Forums → The Tavern → Should Shakespeare be taught in high school?
| 22 | 4864 |
It is really necessary for us to read plays in the 1500's? My class is halfway through reading Macbeth and I have to say, it is incredibly boring. For one, you don't even know half the stuff they're saying. Even if you read it over a couple times, it's still confusing what's going on. We read it as a class and everyone stutters which is so annoying. I think it would be better to read a good novel and analyze it rather than a Shakespeare play. Thoughts?
- 22 Replies
It is really necessary for us to read plays in the 1500's?
Is it necessary to read anything that is of a different time period? The answer is YES! It is English and Literature after all. Learn some renaissance culture. It's sure as hell better than Post-Colonial and 1890's Pioneer junk.
My class is halfway through reading Macbeth and I have to say, it is incredibly boring. For one, you don't even know half the stuff they're saying.
Perhaps if you did know what was transcribing, the drama would be interesting. I thought it was interesting when I read it.
We read it as a class and everyone stutters which is so annoying.
And this contributes to the bore of the read?
This seems like some guy who hates popular old play's and much you've got to learn from them and stuff. Please don't undermine a school because you think what you are learning is stupid and boring.
everyone stutters
They just suck at reading.
We just got done with Romeo and Juliet. Fun play, despite my class being full of retards who can't understand anything that isn't txt sp33k. Is it really so hard to read five words without taking a thirty second pause? Correct answer: Yes, apparently it is. I read Friar Lawrence's final speech in the same time it took most of them to read four or five lines. Pathetic.
Back the the topic: Yes, yes it should. That's a bit like asking should we read the Iliad or the Odyssey? Of course we should. It cultures us and brings us a wider perspective on literature.
It is really necessary for us to read plays in the 1500's?
Yes, it really is. Maybe your teacher isn't doing a good enough job of getting your class to really enjoy these plays. First of all, you should really start with King Lear. Macbeth, Romeo and Juliet, Julius Cesar, and Hamlet all seem to be the most common starting points for Shakespeare, which I don't get. King Lear is short, chop full of action, has an easier plot and fewer characters, and is much more fun to read. Edward is my favorite "villain" out of every book I have ever read.
About your novel comment: why can't your class do both? Plays should be short- if you think about it they are performed (and therefore read) in the span of one night. This leaves you with plenty of time to read a novel as well, even if you analyze both works.
But, on this note, I think you do have somewhat of a point. Often, I think teachers teach books, simply because they were taught these books in high school. Which doesn't necessarily mean this book was any good in the first place. An example would be The Scarlet Letter, which many classes read. But, (unlike Shakespeare) everything that made the scarlet letter good when it came out is no longer relevant. It really isn't that thought provoking anymore, and really doesn't exemplify a literature style in any extraordinary way. Shakespeare's plays, on the other hand, are written on timeless themes and are examples of some of the finest prose and poetry in the history of the written word.
I read Romeo and Juliet last year and almost finished Julius Caesar right now. It is hard to understand at times, but after a while it gets easier.
we only learned one or 2 shakespear master pieces (Which i cant even remember what they were). but i guess thats it when they teach you english as a second language. i doubt any other school taught shakespear over here
It is really necessary for us to read plays in the 1500's? My class is halfway through reading Macbeth and I have to say, it is incredibly boring. For one, you don't even know half the stuff they're saying. Even if you read it over a couple times, it's still confusing what's going on. We read it as a class and everyone stutters which is so annoying.
I do know where you're coming from on this, as so many times I found myself tearing my hair out thinking why do I have to write an essay expounding on the virtues of this pentameter? It wasn't until much later that I realised just how valuable the experience was... and how great a grasp of human nature Shakespeare had. The guy knew how to write.
In high school we were forced to do a module which had us comparing how the themes of Shakespearean plays were adapted into modern works. At first it seemed like such an asinine task (mainly due to the evil of standardisation of the syllabus, which my school was never fond of), but it did end up providing a stepping stone by which I came to understand what themes underpinned all literature, and its variations throughout the history of literature. You could even say that it eventually inspired me to think of what I might want to do to take literature towards the future.
Possum wrote me an essay on why they shouldn't. It was good too. Doesn't really matter, school is school, you're always going to find something to complain about.
One thing that my teacher did while we were reading Shakespeare in High school was she had us make a comic about the play as we read it. Part of your homework was to make a comic after every scene we read, which really helped you visualize the plot. I actually used my comic, rather than the play, to study for the final test. So, things like that make it a little more palatable.
Yes I do think we should learn Shakespeare in high school. They are actually really good plays if you try to understand it. Also it is cool to learn a little history about Shakespeare.
They just suck at reading.
No, even my teacher has a hard time reading some parts.
About your novel comment: why can't your class do both?
We do. We'll spend a good half of the semester on Macbeth, then we'll read Lord of the Flies, and the last bit on other English things. My problem is I'd rather read two novels than one and a play.
I asked my teacher this question and he said, "Because his plays have universal themes that can relate to us in society." I guess that's kind of true, but most of his plays are old fashioned and they wouldn't happen in real life. We should maybe change the curriculum a bit or have another type of English class you could take that focuses on Shakespeare and English back then (maybe in gr. 11 and 12).
I do not believe shakspeare should be taught (it's so old tiyme)
You know why we need to read Shakespeare? So that you can learn to spell 'time' right, noob.
For reals, though. I'm a freshman in high school, and even I believe it should be taught.
Once, I did a Shakespeare play at my community play. Instantly I noticed my vocabulary expanding. Shakespeare is necessary to understand literature, and help us become well rounded individuals.
What most people have been saying on this thread, "Shakespeare is neccesary for school." Just don't complain and start working on your Sakespeare..
i feel that it shouldnt be taught in schools. Possible if it wasnt in old english itd be better but ive just nfinish romeo and juliet and we had a big dissucussion about i. you wont need i in life and your wasting vaulable school time
you wont need i in life and your wasting vaulable school time
How do you know this is true for 100% of those studying it?
You must be logged in to post a reply!