Is teaching Shakespeare worthy of the efforts?

Question

In another word: Do you think kids at school benifit from learning Shakespeare?

Answer 1

I assume your question is confined to teaching Shakespeare to school-age children; it should go without saying that adult audiences and actors who already love Shakespeare can clearly benefit from school-learning if they are so inclined.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Shakespeare's plays were not written for schoolchildren, and it is sad that most people's first experience of Shakespeare is as an unpleasant and mystifying duty performed only to appease their elders. A substantial minority of kids will always benefit from being taught Shakespeare, but much of that particular minority will often find Shakespeare through routes other than school.

For young kids, Shakespeare is great for violence and silliness, but modern forms of entertainment are much better at it. OTOH, young kids with their extraordinary language-learning ability and tolerance for ambiguity are better able to appreciate the musicality and poetry of the original language, and to memorize vast swaths of stuff that will serve them well in later life. Still, it's probably not worthwhile to "teach" them Shakespeare, although it's certainly a good idea to have them attend plays.

For tweens, Shakespeare is quite good at presenting and framing adult relationships, but the stilted and archaic forms of language and presentation pose quite a barrier. Also, there's the problem of what to do with the dirty/bawdy bits - to bowdlerize them does damage to the material, but to explain them can often overfocus the kids on stuff that's age-inappropriate (and might draw the wrath of parents). All in all, I'd say wait till age 11 or 12.

Teenagers should have enough Shakespeare to get some glimmer of how much he contributed to the English language, and also to acquaint them with the classic plots and themes. For bright and/or sensitive teens who have a love of theatre or language or history or human relationships: Feed their hunger, as much they want. For the rest, schools should be content to present the banquet to them and insist they partake of enough to be polite, but not to force-feed.

Universities should, of course, offer classes in Shakespeare. His most natural target audience is reasonably intelligent people who are full of their own humanity -- socializing, backstabbing, jockeying for position and influence, romance, sex, violence, suspense, angst, slapstick, etc. Sounds exactly like a college crowd to me. :-)

Answer 2

I think there are probably more important things that kids could learn. In the world of theater arts, it might be more interesting for them to learn about more contemporary screen play writers, authors, etc.

However, learning about the classic Shakespearean plays can be beneficial later in life when one is exposed to seeing the plays, "remakes", or analogies made in reference to S.

I'd say that rather than put kids through the suffering of actually reading them, that they would appreciate watching the actual plays and learn more from that experience.

Answer 3

only if reading one of the greatest writers the planet has ever produced has any benefit at all, then yes, they would

Answer 4

YES! I could write tons here, but this is enough.