/lit/ - Literature

>>12404760
No bideo gayms, cell phones of tv

Can you not comprehend how language changes over time?

College students are lazy idiots. They won't even watch a movie unless you screen it in-class.

Present day college students are morons

>>12404776
kys

Entertainment has changed.

>>12404760
wow, it's almost like the English language has changed in 400 years

You're supposed to watch Shakespeare after a few beers, see:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOQozTk5Gj0

>>12404760
>>12404776
>>12404782
>>12404784
>>12404785
>>12404804
>>12404811
>>12404831
>>12404962

nope these are all wrong answers. the correct answer is that they are plays, not books. You can go watch a shakespeare play on stage today and you will understand it perfectly. You're not really supposed to just be reading play scripts, that's not what they're written for. You might not get what the fuck Macbeth is talking about when he just starts gibbering at a dinner, but when you see Banquo on stage holding a mirror, shit makes a bit more sense.

>>12404776
Faggot

>>12404978
Or the language has changed over time and the syllables aren't accentuated the same making the play seem stilted. Also kids aren't taught how fucking verse works, they're talk iambic pentameter poorly and entertainment has modernized. Watching them live still sounds like gibberish spouted by retards who accent words in goofy ass ways if you don't know what the play is actually doing.

>>12405025
>Watching them live still sounds like gibberish spouted by retards who accent words in goofy ass ways
No they don't

>>12404978
>You might not get what the fuck Macbeth is talking about when he just starts gibbering at a dinne
Unless you're an idiot, why wouldn't you?

>>12405047
you tell me

>>12405034
They literally do. They don't to you because you have the tools to understand them but to anyone who has not been educated to understand them they do. You're expecting people to bridge a 400 year gap in meter, form and language in an instant just because someone is reading it to them.

>>12405057
Beats me. Macbeth is a very straightforward piece, not sure why someone wouldn't understand what was going on. We had to do it at school when we were 12 and nobody got confused in this way

>>12404978
Not an answer because they're not huge fans of watching them either.

>>12405063
well, teachers teaching you something is very different than reading a textbook on your own

you'd understand this if you weren't fucking stupid

>>12405060
Not buying it. The language is the same, and children study these plays, even act them out in most good schools. If someone is college age and can't understand Shakespeare the problem is them not Shakespeare

>>12405060
when was the last time you saw shakespeare performed live?
where was this?
what was the play?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FHoaPLO6Zd8
do you have a difficult time following what these actors are saying?

>>12405070
Children need the teacher because they are children, and will need help with any text.

>>12405060
Oh, come off it. Yes, it requires a little acclimatisation. But it's still the same language, ffs. At first it's a bit tough, but you read a few plays, watch a few plays, consult footnotes or guides or whatever where you need it, and very quickly you learn to understand it intuitively. The gap isn't *that* big.

>>12405078
unfortunately, I'm watching reality television, so I can't even say that you're the dumbest person I've seen in the last ten seconds, but rest assured, if I hit pause, you could easily claim that title

>>12405060
>the 400 year gap isn’t surmounted by the simple fact that they’re still speaking the same fucking language
Why are you projecting your retardation so hard? Oratory skills haven’t been lost to time just because of the relative age of the playtexts, if anything Shakespeare is one of the few playwrites whose work can still be accurately and faithfully performed, simply because his language, imagery and cadences have passed on so much genetic information to our own understanding of language.

College kids aren’t taught meter, and the centuries that have passed between us softens the achievements of his characterizations. It’s easy to take someone like Thersites for granted because Shakespeare we’ve had (the Shakespearean) him for 400 years.
Read “Shakespeare and the Invention of the Human”

>>12404978
Are you seriously suggesting the crowd at the Globe wasn't lubricated?

>>12405088
I have no difficulty reading Shakespeare. The guys fucking great. The question was why do some people have trouble understanding Shakespeare and I believe what I have stated explains the gap.

>>12405088
>"genetically" passing on acquired knowledge

>>12405155
Definition of genetic
1 : relating to or determined by the origin, development, or causal antecedents of something

>>12405161
You googled "generic"

>>12405111
Your explanation is fucking stupid, because so little has changed since Shakespearean times. One or two words yes (what is a fardel) but hardly anything else. The fact that children can understand Shakespeare with a little guidance shows that adults have no excuse but stupidity for not understanding him

>>12405194
Adults don't bother to read it. Most of them read it in high school and hated it because they weren't given any guidance. Poor education teaches people to avoid education.

