• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Shakespeare?

Heyo

Veteran Member
A recent discussion in another thread has pulled me back to a basic inability I have had all of my life: I cannot understand the writings of Shakespeare.

I have looked up the words, tried reading out loud, tried watching movies, tried watching plays, tried reading silently a slow, I tried listening to the sonnets read by Patrick Stewart. For some reason, no matter what I do I am lost within the first couple of pages of any of Shakespeare's plays and almost immediately in any sonnet.

I have been in a cycle over the last few decades where I try (once again) to read some play or sonnet, find that I cannot make heads or tales of what is written, give up for another year or so, and repeat.

What is even more unusual is that I can read Milton with no real problems. I don't know the English of Chaucer, but it doesn't seem too much more opaque than what Shakespeare writes.

I know some people here are Shakespeare devotees. Does anyone have any suggestions? i have been trying now for at least 40 years with essentially no success. I know I am reasonably intelligent, but for some reason this material is impenetrable to me.

@Evangelicalhumanist
I know very little Shakespeare and was never pestered with him in school (it was Goethe and Schiller for me). I later found that Shakespeare isn't the genius he's made up to be. He wasn't the first and he wasn't the best, he was just the first to re-popularize the classical drama and he did it in a crowd pleasing way. He speaks to the emotions like Goethe speaks to the intellect.
What I want to say is, maybe you expect too much from Shakespeare. Shakespeare is Michael Bay, not Stanley Kubrick. Just sit back and enjoy, don't think about it too much.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Suggestion number 1 -- immediately available and free -- try watching on YouTube the 9 episodes of "Playing Shakespeare" Here is a link to episode 1.

You will find such great actors as Dame Peggy Ashcroft, Judi Dench, Ben Kingsley (Ghandi), Sir Ian McKellen (Gandalf), Patrick Stewart (Captain Pickard), David Suchet (Poirot) and many others, talking their way through their struggles with understanding.

It's led by John Barton, one of the Royal Shakespeare Company, and one of it's more famous directors.

All 9 episodes are really, really worth watching.

If I recall right, one of the problem is that apparently his writings rime in Middle English. At least that is one hypothesis.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
And I have read translations. But when I compare to the originals, I cannot see how the translations correspond. Sort of like reading Dante in English translation or in the original.

And, frankly, I find the translations pretty boring. if that is all there is to Shakespeare, then I am OK letting others have it.
Yes, reading the translations misses the word-play, puns, double entendres, &c -- which is where all the fun is. The guy was a real card.
Have you thought of taking a course in the subject? The archaic words and expressions will be explained, along with the intricacies of the stories.
 
Last edited:

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic Bully ☿
Premium Member
Practice writing mathematical puns in equation format, and then you might be in the right mindset to plug into Shakespeare
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
Well, I can read the Cliff's notes for the stories. I guess I want to know what the fuss is about. And I guess that means at least being able to watch a play and understand what is going on.
OK, good. So here's my advice:

1. Don't read the play, watch the play. That's pretty straightforward. You won't be able to notice all the possible overlaps and granular bits and pieces but you will get a sense of the conversationality of the text
2. Choose plays that are not "fast" in the sense that they are rapid fire conversation which will be harder to follow (some of the comedies are more difficult in this sense) and choose ones that are not as focused on complex psychology and introspection so you won't have excessive speeches -- I would avoid King Lear at the beginning of your journey. Great play, complex speeches.
3. Know the plot beforehand. Shakespeare's audiences did so why shouldn't you.
4. Watch a version in which the director works to make meaning known through staging and not just through the words themselves. One (controversial?) recommendation I have is the 1996 film of R+J with Leonardo DiCaprio. The language is Shakespeare's, but it is made approachable through presentation.
5. Read along with a play if you can (and hit pause to look words up). Shakespeare's vocab isn't the same as yours. Don't expect it to be.
6. Do a little study on the idea of Shakespearean roles -- understand the lead actor concept, the clown role and the gender issues

I recommend starting with Macbeth (though you might want to do some pre-reading about monarchic succession amongst cousins/nobles so that you understand) or Othello. Don't worry about the overlap between the story and actual history or about the specifics of geography.

Or, alternatively, sit with someone who understands the play and go through it line by line with that person and don't expect that you can just pick up the text and "get" it.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
O
Okay, I stand corrected for what variant it was. That doesn't in itself mean that he didn't write in rimes, that don't rime today.
The issue there is often a function of accent (there is a series of videos out in which actors read in what is believed to be time-authentic accent and this brings out some of the rhyme). Sometimes, it is a result of the author's writing not being an intended exact rhyme. Half-rhyme was a reasonable choice so if one expects only a perfect rhyme, one will see these as problems.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
A recent discussion in another thread has pulled me back to a basic inability I have had all of my life: I cannot understand the writings of Shakespeare.

I have looked up the words, tried reading out loud, tried watching movies, tried watching plays, tried reading silently a slow, I tried listening to the sonnets read by Patrick Stewart. For some reason, no matter what I do I am lost within the first couple of pages of any of Shakespeare's plays and almost immediately in any sonnet.

