Bill Shakespear - Was He Any Good ?

[crofty1984]

ItsaTVR said:

Well then, someone else was clearly a genius... whether he be called Wil Shakspere or the 14th Earl of Gurney. A Rose, by any other name, etc...

Axl Rose wrote Shakespeare? Wow, I didn't realise he was that old.

[Eric Mc]

Bedazzled said:

Were his plays seen as 'highbrow' at the time, or were they the Elizabethan equivalent of TV drama for the drunken masses? I thought his writing was primarily pitched to be commercially successful and easily accessible art?

It was pretty much mass entertainment.
Just because something is aimed at the masses doesn't mean it has to be dumbed down. Shakespear recognised that. I wish modern writers had the same approach.

[Mutley]

Eric Mc said:

I know he could spell "emperor" (although not his own name).

I think he deserves the accolades given to him. The older I have become, the more I have recognised his ability to put into words the human condition.
When I studied "Romeo and Juliette" I was 16 and I was 18 when I studied "Hamlet" - both great plays. But I was much too young at the time to truly appreciate their content.

Over the past 20 years I have seen all the comedies and some of the tragedies and have really,. really enjoyed them all.

My favourite is probably "The Taming of the Shrew".

Eric, could the spelling of his own name be because the idea of writing and maintaining a spelling was still in its infancy? As was literacy as we understand it, and as long as people understood the word, why worry?

Have to say The Taming of the Shrew and Much Ado about Nothing are my favourites

[Eric Mc]

Attempts to standardise spelling didn't really take hold until the 19th century.

[bad company]

I seem to be in a small minority but I don't like any of Shakespeare's work and will stick with the 'new clothes' theory.

[Halb]

You don't like it, and can't see the standard of it so you think it's no good?

Anyhoo, looks like there are some ace BBC things coming up soon, doing four of the historical plays. Got a few familiar faces in it.

The best way to get Shakey is to read/act it.

[kenny Chim 4]

Halb said:

The best way to get Shakey is to read/act it.

I agree Halb. When you read one of the (36?) plays you don't get caught out as a modern observer may do trying to understand the gist whilst listening to an actor's words- you can simply re-read the line(s) and make your own account.

I have often wondered why so many of the great works were set in Italy as it's commonly believed that he never went there. However, there is a new understanding that perhaps Shakespeare spent his 'lost years' at sea:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/william...

If I were to take Charles Spencer's theory further, what's to say that the bard perhaps visited Veronna, Venice or Florence?

Edited by kenny Chim 4 on Wednesday 30th May 00:32

[DJRC]

In the end the mystery of The Bard only adds to the legend of the body of works.

Of the comedies my preference is Much Ado About Nothing. Of the epics, Ant and Cleo.

The ultimate question of how does one rate Shakespeare can be resolved by a simple question:

Give a top 10 passages of the English language...


9 out 10 are from Shakespeare. The only other chap who gets just one in is Churchill. Make it 7 or 8 out of 10 if you want to allow Tiger Tiger and/or Jerusalem from Blake. I personally would also throw in Liz's speech at Tilbury Field, but thats just me.

A ridiculous notion? What about Keats, Milton, Tennyson, HG Wells, Byron, Marlow, STC, Wordsworth, etc, etc...well OK then, which of Shakespeares great passages of txt do you drop to make way for "I wondered lonely as a cloud"? The body of works attributed to Shakespeare is pure genius and as a body of work in both its merit and impact it will never be surpassed.

[Mutley]

bad company said:

I seem to be in a small minority but I don't like any of Shakespeare's work and will stick with the 'new clothes' theory.

You're not, it's just that here all the pro Shakespear folk have pipped up. Besides, who says you have to like it? Thing is, I'll bet you've seen films/tv episodes under different names and have liked. Whether you like it as wot was wrote, or an updated version, our likes are subjective.

Shakespear has to be seen, or at least read out, to be 'got' However, if you can get hold of it, watch "Shakespear Re-Told" it was on about 5 years ago, and was the stories transported to modern day.

I'm off to Taming of the Shrew at the Globe next month, no better place to see it.

[Eric Mc]

When speaking about artistic endeavours, whether one likes or appeciates that "art" is totally subjective. So, not liking or "getting" Shakespeare is perfectly acceptable.

[Halb]

There is a difference between not liking something and then saying it is Emperor's new clothes because you don't like it. It is basically saying it has no artistic merit whatsoever.

[Eric Mc]

Halb said:

There is a difference between not liking something and then saying it is Emperor's new clothes because you don't like it. It is basically saying it has no artistic merit whatsoever.

That is different - I agree.

I dont like a lot of modern art - but I would never claim it wasn't "art".

[Goughie]

I've never been a great fan, but it's difficult as an Englishman not to be stirred by Henry's exhortations at Harfleur or to be mesmerised by his St. Crispian's Day speech.

[Eric Mc]

Or John of Gaunt's speech in "Richard II".

[Halb]

Eric Mc said:

Or John of Gaunt's speech in "Richard II".

I like that spoken by Basil Rathbone at the end of one of his Sherlock films.
Only slightly spoilt by the change of the last word.

Incidentally, Hound of the Baskervilles is on TCM today.