# William Shakespeare



## Delvok (Nov 13, 2007)

This guy can write one hellevua play. I like Macbeth, Othello, and Hamlet but couldn't really get into Romeo & Juliet (I enjoyed the backstory of the family feud but not the romance). 

Other Shakespeare I want to read: some of his histories, Julius Caesar, Titus Andronicus, The Merchant of Venice, King Lear, Antony and Cleopatra, Coriolanus, Timon of Athens, Pericles Prince of Tyre, and Cymbeline.

So yeah. Anyone else like him?


----------



## VigorousMastication (Nov 14, 2007)

It amuses me that on a writing forum, no one has anything to say on Shakespeare. I guess part of the problem is that there's not much to say. His stories are so timeless they've become cliches, and many people who are forced to study his work in school don't really appreciate just how good his use of language really is. Personally, I loved all of the Shakespearian plays that I had to study, even Romeo and Juliet . I also love his sonnets; I wish I could write poetry even half as good.


----------



## Athnephiel (Nov 14, 2007)

off topic, nice name VigorousMastication.


on topic: I'm not really a fan of Shakespeare, simply because I don't like plays. On the other hand, he IS a genius.


----------



## Hawke (Nov 14, 2007)

Love Shakespeare. One of my most treasured books is _The Globe Illustrated Shakespeare - The Complete Works. _


----------



## ClancyBoy (Nov 14, 2007)

I have the Yale Shakespeare.  Tiny font and no bloody pictures.

When writers say there are no new stories to tell, I want to invite them to read more Shakespeare.  Every single one of his plots is complex, original, and extremely compelling, and none of them rely on things like chosen children, plot coupons, or dark lords of ultimate evil.


----------



## Korkskrew (Nov 14, 2007)

I greatly enjoy the majority of his works, the Tempest being my personal favorite, though after sitting through five hours of a complete and unchanged 
production of Henry V, it began to lose its charm. Though, their expressionistic Agincourt was very impressive.


----------



## duston (Nov 17, 2007)

Korkskrew said:


> I greatly enjoy the majority of his works, the Tempest being my personal favorite, though after sitting through five hours of a complete and unchanged
> production of Henry V, it began to lose its charm. Though, their expressionistic Agincourt was very impressive.



I can't believe that they could take five hours to act out Henry V, even if it is one of the longest ones.

That must have been really poorly directed.


----------



## Mr Sci Fi (Nov 18, 2007)

ClancyBoy said:


> Every single one of his plots is complex, original, and extremely compelling, and none of them rely on things like chosen children, plot coupons, or dark lords of ultimate evil.


 
Actually, much of his work was adapted.


----------



## CroZ (Nov 30, 2007)

I can gain more literary insight from one of his plays than  ten classic 20th century novels.



> Every single one of his plots is complex, original, and extremely compelling, and none of them rely on things like chosen children, plot coupons, or dark lords of ultimate evil.


they say a lot of his works were based on preexisting plays. 



> When writers say there are no new stories to tell...


that's just hack speak.


----------



## Hodge (Nov 30, 2007)

ClancyBoy said:


> I have the Yale Shakespeare.  Tiny font and no bloody pictures.
> 
> When writers say there are no new stories to tell, I want to invite them to read more Shakespeare.  Every single one of his plots is complex, original, and extremely compelling, and none of them rely on things like chosen children, plot coupons, or dark lords of ultimate evil.



Yeah, except for his comedies, which are very formulaic.

But his tragedies rock (even if many of them ARE based on prior works—the Shax added depth and genius to them), as do his histories.


----------



## playerpiano (Dec 2, 2007)

Its unfair to say that his plots are original. Romeo and Juliet among many others were adaptations of well known stories or even adaptations of other plays, as well as some political pieces picked from the headlines of the day. What is exceptional is the langauge, the way in which the stories were told. Written to be performed but poetry in themselves. That is a rare feat that has placed them in thier current stature. Though some plays are excelent works of originality. Midsummer Nights Dream has no known historic parralel and inveneted the benign role of fairys in modern myths.


----------



## Rumrunner (Dec 2, 2007)

> Originally posted by *playerpiano*:
> Midsummer Nights Dream has no known historic parralel and inveneted the benign role of fairys in modern myths.


Don't wholly agree with that.  _Midsummer Night's Dream_ largely follows the patterns laid out in medieval romance, though it has a more pastoral bent.  But that fusion seems natural, to me, because the romance and pastoral genres have quite a bit in common in their own way, anyhow.  Even the generic Greek-inspired names of the characters, the human ones at least, are fairly common to romance.

