Shakespeare digression

Everyone I know, well my friends at least. Ok some people I know have never seen it, probably wouldn’t watch it if I gave them money, nor would I chastise them for it. All I know is anyone I have ever met who actually watched it and took the time to get into his plays, got it. Is it really that hard to understand? I mean middle English? Well I guess it is, I don’t think it is, but clearly you do, which is fine it’s not like Americans speak English that well anyway. That was a joke ok, I was joking, it wasn’t serious. :stuck_out_tongue:

In original language, few would know even British citizens of modern times. The artistry is play on words, substituting words, and creating pallets of odd emotions. Shakespeare was slang , fantasy, debauchery, reverence and bloody truth. To compare the works to paintings. I propose abstract with purpose.

Well the only quote I understood was “to be or not to be that is the question” which means should we be true people or not? I am true but this world is full of fakes.

See, so many see that quote as suicidal question. Others see it as you. There are other views. Art is not one perspective. Here’s a question: If a painting/sculpture etc. makes a blatant statement is it art or advertising?

Well if the painting has all over it “buy such and such a toothpaste”, I would call that advertising.

Then that fits Warhol. That is one advertiser. What about all the "artists " that claim they are making a statement? Are they not advertising their opinion and expecting you to buy it? Could we not fit Shakespeare into that?

Most people I talk to about him.
I often attend WS plays, and have seen 3 or so in the last 12 months.
There has also been a series of the historical plays on the BBC last year which I saw.
After a while you tend to pick up the patter and rhythms of Elizabethan English and the manner of speaking becomes more familiar.

Obviously knowing the gist of the plot, and then you start to see the minutiae and the detail. It is then that you understand the beauty of his method and his writing.

Anyone who attacks the Bard is not on my side. But more to the point, attacking WS has no relevance to the thread.

oh …
before I forget…

:slight_smile:

:slight_smile: My point Hobbes is that the average person will fall asleep trying to sort his words out. Chaucer’s Canterbury tales in its original language, gave 3/4 of my classmates blearyeyed syndrome. Shakespeare caused alot of absence s :slight_smile: Art is perspective. Cartoons can be art.

Dear Helandhighwater,

I also experienced this behaviour with Hobbes Choice. It was a moment when there was criticisms against Margaret Thatcher, Hobbes Choice would criticize her, but he would not allow me to criticize her. If I criticized Margaret Thatcher he would defend her.

It is a very demanding task to understand Hobbes Choice at times.

By the way Hobbes, you mentioned that Shakespeare could not have been aware of Cervantes work because of the dates when works were translated, and then when I proved you wrong, you have kept quiet. May I have an apology, please :smiley:

Well you asked a question - I answered it.
I love WS, and have been to the Globe Theatre 3 times now. It is utterly brilliant! Hats off to Sam Wanamaker for helping make it happen.

I agree that a majority of school kids find it difficult.
As a teacher I’ve found ways to present it so that they can find it more accessible - usually by offering them a dumbed down text or getting them to act it out.
Chaucer is a whole lot more tricky, but can be made accessible in the same way.

So you de-rail the thread with a personal attack then you want an apology??
Are you kidding?

  1. Yes, I missed your reply about the date of the death of WS. He could have read Cervantes, no that does not prove that he was Cervantes, or that Cervantes wrote all of WS works, or any of them, or that WS wrote Cervantes. In fact it does not prove anything except this…
    I’ll tell you what it proves. WS might have read Don Quixote..
  2. On the matter of Thatcher - I was not attacking you for attacking her. I was attacking the bollocks you were talking about her. If you want to criticise a person you should attack the truth and not make up nonsense that is not true. It just reflects badly on you.
    You should thank me for putting you right.

Alright I thank you for enlightening me :blush:

Thanks accepted.

I’m glad to see this all worked out.

My sarcastometer just broke but I am sure it all works out in the end.

Let’s just say we all thank Hobbes for being the new Jesus and leave it at that.

Although I am not so sure Jesus ever sent PMs saying re: hey shit for brains! and are re: are you out of control. I think he was a little more phlegmatic in his approach to enlightening the human condition. :laughing:

And no I am not going to report him for it, I really don’t care enough, it just puts some context on this weird disagreement.

At least your students get a taste Hats off to you for that. If given the full dose of WS. too many would lose out.
It is sad that it must be so. In 6 or more decades will the real works be only for historians? I hope not. The art would be lost.

I love your sarcastometer, may I borrow it? I am intrigued by these PMs, what are they about?

PM means private message. That’s all.
Access messages from 'user control panel" above.

Yes I am aware that PM is a direct message sent from one user to another. What I am intrigued is how Jesus is sending messages and the context of the messages. I am assuming here that Jesus refers to Jesus of Nazareth.