Do we venerate him because he's simply the best Anglo-Saxon

>>9150024
because people are cucks for british accents, culture, and etiquette

but its really because he's good. remember that the chinese got buttfucked by the brits, but eventually kicked them out. they love shakespeare, even if they don't love brits themselves.

>>9150035
This.

Shakespeare is loved in places where there is no love for the west.

He is good.

>>9150035
I'm aware that he's great, i'm just wondering if his status as one of the immortals has to do with the fact that the English language has become the Earth's lingua franca more than anything else. Like is he on the same level as Virgil, Proust, Ovid, and Cervantes, or do we not think so because we can't fully experience those other authors who lose something in translation?

>>9150044
The latter. He's great, but he has been massively influential only in the UK. He's great but he is not top 10 material.

>>9150067
>>9150044
He's the best of all time in his narrow field of theater. In terms of all literature, I think he cracks the 20, but barely.

>>9150044
shakespeare is slightly lost in translation due to the gap between elizabethan era english and our own american dominated english.

french culture was more dominant in europe for longer. this influence shows up in as far as russian literature, where upper classes distance themselves from commoners by speaking french, instead of lowly russian. but even in europe then, shakespeare's panorama of characters spoke more to the average european. french literature by comparison is a little narrow in its choice of themes, focusing too much on decay, fanciness, hypocrisy, poverty, perfume, and so on. shakespeare is much more relateable by comparison, since his characters live in more ordinary circumstances, yet they live with a certain intensity that speaks for the entire human experience.

>>9150074
I think in terms of use of the English language by a fiction writer, it's hard to top him. His ability to generate beauty with English is pretty unparalleled, despite the fact that beauty is so subjective.

He's the reason we know how great iambic pentameter is, after all.

>>9150079
I agree with your last point. I don't think that any author was capable of understanding human psychology as well as Shakespeare until the late 19th century Russia writers. Shakespeare understood people as well as Dosto, but did so while also being an unbelievably good stylist unlike Dosto.

>>9150081
>His ability to generate beauty with English is pretty unparalleled

this would be true if the romantics never happened. keats, blake, byron, and shelley all can legitimately compete with shakespeare in terms of evoking beauty with words. shakespeare is primarily known as a playwright, but his status as english's poet is diminished because of the repetitive structure of his sonnets, among other reasons.

>>9150081
Not to mention that he invented the human.

>>9150098
what about my prior point? you don't think shakespeare's language is partially lost to modern english readers?

>>9150024
In France we never studied Shakespeare at school, we've got so many incredible French authors to study that we can't spend time studying foreign ones.

>>9150108
It's like learning a new dialect. If you read enough 17th century literature he becomes clear. It's only a problem for casual readers.

>>9150115
Same in Italy. We've studied for something like 2 weeks and that's it.

>>9150115
personal taste is valid, and i can completely understand that people consider shakespeare extraneous compared to a vaster body of literature, but shakespeare by himself appeals to the rest of the world more than 10 major french authors put together do.

>>9150103
You can't just talk about the aesthetic quality of his verses as separate from the characters he was able to draw. Keats elicited awe through his use of words as well as Shakespeare did, but Keats never came up with characters that resonated so much to so many people. It's that combination of beauty and psychological realism that made Shakespeare special.

>>9150074
Who would be your top 20?

>>9150119
his character's words aren't always our words though, as they would come across as poorly paced and artificial. they can be strange. like when characters in an opera get stabbed, but instead of screaming, they break out into song. those kind of quirks disrupt willing suspension of disbelief.

as much as i love shakespeare, many of the criticisms against theatrical stylings are legit.

>>9150126
i just did, as do many others. i made a distinction between plays' lines and poetry. his poetry is not spoken by his characters. keats is the better poet. what's the problem?

>>9150122
Not really, he's just more famous due to the current influence the English language and culture has.

>>9150134
You accept stylistic anachronisms because they exist in literally every medium. You judge those aspects of his plays through the prism of Elizabethan England, like you judge Citizen Kane through the prism of 1940s cinema.

