<p>Who here loves William Shakespeare?</p>
<p>I…appreciate his contributions to vocabulary and grammar.
There, that’s nice, right?</p>
<p>Haha no, I think he would be a lot more popular if they translated his pieces into modern English. They’ve already changed the spelling, which takes away half the fun of linguistically analyzing him, bleh.</p>
<p>Shakespeare is in Modern English.</p>
<p>^Early Modern English.</p>
<p>In general, I do not read anything by the English. For no particular reason. Though I appreciate intelligent criticism of him, I did enjoy Hamlet a little too much. He is, however, my sister’s darling.</p>
<p>Yeah Shakespeare is BARELY modern English; a lot of his vocabulary is incredibly outdated, and he’s still transitioning into modern grammar (heh, grammar as we know it wasn’t fully established, as far as I know, until the 19th century).</p>
<p>PLUS the Great Vowel Shift was still going on during his time, so some of the rhyming is off.</p>
<p>But not many, if any of you, can argue that he was not a great writer.</p>
<p>^Tolstoy could. And did. </p>
<p>Eliot argued that some of his greatest plays were so deeply flawed as to be truly awful.</p>
<p>In what ways were his plays deeply flawed?</p>
<p>You really should read the [whole</a> essay](<a href=“Authors - Collection at Bartleby.com”>Hamlet and His Problems - Collection at Bartleby.com), since I hardly remember all of his supports, but Eliot holds the belief that Hamlet’s motivation was lacking, which leads to the whole play’s lack of quality.</p>
<p>I’ve not read much on why Tolstoy disliked Shakespeare, but he seemed to be against the whole oeuvre, calling general love for the playwright a “mass psychosis.” In Tolstoy’s later years, considering his aesthetic theories, hatred of Shakespeare would be a foregone conclusion, but in his youth, not so much.</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone could say that all of his plays are that great. Cymbeline?</p>
<p>Well, I am fond of some of his works.</p>
<p>Though I think Milton a better writer, I liked Julius Caesar, The Merchant of Venice, and The Tempest</p>
<p>I also find Gogol and Ben Jonson more lulzy, but everyone’s taste differs</p>
<p>EDIT: also, on the English thing, why is it impossible to find an un"translated" copy of anything by Chaucer in the bookstore?</p>
<p>I’ve read 5 of his works. Romeo and Juliet was crap. A Midsummer’s Dream and The Comedy of Errors were okay. Macbeth was better; Hamlet was best though (for me).</p>
<p>I don’t enjoy his plays very much (I’ve only read Romeo and Juliet, Julius Caesar, and A Midsummer Night’s Dream; also a modified script of MacBeth from drama class in middle school that kept certain important lines intact), but I can appreciate his sonnets.</p>
<p>And even though this is really off-topic and I don’t necessarily endorse his opinions towards Shakespeare, T.S. Eliot is one of my favorite poets (when I can understand him).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because you live in the middle of nowhere</p>
<p>lol sames. I find Ezra Pound’s translations and analysis of Confucian texts poor in quality compared to Waley, but I still like his poetry</p>
<p>^ but this was in Portland! It’s a metropolis!</p>
<p>[Amazon.com:</a> The Canterbury Tales (original-spelling Middle English edition) (Penguin Classics) (9780140422344): Geoffrey Chaucer, Jill Mann: Books](<a href=“http://www.amazon.com/Canterbury-original-spelling-English-Penguin-Classics/dp/014042234X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1278037425&sr=8-1]Amazon.com:”>http://www.amazon.com/Canterbury-original-spelling-English-Penguin-Classics/dp/014042234X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1278037425&sr=8-1)</p>
<p>sweeeeeeeeeet and it’s penguin classics</p>
<p>I’ll have to decide whether to read that or Tasso after I finish my current book</p>
<p>Personally, reading his work is dreadful.</p>
<p>Okay, yes I will agree that Milton is a better writer, however, Shakespear incorporated many aspects of life during his time that many writers back then failed to accomplish.</p>
<p>lol not to get into an argument, but Milton’s work (Paradise Lost and Areopagitica especially) is filled with commentary on the political situation of the time, whereas Shakespeare, because he was sponsored by the Queen/King, was less of an agent for reform</p>