>>12405071
The blame lies with the teachers, Shakespeare is meant to be enjoyed not studied

>>12404760
People were smarter back then

>>12405496
>not both
Arguably all “art” is meant to be experienced and not studied, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t valuable things to be learned from close analysis of the work. Shakespeare’s language is so rich and evocative that you could write an entire essay on a single couplet alone.

>>12406395
they ought to be enjoyed first & studied after

>>12406532
This is arguably true but I have had experiences counter to this. I read and studied Anthony and Cleopatra long before seeing it, and when I finally did I was able to pick apart why the production I saw was such a steaming pile of turds. despite the unique adaption (being set during the Haitian revolution rather than in Egypt, with the Romans as the French and the Egyptians as the revolting slaves), they made Anthony put to be a lecherous old man lusting after a young girl, when their relationship is supposed to be one of equal maturity between older people. They made a mockery of scenes which are intended to be taken with the utmost seriousness. Unless I had read the play beforehand I would’ve never been able to pick up on the staged inadequacies of the production I witnessed. Also reading Shakespearean verse makes it much easier to understand it in performance, as you’re able to internalise the rhythms and cadences of speech before hearing it performed.

>>12406566
it's teaching that i'm against, not reading them, you can act them out in the theatre of your own mind.

>>12404760

There's little value in babbling about stupid puns.

>>12404978
surprisingly lame and shallow explication for someone claiming to hold the truth

I'm sure even college students enjoy seeing the plays

>>12407765

https://youtu.be/_1tIRM160Tc?t=393

Note how even demented simpletons find puns repulsive.

>>12404978
>You can go watch a shakespeare play on stage today and you will understand it perfectly.
You might, most won't. I used to work in the English department in secondary schools and I've been on enough trips to the RSC and the Globe to know that most kids (and quite few teachers, worryingly) haven't go the foggiest idea what the fuck is going on.

>>12405083
hehehe OWNAGE hehehe

>>12407765
this

>>12406737
Shakespeare is best when read. I've seen a lot of theatrical productions and every single one has been shit.

I blame academia for canonizing and antagonizing Schakespeare to the folk. His plays are so fun.

>>12407977
>and quite few teachers, worryingly
Yep. Being lower middle class I know a few English teachers. Most don't really grasp Shakespeare and just teach from a textbook and hope they don't get asked too many questions by the pupils, which is easy enough to ensure. They got into teaching English because they liked To Kill A Mockingbird etc. I think the whole dumbing down of the syllabus is as much for the benefit of the teachers as it is to be more 'inclusive' or whatever

>>12408111
>>12408111
I was an English TA and I got told off by by my head of department for teaching kids about iambic pentameter during catch-up sessions because it was "a waste of time."

She was right, to an extent, the majority of them didn't grasp it and most of those that did seemed to forget what it was a few weeks later. Only one student actually used it in her exam

>>12404978
>You're not really supposed to just be reading play scripts,
Hamlet was probably never preformed in full in Shakespeare's time and only readers were able to appreciate the full work. Other playwrights of his day published editions of their plays with "deleted scenes" for the reader. The whole "lol you aren't supposed to read them" wasn't true in Shakespeare's time and it isn't true today.

>>12408007
where do you live?

>>12404978
Fucking this. We teach Shakespeare in entirety the wrong medium and then Get shocked when students can’t understand them. Having actors adds a completely different et demention. People complaining about tv in this thread make no fucking sense because without visual action to accompany the text the process of reading Shakespeare is cold and detached. Hence why most schools that teach it asgin roles to be read aloud, but this is still a vast world from professional acting and having the freedom of body language and getsure. It actually really frustrates me. For example my sister is one of the most vapid mindless consumers of media you’ll meet in your life, but after she was forced to see one staged for extra credit she said she was surprised by how funny and entertaining it was

>>12405535
[citation needed]

>>12408213
>without visual action to accompany the text the process of reading Shakespeare is cold and detached
Not true at all.