>>9150144
>his poetry is note spoken by his characters
That's not true though. Many of his plays are written in verse rather than prose. Henry V basically stars like an epic poem.

>>9150149
but i don't judge it from that prism, and neither do many readers today. if it can't speak to readers immediately through language, then it will diminish in value. maybe not as art, but certainly as entertainment and in the play's ability to speak to people, regardless of high ideals.

>>9150153
well yes there are exceptions like in twelfth night or his humorous verses, but not his sonnets. you knew what i meant.

>>9150163
I don't think a work's ability to speak to the average person can be judged as a virtue. I think you're right that less English-speakers are going to understand Shakespeare the further along we get, but foreign language speakers, who get their Shakespeare translated into modern versions of their languages, are going to claim him the same way that the world has claimed Homer.

>>9150197
i agree, and they'll be our betters when that happens.

shakespeare is eternal.

>>9150167
Literally most of the famous soliloquies are written in iambic pentameter. I really don't think that you can separate his poetry from his play writing. He did put out a bunch of sonnets, but most people know Shakespeare for his plays rather than his sonnets.

>>9150024
No, you idiot. The cult of the Bard as we know it now was started by German professors in the late 18th century.

Truly one of the plebbest of questions.

>>9150211
Wasn't it fucking started by Milton and his bros in the late 17th century?

>>9150210
the conventional view is that those aren't poems, even if they have a poetic quality. you should get onto changing people's minds about that, especially in uni departments.

Dumb bards and their dumb lutes.

>>9150229
oops, sent this too early

but like bloom said, there probably isn't a future for literature in america. bring shakespeare to china and brazil instead.

>>9150229
We aren't talking about what are and aren't poems, we're talking about the use of language, and how Shakespeare's use of language compared to the Romantics. My point is that Shakespeare's use of language in his best verses is superior to Keats' or Blake's use of language in their verses because he was able to combine aesthetic beauty with deeper characterization.

>>9150243
unfortunately your ideals are not shared by the public at large. you may be right, but something about your position isn't persuading me. and as a poet, shakespeare's poems are outshined by keats and byrons. which is why they're more widely thought of as english's poets. forgive me if i'm being redundant.

>>9150243
Why exactly do you think characterization is a better way to judge art? Science shows that the anthropocentric view is mere chauvinism. Characterization might be an important aspect of literature, but it doesn't reign over all.

>>9150254
>KING RICHARD II
Give me the crown. Here, cousin, seize the crown;
Here cousin:
On this side my hand, and on that side yours.
Now is this golden crown like a deep well
That owes two buckets, filling one another,
The emptier ever dancing in the air,
The other down, unseen and full of water:
That bucket down and full of tears am I,
Drinking my griefs, whilst you mount up on high.

>HENRY BOLINGBROKE
I thought you had been willing to resign.

>KING RICHARD II
My crown I am; but still my griefs are mine:
You may my glories and my state depose,
But not my griefs; still am I king of those.

>HENRY BOLINGBROKE
Part of your cares you give me with your crown.

>KING RICHARD II
Your cares set up do not pluck my cares down.
My care is loss of care, by old care done;
Your care is gain of care, by new care won:
The cares I give I have, though given away;
They tend the crown, yet still with me they stay.

>HENRY BOLINGBROKE
Are you contented to resign the crown?

>KING RICHARD II
Ay, no; no, ay; for I must nothing be;
Therefore no no, for I resign to thee.
Now mark me, how I will undo myself;
I give this heavy weight from off my head
And this unwieldy sceptre from my hand,
The pride of kingly sway from out my heart;
With mine own tears I wash away my balm,
With mine own hands I give away my crown,
With mine own tongue deny my sacred state,
With mine own breath release all duty's rites:
All pomp and majesty I do forswear;
My manors, rents, revenues I forego;
My acts, decrees, and statutes I deny:
God pardon all oaths that are broke to me!
God keep all vows unbroke that swear to thee!
Make me, that nothing have, with nothing grieved,
And thou with all pleased, that hast all achieved!
Long mayst thou live in Richard's seat to sit,
And soon lie Richard in an earthly pit!
God save King Harry, unking'd Richard says,
And send him many years of sunshine days!
What more remains?


