Why do people consider Shakespeare a writer? He wrote plays intended

>>9297019

He was the invention of The Earl of Oxford and his works are only still famous because British Imperialists used him as "evidence" of their cultural superiority.

Shakespeare is a good dramatist but fails on every level by literary standards.

Chaucer >>>>>> Shakespeare

>>9297028
>>9297045
/lit/s really gone to shit, huh?

>>9297019

>Why do people consider Shakespeare a writer? He wrote

Gee, dunno

>>9297019
>why do people consider Shakespeare a writer?
>He wrote

What did he mean by this?

>>9297070
>>9297071
Damn beat me by 23 seconds

>>9297019

The theatre writers also are writers.

>>9297045
Shakespeare copy and steal many Chaucer's things, but is better.

What a shit-tier thread.

So what if he didn't prepare his own legacy? He just left that to his friends after all, and they took care of it.

Believe it or not Shakespeare wasn't a kind of one man genius either. He was working with plenty of fellow dramatists.

He wrote dramas and lyric and narrative poetry. If he isn't a writer nobody is.

>>9297019
The same reason people consider Homer a poet

you don't have to know that you're great in order to be great. In fact, one of the signs of greatness is often apathy or even antipathy towards one's own work (see Chaucer, Kafka, etc)

>>9297130
>He was working with plenty of fellow dramatists.
Very early in his career for his worst plays. Shakespeare is unique for his time in that at a certain point in his development he stopped all collaboration and wrote all of his works, including all of his greatest ones, alone.