Shakespeare baptised today 26 April 1564

[Merlin of Flyote 8]

William Shakespeare was baptised on the 26th April 1564, as recorded in the Stratford upon Avon parish register. It is speculation that he was born on St. Georges day April 23rd.

[saltandsauce 0]

this is news how?

[aiumkastarkius 0]

The present is the news...

The world's greatest word inventor's 445th birthday!

[toxicpiano 125]

It's news because he's 5 years from being 450!!!!!!!

[warrior 169]

When are we going to forget him please?

When he turns 500 then not another word about him *hopes like mad*.

He wrote some plays that bore most to death at school, looking up every other word and then in the end it doesn't make sense and the book could have been cut down to a quarter of the size. Then the teacher asks you to analyse why and what Shakespeare wrote that and why you think he did, when they have no idea why Shakespeare wrote what he did because noone alive has met him and it really doesn't matter what I think he wrote. I'm British and yes we should we remember great things that happened but Shakespeare "ain't that great".

I also find it ridiculous how much attention he gets, at my school on the GCSE options, you are forced to do English literature(ie Shakespeare and Poems), when an Electronics option is not even available and IT is only a short course (IE half a GCSE). I'm pretty sure in this age, Electronics and IT is going to be way more useful than Shakespeare.#

I do admit though he created some phrases that are used in normal life, but he's done that bit of good no reason to study the 'bad' stuff

aiumkastarkius: Very useful inventing words that people can't understand without translating it.

Sorry for the rant, just can't stand his writing.

Jonathan

[Merlin of Flyote 8]

Originally posted by: aiumkastarkius

The present is the news...

The world's greatest word inventor's 445th birthday!quote>

Do not confuse baptism with birthday. Nobody knows his birthday, because the church who was the record keeper of the time wasn't interested in birth, only baptism (ie. coming into the "family" of god).

There was an old wives tale that everybody was baptised 3 days after birth, but facts do not seem to bear this out. If it were true then he would have been born on the 23rd (St. Georges Day). But don't let the truth spoil a good story.

[Jezus53 18]

I could have sworn it was by the seventh day of birth. I'll have to consult my grandfather on that one.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Happy B day Will !!!

[Merlin of Flyote 8]

Originally posted by: Jezus53

I could have sworn it was by the seventh day of birth. I'll have to consult my grandfather on that one.

quote>

In britain it's supposed to be 3 days, but it's not true.

[aiumkastarkius 0]

Warrior:

www.pathguy.com/shakeswo.htm

[3dpuzzlemaster 20]

warrior does have somepoint, everyone pays so much attention to him and you have to do stupid things in school. Also, he may have not have made the plays and poems and all that stuff. Why do we pay so much attention to him? He is good, but seriously! We had to do a stupid play in school that he made... it is called "Taming of the Shrew."

[ShortStraw 1]

PEOPLE!

It's Shakespeare! Get a hold of yourselves for cryin out loud.

Don't let your difficulty with your native language or your bad school experiences blind you to the simple obvious fact that the man is an icon for good reason. Sheez, this is like seeing people rip on Einstein "cuz sience is stoopid lol". . .

[3dpuzzlemaster 20]

I have good English skills, and I had no bad school experiences, it is just that Shakespeare is not extremely cool, but he is good. Yes he has good reason, but come on!

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: ShortStraw

PEOPLE!

It's Shakespeare! Get a hold of yourselves for cryin out loud.

Don't let your difficulty with your native language or your bad school experiences blind you to the simple obvious fact that the man is an icon for good reason. quote>

and for those of us who don't think this is obvious, what is that reason?

[Duke87 1,070]

The 500th anniversary would be eventful. But 445? Not exactly a nice round number.

And besides, no one said anything five years ago at 440. Why now?

[Eʟᴇᴍᴇɴᴛ 273]

Wow, what a coincedence I had a shakespear presentation for my english class today and we talked about this Well happy-baptism day Shakespeare, since no one actually knows your birthdate.

[Dark_Jedi06 13]

Originally posted by: warrior

When are we going to forget him please?

When he turns 500 then not another word about him *hopes like mad*.

He wrote some plays that bore most to death at school, looking up every other word and then in the end it doesn't make sense and the book could have been cut down to a quarter of the size. Then the teacher asks you to analyse why and what Shakespeare wrote that and why you think he did, when they have no idea why Shakespeare wrote what he did because noone alive has met him and it really doesn't matter what I think he wrote. I'm British and yes we should we remember great things that happened but Shakespeare "ain't that great".

I also find it ridiculous how much attention he gets, at my school on the GCSE options, you are forced to do English literature(ie Shakespeare and Poems), when an Electronics option is not even available and IT is only a short course (IE half a GCSE). I'm pretty sure in this age, Electronics and IT is going to be way more useful than Shakespeare.#

I do admit though he created some phrases that are used in normal life, but he's done that bit of good no reason to study the 'bad' stuff

aiumkastarkius: Very useful inventing words that people can't understand without translating it.

Sorry for the rant, just can't stand his writing.

Jonathan

quote>

I'd the say the brilliance in his writing is that it is largely open to interpretation, and therefore can adopt a somewhat universal quality. His bending of the meaning of average words (and often eclectic words) allows one to have some leverage in how they choose to accept the overall meaning. That, and the plots and character development in his plays are almost always thoroughly intriguing.

I'd say that just because his writing is a bit difficult to understand doesn't mean his masterful use of language should be shirked. Not only that, but high schoolers are the last people you want commenting on the merit of an author. And though some will say he stole most of his work from others, then more power to him because he's the one we still continue to talk about.

