Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (45879)	7/17/1999 4:17:00 AM
From: nihil	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 108807

I love Asimov (especially robot and Foundation) --- he was a polymath -- an excellent text book of physics, good stories (I Robot), legislator (prime directive), guide to the bible. But not really prolific, was he? Only 500+ book and 1600 essays. clark.net He spent most of his life as a professor of biochemistry . He wrote in long-hand I think. How about Jacob Abbott (I had shelves and shelves of books by him, whoever he was) 28 volumes of Rollo, 36 volumes of Harper's story books, hundreds of biographies and histories. Voltaire was productive, and average quality was outstanding. Hugo was great and must have produced hundreds of volumes. Jefferson papers run to more than 100 volumes, mostly letters, only one book.

To: greenspirit who wrote (45879)	7/17/1999 11:13:00 AM
From: jbe	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

Shakespeare was "boring"??!!?? Good thing you are standing by your own spears, Michael! You just might need them. Actually, I expected to find you already buried under a hail of slings and arrows from outraged posters this morning. :-) A "cult following" in "academe", eh? Well, seems to me Shakespeare has quite a following among the general public, too. Just think of all the movies that have been made over the years -- Hamlet,(at least two versions), Midsummer Night's Dream (ditto), Henry V(ditto), Richard III (ditto), Macbeth, etc. (And they've done well at the box office, too, even if not as well as such towering classics as Something About Mary. <g>) And, if I recall correctly, a movie about Shakespeare has been immensely popular, winning an Academy Award last year. And our language is saturated with Shakespeare, Michael. I'll bet you've used at least one of the following expressions (beginning with "slings and arrows," of course) without necessarily even being aware they came from Shakespeare: this too, too solid flesh the beast with two backs double, double, toil and trouble Alas, poor Yorick Et tu, Brute My salad days poor but honest a motley fool all the world's a stage I have not slept one wink not a mouse stirring Frailty, thy name is Woman! in my mind's eye neither a borrower nor a lender be more honoured in the breach than in the observance leave her to heaven the time is out of joint a towering passion sweets to the sweet it did me yeoman's service The lady doth protest too much Good-night, sweet prince I know a trick worth two of that He hath eaten me out of house and home Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown A man can die but once the turning of the tide we few, we happy few let's kill all the lawyers Beware the ides of March it was Greek to me lend me your ears the unkindest cut of all sharper than a serpent's tooth more sinned against than sinning every inch a king even-handed justice out, damned spot a tale told by an idiot the devil can cite Scripture It is a wise father that knows his own child the world's mine oyster as good luck would have it what fools these mortals be men were deceivers ever a foregone conclusion neither here nor there his better angel my kingdom for a horse What's in a name? A plague on both your houses! to kill with kindness strange bedfellows brave new world We have seen better days etc., etc., etc.

To: greenspirit who wrote (45879)	7/17/1999 11:46:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Shakespeare was boring. I suffered through Hamlet, Macbeth, and Julius Caesar in high school, and totally agreed with you. In college he was something to read in order to write a paper on, not something to read for enjoyment. After college I would occasionally pick up a play to see what all the fuss was about, but would quickly put it down again in favor of Austen, Trollope, Hardy, etc. Then a few years ago I decided to try Shakespeare again. And I found out what all the fuss was about. Read as an adult with life experiences behind one, he is incredible. Extraordinary humor, insight into human experiences, richness of language and imagery, etc. Now, no matter where I go, and no matter what other books I am taking with me (like Maugham, I can't travel without books--even when I drive into town to shop I have to take a book in case I get a flat tire and have to wait for AAA) I always have one or two plays with me. And they are often the ones I pull out first. If you haven't read him for a while, go back to him. You may find him a totally new experience.

To: greenspirit who wrote (45879)	7/18/1999 3:40:00 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 108807

Michael: Shakespeare is not inherently boring, although he is taxing, since the language and culture of the plays is now so remote from the experience of 20th century Americans. Macbeth is almost unintelligible in performance, for example, and the success of Branagh's Henry V to me demonstrates the way in which any deep feeling for the plays has deteriorated to a love of costume spectacle and sense of taking one's "cultural medicine". You are right, though, that there is a degree of Bardolatry in the academy. Some of the plays, for example The Winter's Tale, are just plain bad, and yet there are scholars who make careers out of trying to untangle the flower symbolism employed. There are people who take seriously searching Shakespeare for "doctrine" about things like natural rights. There are people who will not acknowledge that Ben Jonson probably wrote superior comedies (I mean, that it is a legitimate subject of argument), or that some of the rhetoric (such as "multitudinous seas incarnadine" ) is just plain silly. Having said all of that, ultimately Shakespeare is a greater writer than Asimov....