[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 73 KB, 449x600, shakespearePA_449x600.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1529173 No.1529173 [Reply] [Original]

how can anyone not like Shakespeare?

>> No.1529176

Plays are meant to be watched, not read.

Get back to /tv/

>> No.1529178

it doesn't happen

it's like asking how someone hears colors

>> No.1529187

>>1529184
this is simply a lie

>> No.1529184

>>1529178
I do hear them, and I don't like shakespeare..vive la avant garde

>> No.1529191

>>1529187

>has never heard of synesthesia

>> No.1529192

I hated reading Romeo and Juliet in High School.

>> No.1529195

>>1529178
Actually, some people do. It's a rare neurological disorder. I shit you not.

LSD supposedly alters how your brain processes external stimuli (beyond the obvious, of course).

>> No.1529196

>>1529184
Shakespeare was avant-garde in his time, rejecting a lot of the poetic/literary conventions set by Petrarch.

Though I guess now he's not anymore.

>> No.1529198

>>1529176
>Plays are meant to be watched, not read.

Closet dramas. Not that this applies to Shakespeare, but you made a blanket statement about plays in general.

>>1529178
>it's like asking how someone hears colors

Synesthesia

>> No.1529205

>>1529196
yeah the point of avant garde is to be avant garde at this time...

>> No.1529214

>>1529198

No no I meant real plays.

>> No.1529217

>>1529205
isn't it always? We can only be avant-garde in our time, unless we predict and pre-empt the future.

>> No.1529228

>>1529217
Being avant garde means knowing the right time to commit suicide. (nice quote, eh? )

>> No.1530694

Eh, my current Renaissance poetry tutor dislikes him. I can see why, in a way, he's rather good, but not fantastically better than many of the other authors of that period.

>> No.1530705

>>1529176
>retard detected
>>1529214
>retard confirmed

>> No.1530713

Only reason people like Shakespeare is because Marlowe died.

>> No.1530727

>>1529176
If so why did Ben Jonson labor to publish his own plays in his lifetime (the first english writer to so) and then why did Condell and Hemmings go to such lengths (with Jonson's aid) to publish the first folio. Why were Shakespeare's plays published in quarto often as soon as they were performed? How did Plautus influence these guys? By actual performances? Wake up, Shakespeare was a fucking hard core poet, working in a brand new genre, and the written text was specifically different and more detailed than the 2 hour performcances. Enjoy the fact he understood plays could be read and read them for your own benefit.

>> No.1530730

>>1530713
Yep. The only reason.
The only reason in the world.

Good call.

You stupid, stupid faggot.

>> No.1530739

>>1530694
This seems like a a fair response. As a dramatists, few of his plays actually work that well - in terms of plotting, dynamics etc. What people remember, rightly, is the astonishing poetry, in which he was, I think, a league apart.

As a dramatist we tend to be too easy on Shakespeare and forgive him for faults which aren't necessarily the faults of other dramatists of the time by saying "Oh...you know, that was just the convention then..." when a quick look at Marlowe, Jonson & others will tell you that there is no need for very profound drama to feel...well, like it drags sometimes.

As a poet though, yeah probably the best there's ever been.

>> No.1530745

>>1530713
They both died.
But I know you mean Marlowe died young. Still, if you really knew what you were talking about you'd know that Shakespeare didn't really achieve the wide-blown academic success he has now until the 1800's. Until then, there was heavy debate over who was the greatest Elizabethan playwright, and Marlowe was one of the biggest contenders for the title of "Best." Taking this into consideration, it seems foolish to think Marlowe's early demise had anything to do with Shakespeare's fame today.

>> No.1530756

People claim to like Shakespeare because it's the popular thing to like. They think that just by claiming to be a fan, that it automatically makes them cultured or more intelligent than they really are.
It's like PC literature.

>> No.1530763

>>1530756
Well, yes, some people do that, certainly; however, just because a person claims to like Shakespeare does not mean they're merely attempting to sound cultured or that they don't actually like his works. You gotta watch those sweeping generalizations.

>> No.1530767

ITT uneducated unknown retards with no merit talking down Shakespeare

>> No.1532457

>>1530767
welcome to the state of literature c 2011

>> No.1532474

>how can anyone not like Shakespeare?

Fucking personal opinions, how do they work?

>> No.1532499

People can do it, but they're generally broken/undeveloped autists. It's like people saying they don't like the Beatles or Beethoven. Sure they're out there, but there's very very few and even the people who insist they don't like them generally secretly enjoy it.

>> No.1532508
File: 829 KB, 1746x2444, Bloom_Harold_03.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1532508

Not appreciating Shakespeare amounts to either two possibilities. One, you suffer from extreme influence anxiety. Two, you're a stupid high-schooler who doesn't know shit.

>> No.1532512

>>1532474
aesthetic transcendence, how does it work

>> No.1532516

>>1532508

3. You were forced to read one of his shit plays and don't know about Hamlet, King Lear, or Othello.

>> No.1532524

>>1532516
That's called being a stupid high-schooler.

>> No.1532530

>>1532524
lol

>> No.1532531

>>1532524

stupid high schoolers are the one's who didn't read the play to begin with and just hate him because he's old and school made you read.

>> No.1532539

>>1532516
>>1532531
>3. You were forced to read one of his shit plays and don't know about Hamlet, King Lear, or Othello.
> stupid high schoolers are the one's who didn't read the play to begin with and just hate him because he's old and school made you read.

So I'm right?