I have been in a cycle over the last few decades where I try (once again) to read some play or sonnet, find that I cannot make heads or tales of what is written, give up for another year or so, and repeat.

What is even more unusual is that I can read Milton with no real problems. I don't know the English of Chaucer, but it doesn't seem too much more opaque than what Shakespeare writes.

I know some people here are Shakespeare devotees. Does anyone have any suggestions? i have been trying now for at least 40 years with essentially no success. I know I am reasonably intelligent, but for some reason this material is impenetrable to me.

@Evangelicalhumanist


I can't read Shakespeare at all, it totally confuses me but i love Shakespeare plays.

Watching Patrick Stewart or on stage at Stratford upon Avon or David Tennant is magical.

Listening to audio of an RSC actors performance rather than read can help
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Something like this:
Merchant of Venice I.1.79-104
Gratiano
Let me play the fool:​
With mirth and laughter let old wrinkles come,
Let me grow old laughing
And let my liver rather heat with wine
and boozing
Than my heart cool with mortifying groans.
than feeling rotten like this
Why should a man, whose blood is warm within,
Why should I, a young man
Sit like his grandsire cut in alabaster?
Sit like his grandfather's statue [on a tomb]
Sleep when he wakes and creep into the jaundice
Wake up and still be asleep, and going yellow
By being peevish? I tell thee what, Antonio –
For being snarly?
I love thee, and it is my love that speaks –
I speak to you as a friend
There are a sort of men whose visages
Some men have faces
Do cream and mantle like a standing pond,
that are so motionless, if they were a pond they'd grow scum
And do a wilful stillness entertain,
With purpose to be dress’d in an opinion
Of wisdom, gravity, profound conceit,
intended to make them look wise
As who should say ‘I am Sir Oracle,
As if they were saying, I'm the smart one
And when I ope my lips let no dog bark!’
and when I speak, all of you shut up,
O my Antonio, I do know of these
That therefore only are reputed wise
For saying nothing; when, I am very sure,
and are thought wise by looking wise but saying nothing
If they should speak, would almost damn those ears,
Which, hearing them, would call their brothers fools.
and if they spoke, would speak only abuse of their fellows.
I’ll tell thee more of this another time:
But fish not, with this melancholy bait,
but I won't fish for your sympathy
For this fool gudgeon, this opinion.
with this little bait
Come, good Lorenzo. Fare ye well awhile:
I’ll end my exhortation after dinner.
We'll talk later
My tendency is not to provide "side by side" translation, because it gives the reader the chance to ignore Shakespeare's words and, more importantly, cadence. Rather, I like to explain what the unfamiliar words and phrases mean (or odd usages of familiar words), and then have the reader go through Shakespeare's own words again.

I also like to make sure they have the cadence of blank verse firmly in their heads as they read, but then read the words as we would most naturally stress them. That really helps to show Shakespeare's intention, because stressed words or syllables in the off-beat position just naturally take on a new importance by ear alone. So take two lines:

"Why should a man, whose blood is warm within,
Sit like his grandsire cut in alabaster?"

In blank verse, the first words, "why" and "sit" would be unstressed -- but it is natural for us to stress them, and because they're in the off-beat position, we hear them as even more stressed. This gives importance to the whole question, and that makes sense because Gratiano really is trying to reach Antonio -- to try to help cheer him up.

Read properly, that just pops right out at you.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
OK, a specific example. I am reading the Merchant of Venice. I can kind of get that Antonio is sad and is isn't about his ships. Then some other people come in and somewhere Gratiano's stuff that starts 'Let me play the fool' and ends 'I'll end my exhortation after dinner', I am lost. I briefly recover and then am lost again with Bassanio's part that begins 'Tis not unknown to you, Antonio'
So, to continue the story with Bassanio's "'Tis no unknown to you, Antonio..."

Bassiano is a noble, unlike Antonio who, while quite wealthy, is a commoner merchant. Bassanio has squandered much of his own money, mostly with showy display ("showing a more swelling port than my faint means would grant") and is actually in debt to Antonio. "To you, Antonio, I owe the most in money." Bassanio thinks he has a pretty good chance to marry a beautiful and very rich girl in Belmont (this is a fictional place). She has looked at him coyly in the past, but he needs more money to go and ply his suit with other rich suitors from around the world. Antonio's wealth is all tied up in goods at sea, which will be profitable when he gets them home, but right now....well, he really loves Bassanio (Jeremy Irons plays it as pretty homo-erotic), and he has good credit, so he sends Bassanio to see if there's a money-lender who will take his credit. End of scene.

Now, keeping that brief description firmly in mind, see if you can read the actual lines again, and get a deeper sense of what's going on.
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
I cannot even tell what the movies are saying after the first couple of minutes. It really is like it is in another language. I can pick up the emotions of the actors, but not the relevance of the words to what they do.