Not that it's not a great play (though far from my favourite;  I'm inclined to agree with Hodge that the tragedies are his best works), but it's certainly not totally without precident.


----------



## Kittenification (Dec 3, 2007)

I'm a pretty big fan of Willy Shake, although I have to say, Much ado about nothing was not my favorite piece of writing


And Titus Andronicus has the line "Villain I have done thy mother!" which is, in my opinion, hilarious.


----------



## Mira (Dec 5, 2007)

Delvok, I'd advice you to read King Lear as well. I never thought of my self as a Shakespear fan, but after reading this book over and over for a class, I discovered that it's just such good writing, with so many layers, and so many little bizzare and complex twists... Plus, the language is awesome I've personally only read King Lear, Macbeth (which I also liked) and Romeo and Juliet (in gr 9, as a girl, the story seemed very appealing... now it just seems somewhat cliched...)


----------



## Avor (Dec 24, 2007)

I can't stand Shakespear, well, not his serious work anyways. I love his comedies, I enjoy watching them. But things like Macbeth and Hamlet just suck the same way Star Wars Epidsode 3 sucked, you're watching these character do stupid thingss and screw themselves over.

For example, I'm halfway through Macbeth and I want to reach into the book and just bitch slap him for being so stupid. It annoys me to no end watching people stupidly fuck up and ruin everything, I see what they're doing wrong, I know how it's going to get bloody, and then it happens and there is nothing I can or do about it other than close the book and tell my peer that it's stupid.


----------



## laciemn (Dec 25, 2007)

I can't say I like it--I don't despise it and I can get into it it, it just isn't me thing.


----------



## Defiant Rain (Jan 1, 2008)

Shakespeare is wonderful. I loved Hamlet and Midsummernights dream the most. I love his characters the most, Mercutio, Malvolio. I think his death scenes are amazing.


----------



## SnipSnap (Jan 1, 2008)

I was reccomended by a homely librarian to read to Henry V, but I can't find a copy of it anywhere [I really haven't looked anywhere, though] I'm sure there's a copy on the internet.


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Jan 3, 2008)

I wrote a two papers on two of Shakespeare's works in English 202.

I wrote one on his Sonnet No. 130: _My Mistress' Eyes Are Nothing Like the Sun. _I argued in my paper that Shakespeare's dark lady in the poem was what Latin Americans would define broadly as a _morena_. Potentially a dark Moor.

The other paper I wrote was on _Hamlet_. I should dig that essay up because for some reason I seem to recall finding out some interesting and surprising things in the research I did through some existing critiques of _Hamlet._ I think it was something sexual but I can't really remember - it might have been homosexual. Nonetheless, _Hamlet_ addressed moral questions, if I'm remembering correctly, regarding the times, about Purgatory and dieing in a state of "mortal sin."


----------



## Wallmaker (Jan 8, 2008)

Love him.
Course I'm biased.  I took a lotta Shakespeare... a LOT.  

I think why people don't like the works is becuase a play is really meant to be performed and it needs energy and visualization to get passed the older (yet lovely) language for ease of understanding.  That being said... Brannagh's and Thomson's Much Ado About Nothing is one of my favorites and I also loved Richard III with Sir Ian McKellen and its sincerely creepy ending.  

As for Shakespeare's work being adaptations... it was all good in those days.  Adaptation showed a love for source material and passing on the story.  Most of Chaucer's Canterberry Tales were also retelling of classic stories as well.  But his tales stuck around cause he told 'em good.  Much like Mr. Shakespeare and his plays later on.


----------



## SnipSnap (Jan 12, 2008)

Writ-With-Hand ... Yes. I don't know of any homosexual things going on [It's possible Polonius had a thing w/ men, but he would have swung both ways.]

But the thing about dying w/ mortal sin ... an awesome theme of the play. We only get two glimpses at it. First, in Hamlet's "famous" soliliquoy in Act 3 Scene 1. He questions "To be, or not to be." and goes on to say that it would be better to die w/ moral sin attatched to a human, than to live gathering more sin all the while. We also see this further in Act 5 Scene 1. The two "clowns" talk about how Ophelia drowned herself, so she shouldn't get a Christian burial, and will thus go to Hell. 

The Most interesting part of the play is when we learn that Ophelia will not be buried in christian suit, and Hamlet jumps in to join her. So does Laertes.

Shakespeare definately is trying to tell use something about death. 

It's such an awesome play. One of my favorites by him.


----------



## CelticRose (Jan 17, 2008)

I just stumbled upon this. I actually love Shakespeare's works quite a lot. And I would have to agree with many of you that my favorite play is Hamlet. The plot is so intricately woven with such amazing speech. I myself have played the role of Ophelia.

