Poll: What is the Big Deal With Bloody Shakespeare?!?!
- Thread starter interspark
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I haven't read much of his work, though from my understanding his work resulted in/influenced a lot of the English we use today, perhaps even, ironically, some of the English you're using to insult him.
I do suppose others aren't too worried about that.
I wanted to mention that, but I was worried it might be rather insulting.cuddly_tomato said:
I have to say though op, that your initial post does seem to indicate that appreciation of literature wouldn't be your thing.
I do suppose others aren't too worried about that.
Shakespeare was quite brilliant, IMO. In my experience I find the people who hate him or find him boring are the ones who aren't taking the time to understand the language.
That's your opinion.HigherTomorrow said:
Objectively Shakespeare isn't the best writer. I can say his plays are terrible, you could say otherwise but both of us aren't right or wrong.
The work Shakespeare is ok, not utterly brilliance for everyone to fawn over, but still amazing literature. That said, Shakespeare himself was pure genius, with his great work for the English language.
Thank you for this, calling early modern English "old" is one of my pet peeves. On the other hand, the OP did not completely misspell Shakespeare's name; in Shakespeare's time, there were a good half a dozen correct ways of spelling it -- and the OP's version was one of them. Basically, he spelled it so wrong that he spelled it right.megamanenm said:
OT: Shakespeare's plays are great if you have a good enough command of the English language to actually understand them. To this day, the best time I've had reading through a play was in my high school freshman English class, where the teacher encouraged us to point out every double entendre in Romeo and Juliet. I read Mercutio's part, and the class spent the whole time laughing -- at least until he dies, and the play changes from comedy to tragedy.
But then -- and I mean no offense by this -- I was reading on a 12th grade level in kindergarten, while your spelling suggests that you're still very much at a high school level right now. The person who said the public school system teaches students Shakespeare before they're ready is right; it takes a really good teacher to handle it well in high school -- and even then, the students need to be on at least an honors or AP level to get it.
You don't even spell "Shakespeare" right.
And "Hamlet" is one of my favorite books, definitely my favorite from before 1900.
And judging from the epic horror that is your spelling and punctuation, you should have spent less time blocking out your teacher and more time actually WORKING and improving your English.
And "Hamlet" is one of my favorite books, definitely my favorite from before 1900.
And judging from the epic horror that is your spelling and punctuation, you should have spent less time blocking out your teacher and more time actually WORKING and improving your English.
That's a bit elitist, don't you think? Our English 30 (grade 12) teacher had us all read Hamlet, and explained the circumstances well enough that everyone - even the 30-2 "special readers" group - understood each scene and dialog perfectly well.Owyn_Merrilin said:
At least I think they did. I was reading grade ten material in grade one, so maybe I'm just talking out of my ass.
I enjoyed it at school.
The Merchant of Venice was great. I felt sorry for Shylock even if his actions may have seemed a bit extreme. Those bloody Christians that looked down on him yet needed his services. And his daughter. Pft. What a ***** (Stealing the money).
The Merchant of Venice was great. I felt sorry for Shylock even if his actions may have seemed a bit extreme. Those bloody Christians that looked down on him yet needed his services. And his daughter. Pft. What a ***** (Stealing the money).
How many authors managed to capture the entire spectrum of what it is to exist as a human in their works?
There is hardly room to hold subjective stance as to the quality Shakespeare. He is unquestionably one of the greatest authors ever to put pen to paper. He revolutionised theatre and the English language. I suspect those of you saying his work is poor and overrated are simply ignorant, or lack the attention span digest anything he's written. If you are going to criticise Shakespeare you're going to have to do better than "I found his works boring" or "I didn't laugh at his comedies". Have the decency to at least present a decent criticism, or else stop commenting on what you have little to no understanding of. You may not enjoy his works, but if you are going to make statements about their quality and significance you best have thought long and hard about your argument.
There is hardly room to hold subjective stance as to the quality Shakespeare. He is unquestionably one of the greatest authors ever to put pen to paper. He revolutionised theatre and the English language. I suspect those of you saying his work is poor and overrated are simply ignorant, or lack the attention span digest anything he's written. If you are going to criticise Shakespeare you're going to have to do better than "I found his works boring" or "I didn't laugh at his comedies". Have the decency to at least present a decent criticism, or else stop commenting on what you have little to no understanding of. You may not enjoy his works, but if you are going to make statements about their quality and significance you best have thought long and hard about your argument.
