Shakespeare in school

Dopefish · Post by **Dopefish** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:33 pm

To truely experiance Shakespeare you must read it in it's original Klingon - Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country

I've read
Freshman - Romeo & Juliet
Sophmore - MacBeth
Senior - Othello (Hamlet later in the year)

Of course it doesn't really count since they're all edited and the school's meathod of teaching leaves much to be desired.

Kazer0 · Post by **Kazer0** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 10:24 pm

I read R&J and Macbeth. But im only done to Gr 11 english.

Post by **emmzee** » Fri Apr 09, 2004 12:28 am

I recall enjoying Shakespeare when we read his plays in skool ... umm we read R&J, Macbeth, and Hamlet I think. Also went on a class trip to see King Lear ... that was decent

Did you guys know that there's still debate over who really wrote the Shakespeare plays? I can't find the site I was reading about it ... but this one seems to give a decent, if biased, outline:

http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/guide.htm

Essentially, there are some doubts that the William Shakespeare of Stratford really wrote the plays. Not saying that he didn't, or he did, just saying that there's debate about it, which probablly will never be solved

denrix · Post by **denrix** » Fri Apr 09, 2004 3:20 pm

TO my knowledge, Shakespeare is done in every literature class all around the globe. At least, I know for a fact that he is taught in every school in Europe, and apparently here in Canada too.
I kinda think his works are shit, but, whatevea. that line is still cool. "to be or not to be".

GAMER · Post by **GAMER** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:56 pm

Yeah. I've just finished doing Romeo and Juliet and last year we did A Midsummer Night's Dream. Personally i think society should get over Shakespeare. Not saying his plays weren't decent, infact they were somewhat entertaining and morally deep, but Shakespeare has been done to death. Are there not other modern authors whose plays/texts convey universal themes and the same "uniqueness" attributed to Shakespeare? Admittably, alot of texts that you read today are elaborate modernisations of Shakespeares plays, even if they claim they are "original". Any story about star-crossed lovers can be said to parralel Romeo and Juliet, however, Shakespeare did not comeup with the entire concept of star-crossed lovers. He cannot be given credit for such a story and every other story about star-crossed lovers. I HATE ENGLISH!!!

On a related topic - It is said that Shakespeare, "the greatest playwright of all time" may have written the bible. Now, it seems that Shakespeare wrote plays. Plays that were both fictional and showing HIS own views about morals and life. Do you suppose that the Bible could have been compiled as a play or text to entertain...?

GAMER

Post by **emmzee** » Sun Apr 11, 2004 1:05 am

"It is said that Shakespeare, "the greatest playwright of all time" may have written the bible."

Umm ... Shakespeares plays were written in late 1500AD and early 1600AD. The Bible is comprised of the Old Testament and the New Testament. The OT was recorded from about 1450BC to 430BC. The different letters and writings of the NT were recorded from around 50AD to at latest 100AD. It would be quite a feat for Shakespeare to have written them.

I think what you're really referring to is the urban legend that Shakespeare translated (or was one of the people that translated) the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible. I remember hearing this before too but a quick search revealed the following on urbanlegends.com:

http://www.urbanlegends.com/religion/sh ... bible.html

Essentially, there's no proof that Shakespeare had anything to do with the KJV translation. And besides, as I alluded to above, there's considerable debate over who even wrote Shakespeare's plays!

GAMER · Post by **GAMER** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 7:25 am

and on that matter - who in Australia watched that doco on Shakespeare the other night?

GAMER

John The Ax · Post by **John The Ax** » Sat Apr 24, 2004 2:56 pm

We just did JC recently. Pretty good, too. Shakespeare's underrated by a lot of students. I think most choose to "just not get it".

GAMER · Post by **GAMER** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 6:57 am

i get it allright. But why can't we have some variety? Why can't we use some different texts?

GAMER

Dopefish · Post by **Dopefish** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 6:17 pm

Anything taught in school is considered suckage just because it's taught in school.

Post by **wardrich** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 9:50 pm

Grade 9 (Freshman): Romeo and Juliet
Grade 10 (Sophomore): Julius Caesar
Grade 11 (Junior): Macbeth
Grade 12 (Senior): King Lear

-Richard-

Post by **Wally** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 10:17 pm

you bet :|

Romeo and juliet

we also are doing King oedipus which is stranger

GAMER · Post by **GAMER** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 4:29 am

SAME!!!

GAMER

Thunderdog · Post by **Thunderdog** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 7:39 am

shakespeare is a band of fishing tackle, you fools. >:(

Interon · Post by **Interon** » Sat May 01, 2004 9:46 pm

JKSM · Post by **JKSM** » Sat May 08, 2004 2:57 am

When I was in school, my school taught us the Shakespherean book, "Merchant of Venice" & 2 books ("Role of Thunder"-story with racism theme & "The Inspector Calls"- a modern play) for 1 year to prepare for the GCE "O" level exams while other schools taught the students for 2 years. The school was not so exam oriented

and they taught us other things not for GCE "O" level exams such as poems and extracts from the different Shakepearean plays. The only plus point is that this gave us the chance to widen knowledge on other books. I still remember the phrase from Julius Casear, "Brutus is an honourable man" - now that repetitive phrase was really effective in making people remember "is Brutus honourable?" .

The book I studied was "Merchant of Venice" and it was supposed to be one of the easier kind of Shakespeare books to study for exams, that was what some said. Probably that was one of the reasons I liked it too. Now I still remember the poem from the "Merchant of Venice" even though 11 years have passed since the exam and I can still recite it by hard. It's:
"All that glitters is not gold;
Often have you heard that told:
Many a man his life hath sold
But my outside to behold:
Gilded tombs do worms enfold.
Had you been as wise as bold,
Young in limbs, in judgment old,
Your answer had not been inscroll'd:
Fare you well; your suit is cold.
Cold, indeed; and labour lost:
Then, farewell, heat, and welcome, frost!"
This is quite meaningful or at least the common English saying has used the first line, "All that glitters is not gold".

One part in that play that I remember is the dirty jokes (arising from puns) told Lancelot.

I am not so fond of reading old English but being forced to study a Shakespherean play gave me a chance to appreciate the it. Shakespeare's play are quite different from other plays and we know that has managed to last for years otherwise students won't be still studying them

"The Midsummer Night's Dream" is one of the last play I would ever want to study. Thankfully I didn't have to. After reading the simplified version, I had already found most of the parts boring although there was some plot. Hope I don't offend any fans of that play title.

hiiihiii · Post by **hiiihiii** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 8:07 pm

x?
x?
x?