The reason why I and so many other dislike his work is because we were forced to read them in highschool.

Last year i studdied the tempest, it put me off shakespear compleatly...

 

3months learning for the SATS and this year they cancel them.

 

yeah the tempest wasn't that good tbh, I think we're doing roemo and julliet in english soon ... can't wait :thumbdown:

If Shakespeare was just a "good" writer as some of you say.. we wouldn't still be reading and acting his works today. He's dead, but his writings will forever live on,

Dux, the main reason we only say he was good is because we were forced to read his works.

Currently reading Romeo and Juliet in school, and I think I'd enjoy it a lot more if we didn't have to stop and analyse the last few pages that we've read. When I read a book, I prefer loosely thinking about the feel of each part as I read, rather than scrutinising every word to try and eke out every last dreg of meaning.

 

 

 

It's also annoying because we each are given parts to read out, and when people are messing around and laughing at worlds like "thou" it's really off-putting. :wall:

Currently reading Romeo and Juliet in school, and I think I'd enjoy it a lot more if we didn't have to stop and analyse the last few pages that we've read. When I read a book, I prefer loosely thinking about the feel of each part as I read, rather than scrutinising every word to try and eke out every last dreg of meaning.

 

 

 

It's also annoying because we each are given parts to read out, and when people are messing around and laughing at worlds like "thou" it's really off-putting. :wall:

 

O_O are you in my class

Dux, the main reason we only say he was good is because we were forced to read his works.

 

 

 

That makes no sense. Yes, Shakespeare is not for everyone. And yes, being forced to read things often results in a dislike for the writings.. but to say he's just good because you're forced to read is stupid. Admit the works are excellent, and then say that the way you were presented them was horrid and you wished they were not forced upon you.

If we are to be forced Shakespeare works,at least let us decide which work we want.I barely held my fist away from many walls through Romeo and Julliet,imagine if I spent a year reading slowly because the rest of my class can't comprehend English.

Dux, the main reason we only say he was good is because we were forced to read his works.

 

 

 

That makes no sense. Yes, Shakespeare is not for everyone. And yes, being forced to read things often results in a dislike for the writings.. but to say he's just good because you're forced to read is stupid. Admit the works are excellent, and then say that the way you were presented them was horrid and you wished they were not forced upon you.

 

 

 

He may have been the best of his time, but I feel a lot of more modern writers have far surpassed him in skill. Aldous Huxely and William? Golding come to mind as writers that I find vastly superior to shakespeare.

Dux, the main reason we only say he was good is because we were forced to read his works.

 

 

 

That makes no sense. Yes, Shakespeare is not for everyone. And yes, being forced to read things often results in a dislike for the writings.. but to say he's just good because you're forced to read is stupid. Admit the works are excellent, and then say that the way you were presented them was horrid and you wished they were not forced upon you.

 

 

 

He may have been the best of his time, but I feel a lot of more modern writers have far surpassed him in skill. Aldous Huxely and William? Golding come to mind as writers that I find vastly superior to shakespeare.

 

 

 

I don't agree with them being vastly superior, but nonetheless.. I agree there are many modern writers that are great. But that doesn't mean Shakespeare is irrelevant then..

I wouldn't call him the pinnacle of writing, but he's okay I guess. I've only read Macbeth and R + J, both for school.

 

Macbeth was the better of the two, mostly because it was more exciting, and had a better story imo.

 

Romeo and Juliet were both [developmentally delayed]. I believe Romeo pointed out Juliet's breathing before his suicide? W'ever.

 

 

 

If I have to read more Shakespeare, I won't mind too much, but I probably wouldn't go out and look for him.

If only he didn't wrote in such a ridiculous manner... I remember reading one of the Father's lines in Romeo and Juliet, half a frikken page of text only for this: "Go to , Juliet."

 

 

 

½ page just to say that? :roll:

 

 

 

 

 

/My Shakespear Rant

[hide=]

Dux, the main reason we only say he was good is because we were forced to read his works.

 

 

 

That makes no sense. Yes, Shakespeare is not for everyone. And yes, being forced to read things often results in a dislike for the writings.. but to say he's just good because you're forced to read is stupid. Admit the works are excellent, and then say that the way you were presented them was horrid and you wished they were not forced upon you.

 

 

 

He may have been the best of his time, but I feel a lot of more modern writers have far surpassed him in skill. Aldous Huxely and William? Golding come to mind as writers that I find vastly superior to shakespeare.

 

 

 

I don't agree with them being vastly superior, but nonetheless.. I agree there are many modern writers that are great. But that doesn't mean Shakespeare is irrelevant then..

