Is he worth reading? People say you have to see the plays instead.

>>9815109
It doesn't hurt at all to read him before watching the plays live.

>>9815109
I definitely disagree but that's maybe just my inability to comprehend him immediately speaking for itself. I feel like something like Hamlet for example has to be read slowly first so you can understand every line. After you do that twice or so watching it you'll understand everything they're saying, which is a cool experience to work towards. I remember being convinced Shakespeare wasnt for me when I couldn't follow Hamlet live at all. Only when I invested hours into understanding it did I truly realize the greatness of Shakespeare.

>>9815109
I don't really see why reading Shakespeare's plays is mutually exclusive with seeing them on stage. In fact, I think that both activities should go hand in hand. If you just read the plays, unless your imagination is that fucking wild and vivid, you'll miss many details that the play on stage provides; if you just watch the play on stage, many details that the slow, careful reading of the lines rush by without you even noticing them.
What I do, if it has any value for someone else, is to read the play I'm interested on, then watch the play (the Globe on Stage productions are really good), and then I read the play again.

>>9815109

If you're completely unfamiliar, read one play carefully to get a sense of the language. Then watch every other, you pick it up. Also: read the synopsis beforehand, it doesn't hurt the experience.