<p>
are you one of those people who places more emphasis on grades than anything else that could matter? i get good grades because i’m somewhere in between, fairly intelligent but i put work in. i have friends who don’t do as well in school because they don’t try as hard, and that doesn’t mean that i’m smarter or more special, we just have different priorities. i know people who read the kinds of books that we study in school and know more about history and philosophy than i do, but they just don’t care to align their studies with the curriculum. this doesn’t mean that they’re lazy, it just means that school doesn’t mean everything to them. and there’s really nothing wrong with that.</p>
<p>I also find it funny when people go:</p>
<p>OK let’s see if you are intelligent. Who was the 5th president of the united states? oh you don’t know? haha you must have a low IQ. </p>
<p>or something along those lines.</p>
<p>@BillyMc: I hate that trend, where everyone is a gifted student. Best I understand, it’s happening in Germany as well, where gymnasium attendance (as a % of students) has risen dramatically, because EVERYONE’S KID is OBVIOUSLY gymnasium material.</p>
<p>Note: I’m just a huge Shakespeare fan. If you believe there is no objective best, or that Tennyson or Pope is the best, more power to you. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, you can’t really, but you can try at least. What I meant by objective was not that our personal prejudices wouldn’t come in to play–of course they would–but just that this writer wouldn’t be your favorite writer or the one that speaks to you, personally, the most. And of course there doesn’t have to be a “best” writer, but I would say if anyone is it’s Shakespeare for sure.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why would you try to do something that you know to be impossible?</p>
<p>Ironically, Shakespeare, although demonstrating a high level of genius in his use of the English language, showed just as high a level of straight knowledge as any of his contemporaries, including, for example, Ben Jonson, who attended the Westminster School and may have gone to Cambridge, but preferred to create his own plots, while Shakespeare drew from a variety of sources, from British and Roman history, to tales from the Orient, to the Decameron.</p>
<p>Someone like Horace or Pushkin who didn’t draw so obviously from the past may be a better example of the power of artistic genius to transcend knowledge, since without the latter, Shakespeare would have like 2 plays, as all the rest have unoriginal plots</p>
<p>I like when Maple uses his didactic voice.</p>
<p>hahaha</p>
<p>btw, what is your SBNation name. I feel like stalking but I’m too lazy to figure out what it is on my own.</p>
<p>I’m not giving it out, lol.</p>
<p>>_></p>
<p>You’re JaredfromLondon, aren’t you…?</p>
<p>@maple You’re right. I didn’t mean Shakespeare was a ignorant genius, but just showing what can be accomplished without proper education. I doubt that genius can fully manifest itself without knowledge.</p>