[/hide]

 

 

 

I agree he is not irrelavant, but I think his works have become dated to the point of losing all but historical value. I guess not understanding the writing contributes to that feeling, biggest problem I had was the lack of worth to macbeth. By that I mean, the theme is generally that unbridled ambition will turn out horribly. Not that the theme is inaccurate but its so topical that I lose interest in the literary value and just read for the action.

I'd also like to point out (I guess I'm complimenting the man now), that Shakespeare wrote most of his plays in a week or two.

He managed to make one month of every high school year I've had into hell. That's pretty impressive.

I'd also like to point out (I guess I'm complimenting the man now), that Shakespeare wrote most of his plays in a week or two.

 

 

 

Wow, assuming thats true I give him serious credit for writing ability. That doesnt improve th efinal quality of the works but that is some serious talent.

I agree he is not irrelavant, but I think his works have become dated to the point of losing all but historical value. I guess not understanding the writing contributes to that feeling, biggest problem I had was the lack of worth to macbeth. By that I mean, the theme is generally that unbridled ambition will turn out horribly. Not that the theme is inaccurate but its so topical that I lose interest in the literary value and just read for the action.

 

 

 

The reason Macbeth is my favorite of his plays is because it is more simplistic than his others. Not even the most overzealous English teacher can shove your nose into analyzing something that just isn't there. Looking at the development for Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, which is excellent, is pretty much the only relevant thing you can do with it. Beyond that, it's a cool story of intrigue and war revolving around Macbeth's actions and ambitions.

 

 

 

I've also seen a live performance of Macbeth and Julius Caesar and filmed performances of Macbeth (Ian McKellan plays Macbeth and the dude that plays Emperor Palpatine is in it too) and The Merchant of Venice. I enjoy seeing them performed but for me it's always so much harder to follow what they're saying, especially since I have a hearing problem. So I like reading them slightly better, it gives me all the time I need to take it in.

 

 

 

The realist in me cringes a bit whenever I read him, though. I don't know what world Mr. Shakespeare lived in, but as far as I'm aware very few if any people can pull off the spontaneous eloquence that every single one of his characters does.

To make a valuable reply or not to make a valuable reply, that is the question.

 

 

 

Oh, looks like I already made that decision.

I had to read Romeo and Juliet for school. I hated it so much, especially after my teacher had the bright idea to make us read the entire thing out loud, with every classmate given a different role. Some parts ended up being pretty funny though, since it was a guy who had to play the wet nurse XD. I didn't even find the story that interesting. I mean Romeo falls in love with Juliet on day 1. Day 2 they get married. Day 3 they both commit suicide.

 

 

 

The fact that you have to read it line-by-line, trying to decipher what exactly Shakespeare is trying to actually say is the biggest pain in the [wagon] of all time.

 

 

 

The real kicker to all this was that my class had to watch the modern-day adaption of R+J, starring Leonardo Dicaprio. Horrible movie.

Oh God. Why? Why do I return to TIF to have Shakespeare as the second topic to see?

 

 

 

Anyway.

 

 

 

Midsummer Night's Dream is brilliant. I prefer the comedies to the tragedies. In any case, the important thing about his plays is... Well... that they're plays. Reading them is really nothing to playing them or seeing them. Many of his characters are an actor's wet dream, because they're so well drawn, so deep and the text so lyrical and well, textured, if that's a word. Lady Macbeth, oh my god, love!

To make a valuable reply or not to make a valuable reply, that is the question.

 

 

 

Oh, looks like I already made that decision.

 

 

 

Alas,dear braincells I hardly knew ye.

I have to say I love Shakespeare. My favourite is Othello and I am surprised that no one has mentioned it. Othello is a fantastic play and Iago is an extremely clever character. For me this was Shakespeare at his best. Iago is the most manipulative character I have ever come across in plays. I think this is one of those plays that really benefits from Shakespeare's indirect way of saying things, unlike R&J which left me screaming SAY WHAT YOU MEAN! Iago just drops hints to Othello about his wife's infidility and as the reader you just sit back and watch it all unfold.

 

 

 

Emphasises some basic human qualities we all can relate to, jealousy and the need for revenge!

I would love to say that I liked him, but I don't. I never valued English as a class, because the majority was based upon opinions. But, I cannot say that his work was bad, it was only school who made it so dull.

How do we know that all those literary techniques and themes ( for example in Macbeth, power ambiton). And all those random characters in the tempest, weren't just made up while he was smoking something ?

 

 

 

For example the rime of the ancient mariner was concocted when our friend Sam was high on opium.

 

 

 

That was the inspiration in those days.

How do we know that all those literary techniques and themes ( for example in Macbeth, power ambiton). And all those random characters in the tempest, weren't just made up while he was smoking something ?

 

 

 

For example the rime of the ancient mariner was concocted when our friend Sam was high on opium.

 

 

 

That was the inspiration in those days.

 

 

 

Even if that were true, what's your point?