>> No.1532548

>>1532539
Remember when Wishbone was Othello? HAHA THAT CHICK WAS INTO A TERRIER!

>> No.1532569

>>1532539

No.

Take me for example.

I thought I hated Shakespeare because I had to read Romeo & Juliet.

Then I heard about King Lear and decided to give him another chance and realized I was wrong.

A stupid high schooler wouldn't have done that.

>> No.1532578
File: 11 KB, 220x220, donald_gibb_4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1532578

NERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRDS!!!!!!!!!!

>> No.1532612
File: 48 KB, 706x499, bloom_harold.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1532612

>>1532569
You hated him as a stupid high-schooler, then you moved on from that stage. You keep confirming my views in your attempts to dismiss them.

>> No.1532624

>>1532612

But I wasn't stupid. I was ignorant. There's a big difference there.

>> No.1532635

>>1532612
Or Romeo and Juliet is just a fucking awful play.

>> No.1532642

>>1532624

The difference being that stupidity welcomes ignorance.

>> No.1532653

>>1532642

But ignorance does not imply stupidity.

>> No.1532663

Never read shakespeare in high school. Paid the kid that sat behind me 40 bucks to to do all the reading and paperwork. From what I gleaned from what little I read of his work that I handed in, shakespeare was sorely lacking in tits and gunfire. Luckily, it's even easier to find people to do your work in university, or at the very least take a recorder to class with them. You know, for the early classes.

>> No.1532697

>>1529184
l'avant garde.
>learn to french

>> No.1532805

I almost hate Shakespeare, at best I'd say I strongly dislike him. I can appreciate his wordplay (which truly is brilliant) and language skills, but honestly, the man needed an editor. Every character in every play (barring the poor of course!) is a master of the English language, cleverly using puns and astrological allusions while having a casual conversation. Nearly every character sounds the same (B.N. "sounds" does not mean "acts like." The characters have distinct personalities, but their manners of speaking are nearly identical.) With all this monotony, the plays all run for 3+ hours. Sure, the plots had good arcs and setups and whatnot, but for the man who said "Brevity is the soul of wit" one would think he would try to shorten his plays to a reasonable, non-masturbatory length.
Sure, objectively I think Shakespeare is fantastic for his use of language and superb characters, but subjectively I simply cannot enjoy his plays for the above stated. However, Hamlet is wonderful.
>come at me bro

>> No.1532816

>>1532697
They were clearly removing elision for emphasis.

>> No.1532824

>>1532805

Hamlet is one of his least accomplished works from a critical perspective, despite having flashes of brilliance.

>> No.1532832

>>1532824
No.

Your opinion does not "a critical perspective" make. You've got about 300 years of scholarship disagreeing with you.

>>1532805
As long as you concede his talent, it's cool. But I'd also like to point out most of his plays are <100 pages. I think it's just the arcane language screwing with your perception of pace.

>> No.1532839

>>1532663
>yfw unemployment in three years

enjoy while it lasts, bro.

>> No.1532848

>>1532832
alright, I might have been wrong there, but I think that most productions of Shakespeare that do not cut anything run for around 3 hours. I had a teacher tell me that this is because the actors pause too much during their lines to add emphasis and emotion, which make the plays really long, even at 100 pages of script. I do know, for example, Hamlet takes around 4 hours even if you read it with correct meter and without actor's pauses (this is his longest play though.)

>> No.1532877

>>1529173
Unless someone studied the language or got some help, (like a guide or took a class) they're flat out lying about being able to just read and understand more than 40-60% of Shakepeare.

Maybe they saw some film adaptation or a play with actors doing the typical "I'm almost screaming" delivery, which I guess can be fun.

>> No.1532886

>>1532877
Umm, I can understand nearly everything of a Shakespeare play unaided. Early Modern English.

>> No.1532905

>>1532886
>he's too dumb to know that he's missing hundreds of allusions
either that or you're an expert of ancient and early Renaissance history, alchemy, astrology, early astronomy, grammar, Renaissance and pre-Renaissance literature, classics, mythology, Ptolemaic theory, and archaic anatomy

>> No.1532907

>>1532877
Shakespeare is *not* that hard to understand. I have never been able to comprehend the number of people who say the language is hard to understand. It's just older english for god's sake, take two seconds to look at any of the antiquated words in the context they're being used and it's more than clear enough to know what's being said.

>> No.1532908

I don't like him because when I read/watch a play by him I get nothing from it and I can walk away from it quite easily. He does not use emotions properly, and his characters are bland, and do not act like people.

He is not a good writer.

>> No.1532917

>>1532907
there's often more than just the literal meaning to the words, however. he's not really that hard once you've put in the initial time, but i still suspect you're exaggerating your abilities.

>>1532908
not sure if troll.

>> No.1532919
File: 25 KB, 462x238, 1296354661842.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1532919

>>1532877

>> No.1532923
File: 16 KB, 210x214, 1286438712572.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1532923

>>1532907
>>1532886
Go read some analysis and see how wrong you are about your assumptions. It'll be entertaining.

>> No.1532930

I love Shakespeare. I can read some of his stuff over and over again and not get tired of it

>> No.1532931

shakspeer spekes lik a diffrent laguije or sumthine lol ts weerd

>> No.1532949

>>1532923
How do you know they didn't make the right assumptions?? Huh????

>> No.1532957

>>1532923
I have, and it doesn't change the fact a Shakespeare play is understandable to a modern audience. That's why they still get performed.