>>12408007
I think you mean that Shakespeare is best when performed, but very few performances are competent.

Anyone here live in Atlanta? This thread has inspired me to check out the Shakespeare Tavern. They're doing Love's Labour's Lost this month.

>>12408168
England.

>>12408239
Nope. We do not like to see our author's plays acted

>>12408239
>I think you mean that Shakespeare is best when performed, but very few performances are competent.
I don't think that's what he meant. I think that's what you think. What's more, I think you know that's not what he meant.

>>12408238
It is in a classroom setting. And his story’s are simply designed to be visually imparted. That’s part of why he’s so adaptable. The text is fairly universal but the action and vision of the director bring its to life. Take Macbeth seeing the ghost of the king, probably my favorite scene in my favorite play. If this were a novel the writer would have to be out of there goddanm minds to convey this all in a wall of text rant, but Shakespeare deigned this scene for an actor to play of of. There’s a a lot more than the words when you have an actor to physically stand and react. Maby his words get shaky and uneven. Maybe an actor comes in painted a ghastly blue and all the others don’t acknowledge him. Maybe vise versa and Macbeth stands there intensely staring and shouting into blank space. All this tangible vision is lost when it’s only conveyed in words

>>12404962
This is true. Got to The Globe and everyone's getting the pints in. You're supposed to go the theatre to have fun

>>12408291
>It is in a classroom setting
You don't need to convince me that current literature education is dismal.

>All this tangible vision is lost when it’s only conveyed in words
I don't disagree, at least not completely. But much of the poetic beauty of Shakespeare's words are, IMO, best experienced when one is able to read and re-read at their pace. I can read any of Hamlet's soliloquies whenever I wish, without having to sit through four hours of a production that is ultimately somebody else's interpretation. I can pause to reflect on lines or even individual words(, words, words). And I can skip ahead or back and cross reference with other scenes, other plays, or even works written by other authors centuries later.

There certainly are aesthetic qualia better obtained or only obtainable by a live production, but for various reasons I prefer reading.

>>12408273
well i live in england and i've seen good productions. i think that these plays are so great that they can stand up no matter how badly we do them and how strangely we approach them.

and there are orson welles' 3 shakespeare films which are some of the best kind of stuff.

>>12408381
it was never meant to be read and re-read.
he wrote his plays to amuse audiences in a theatre and he never bothered to have them printed

>>12408451
>it was never meant to be read and re-read
And yet I do so, will continue to do so, and will enjoy doing so for as long as I may.

>>12404760
Attention spans have gotten significantly shorter as the speed of life has increased with technological innovation. Keep in mind that most people in his day couldn't read or write. That means that they managed their entire life simply by listening and remembering what people said.

>>12408451
>it was never meant to be read and re-read
then why were people transcribing, printing, and circulating the scripts from day fucking one you fucking faggot know-nothing FUCK
why did his fucking company mates spend the time and money gathering his manuscripts, the published quartos, and anything else they could get their hands on and set it all to print after ol' shakes' kicked it???
how did the introduction to the folio go again?
>Who, as he was a happie imitator of Nature, was a most gentle expresser of it. His mind and hand went together: And what he thought, he uttered with that easinesse, that wee have scarse received from him a blot in his papers. But it is not our province, who onely gather his works, and give them you, to praise him. It is yours that reade him. And there we hope, to your divers capacities, you will finde enough, both to draw, and hold you: for his wit can no more lie hid, then it could be lost. Reade him, therefore; and againe, and againe : And if then you doe not like him, surely you are in some manifest danger, not to understand him. And so we leave you to other of his Friends, whom if you need, can be your guides: if you neede them not, you can lead yourselves, and others, and such readers we wish him.
what was that?
Read him, you say?
And again and again and again and again AND AGAIN AND AGAINAGINAGINADGNIAGINAGINAGNAGIANDGNASNFANASINGNIAGINAGINAG
cunt fuck piece of shit god dammit

>>12407977
>>12408111
>>12408153
I've always gone to good schools and been somewhat insulated I guess, but there's no fucking way this is true. I just can't believe it. A TA works at a university, right? (Sorry I'm not American). How the fuck can university students not grasp iambic pentameter? I've lived in Russia for a while, and I've had great conversations about Shakespeare with Russians who speak English as a second (or third) language. They grasped it. Now you people are telling me that _teachers_ in the Anglosphere can't understand him? Wtf. I don't buy it. There's no way things are that bad.

