Synthesis Essay On Shakespeare
After reading the rather confusing (and extremely hostile) essay "Shakespeare," it's not hard to tell that the author calls for an eradication of William Shakespeare's plays from English classrooms. The author feels that many of Shakespeare's great plays, including Macbeth, Romeo and Juliet, and Twelfth Knight, are irrelevant to today's society. Although the language in this essay is extremely convoluted and tangled, as I am sure everyone has noted, I believe that I have found the quintessence of the author's reasoning. In simple terms, he believes that the language used in Shakespearian plays is alienating; reading Shakespeare prevents us from discussing other global issues; and Shakespeare's works were political propaganda launched by the
…show more content…
In fact, I would argue that adolescents of today would have a hard time understanding the dialects used in the early 1900s'. Thus, I find no reason to disagree with his statement that Shakespeare's language is somewhat alienating. However, on another note, I find it very important that students should expand their horizons of language. As the old saying goes, it's always in the old stashes of literature where we find true bouts of wisdom. His second paragraph is also beautifully argued, if one looks beyond the convolute language. He claims, for example, that if we are to live in the educational facade of Shakespeare, —whose goal, by the way, was to convey morality to the populous en masse — we should, at some point, focus on the real issues in today's world. Thus, he argues against spending hours and hours of reading the bard’s surreal scripts. I also cannot help to agree with his argument third paragraph. It is no doubt that, for example, in Macbeth, the pious king involved in occult portrayed is king James himself. A gesture of flattery, one can argue, is present in almost all of the bard's plays. The conclusion, I have to admit, is very poorly put together, and seems like a hate speech toward Shakespearian enthusiasts (e.g. "not throw forts built of iambic pentameter with the occasional rhyming couplet to securely glue the walls
In fact, I would argue that adolescents of today would have a hard time understanding the dialects used in the early 1900s'. Thus, I find no reason to disagree with his statement that Shakespeare's language is somewhat alienating. However, on another note, I find it very important that students should expand their horizons of language. As the old saying goes, it's always in the old stashes of literature where we find true bouts of wisdom. His second paragraph is also beautifully argued, if one looks beyond the convolute language. He claims, for example, that if we are to live in the educational facade of Shakespeare, —whose goal, by the way, was to convey morality to the populous en masse — we should, at some point, focus on the real issues in today's world. Thus, he argues against spending hours and hours of reading the bard’s surreal scripts. I also cannot help to agree with his argument third paragraph. It is no doubt that, for example, in Macbeth, the pious king involved in occult portrayed is king James himself. A gesture of flattery, one can argue, is present in almost all of the bard's plays. The conclusion, I have to admit, is very poorly put together, and seems like a hate speech toward Shakespearian enthusiasts (e.g. "not throw forts built of iambic pentameter with the occasional rhyming couplet to securely glue the walls