How hard would it be to write like Shakespeare? Let us say you

>>9330925

Copying his language style isn't too difficult. Just read those stupid Star Wars in Shakespeare style books.

>>9330925
Why would you want to? It doesn't make you stand out much unless you can translate it. Besides, he should admired, not immitated. Mastered two artforms, established modern tragedy and comedy, and is the best writer to merge poetry and prose. Bow down.

>>9330925
there are only a select few writers who have ever existed whom compare to him; i honestly don't think anyone living within our current era would be capable of what he did without seeming like a bad imitation of shakespeare.

>>9330925
I truly believe that Shakespeare is "raw writing". You can never glean the insight that he possessed in his time or create a style more perfect than his own. You can still be a great writing, but this man is THE fucking writer. I was discouraged when I first seriously started reading him because he nailed fucking everything. Only Da Vinci, Socrates and Newton can touch his genius.

>>9331199

lol go to bed, harold

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFzl0_Qeb84

>>9331199
Trip dubs speak trutb

>>9330925
Imagine Scarface, for example, in a different language (italian or spanish) that does not have the same verbal influence as English, but not with the language of everyday conversation. Imagine Scarface but with a metaphorical and poetic language, like Macbeth (not the same imagens, of course; original ones, but with the same richness as the ones in shakespearean tragedy): is this that hard to write? What if somedoby today did something like that?

>>9330925
Should be doable if you are almost autistically obsessed with puns and sex jokes.

>>9331724
Lol

>>9331724
oh shit maybe maybe I am a genius after all.

>>9330925
Shakespeare's true genius lies in his ability to portray the full spectrum of human character, imo. I'm sure many could match the force/talent of his style, but I've yet to consume any media whose characters surpass the depth, nuance, and emotional complexity of those found in Shakespeare.

>>9331199
>>9332843
these 2bh

>>9331022
They're hardly the same. Shakespearean English, yes, but not Shakespeare. They don't contain the number of puns or amount of poetry, they just look like "ye olde english" to people who can't tell the difference.
It's hard to imitate any author without it looking like a joke, Shakespeare would be even harder.

>>9331681

I would love it

It would be extremely difficult. His verse is superb, both when he adheres strictly to meter and when he varies it. His depth of characterization and psychological insight is unmatched. In fact, I find it more impressive when he clings closely to a pre-established narrative, especially in the histories, since he's taking something known and casting it in a new and brighter, more intimate light. Additionally, the intersection between his poetry and characterization is incredible. In Julius Caesar, for instance, he writes public characters versed in rhetoric; in both parts of Henry IV, Falstaff/Oldcastle imitates both actual and possible characters without saying so openly; and the pitch of voices based naturally on the sounds used in their dialogue creates unique voices even without acting or vocabulary choices as far as meaning is concerned (this is especially noticeable in Othello).