Shakespeare!

@MissBannanaBomb There are theories saying that Shakespeare was just a pen name and some other bloke had done all the writing.

Reply Report

@Whispering What you said about the whole message of Romeo and Juliet is completely wrong. If you were to look at it again, you would see that it is also about fighting, and the futility of that. Every single story has a moral. In Hamlet, it's to do with procrastination, greed and madness, all topics still relevant today. And the storylines are excellent - lion king, 10 things I hate about you, she's the man are just a few movies based on Shakespeare. And not only is he studied in English speaking countries, but many other countries around the world. A country wouldn't bother translating a story for study if it wasn't written by one of the best writers who ever lived. Another word he gave us is bubble.

Reply Report

@Anika_Birgitte I didn't get that out of Romeo and Juliet, even after reading it multiple times. I honestly think that the people studying the stuff are the ones who got the morals out of it and then everyone acts like it was his intention. I think he wrote to entertain people, not to show all these subtle life lessons that are buried really deep. You could get morals out of anything if you really tried. Like, the say in MOV he was protraying the problems of the racism of his day, when it really just looks like he was being racist himself.

I wasn't completely wrong, because the stupid ideas about love. are way more prominent in the play than anything about the futility of fighting.

I do think Shakespeare was a very good writer. I'm kinda arguing for the sake of arguing here. I just think he's overstudied, and not everything he wrote was great just because he wrote it. Someone could be an amazing writer but still have bad life lessons in their stories. Not all of it, but some of it.

Reply Report

@LeniBastRiver2777 - yeah everyone knows that they will die and they all want to do something that will make them immortal.

As for the egyptians, they also believed that they could travel between statues of themselves once they were dead.

and everyone get a little morbid every once in a while no worries.

Reply Report

@Whispering That makes sense. I guess I was only really arguing because we are talking about the relevance f Shakespeare in English at the moment. But part of what makes Shakespeare great is that, whe writing to entertain the masses, he has managed to include so much morality that is still relevant today. We can still associate with his ideas, even though the writing has become outdated.

Reply Report

@Anika_Birgitte Yeah. There were a couple of very good parts in MOV that definitely apply to now, although I didn't like the story itself overall. And I do like the way he wrote.

Reply Report

thanks. @PenvsSword

Maybe i should make statues incase. I like to be prepared in the afterlife.

Has anyone noticed that Romeo and Juliet lasted just a week. Kids back then had no self respect smh @Anika_Birgitte @Whispering

Reply Report

@LeniBastRiver2777 What do you mean it lasted just a week? The play?

Reply Report

No i mean the whole plot lasted a around a week and Romeo and Juliet were just 14 years old @Whispering

Reply Report

@LeniBastRiver2777 I know! I think it was like two days between when they met and got married? That's why the play irks me to no end. Juliet was fourteen, not Romeo. He was probably around twenty, I'm guessing, although it doesn't say.

Reply Report

I can't beleive no one has mention the shrew or 12th night! The shrew is about a grumpy lady who get taught by a man how to act like a proper lady.

Reply Report

I love how the media paints us to be rebells @Whispering. I'm like R&J people R&J!

@UnlistedNapper i think that Kat was just ahead of her time! but still love the play

Reply Report

@Bastcat13 Sorry, I don't understand what you just said.

Reply Report

My favorite Shakespearean play is probably Romeo and Juliet, mostly because it was the first one I read and it's pretty misunderstood and Mercutio is amazing. Second is Hamlet.

To quote Tv Tropes: "Boy Meets Girl. They fall in love. Problem is, boy and girl are members of Feuding Families. Boy secretly marries girl. Boy kills girl's cousin, leaves town. Girl engages in dangerous plot to avoid an Arranged Marriage set up by her parents. Plot goes horribly right. Boy, hearing of girl's "death," goes back to town and kills self at her grave. Girl, awaking and discovering this, kills self in turn. Families reconcile. The End! And yes, it all happens about that fast—one of the major themes is that the two leads are rushing into it and should not have moved so quickly."

