Overrated
Overrated
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
Overrated
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
Disprized is obviously dispraised. How can any fucking ACTUAL FUCKING RETARD seriously think it's "despised"? Unbelievable
cope. You live in the shadows of giants.
Seethe
agreed
can't stand the writing and the plots suck
Filtered
Thinking Shakespeare is overrated is the most midwit, high school-tier opinion.
No, Homer and Aeschylus did not "invent the human" in the way Bloom meant Shakespeare invented the human. Shakespeare's characters clearly, undeniably have a kind of consciousness and inwardness that Homer and Aeschylus didn't even come close to giving their characters, as great as they were. You could more reasonably make the argument that Chaucer "invented the human" before Shakespeare. You were filtered.
>have a kind of consciousness and inwardness
Hamlet is literally Amleth and Orestes. Cope.
Shakespeare is great and his plays have a focus on the inner human experience that few other writers, especially of the era, show (closest I've read is Dante), but to say Homer doesn't give his characters an inner quality is beyond absurd.
Consider the two big works of 20th century English literature each has inspired: Ulysses, versus...Infinite Jest (lol).
Being a fervent Shakespeare fanboy is also just as big a sign of midwittery. You're treading on a road hacks like Harold Bloom paved.
>Being a fervent Shakespeare fanboy is also just as big a sign of midwittery.
Based
No, Homer's characters do not have inner experiences in the way that Shakespeare's do. They are not surprised by what they hear themselves think, causing them to question their identity, in the way that Shakespeare's do. Yes, they're beautiful characters with powerful emotions, but they're not self-reflective in the way that Hamlet and Macbeth are, for example. There's a change in characterisation that seems to start with Shakespeare. Bloom exaggerates, of course, but he's right that Shakespeare's representation of personality is incredibly original.
>Consider the two big works of 20th century English literature each has inspired: Ulysses, versus...Infinite Jest (lol).
This is asinine. Homer and Shakespeare's influences are incalculable, and to reduce them to two specific books, just because they have explicit references to each, is hilariously silly. Not to mention, Joyce's biggest influence, by far, is Shakespeare. The connection between Ulysses and the Odyssey is obvious, but Shakespeare had a much deeper, less explicit influence on him.
>You're treading on a road hacks like Harold Bloom paved.
Bardolatry predates Bloom by centuries. He didn't pave the road lol.
Ulysses is literally a thesis on Shakespeare's Hamlet you fucking idiot.
For sure. He's a good writer no doubt, but, nothing more than that. I'll never understand what Harold Bloom saw in him. I feel like I couldn't have read the same plays that he did.
Every praise labeled at Shakespeare that tries to make him sound like a god can be refuted
>He invented the human
No, Homer and Aeschylus did.
>200 IQ superhuman genius
Read the folio written by his hand. He couldn't spell his own name.
>He invented language
He invented words because he didn't have a great understanding of vocabulary. The fact we today use the words and phrases he coined was beyond what he could've imagined and out of his control.
>Wrote the best characters because they're multifaceted
Read Mahabharata and 1,001 nights.
>Universal themes
This applies to so many writers. It's ridiculous.
Yeah, he was fine. His sonnets are better than his plays.
Wagner wrote the best explanation of Shakespeare's genius.
Have you put much effort for to make this thread.
>for to make
Why does he have an ear ring? Was he a fag or a sailor or something?
He was a pirate, he copied everything from others and took the credit
He also modernized the definition by stealing something without actually taking it away, an idea he got from a contemporary
Was The Tempest his original idea?
It’s based on a real event iirc. Stolen from reality, from god. Imagine stealing from the lord.
Shameless
None of his works were original. THey were all adaptations of stories from history or mythology or other sources.
Still pretty good writer though.
Thread made by
I think he's underrated
He is the best writer to exist.
List every writer.
“Adaptation bad” has to be the most midwit opinion in history
>no you can’t just adapt and improve an old story all art must be wholly original and separate from any other piece of art ever made
>why no, I haven’t ever created anything. Why do you ask?
Not real
I get why people like Shakespeare, it's like a puzzle of trying to figure out what the fuck he's saying
Never read him before besides the No Fear Romeo and Juliet in high school. Where do I start boys? Hamlet? Macbeth? Folger or Arden?
I think he's underrated.