I think it’s just a bunch of literature graduates who are creating this hype around Shakespeare and sort of circlejerking and making it like a big thing so that their useless degree somehow remains relevant

  • CoachDom@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    2·
    1 year ago

    I wouldn’t agree with it but it’s definitely an unpopular opinion :D

    To some extent, it might be the case that he is a little overhyped - but I would argue any artist that is so popular, is in danger of being overhyped. I only read “Romeo and Juliet” and “Hamlet” from his work, and I can appreciate his workshop - it’s really good stuff that survived for many years and remained valid.

    But to each their own - art is meant to serve you - if you don’t like it, move on and try something different. Definitely better way of going on about things rather than sticking to it, and pretending to like it in fear of being laughed at for a simple reason of sticking out of the crowd.

    • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
      1·
      1 year ago

      I look at most of the classical composers in the same way. Beethoven, Bach, Mozart and the like have reason that they’ve been studied and reinterpretdd for as long as they have. Modern popularity doesn’t have the persistance of time to judge against. As much as I might like the guys and their influence on modern music I can’t imagine anyone will be studying the works of Ozzy Osbourne or Kurt Cobain 400 years from now.

  • cakeistheanswer@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    1·
    1 year ago

    I mean I didn’t graduate with a lit degree and spent my career in IT so I guess you can take a cross disciplinary endorsement. I was just a nerd.

    His writing and timing are impeccable if you see it live, which is kind of lost on the page.

    I found the histories worth reading because he’s editorializing history in his time. You have to remember his audience was us plebs, so we get the gossip instead of the record. You know too many times in history the hot gossip got covered by… literally Shakespeare?

    The fact that he’s to the English language what the Beatles are to rock music feels eternally relevant too.

  • Scotthomas@lemmy.world
    1·
    1 year ago

    While I agree his language can be impenetrable for modern audiences, remember it’s just hundreds of years of evolving linguistic norms that have made it that way.

    He wasn’t trying to be haughty when he wrote (the uneducated folk loved his work).

    But his grasp of story structure, pacing and tension was intuitive and near flawless. In multiple genres.

    And yes, I have a writing degree, so I’m in the circlejerk.

    Edited: Ok, I see it now. I’m a total tosser. Sorry

  • chumbalumber@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    1·
    1 year ago

    I mean, like it or not Shakespeare has been a cultural juggernaut for 4 centuries. I’m not sure a bunch of literature students could manage that kind of outsized impact!

    These are just some of the words he invented that are in common use:

    accommodation

    aerial

    amazement

    apostrophe

    assassination

    auspicious

    baseless

    bloody

    bump

    castigate

    changeful

    clangor

    control (noun)

    countless

    courtship

    critic

    critical

    dexterously

    dishearten

    dislocate

    dwindle

    eventful

    exposure

    fitful

    frugal

    generous

    gloomy

    gnarled

    hurry

    impartial

    inauspicious

    indistinguishable

    invulnerable

    lapse

    laughable

    lonely

    majestic

    misplaced

    monumental

    multitudinous

    obscene

    palmy

    perusal

    pious

    premeditated

    radiance

    reliance

    road

    sanctimonious

    seamy

    sportive

    submerge

    suspicious