What would Shakespeare think of us

I think Dan Poole and Giles Terera's TedTalk revealed a number of interesting points regarding Shakespeare. I thought it was absolutely amazing how they could travel to so many different parts of the world and connect to these other people through the works of Shakespeare. It shows just how widespread and popular Shakespeare has become. One of the actors remarked how "Shakespeare wasn't meant for a few people, but all of us." I thought this statement summed up all of Shakespeare's work. He didn't write to connect with a few people but to connect with every human on Earth; his themes, stories, and emotions are universal. We have all felt, at some point, like a character in one of his plays. Perhaps it is for this reason that Shakespeare is so universally well-known: we don't read his plays, we feel them. I also agreed with the actors' point that if Shakespeare was alive today, he would be absolutely dumbfounded by his posthumous success. He would be amazed to see his plays translated into so many languages and read by students and play enthusiasts all over the world. I believe he would have felt as if he had accomplished his goal: having the world experience and feel the inner workings of his mind.

Shakespeare is everywhere

Until watching Christopher Gaze's TedTalk, I truly did not realize just how many famous sayings Shakespeare had coined in his day. It is amazing to hear sayings that were invented centuries ago still used in our modern and ever-changing world. It is so common nowadays to hear words or phrases get used for a few days or weeks, and then never heard of again. However, Shakespeare's sayings are emblematic of Shakespeare's lasting reign over the English language. I found Gaze's anecdote about Hamnet's death to be quite interesting. Shakespeare knew that if he had not wrote "Shall I Compare Thee To a Summer's Day", Hamnet may have never been remembered. I personally had always believed that this sonnet was one of love for his wife or an admirer; I was shocked to hear it was written as a eulogy for his son. This completely changed the meaning of the sonnet and in my opinion, makes it much more beautiful and meaningful. Gaze's TedTalk and the aforementioned anecdote specifically made me view Shakespeare as more of a human, instead of some "god-like playwright". Shakespeare experienced emotions just like me and you, and channeled these emotions through his sonnets and plays. This thought gives Shakespeare's works a much more personal touch.

The Adaptability of Shakespeare

What makes Shakespeare so famous and universally loved? Perhaps it's his wondrous creativity and wit that withstands the test of time. But perhaps, its the adaptability factor of his plays. Think about it: you can take nearly any one of Shakespeare's plays and adapt it to nearly any plot or time period. It's this versatility that has allowed Shakespeare to become the greatest playwright of all time; his stories are universal and his themes fit the mold of any story you'd like to tell. For this reason, Shakespeare can remain relevant in modern culture, although he deceased hundreds of years ago.

As a result of the versatility of his plays, there are some very crazy adaptations of Shakespeare. There is a TV Movie adaptation of The Tempest that takes place in the Mississippi Bayou during the Civil War. There is a 1956 movie which also tells the tale of The Tempest...in space that is. Consider even the 2006 film She's The Man starring Amanda Bynes, which adapts Twelfth Night into the story of a high school girl becoming a star on the male soccer team. The point of all these examples is that Shakespeare's adaptability is second to none; his stories can take place at any point in history with any type of character. So the next time you go to the movies, watch out for your favorite actor or actress playing the role of Romeo, Macbeth, or Hamlet.

Hamlet and The Lion King

While watching the Hamlet movie in class, my mind began to wander a bit (sorry Ms. Maxey). I thought of other stories in which the king is killed by someone who then takes his spot on the throne. That's when it hit me -- The Lion King is the story of Hamlet! Sure enough, I googled the two classics and there were thousands of results comparing the likeness of the two stories. The similarities are undeniable. Both Scar and Claudius play an uncle who kills the king in order to take his spot on the throne. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are both good friends of Hamlet, similar to how Timone and Pumbaa are Simba's best friends. Both The Lion King and Hamlet tell the story of a prince who wishes to reclaim the throne from his uncle. Both Simba and Hamlet's dads die at the hands of their uncle and Simba and Hamlet both eventually fight their uncle to reclaim the throne. Until watching Hamlet in class, I had assumed The Lion King was an original Disney story. Regardless of whether its an adaptation or not, The Lion King is an incredible story and pays tribute to Shakespeare's talent while also showing the lasting power of his work. I think it is interesting to see just how many recent movies and books have been influenced or even completely stolen from old William.

Response to "Shakespeare's Sister"

"Shakespeare's Sister", an excerpt from A Room of One's Own by Virginia Woolf discusses the melancholy story of what would have happened had Shakespeare had a sister of equal talent. Woolf claims that Shakespeare's sister would have never even had the chance to become a successful playwright, as a result of her gender. Woolf states that this fictional girl would be subject to a life of domestic tasks, as most women were during this time, despite her literary talent. Although this story features Shakespeare, this story still works if you were to replace him with any male writer before the 20th century or so. Say that Mark Twain or Charles Dickens had a sister - do you really think they would be as successful as their brother given that they had the same talent? Sadly, the answer is likely no. There are very few successful female writers before the 20th century, simply as a result of their gender. It is upsetting to think about all the great works of art that we have missed out on as a result of them being conjured up in the minds of women. This excerpt from Woolf reveals the harsh truths of being a female writer during the Elizabethan Age, but her story reigns true for the most part up until the twentieth century. It is a sad truth that only in the past century or so have women been respected as much as men in the literary world. Though its long overdue, we are fortunate today that we live in a world where writers are judged off their works of literature, not their sex. So yes, even Shakespeare's sister would be famous today.

Response to "Is Shakespeare Still Relevant?"

Is Shakespeare still relevant? It's a question that has lingered through every high schooler's mind when they are instructed to read Romeo and Juliet or Hamlet or Twelfth Night. Most teenagers will tell you the answer is no, as his vocabulary and complex wordplay is too intimidating and hard to comprehend. And I agree with these people to some extent. Shakespeare's archaic lexicon is just too hard to comprehend for most high schoolers. The English language has changed immensely in the past 400 years and its unreasonable to think that your average teenager will be able to translate this "foreign language" while also trying to dissect the plot of Shakespeare's works. And I wholeheartedly agree with the author's point that No Fear Shakespeare completely removes the poetic aspect of Shakespeare's writing just so a high schooler like me can understand the man. If I have to stop every page to translate what he is saying, then there is almost no literary value in reading his works.

Don't get me wrong; I completely respect Shakespeare and his works of literature, but I don't think he should be assigned reading for high schoolers. High schoolers get so frustrated with his archaic vocabulary and wordplay that they end up detesting what is supposed to be a work of art. I agree with the author's point that Shakespeare's themes are universal and ubiquitous in nature, but I feel as if there are other works that could accomplish this goal more effectively, without getting a high schooler to hate the most respected playwright to grace the Earth. In summation, I do believe that Shakespeare is still relevant, but I also think his confusing language strips the literary value from his works when read by high schoolers.