.

About all that I see that can be legitimately said is something like: "Early on, prior to 1947, VN seems to have entertained doubts about the authorship of the Shakespearean plays." I write "seems" since it also seems possible that VN was merely interested in the authorship question as an instance of literary historical inconclusiveness, a kind of myth or story useful as a plot device or detail.

I think this probably advances your enterprise very little. Sorry.

Regretfully yours,

~/gsl