How is this not poetry? It's in rhyming iambic pentameter.

>>9150278
i'm not the one you need to convince. tell the literature departments.

i never said you were wrong about it. i don't view different genres and mediums as truly distinct.

>>9150271
I don't privilege characterization over aesthetics; I think both are valuable. My point is that when judged on pure aesthetic terms Shakespeare and Keats are competitors, but when you add in the fact that Shakespeare was better at forming memorable characters along with his beautiful prose, then I think i'm justified in calling him a superior poet.

>>9150286
it's an ambiguous claim, but one i find intriguing, and worth hearing more about.

when keats wrote poetry, his personal characterization is reflected in each of his poems, and keats is an exquisite consciousness himself.

File: he's like 30 and babbling about his dead jester giving him piggyback rides.jpg (54KB, 619x557px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 619x557px

What was his fucking problem?

>>9150024

He's not one of the greatest writers in any language. I keep asking what is his relevance for history of literature, and I can assure you that beside characterization and prose people are not giving me any points.

>>9150301
He was an indecisive pussy, and invented by the jews so that Western cultures to come would follow his example, and degenerate the Western world, so they could take control.

>>9150292
When Keats delved into his own consciousness to create his admittedly astounding art he was writing about one person. What Shakespeare was able to do was to articulate similar complexity when it came to people who were nothing like he was.

>>9150306
>beside characterization and prose

Lol. Literally the two most important things for literature.

>>9150306
Then your classes are plebs.

>>9150301
He knew he had to kill that fucker, but he also knew that murder was wrong and that ghost weren't a good source of information. Not that hard to get.

>>9150319
If that's really what you think, I'll place Dante over Shakespeare.

>>9150346
I don't know. You're comparing one astonishing, immortal work when it comes to Dante, to multiple fantastic works when it comes to Shakespeare. Are multiple 9/10 works worth more than one 10/10 work?

>>9150105
kek

>>9150370
They won't be immortal after the brown invasion is done with Europe.

>>9150024
I don't see why it couldn't be a combination of both. It isn't unreasonable to think that a society that is culturally exceptional would also be imperially successful.

>>9150105
What the fuck did Bloom even mean by that?

>>9150024
>>9150044

Billy is a beast and the best English playwright bar none (though not the best English writer since Milton exists). A lot of writers are well known because of the diffusion of imperialism yet aren't deserved (e.g., Orwell), but Shakespeare is genuinely wonderful. Probably any annotated Shakespeare should be helpful in getting into his works. Obviously Harold Bloom is a paramount Shakespearean scholar.

>>9152152
He means that Shakespeare is the first playwright to invent truly rounded, multi-faceted characters with unique personalities, desires, foibles, etc.

>>9150044
These questions are only the concern of legit proles. What determines the quality and reception of art is in the art itself, not some whacko bullshit generalizations like biases and psychological responses and all that. People who have read Shakespeare know he's great. That's it.

>>9152313
Orwell is known for his anti-imperialist writings, which why the third world admires him so much.

>>9152386
Orwell's reputation precedes his actual writings. He pretended to be many things so could walk in a number of groups, but Orwell is not admired so much in the third-world except among rightist circles. His very pro-imperialist writings are not circulated as well as 1984 or Animal Farm. Even Homage to Catalonia is less an anti-imperialist text than it is an anti-"Stalinist" screed. This is a man that gave away names to the British Empire of people he didn't like whether they were communists or not (most weren't iirc).

>>9150024
Dante, Petrarch, Virgil: I honestly think these are infinitely superior to him.

He wasn't even the best playwright of his generation. That was Marlowe.

