Shakespeare

https://youtu.be/6-XrJHCLiHE

>>9630409
Milton is better desu

>>9630409
Underrated

>>9630423
Overrated

>>9630423
By what criteria? You could argue that Blake was more brilliant in concept but Shakespeare is foundational to the English language. Comparing Milton to Shakespeare in that way is as absurd as comparing the guy who made Facebook with Frege.

>>9630423
Maybe in the heights of bombast and rhetoric and creating beautiful situations.

However, Shakespeare has a much greater range of humanity and characterization. Also while Milton is the man to go to if you want to read mindblowing verse, Shakespeare has both top-notch poetry (not maybe at Milton's heights consistently, but sometimes at or above it) and, as I said, a huge range of humanity, events, and characterizations.

Paradise Lost, for instance, is obviously an ingenious monument of humanity but is almost inhuman and cerebral. Milton is too grand in it to have the stuff Shakespeare has that has made him "eternal" and "universal" -- jokes, characters from every range of stupidity to brilliance, from womanly women to manly men and vice versa, from young to old, etc.

File: crazy jew eyes.png (89KB, 311x300px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 311x300px

Anything liberals can use against Trump is overrated

No, we've reached a point where, regardless of his objective quality, he's undoubtedly the most influential English author in history.

Essentially, even if he wasn't great, he's now retroactively great.

>>9630467
>he's undoubtedly the most influential English author in history.
Actually he's been replaced by @dril

>>9630467
>influence as the sole criterion of greatness
Undoubtedly essentially retroactively you're retarded.

Paradise Lost is like 30% allusion. That's not even creative.

>>9630467
so historically great

>>9630478
hey you
SHUT THE FUCK UP

>>9630462
>Paradise Lost, for instance, is obviously an ingenious monument of humanity but is almost inhuman and cerebral.

Why is this a bad thing? We don't raise literature about subhuman beasts on a pedestal like we do Shakespeare. Since posthumans will very certainly succeed humanity, and their sense of reflection will be very unlike ours, wouldn't works like Paradise Lost be favored by them, over Shakespeare? And if so, why don't we admit that their sense of values would be greater than ours?

>>9630409
No
Shakespeare is still GOAT at least in english

>>9630478
Underrated post

>>9631563
That's a good question.

I would say that the characters in PL are not even like Nietzschean ubermenschen, they're just caricatures.

Shakespeare I like because I prefer a good portrayal of humanity better than a caricatured portrayal of angels, demons, Gods, the devil, and Adam and Eve. Basically, for Milton, they are mouthpieces for his (admittedly beautiful) philosophizing and theologizing, but they don't themselves have too much of a psyche behind them. Not only that, but "posthumans" will likely be automatons wired into a truly world-wide Internet-like system, but even more integrated and expansive now, and lack any emotions or appreciation of art and only exist to serve the state after many people are genocided to solve overpopulation and excessive resource use. It seems to me you swallowed too much System's Propaganda if you think transhumanism is about turning us into Nietzschean ubermenschen.

>>9631855
>It seems to me you swallowed too much System's Propaganda if you think transhumanism is about turning us into Nietzschean ubermenschen.
Kill yourself you presumptuous imbecile.

Yes. All of his plays are uneven as fuck, massive structural problems in almost all of them. Filled to the brim with anachronisms; Shakespeare paid no attention to the time period he set his plays in. Not an original story to be found in his oeuvre. The only good thing about him is his way with language.