>>12408496
It is that bad.

>>12408487
>That means that they managed their entire life simply by listening and remembering what people said
Yeah, as far as anyone knows there were no rehearsals for plays back then. Actors just memorized their lines pretty much effortlessly.

>>12408515
shut the FUCK up

>>12408493
>that wee have scarse received from him a blot in his papers.
would he had botted a thousand!

>>12408554
>botted
*blots*
blotted

>>12408496
>Now you people are telling me that _teachers_ in the Anglosphere can't understand him?
It's totally true, I've known multiple English teachers who found Shakespeare impenetrable.
Think about who becomes a teacher. It's a badly paid job for people who weren't smart enough to go into the professions, but are too middle class to be a truck driver or something. Like the clergy used to be in Victorian novels

>>12404760
As an Italian who learned English as his third language I'm flabblergasted by this shit. Never had a problem understanding fucking Shakespeare. He's basically English Dante in that he Invented how you people speak now. Perhaps It's more evident to me as an external observer but still, saying that his opus isn't relevant to people today and that young educated people have problems understanding him is just outright bizarre.

>>12408496
You realize you can just go through the motions and become an English teacher, right? I know people who have degrees without ever reading works by people like Shakespeare or Austen.

>>12408581
My work takes me to Frankfurt a lot, and I swear I have better conversations about English literature there than I ever do in my London office.

>>12408581
I think part of it is, at least in America, that we don't learn how to read poetry effectively. A lot of the confusion in reading Shakespeare arises from unfamiliarity with poetic writing. When I was in 9th/10th grade I found Shakespeare's prose passages much easier to understand and wished he wrote all of his plays in prose. (I no longer hold this opinion, ofc).

I'm guessing you might learn how to read poetry better in Italy.

>>12408528
I went from a private high-school to a state university. In an art history course I took as an elective, the professor was wonderfully shocked and surprised when I knew who Hobbes and Rousseau were, and why they would influence the Rococo. This was a upper-level course designed for 3rd year students. I never learned anything beyond what I learned in high-school. Even in my class on late-medieval literature, we never read the full Canterbury Tales, and each class essentially boiled down to the teacher telling the students what they'd actually read, "translating" from middle English to contemporary English.

>>12408598
That's harsh.
>>12408601
Well we were taught some metric and they made us recite some shit every once in a while but not all that much to be honest.

>>12408526
I've never heard this before, and I have no real frame of reference to determine its believability.

>>12408595
>I know people who have degrees without ever reading works by people like Shakespeare or Austen.
Provided you're talking about English degrees, which I suppose you must be, then this has legitimately ruined my evening

>>12408621
"Effortlessly" was a stretch, but I specifically remember reading recently that there were no rehearsals.

>>12408614
>That's harsh
Harsh but true. Outside /lit/ the only conversation I've had about Paradise Lost was with a German lawyer. Have never met another English person who's read it

>>12408637
Hell, I read it, and even I haven't read it.

>>12408642
what did you mean by this

>>12408668
I mean, even when I read it, I didn't really read it. I remember nothing about it. All I know is that I spend time reading the words on the page. But in all that time, I didn't pay attention to a single word. Just nodded my head along with the meter, like I was listening to some pop song.

>>12408471
as long as you're having fun i guess

>>12408493
mate i was obviously talkin about rereading passages at thy own pace which is what you mentioned. shakespeare himself has made his own plea in this matter: "i pray you, mar no more of my verses with reading them ill-favoredly.”

>>12408681
>i pray you, mar no more of my verses with reading them ill-favoredly.
I'm not sure how you get "don't read my writing at all" from this.

>>12408704
Yeah, if anything, this encourages multiple readings to find the ideal vocalization. Almost like an actor might.

>>12408704
don't think i ever made that point

>>12408717
well if we're agreeing it ought to be acted...

>>12408719
Then what's wrong with re-reading passages? What point *are* you trying to make?

>>12408637
I meant harsh on you...

