am i the only one who thinks that William Shakespeare was an complete idiot!!!?

Question

lol,this is just for laughs, but hear me out.... i'm a college student(criminal jsutice major)..... i'm taking a english course right now and a history course(along with other classes... and so on... my english teacher goes on and on about how he was such a genius, yet my history teacher is really the one who knows what he is talking about. my history explained to us how smoking tobacco and weed together in those clay pipes were common practice during his day and that evidence fromj remains at the famous globe theater shows that many of his guests smoked on those pipes. the point i am trying to make is SHAKESPEARE WAS JUST SOME BLABBLING IDIOT WHO GOT HIGH AND MADE UP HIS OWN THOU"ST THEE"OT WHATEVER WORDS yet english proffesors treat him like the second coming of christ. that's like saying tupac(popular dead rapper who was higher than a kite) should have his own gospel right after matt and mark. come'on. shakespeare is good, but not GREAT............lol

Answer 1

Yes, you are.
Shakespeare was using perfectly correct language for his day. He made up a few idioms that we still use today, and a few words.
Of course, his plays and sonnets are written in more formal, and less vernacular language, requiring someone to actually get off their chair and put some work into it when trying to understand.

I dare you to name one English writer who was a contemporary of his that influenced all those who came after him even ONE-HALF as much. To me, this is a good measure of his quality.

Tupac? Please! What he put out is not music, but percussion.

EDIT - There is a hot new book, "Teach Like Your Hair Is On Fire," where the successful teacher describes his program for teaching English to students whose first language is not English using - you guessed it - Shakespeare.

Answer 2

It's a shame your history professor hasn't learned about ad Hominem fallacies, aka "The Fallacy of Personal Attack."

Even if good old Bill smoked up, that doesn't prove anything. His work should stand on it's own merits. Also note that there's no way to say that just because there were pipes found around the remains of the Globe, that doesn't prove that Shakespeare was a user. As a criminal justice major, you have no doubt learned that all evidence is circumstantial, some more than others.

Find a contemporary english version of some of The Bard's works. They feature the original text on the left page, and a modernized version on the right. For someone who finds Shakespeare's writing style inaccessible (like ME for instance) this is a great way to get at the meaning. I also think it's a great excercise in how the language has evolved over the centuries. In much the same way that the word "gay" has changed it's meaning from happiness to a kind of sexual orientation, many words that meant one thing in Shakespeare's day mean something different today.

Incidentally, as someone who has spent some time on school boards, I have observed that teachers of history, social studies, and civics almost always have an unduly high opinion of their own value. They're important, sure, but not nearly as important as, "readin' writin' & 'rithmatic."

Answer 3

Shakespeare? Oh, you've made me weep? Of course he's brilliant, that's why you are forced to study him. I'm sorry but i absolutely loved studying Shakespeare but i also think it is quite pointless making somebody study something that they don't really have any desire to learn. As for the language? Well, sorry but you can't hold it against the guy! That was simply the language of the time. Ahh ....... i could go on all night here.........but I won't. I'm simply gonna give you one of my favourite pieces.......

My Mistress' Eyes are Nothing Like the Sun (Sonnets CXXX)

My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun;
Coral is far more red than her lips' red:
If snow be white, why then her breasts are dun;
If hairs be wires, black wires grow on her head.
I have seen roses damask'd, red and white,
But no such roses see I in her cheeks;
And in some perfumes is there more delight
Than in the breath that from my mistress reeks.
I love to hear her speak, yet well I know
That music hath a far more pleasing sound.
I grant I never saw a goddess go:
My mistress, when she walks, treads on the ground.
And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare
As any she belied with false compare.

-- William Shakespeare
Now, I ask you, could anybody but as brilliant as Shakespeare write a love sonnet that is beautiful but also describes his lover's foul breath?

Answer 4

Your History teacher is the one who knows what he's talking about? It's weird that some of my colleagues at college talk about professors as if they were children who used to play with them in their house playground!

Ok I have a point to make here apart from how cheeky the question is:

* You wouldn't think that Shakespeare is a complete idiot if you weren't forced to study his works. It feels that you're a bit nervous and your studying isn't going quite well because of William Shakespeare.
* What's it with "thou" and "thee" that are driving you mad? This is classical old fashioned English, or do you expect William Shakepeare to write "yoooo" and "wassup" instead?! :)
* If you don't like him, you can give better reasons seriously, and after all it's up to you whether to like him or not!
* English professors treat him like the second Christ because they understand his works well. It's their own choice, and don't think they forced you to like him!
* He's the best dramatist I ever read, and that's just my opinion. :)

That's all! Try a bit harder next time!

Edit: Just a little thing to add. I didn't mean to offend you by saying "yoo" or "wassup". I respect you more than you can imagine.

Answer 5

William Shakespeare was brilliant. I for one do not think he was a complete idiot. He had his idiosyncracies, superstitions and heathanistic attitude but that is just him being him. His works are the basis for much of the material you digest every day. I do not smoke but there are many weed smokers who are incredibly intelligent and wise, including those same professors you spent money to learn from. As for Tupac, he was also a great artist. Opening your mind will help you to be successful when you leave college.

Answer 6

There are many. The Akira Kurosawa film "Ran" and Jane Smiley's "A Thousand Acres" are both retellings of Shakespeare's "King Lear." For other "Lear" correspondences you should consider Michael Corleone's planned retirement from crime and the ensuing anarchy in "The Godfather Part III." If you prefer television, why not "King of Texas," wherein Patrick Stewart plays a character named John Lear who is all too much like King Lear? Do you prefer "Hamlet"? What about Tom Stoppard's play "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead"? And of course Dickens's "Great Expectations" is run through with allusions to "Hamlet." Music? Dire Straits had a song called "Romeo and Juliet." I could go on, and on, and on . . .

Answer 7

You have to take, and read, Shakespeare with an understanding of the context and style it is written in.

Simply put - art is in the eye of the beholder and if the brain behind the beholder's eye only understands, or has read, contemporary literature Shakespeare may seem like gibberish.

Answer 8

You are not alone. The world is full of idiocy and ignorance. You may not like him, but the guy was a genius.

If he smoked pot, if he was a bad husband or had smelly feet, that's irrelevant.

Answer 9

Lol, I like that! That is quite an interesting idea. I do really like Shakespeare, but that would make sense!

Answer 10

Given the poor quality of your own English, you are probably not the best judge.

.