>>9152797
true

Why is he regarded in such high esteem as a poet?

>>9152797
>>9152802
Shut the fuck up

>>9152804
THIS is the problem. I agree if lads say he's the greatest playwright ever, but in poetry... please... there are so many better than him.

>>9152434
Bullshit, I'm from a third world country and while there are right wingers who ony read his memes, a lot of people are aware of Orwell's leftsoc views

>>9152804
The distinction between poet and playwright isn't clear when like over half of his plays are written in verse. He also write two long narrative poems, and over 100 sonnets.

>>9150024
is that an earring?

Take the stage directions out of the Henriad and you have the world's greatest epic poem.

>>9152814
>over 100 sonnets
So what? Dante and Petrarch wrote about 400 sonnets each one. When poetry is serving theatre (then stage action) it loses the best of what it has to offer.

>>9152838
These are the forgeries of jealousy.
And never, since the middle summer’s spring,
Met we on hill, in dale, forest, or mead,
By pavèd fountain, or by rushy brook,
Or in the beachèd margent of the sea,
To dance our ringlets to the whistling wind,
But with thy brawls thou hast disturbed our sport.
Therefore the winds, piping to us in vain,
As in revenge, have sucked up from the sea
Contagious fogs, which falling in the land
Have every pelting river made so proud
That they have overborne their continents.
The ox hath therefore stretched his yoke in vain,
The ploughman lost his sweat, and the green corn
Hath rotted ere his youth attained a beard.
The fold stands empty in the drownèd field,
And crows are fatted with the murrain flock.
The nine-men’s-morris is filled up with mud,
And the quaint mazes in the wanton green
For lack of tread are undistinguishable.
The human mortals want their winter here.
No night is now with hymn or carol blessed.
Therefore the moon, the governess of floods,
Pale in her anger, washes all the air,
That rheumatic diseases do abound.
And thorough this distemperature we see
The seasons alter: hoary-headed frosts
Fall in the fresh lap of the crimson rose,
And on old Hiems' thin and icy crown
An odorous chaplet of sweet summer buds
Is, as in mockery, set. The spring, the summer,
The childing autumn, angry winter change
Their wonted liveries, and the mazèd world,
By their increase, now knows not which is which.
And this same progeny of evils comes
From our debate, from our dissension.
We are their parents and original.


What the fuck does this lose by "serving theater"? This is Ovid-level good.

>>9152853
doesnt rhyme mate

>>9152853
What's good about this?

>>9153813
The part where it's beautifully written

>>9152434
>>9152313

Tripfag please leave.

>>9153983
Good argument

>>9153962
Circular reasoning

>>9154055
Not everyone converses on this site to have a fucking argument, sperg. Get over yourself.

>>9154073
>not everyone cares enough to think long and hard enough to have a rational basis behind their post.

Thanks for your glib and easily ignored posts?

Not even that sperg, but you clearly don't hold yourself to a high standard. In fact, you don't seem to hold yourself to any standard, and that shit is fucking sad.

>>9150024
We venerate him because western society right now is anglocentric.
This is honestly the worst timeline.

>>9152838
Petrarch is a boring writer. Romeo and Juliet is practically a snubbing and one-upping of Petrarch. Dante's Comedy is ultimately just a self-indulgent series of neat references of people he likes and doesn't like. Shakespeare may not be as skilled a poet as Dante but his entire body of work is much, much richer. Even Joyce said so.

>>9153983
:)

>>9154073
OK. Nice opinion but it's a bit worthless

>>9150067
>>9150074
>>9150081
>>9150103

You fuckers are retarded. You think that Shakespeare is considered so great simply because of his command of the English language? It's because of his IDEAS. His grasp of human nature.

Do you think he was just writing pulp fiction? Re-read "The Merchant of Venice" and note how Shylock is the perfect representation of narcissism, hundreds of years before Freud wrote about it.

Of course you would have to understand what things like narcissism are first, which you don't.