>>12408642
You have the soul of a poet anon.

>>12408681
that line is placed in the mouth of an earnest but kind of stupid young man in the grips of love it is not to be taken as the gospel of saint william just as no other line or set of lines or whole speeches or whatever should be construed as the actual and final thoughts of the author on the subject, because they will inevitably find their contradiction in another line, set of lines, etc. either within the same play or in another
you piece of hairy cunt flap

>>12408731
it does wilm shaxpy a disservice.
>What point *are* you trying to make?
well that it was never meant to be read and re-read is all i said

>>12408759
>it does wilm shaxpy a disservice.
Why?

>>12404760
shakespeare is shit like everithing coming from england

>>12408724
That's ideal, but not everyone has a theater and production company. And that's ignoring that most actors can't do Shakespeare anymore. So you should at least make do, and stage the play in your head.

>>12408738
If only I had the pen.

>>12408771
well he never had them published did he

>>12408793
>ignoring that most actors can't do Shakespeare anymore
well there's a thousand ways to do any great classic
>stage the play in your head
agreed

>>12408808
>well he never had them published did he
So? I doubt he cares much what I do with his plays honestly. And if you are right and he did not want his plays to be published (which is speculation), then you are doing him as much a disservice by watching them as reading them, since you aren't watching the King's Men perform them at the Globe.

>>12408822
i don't watch them. much of the poetic beauty of Shakespeare's words are, IMO, best experienced when one is able to read and re-read at their pace

>>12408846
that's what I said

>>12408846
kys troll cunt

"I learned English as an eleventh language and Shakespeare, for me, has always been a walk in the park."

Every time with these types of threads.

Tell me about your taste, /lit/

Old Testament or New Testament?
Verse or prose?
Latin or Greek?
Iliad or Odyssey?
Homer or Virgil?
Petrarch or Dante?
Augustine or Aquinas?
Marlowe or Jonson?
Herbert or Donne?
Richardson or Sterne?
Wordsworth or Coleridge?
Keats or Byron?
Austen or Brontës?
Dickens or Thackeray?
Tolstoy or Dostoyevsky?
Hemingway or Faulkner?
Pound or Eliot?
Esenin or Mayakovsky?
Borges or Cortázar?
Brecht or Shaw?
Camus or Sartre?
Rimbaud or Verlaine?
Evola or Guénon?
Manet or Monet?
Schiele or Klimt?
Chopin or Liszt?
Bruckner or Mahler?
Prokofiev or Stravinsky?
Brahms or Wagner?
Piano or violin?

Obviously an incomplete list by any metric; just wrote this on a whim

Most in his time didn't actually appreciate what was best in his plays. They liked the intrigue and violence of the stories, and the little asides and puns. Shakespeare also included certain lines specifically for his general audience. The play in verse was as standard then as the blockbuster movie is now.

College grads can't enjoy him because nothing is left except the artistic part. They can't enter the mind of the 16th century rabble or discern the brilliant poetics and meditations, so they get really nothing out of these plays.

>>12408944
I am retarded, this was meant to be a thread

>>12408945
>only finally realised how amazing Shakespeare’s writings were in my final year of HS

God I wish I got into it sooner. I’m reading ‘The Tempest’ right now and love it.

>>12408944
>New
>Greek
>Odyssey
>Homer
>Dante
>Augustine
>Jonson
>Wordsworth
>Keats
>Austen
>Dickens
>Dostoyevsky
>Hemingway
>Eliot
>Camus
>Monet
>Klimt
>Chopin
>Mahler
>Prokofiev
>Wagner
>Piano

>>12408944
No.
Usually prose
Greek
Odyssey
Don’t know any Virgil yet
Hate Dante
No
Who?
Who?
I have some Sterne
Who?
Donno
Can’t tell them apart sometimes
Not familiar with Thackeray
Not sure
Donno
Don’t know
Don’t know
Borges
Um
De Beauvoir

Klimt
Prokofiev
Sibelius
Debussy

Just answered on whim

>>12408981
>>12408996
Ignore my low IQ failures at posting and use the thread ;-;

>>12408996
Faggot

>>12408996
mate you chose every wrong answer

>>12408915
And it's invariably someone who doesn't understand Shakespeare at all