I suppose that many people find Shakespeare dull, since he wrote his plays about four-hundred years ago and the language was different then. But if one really gets into it... Shakespeare's writing can open entirely different doors in terms of your perception of the world.


----------



## Mike C (Jan 18, 2008)

SnipSnap said:


> I was reccomended by a homely librarian to read to Henry V, but I can't find a copy of it anywhere [I really haven't looked anywhere, though] I'm sure there's a copy on the internet.



Seek and you shall find. Henry V by William Shakespeare - Project Gutenberg

Plus any bookshop - you really haven't looked anywhere, have you!


----------



## SnipSnap (Jan 26, 2008)

Thanks Much.


----------



## Flintenspiel (Apr 16, 2008)

Shakespeare is so hard to just sit down and read. Damn near impossible. It really helps to read it aloud, and especially to hear it read by different parts. You don't need to act it out, but hearing it, (it was written to be performed) certainly helps.


----------



## RebelGoddess (Apr 18, 2008)

VigorousMastication said:


> His stories are so timeless they've become cliches, and many people who are forced to study his work in school don't really appreciate just how good his use of language really is. Personally, I loved all of the Shakespearian plays that I had to study, even Romeo and Juliet . I also love his sonnets; I wish I could write poetry even half as good.



His sonnets are a favorite of mine as well : ).

Personally, I adore Shakespeare! I find his plays interesting, funny, and just all around great. 

His plays are so well crafted, with each play having intricate plots and very descriptive characters. 

I agree with whomever said he is a genius!



Flintenspiel said:


> Shakespeare is so hard to just sit down and read. Damn near impossible. It really helps to read it aloud, and especially to hear it read by different parts. You don't need to act it out, but hearing it, (it was written to be performed) certainly helps.



This is all too true: Shakespeare's work was NOT meant to be read, it was meant to be watched.

My personal favorites are King Lear, Titus Andronicus, and Hamlet.

Racheal


----------



## Aeria Gloris (Apr 18, 2008)

I find Shakespeare bearable in small amounts.

Last year I read A Midsummer Night's Dream with college and thought it was wonderful. This year has been Measure for Measure which I don't like nearly as much, but the conflicts in the play make good excuses for debates. 

Currently, I am writing an essay to decide whether Measure for Measure is a comedy or a tragedy, and another which centers around Isabella's character.

And I've been told to steer clear of King Lear, as it was described to me as 'one of the most depressing and pointless things he has ever written'.


----------



## RebelGoddess (Apr 18, 2008)

Aeria Gloris said:


> And I've been told to steer clear of King Lear, as it was described to me as 'one of the most depressing and pointless things he has ever written'.



LOL, it's not even the most depressing of all Shakespeare's plays.

Titus Andronicus has to take the cake for that: rape, murder, mutillation, cannibalism...

Racheal


----------



## KarenJoslin (Aug 24, 2009)

Shakespeare is one of my favorite writers of all time, particularly since I was a theater major in college.  The more you understand about Shakespeare's era and its language, the easier it is to understand his work.  He was a master of the double entendre, and his ability to successfully insert comedic scenes in tragedies is particularly brilliant.  The dialogue itself also contains quite a bit of stage direction, yet it doesn't seem obtrusive; in fact, I think a lot of directors don't even pick up on it.  For instance, in Lady MacBeth's soliloquy when Duncan first arrives, she says, "The raven himself is hoarse that croaks the fatal entrance of Duncan under my battlements." This line would make the most sense if the audience actually hears a raven cawing before she says it, yet I don't recall ever seeing a production of MacBeth that did that.  Of course, the line is more than just a stage direction, because in the Middle Ages, when the play takes place, a raven cawing was a death omen.  Lady MacBeth has a similar line about an owl shrieking while she's waiting for MacBeth to murder Duncan. So again, it serves double purpose - both a stage direction and an indication that Lady MacBeth is already attempting to ease her guilty conscience.


----------



## impactblade (Nov 25, 2009)

If I didn't like Shakespeare, I wouldn't be at College studying English Literature at A/S to A level. Having recently read Othello, I have to say that I've started to enjoy even the works that they force us to analyze, though that does put a major crimp into the enjoyment one can take out of the Bard's work. 

Favrioute play? Henry the Fifth, I'm still trying to memorize the speeches.
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.

As a side question, what Shakespeare quotes do You find most...
Awesome/Amazing/Supercalifri-Can't spell that word.

One line quotes or bonking huge paragraphs.
...
Goats and Monkeys!!!


----------

