Am I better at comedy than Shakespeare?

It's """"""""clever"""""""" but I didn't laugh so no

Yes. English linguistical heritage BTFO by neet savant in two minutes.

>>38108166
You really think I'm a savant?

>>38107988
>>38108166
Can't let these dubs go unchucked

But while I'm here, yeah I gotta compliment OP. I liked it.

Shakespeare wasn't a comedian so probably.
I want to see you try tragedy.

Honest opinions, guys: am I a genius?

>>38109023
>Shakespeare wasn't a comedian

lmao end yr life

Shakespeare came to tragedy out of convention, but he is always a comedian - rarely is there even a brief passage that isn't hilarious. His "tragedies" could always function well as comedy, indeed they're some of his funniest (Lear in its entirety, Iago, Hamlet, everything Cleopatra says). If you don't consider him the most comprehensively hilarious person we have record of, you must not have read him recently.

>>38107961
to say "a fine with you have" to "lel I raped them" is just embarrassing; if you're going to play cocky and admire your own joke, at least put it on something clever, easily the weakest line, besides the outofplace meta "Perhaps the comma wasn't necessary". "They say wit is a sign of intelligence" is pure bathos, but the last few lines are better than the preceding.

Reads like some cringy fantasy novel written by Brendan Sanderson.

>>38110736
It's not hilarious, anon. Either you're trying to pretend to be ""cultured"", like some pretentious fool, or you have a really low standard for what you find funny.

>>38111103
In order for something to be seen as cultured it first has to be widely accepted as something good, and if a thing has maintained a massive hold on an entire art form for 400 years, it's presumably of some value. Shakespeare is primarily a comedian; most of his plays are comedies, the plays that aren't always feature some comedy scenes/passages, and even the parts that have function outside of comedy are still funny. And if you consider Shakespeare to be "low standard", I can't guess what you'd consider an appropriate thing to enjoy/find funny

This was originally good.

>>38108401
no i think youre a talentless hack and possibly a retard

>>38113501
And what exactly are your talents?

>tfw too dumb for Shakespeare's comedy.
The difference in language is too much for me. I don't understand his wordplay because I don't understand his words.
The furthest comedy I've read/watched without it being "updated" is Gilbert and Sullivan.
Plus From The Earth To The Moon by Jules Verne. That shit is absolutely hilarious.

>>38113611
Plus comedy is usually doesn't age very well, so most comedy from hundreds of years ago isn't going to be funny to us.

>>38107961
>only eating minced words
Shakespeare is better

>>38107961
It's not very good.
It's a lot of wordplay with nothing tying them together. There's no sense of character and no real direction to the conversation.
Just two people quipping back and forth like a low-quality Joss Whedon script (and he's pretty low-quality to begin with).
Plus, you've got a few lines that are really stretching it. "I could only eat them if they were minced, and I'm no butcher." is absolutely horrible.
It's a "joke" which only exists to set up the next joke and has no other redeeming value.

>>38114025
I don't think you get it.
Originally

>>38113611
Get an annotated complete works (most libraries will have Norton, Riverside, Oxford, etc), peek down at any word you don't understand. After a bit of reading you'll have a good foundation in his word usage/be able to glean his meanings and won't have to necessarily check the annotations.

It also helps to go in knowing, "well, I may not understand it but it would be well worth my while to", and you'll force yourself to pay more attention. Falstaff (in Henry IV part 1 & 2) is hilarious - as is nearly everything involving him - but his speech is so beyond anything one is likely to read elsewhere, that it's easy to get lost and not understand even a passage or line. Slow down, appreciate the dense metaphor Shakespeare constantly uses, and it'll come easier and easier. Once you realize how fucking incredible he is, it's hard to find anything else worth your time, so inadequate is the remaining bulk of the world's contribution to humor.

Another hilarious character is Cleopatra (in Antony and Cleopatra): she's so absurdly melodramatic and histrionic, you hardly need to do any intense reading to catch her humor. Though it's considered a shit play, The Taming of the Shrew has some pretty decent, simple humor - Petruchio is the pinnacle of exuberant misogyny, and there's lots of bawdy humor. As You Like It is also great, and has the best waifu in all of Shakespeare, Rosalind, who is constantly funny. I would also look up the parts with Bottom the weaver, Peter Quince and the other whimsical gang in a Midsummer Night's Dream, some of the most hilarious shit I've ever read. Much of the play is very bad, but the mock-play the crafters work on is very easy to understand and read.

I'd also say that nearly all great writers are often funny, and worth reading. Dickens & Kafka, Beckett (though he's very difficult to follow), Joyce in everything he does, Emily Dickinson, the critic Samuel Johnson, Dostoevsky is hilarious (at least the translations I've read)

>>38114305
Thanks for the advice.
The premise of A Comedy of Errors has always sounded right up my alley, would that be a good one to start off with?
I also don't understand stuff to do with metre or most forms of poetry in general, how do you go about learning that?
Just reading aloud and trying to get a sense of the rhythm?

>>38114499
You don't need to understand the metre/form - it's intuitive enough, you'll easily enjoy the work even if you can't articulate why. Check out some Poetry anthologies/books of essays from your library/online, they will likely have scattered information on the topic, gradually you'll come to have a fairly comprehensive knowledge. It's also noteworthy that the bulk of his plays are actually in prose (King John and maybe another are all verse, but everything else uses prose very liberally),so the poetic forms aren't that important, not to mention his form is very loose - unrhymed iambic pentameter for the most part.

Read the brief intro to Paradise Lost to see a quick 'rationale', Milton's own, for the use of metre and unimportance of rhyme in great poetry; though you can easily read even the poetry as prose, and you won't lose anything you're yet ready to even apprehend. I'd make a habit of carrying a notebook & pen, and copying passages into it - recite them when you're alone (driving is great, you can shout the lines to yourself w/o pussying out because you're afraid someone is listening); I get distracted sometimes when reading, and memorizing passages makes it much easier to take apart and understand - I've only been reading seriously a year or so, and only attempting to memorize for a months, and I can recite thousands of lines of poetry - the bulk of some 300 lines at the end of Act 2 Scene 2 of Hamlet the longest stretch I know yet, but it feels amazing being able to do that, and people are endlessly impressed when I recite for them.

Comedy of Errors is one of his earliest, and weaker/less imaginative than most of the rest, but fairly short, if you're interested go for it. 12th Night is also great, will introduce you to Shakespeare's love for songs (Feste has multiple great songs; Lear's Fool in King Lear also has some great ditties if you like the sort).

>>38114723
Alright, thanks for all the information!
You've been very informative and helpful.

>>38115340
you're welcome, enjoy