>>9150024
The more I learn about him and his writing the more impressed I am, consistently

>Dante's Comedy is ultimately just a self-indulgent series of neat references of people he likes and doesn't like.

Yeah, that's pretty much it.

>>9154221
>narcissism, hundreds of years before Freud wrote about it.

lol, you mean Narcissus, the personification a concept that probably predates antiquity

MoV is deadly with that shit though

Who's the best Shakespeare character and why is it Beatrice?

>>9154429
I have a soft spot for Hal/Henry V. Such a towering, mighty character, even when he's not being taken seriously.

>>9154431
The Henriad is probably my favorite thing of all time

>>9154115
You'd better not use a name: I read many of your posts around /lit/ and 90% of them are retarded.
>Petrarch is a boring writer
You'd look much more smarter by saying you don't understand him.
>Dante's Comedy is ultimately just a self-indulgent series of neat references of people he likes and doesn't like
The Divine Comedy is the most complete and immersive brand experience I've ever had in literature. It's a universal understanding of history, reality, nature and human condition. Like philosophy – but better, because it's poetry. In order to alleviate your inferiority complex, I suggest you to read Dante again – and maybe study him seriously, this time.

I'm probably stupid I don't understand why he is good.

>>9150024
Neither, really. He's great, but it was the timing of his career that enabled him to jump-start his country's literature ahead by a good century or so. He was the right man at the right time.

>>9150024
No one outside of Anglo countries venerates him, lol. God, you anglos are so insufferable

>>9156977
>No one outside of Anglo countries venerates

There are videos on youtube relating to Shakespeare in other languages that have hundreds of thousands if not millions of views. Shakespeare very much is venerated world wide

>>9157050
No, he's right instead. Of course every country reads Shakespeare, but not every one thinks it's the greatest. This is where you Anglos fall miserably. America has Whitman, Germany has Goethe, Italy has Dante, France has Baudelaire. And I can assure you that no one of these nations places Shakespeare above their great poets. And that's fair, since everyone has its own tradition, even if we live in a globalized era etc etc. Stop believing you're the centre of the world.

>>9157077
You get my (up)vote.

>>9157077
No one fucking said that he's a the poet laureate of every single nation across the globe. We say he's venerated worldwide, which is as close to fact as you can get when it comes to broad generalized statements. Cultures are capable of admiring more than one writer at a time, you fucking retard; America isn't forced to choose between Whitman and Shakespeare.

>>9156977
>Typing in the Anglo language, on the Anglo invented Web, on the Anglo invented computer
Who cares about your backwater shithole country?

>>9154393
I said "before Freud wrote about it" not "before Freud discovered it."
Obviously I know people knew about it as a concept before Freud, considering I was using Shakespeare as an example of someone who understood it. But it didn't exist as an official categorization of a psychological condition before Freud.

>>9157077
We place Shakespeare above our own poets here in America

>>9157127
What is this? The ultimate colossal bait?
>the Anglo invented computer
KEK everyone knows that the first personal computer was invented by Olivetti, an ITALIAN company
>who is Federico Faggin
I'm pretty sure you need to refresh your memory about the man whereby the computer could be developed definitively
>Anglo invented muh wah wah
Overall, the growth of the internet and the computers world was possibile thanks to many different inventors all around the world. U.S. were the leader of the change, but not all credit goes to them.

>>9157107
My post was in response to OP who bigheadedly assumed that Shakespeare is widly considered the greatest poet of all times and all languages. That's just bullshit, because 90% of non-Anglo people don't think so, period. Then you see your post is basically trash talk and random insults because you're butthurt as fuck.

>>9157404
OP clearly said "one of the greatest" and "greatest Anglo-Saxon writer." He never said "greatest poet of all time in any language.

He's not even the greatest playwright.

>>9157852
Who's better?

>>9157875
Calderon de la Barca, Chekhov, Ibsen, Lope de Vega, Sophocles.