It's pretty famous for being one of the first examples of a 'dramedy'. The first act plays like a comedy, but once Mercutio is killed, it turnes into a tragedy. That's very important. The story makes no sense without Tybalt killing Mercutio and Romeo then killing Tybalt. Basically, the story can't exist without Mercutio. he insisted Romeo get over his old love. He suggested they go the masque where Romeo meets Juliet. He tempted Tybalt to violence. And Romeo got banished avenging his death.

Basically, the point is "don't rush into things or you'll get over your head" and "don't hold a grudge." Romeo, in his time, would have been spitting out crazy cheesy lines and Juliet would have been eating them up. Mercutio is really touchy with Romeo and is usually played gay. Tybalt is pretty stubborn. He may not have been killed if Romeo could have spit out that he and Tybalt were actually cousins.

... I pretty much love this play, and I can recite Mercutio's Queen Mab speech by heart.

And it's full of penis jokes. Funny penis jokes.

Reply Report

Also, this might help.

These guys pretty much got it down, and it's all of them.

ALL OF THEM.

Reply Report

I was just saying that media makes us into rebels, but in Romeo and Juliet's time they were having sex and getting married and all that. @Whispering

Reply Report

@Bastcat13 Well, I wouldn't say it was quite the same, but I get what you mean.

Reply Report

thanks... i think @Whispering

Reply Report

Interesting discussion about Shakespeare. You have to remember in reading them that they were meant to be performed on a stage, so it is not like reading a story by a novelist. I have always found it difficult reading the plays, although I found some to be enjoyable listening to as an audiobook, played by actors and actresses. My favourites are probably the tragedies Othello and Macbeth, but Romeo and Juliet I like alot also. There is deep meaning to some of them, though I get the impression Shakespeare was quite a socially conservative person in his time. So he wasn't specifically innovative, just very talented and wide-ranging in the subjects he covered.

Reply Report

@LetoAtreides "So he wasn't specifically innovative, just very talented and wide-ranging in the subjects he covered."

Don't tell Harold Bloom that, okay? ;) He's the guy who wrote Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human. He will tell you that Shakespeare pretty much invented modern human nature. Don't laugh, he makes a very compelling argument.

You are so right about reading vs. seeing the plays. I am grateful I was introduced as a child to Shakespeare in performance, as entertainment, before I had to study him in school. My advice to anyone who thinks they hate Shakespeare: Stop reading him and watch him instead.

I am one of the many whose favorite play is Hamlet. I am one of the few who does not like Romeo and Juliet.

Reply Report

@chiralphenomena That sounds like an interesting read. By not specifically innovative, I meant that you have to be careful not to read too much into his work. Trying to find some secret meaning. The meaning of them comes from the performance of them. Modern human nature and culture was invented in that era as it was the rennaisance period. But I think its more likely he made an important contribution to that, partly by the influence and the context though, more than by any special quality or meaning to be analysed in his work.

My impression of him as conservative comes from the fact that very few of his plays directly address the people and society of his day. They are all set in historical or fantasy locations. Suggesting it was more a case of providing entertainment and escapism for the people of his time rather than using his art and ideas to change the society he lived in.

He changed art and culture, via his innovative style maybe that has had knock on effects throughout society. But I still think the actual content of his plays is not specifically innovative.

Reply Report

Hey guys! I like Macbeth :)

Reply Report

My favourite work of Shakespeare's is A Midsummer Night's Dream. :)

Reply Report

I'm not even going to get into that debate because I will spam this thread with ridiculous like, how can you even describe it . . . writers' porn. The detail that goes into each character's dialogue, the wit, the puns, the high emotion, the plays on words, and just how unbelievable iconic and quotable everything is. The man invented over 1,000 different words and an uncountable amount of common sayings. That's . . . that's just never been duplicated.

He's not amazing for being innovative (although he was, taking common stories and making them memorable and clever). He's amazing for being amazing with words.

Just...gah. I'm only upset that I've never seen a very good, faithful production of one of his plays. I've seen As You Like It, Love's Labour's Lost, Twelfth Night, and one of the more obscure comedies I can't put my finger on at the moment. Not bad, just a bit lacking. I'm an actor myself, and there's just so much to run with with his words. I'm dying to see a truly great production of King Lear.

Reply Report

Hamlet!!!!!!!!!!*holds a skull* -Jezzy

Reply Report