I like his plays, largely the comedy* ones though, not a big fan of his tragedies. I'll admit I'm not sure if he can be considered histories greatest writer but the central themes of a lot of his plays have certainly made their way into modern pop culture tropes, such as the siblings fighting over inheritance and the ever present 'murder for revenge' all of which no doubt existed before in stories but that he made more popular.
In any case while I'll admit sometimes his writing is very confusing it is worth remembering that back when the texts were written it was a very different time so it was a commonplace language. Still, we have had modern versions of his plays done with regular dialouge and some of them have worked okay.
I guess in the end, Shakespeare is an interesting part of history and one that can occassionally prove to be very interesting, since his plays can features magic and murder and lust and violence, so they sure aren't boring once you get into them.
*Not neccesarily meaning something to laugh out loud to, but back in the old days a 'comedy' was merely something with a lighthearted tone that was sure to have a happy ending.
In any case while I'll admit sometimes his writing is very confusing it is worth remembering that back when the texts were written it was a very different time so it was a commonplace language. Still, we have had modern versions of his plays done with regular dialouge and some of them have worked okay.
I guess in the end, Shakespeare is an interesting part of history and one that can occassionally prove to be very interesting, since his plays can features magic and murder and lust and violence, so they sure aren't boring once you get into them.
*Not neccesarily meaning something to laugh out loud to, but back in the old days a 'comedy' was merely something with a lighthearted tone that was sure to have a happy ending.
Alot of people seem to be getting this mixed up. English language and english literature are two very seperate subjects, if you have nothing better to add other than "judging by your post you should have payed more attention during class" or words to that affect then please don't bother posting. We're talking about Shakespear, not about the OPs ability of written english.
OT: Personally I can't stand it, it physically bores me. Old english I found relatively easy to understand though the plots didn't interest me. I didn't find it funny, I wasn't shocked by any of the endings. Yes at the time of release it was probably revolutionary, extraordinary in fact but by todays standards, it is nothing better than "ok" compared to some of the things which have been written. You could argue that it is brilliant because of what it has inspired; which may be true, but by todays standards i certainly don't think it should be hyped up or even mentioned other than to give him credit for what he started.
It's like someone in a few hundred years saying that avatar is amazing because of the special effects, and how they helped revolutionise cinema and truly showed how good 3d could be. My answer (not that i'll be around) would be pretty much the same "it may have been good then but not by todays standards." Of course this is all subject to opinion, and each to their own.
Personally, i'd much rather have done about lord of the rings, or fight club. I think at that age, something you could relate to (like martina cole, tess gerritsons, lee child, stephen leathers books) would be better. It is much easier to learn something you enjoy doing and can relate to.
OT: Personally I can't stand it, it physically bores me. Old english I found relatively easy to understand though the plots didn't interest me. I didn't find it funny, I wasn't shocked by any of the endings. Yes at the time of release it was probably revolutionary, extraordinary in fact but by todays standards, it is nothing better than "ok" compared to some of the things which have been written. You could argue that it is brilliant because of what it has inspired; which may be true, but by todays standards i certainly don't think it should be hyped up or even mentioned other than to give him credit for what he started.
It's like someone in a few hundred years saying that avatar is amazing because of the special effects, and how they helped revolutionise cinema and truly showed how good 3d could be. My answer (not that i'll be around) would be pretty much the same "it may have been good then but not by todays standards." Of course this is all subject to opinion, and each to their own.
Personally, i'd much rather have done about lord of the rings, or fight club. I think at that age, something you could relate to (like martina cole, tess gerritsons, lee child, stephen leathers books) would be better. It is much easier to learn something you enjoy doing and can relate to.
I see you don't have much cate for grammar..
Shakespeare is one of the best writers in history i think, his works are brilliant. He revolutionised how we speak and how plays were done etc.
Shakespeare is one of the best writers in history i think, his works are brilliant. He revolutionised how we speak and how plays were done etc.