>>9155062
>not understanding Petrarch
How? It's impossible to not understand Petrarch. Which is why his style was copied ad nauseum throughout Europe until it was played to the point of parody and lost appeal. Hell Dante's a better version of Petrarch. Shakespeare on the other hand had the same level of skill but managed to write about more than one subject and with more depth.
Juliet >>> Laura

>The Divine Comedy is the most complete and immersive brand experience I've ever had in literature.
I don't really care about your personal problems, to be honest. Good that you liked it so much, though. It's a good book, it just doesn't reach Shakespeare's tier.

>It's a universal understanding of history, reality, nature and human condition. Like philosophy – but better, because it's poetry.
Sounds like Shakespeare, except he did it better and with a larger body of work. Also:
>Cat'lics
>reality

>>In order to alleviate your inferiority complex
>says the guy getting flustered that his poetfu is getting tossed around on a Trinidadian Snowglobe Collecting website

>>9154429
>>9154431
>Be Hal
>Leave court society and soil your reputation
>Come back around at the most opportune time and do what everyone expected you to be doing in the first place
>'twas but a ruse.webm
>all this fucking fat jokes and shade against /our guy/ Falstaff

What the fuck was Hal's problem?

>>9158129
>implying Hal and Falstaff exchanging healthy bantz wasn't an indication of how much respect they had for one another

>>9150115
>>9150121

Well I sincerely hope every country educational system focus on its own great literature.
And I mean works written in the language, so in USA it would be expected to have american authors and of course Shakespeare, Blake and so on.
There is no time to waste in foreign literature, I don't know about a country in the west that wasn't able to produce enough literature to fill middle and high school as well as undergrad and grad school.
So nothing extraordinary in not reading Shakespeare in non-english speaking countries.

>>9157964
You are pretentious, stupid and wrong.

>>9158281
I dunno, Hal is cold as fuck. First time reading part 1, I thought it was mostly friendly but going back to his first soliloquy didn't he basically plan on just using Falstaff and the gang for his own ends? Play fake friends for his glorification scam and then dump them all. Obviously the series is meant to enhance the popular image of Henry V but I'm slightly disturbed by how manipulative he is. I mean, Falstaff deserves it, he's a horrible human being, but still.

>>9158385
Calderon de la Barca is way better than Shakespeare, and it would probably be hailed as the best playwright if the current western society wasn't full of anglocucks.

Also nice ad hominem you fucking faggot.

>>9158398
The fact that you don't understand what 'ad hominem' means discounts your opinion.

>>9158423
>i post my opinion
>"d-dude you are pretentious and stupid"
That's an ad hominem. You attacked the poster instead of the argument.

>>9158439
No, it's not an ad hominem because (A) I wasn't presenting an argument, I was just pointing out how pretentious, stupid and wrong you are, and (B) those facts have an actual bearing on your argument anyway, which would not be the case if I called you a 'fucking faggot'.

>>9158470
Fallacies do not necessarily need an argument. Fallacies can be in refutations as well. Not that guy btw

>>9158398
The notion that Shakespeare's famous around the world because Anglos took over is fucking retarded. He's not worse than the non-Anglo poets who achieved international acclaim.

>>9150024
Ten great writers have lived for every acclaimed one.

>>9157050
>There're youtube videos relating Shakespeare in other languages
wow! Are you implying that this is actual proof to sustain OP's claim?

>>9157127
I do and other millions of people do too. No need to get mad, bro :P

>>9157357
That's because you're cultural cucks. Putting Others above your own is a sign of lack of respect for yourself.

>>9157822
>Or because he's genuinely one of the greatest writers in any language?
It's implied in OP's post.

>>9157348
...Do you know where the term narcissism comes from?

>>9150024
>Do we venerate him because he's simply the best Anglo-Saxon writer and Anglo-Saxon culture dominated the world through British imperialism? Or because he's genuinely one of the greatest writers in any language?
The latter. If you don't see just how much of modern art borrows from the bard you're an honest to god idiot. Half our stories are just recycled Shakespeare.