Their understanding
Begins to swell and the approaching tide
Will shortly fill the reasonable shores
That now lie foul and muddy.
---William Shakespeare

understanding begins
Things will become more clear
and soon you will understand
and this will replace the confusion


Basically, understanding will come.... stop worrying about it
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
The rhythm and word usage are a huge part of how Shakespeare makes his intention clear. Unlike modern authors, he doesn't tell his actor how to say things in marginal notes -- it's right there in the language.

You begin with understanding a very simple thing -- blank verse (I don't like using the term iambic pentameter -- too fussy). Blank verse is very much like natural speech. It's basically 10 syllables long, and each syllable unstressed an stressed like this: de DUM de DUM de DUM de DUM de DUM.

Now, what happens when a syllable that is naturally stressed occurs in the off-beat position? It makes itself OBVIOUS. Same thing in reversed -- and unstressed syllable in the stressed position calls attention to itself.

So here's a couplet from Midsummer Night's Dream:

"Love looks not with the eyes, but with the mind,
Therefore is winged Cupid painted blind."

OK, when I read this, my *natural* emphasis is something like this:

"Love looks not with the eyes, but with the mind,
There
fore is winged Cupid painted blind"

This doesn't correspond to either of your stress patterns.

In blank verse, the stresses would look like this (and it would be bloody dreadful):

"Love looks not with the eyes, but with the mind,
Therefore is winged Cupid painted blind."

But look what happens when you stress it naturally, but keep up the rythym of the verse:

"Love looks not with the eyes, but with the mind,
Therefore is winged Cupid painted blind."

I guess I already read closest to the second, but with a few more emphasized syllables.

Read those two versions stressing where I've bolded. You can here a wonderful difference between the two,

The first doesn't flow well for me. The second seems more natural. But a 'wonderful difference'? The first just seems to put the emphasis on the wrong syllable.

with the latter so evocative of a girl wondering why the guy she's hot for isn't feeling the same about her.

And I have NO idea how you got that out of what was written. I got something along the line of 'love is blind'.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
NO. It's just a conversation! Like in a movie, or in a restaurant (I've seen that scene done in a restaurant, by the way.)

It's very late -- I'll deal with your previous post tomorrow. I think you'll like how I resolve it for you.

So he's talking with the guy that told him his wife is dead? And now it makes no sense to me at all.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Something like this:
Merchant of Venice I.1.79-104
Gratiano
Let me play the fool:​
With mirth and laughter let old wrinkles come,
Let me grow old laughing
And let my liver rather heat with wine
and boozing
Than my heart cool with mortifying groans.
than feeling rotten like this
Why should a man, whose blood is warm within,
Why should I, a young man
Sit like his grandsire cut in alabaster?
Sit like his grandfather's statue [on a tomb]
Sleep when he wakes and creep into the jaundice
Wake up and still be asleep, and going yellow
By being peevish? I tell thee what, Antonio –
For being snarly?
I love thee, and it is my love that speaks –
I speak to you as a friend
There are a sort of men whose visages
Some men have faces
Do cream and mantle like a standing pond,
that are so motionless, if they were a pond they'd grow scum
And do a wilful stillness entertain,
With purpose to be dress’d in an opinion
Of wisdom, gravity, profound conceit,
intended to make them look wise
As who should say ‘I am Sir Oracle,
As if they were saying, I'm the smart one
And when I ope my lips let no dog bark!’
and when I speak, all of you shut up,
O my Antonio, I do know of these
That therefore only are reputed wise
For saying nothing; when, I am very sure,
and are thought wise by looking wise but saying nothing
If they should speak, would almost damn those ears,
Which, hearing them, would call their brothers fools.
and if they spoke, would speak only abuse of their fellows.
I’ll tell thee more of this another time:
But fish not, with this melancholy bait,
but I won't fish for your sympathy
For this fool gudgeon, this opinion.
with this little bait
Come, good Lorenzo. Fare ye well awhile:
I’ll end my exhortation after dinner.
We'll talk later


I *sort of* see that what you wrote corresponds to what is written. But I have *no* idea how you came to that.

Does that interpretation come naturally to you? How did you arrive at it?
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Their understanding
Begins to swell and the approaching tide
Will shortly fill the reasonable shores
That now lie foul and muddy.
---William Shakespeare

understanding begins
Things will become more clear
and soon you will understand
and this will replace the confusion


Basically, understanding will come.... stop worrying about it

And how did you get that out of what was written?

So far, the lack of understanding has lasted 40 years. I keep hoping for a breakthrough, though.
 
Last edited:

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I know very little Shakespeare and was never pestered with him in school (it was Goethe and Schiller for me). I later found that Shakespeare isn't the genius he's made up to be. He wasn't the first and he wasn't the best, he was just the first to re-popularize the classical drama and he did it in a crowd pleasing way. He speaks to the emotions like Goethe speaks to the intellect.
What I want to say is, maybe you expect too much from Shakespeare. Shakespeare is Michael Bay, not Stanley Kubrick. Just sit back and enjoy, don't think about it too much.
Shakespeare is nothing compared to Cliff.
His notes are clear, concise, & of amazing breadth.
 
Top