a revised updated shakespeare..sacrilage abomination or just sensible?

Question

i wonder why it is when even the bible is updated that young people are tortured with shakespeare.
dont get me wrong, he had some wonderful things to say but but the laguage is like matted hair on an unkempt cat.
isnt it time shakespeare had a good comb through and all the irrelevant and intelligable bits updated.
those who like to study the arcane and obsolete have the original.
i am not advocating modern hip shakespeare with new words...just a version where the ancient & archaic garbled and unintelligable are are at least updated to the extent of sounding antique and old.
its the arragement of words that is germanically backto front that confuses kids, not the ideas or substance,and thats a shame.
why should "im going to the shop for some butter and tea"sound something like " i to the shop some tea for to buy am going methinks but also butter!
why does the 21st century have to pack up and decamp to the 16 century, instead of bringing the 16th century here to join us in the 21

Answer 1

I think that Shakespeare doesn't need updating for the modern era but that it has to be read aloud, and if possible acted out, so the meter and flow can be felt. It is often taught in a flat and dull way and that's why the language can seem stilted but if it is read then it can come alive and is a beautiful thing.

Probably the best "modern" adaptation is Baz Lurhman's Romeo and Juliet. He used the original words but placed it in a setting that was accessible to many different groups. One of the best production I have seen involved an inner city group of amateur actors who put on Henry V: they kept the words but it was done in a modern setting and worked really well. Talking to some of them later they were shocked at the ease of the flow of the langauge and although it was tricky to start with, they really got into how it was used and loved how much slang there was in it.

Answer 2

There have been numerous versions of Shakespeare's plays written in simpler language. They can give you the background, the characters the story. Read them and enjoy. There have also been cartoon versions, puppet versions, three minute versions. Some good, some bad.
The problem is that Shakespeare is not famous for his plots. His backgrounds are rough, and even his characters are often ambiguous. Ambiguity is one of the things that makes his plays rich. But the main thing is the language. He often wrote in poetry, blank verse. The inversions you complain about often have more to do with keeping the rhythm of the verse than how language was used in Elizabethan times. He also had an extraordinarily large vocabulary. The words he used would often have been as unusual then as they are now.
Shakespeare did not write his plays to be read or studied, but be played , seen and heard.
The language is not intended to be transparent, but rich, complex, multilayered. When they want to put on a play, they have to make selections, decide how they would emphasise different aspects and possibilities.
I personally don't understand why young people are tortured with Shakespeare, either. But I don't think that the answer is to rewrite it. Let the kids see it performed, read simplified versions if they want. And choose the right plays. Why do they always pick the comedies, where the histories are often more fun, more straight forward, more accessible, and the tragedies more exciting and action packed?
But leave the poetry. Without the language Shakespeare would not have lasted so long. Nor would he have deserved to.

Answer 3

You just don't get it do you? When reading Shakespeare we are studying, breathing in the 17th Century and a playwright extraordinaire. Yes language (note spelling) is an ever evolving thing therefore even an update would need updating! However we are studying the beauty of the words, its rhythm its elegance. It is worth the effort to research some archaic words in order to partake of the experience. If you don't follow this, then move on to some other form of study, and bemoan the fact that you cannot appreciate what is for many, a linguistic experience of sheer bliss.

Answer 4

Shakespeare was an artist, he used words to convey his art.

Therefore to enjoy his art, you need to read it, in it's widely accepted traditional form.

How would you like to see The Mona Lisa or some other piece of art updated or changed?
It's the same thing!!

By all means have a revised version with modern terminology, but it is a poor copy. Use it by all means to help understand the plays, but it is not shakespeare. After all how many times have we seen the Romeo & Juliet story re-written and re-interpreted??

Once you've understand the modern play, go back to the original and appreciate its wonderful use of word to paint an image and pick up the nuances of his language

Answer 5

If you think about Shakespeare in its current form has affected so much of modern day drama, for example so many story lines in soaps like Eastenders are mirrors of shakespeare stories (there was a feature in the radio times a few weeks back). Also there are adaptations of Shakespeare in teen films for example 10 things i hate about you was a an adaptation of Taming of The Shrew. Think about it would we have soaps like we have now without Shakespeare to give us a few ideas? If there was no shakespeare what would have been inflicted on us at school?

Also, i know i will sound sad but i dont care! Shakespeare rocks leave him alone, he's been dead 600 years he can hardly defend himself. You edit bits out and you lose the plot. I know from experience trying telling romeo and juliet in 6 short scenes......doesnt work so well

Answer 6

Great question.
But I have to say, "Leave Shakespeare alone!".
To change one paragraph, one line, one word is to change the very beauty that makes him so special.
Yes, the language is difficult and archaic, and, yes it does take time and effort to understand the meaning. But the joy is in the discovery. I have acted in many of Shakespeare's plays and, believe me, it is tougher than Stoppard, Pinter and even Ionesco to find the true meaning amidst all the words. But when you do understand, when the glimmer of light shines through, it is incredible!
To the students of Shakespeare, I say, Carry on! It will be made clear if you make the effort!
D

Answer 7

I never could particularlry relate to Shakespeare at school but this was mainly because I couldn't get my head around the language, thankfully my friend was on hand for that one though. And to be honest I had to see the play to understands it. We studied Macbeth and it wasn't until we saw it at Bristol Old Vic with Sir Ian McKellan in the title role that I was truly able to relate to the story. I love history and that was good for me to see it played out like that.

As to modern edges, how about West Side Story that is an adaptation of Pigmalion which was adapted from Romeo & Juliet, there are other too but I can't think of them at the moment and I'm not thinking of the modern versions of his plays loike a Midsummers Night Dream with Michelle Pfiffer/Kevin Kline or any of the Emma Thompson/Kenneth Brannagh productions either.

Answer 8

Your question is largely garbled and unintelligible...was that to make a point?

It's very big of you to stand up for all the people who are (allegedly) confused by Shakespeare...somehow, though, he has managed to communicate to audiences for more than 400 years, and he'll make another 400 (or 4,000, for that matter), without your proposed "updating."

I suspect that you're merely projecting your own inability to understand Shakespeare. I further suspect that you haven't read enough of it (or haven't read it carefully enough) to speak for anyone buy yourself.

Keep trying; you'll get it.

Answer 9

you can get modern english versions, when i was at school and studying shakespear the edition we used had the old english on the left hand page and the moder english on the right hand page so you could easily compare!

Answer 10

Look, it's poetry mate, and it has to scan. It also happens to be extremely good English.
No one yet has tried to update the Hebrew version of the old Bible.