[Merlin of Flyote 8]

Originally posted by: Duke87

The 500th anniversary would be eventful. But 445? Not exactly a nice round number.

And besides, no one said anything five years ago at 440. Why now?

quote>

I wasn't here 5 years ago, so I couldn't post it then.

500th anniversary would be better, how inconsiderate of him not to born/baptised 5 years earlier because you like round numbers.

[JanYpe 17]

Originally posted by: SkiGeek

Originally posted by: ShortStraw

PEOPLE!

It's Shakespeare! Get a hold of yourselves for cryin out loud.

Don't let your difficulty with your native language or your bad school experiences blind you to the simple obvious fact that the man is an icon for good reason. quote>

and for those of us who don't think this is obvious, what is that reason?

quote>

 Shakespeare is a cornerstone of (early) modern English literature. It's not like all English literature follows from him, but he was one of the important figures in the development of English as a serious language instead of just a vernacular one. For the same reasons Dutch schooling pays attention to writers like P.C. Hooft and Joost van den Vondel, because poets and writers like this stand at the beginning of the language you use today.

:edit: Shortstraw said it better one post down.

[duack 14]

Thank God he's dead. He was my most hated of playwrites I studied in drama.

[ShortStraw 1]

Originally posted by: SkiGeek

Originally posted by: ShortStraw

PEOPLE!

It's Shakespeare! Get a hold of yourselves for cryin out loud.

Don't let your difficulty with your native language or your bad school experiences blind you to the simple obvious fact that the man is an icon for good reason. quote>

and for those of us who don't think this is obvious, what is that reason?

quote>

I don't mean any offense to anyone personally.  I struggle with my own difficulties with my native english language and my own bad public education experiences very nearly ruined my own chances at appreciating the brilliance of one of the best writers of all time.

I'm a fan of the English language and a minor history buff.  I've also been an avid reader for as long as I can remember, books have been my preferred form of entertainment and enlightenment for as long as I've been alive.  To me, Shakespeares greatness is self evident and I tend to forget that there's probably a lot of people who don't consciously know much about him.  I italicized consciously because everyone who speaks or reads English has been directly influenced by him. 

English had only been the official national language in England for about fifty years when Shakespeare was baptised.  Up till then French, Latin and Greek were the preferred written languages (French was Englands official language before English).  English was the preferred spoken language in Elizabethan England but it was still a developing thing.  Compared to the dominant languages of the day english was grammatically unstructured with a deficient vocabulary.

It fell to the "wordsmiths" of Shakespeares age, that is, those people who made their living by writing and especially by writing to the masses through the relatively recently invented printing press to expand on the English vocabulary and to a lesser extent to craft the grammatical structure that makes up the rules of Modern English.  The most influential and prolific of these wordsmiths were the poets and playwrights and Shakespeare was the best of them.  It's not just that he contributed more words to the english vocabulary (up to 2000 by some counts), it's also how he put words together, crafting phrases that will still be in common usage 500 years after he was born(!).

Language and thought are inseparable.   You need words to think and to think you need words.  Language is the tool our minds use to think, plan, solve problems, and succeed.  Therefore, it follows that knowing more words gives your mind more ways to think about things and more tools to plan and solve problems. So being exposed to different ways of using language also has the potential to influence the way you think. Having a better vocabulary literally improves your ability to think.

And that's just his influence on the development of the English language.  I haven't touched on his direct influence on literature and to keep this post from getting uncomfortably long I won't, I'll just say that Shakespeare influenced every generation of writers since his death and still today has some level of impact on contemporary plays, movies, and poems.  His stories still make great movies today (about 250 of them, look here----> http://absoluteshakespeare.com/trivia/films/films.htm) and this is sufficient testimony to his skill as a storyteller in my opinion. 

I know Wiki is despised but this wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shakespeare    has a nice general summary of Shakespeares influence and is as good a jumping point off as any if you need further evidence of the unequivocal brilliance that is William Shakespeare.

The last thing I wanna say is, even if you've read his work and seen his material performed as plays and movies and you still just don't like anything he has written. . . you probably like something that wouldn't exist if it weren't for his influence on its creator.   Even if you've never heard of him and have no opinion at all about his body of work, if you use english (especially if it's your native language) or if you enjoy poetry, novels, movies etc then Shakespeare has influenced the way you think.  That , among many reasons I'm intentionally leaving out, is why he is an icon.

Thanks for bearing with me if you read all that and all apologies for my own sloppy grammar and poor handling of the language I just professed so much admiration for.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: ShortStraw

Thanks for bearing with me if you read all that and all apologies for my own sloppy grammar and poor handling of the language I just professed so much admiration for.

quote>

Thank you.  In all of the years, I had to study Shakespeare, no one ever explained what you just did.

It does make me wonder, though.   Why do we not even know the name(s) of the guy(s) who brought Arabic numbers to the western world?

Let's face it:  it's a lot easier to multiply 34 and 59 than it is to multiply XXXIV and LIX.   Mathematics would not be what is it today if we continued to use Roman numerals.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[warrior 169]

From Dark JediI'd the say the brilliance in his writing is that it is largely open to interpretation, and therefore can adopt a somewhat universal quality. His bending of the meaning of average words (and often eclectic words) allows one to have some leverage in how they choose to accept the overall meaning. That, and the plots and character development in his plays are almost always thoroughly intriguing.quote>

This is one of my points, English teachers give you a test on what extracts mean. How can they mark that if it is open to interpretation, everyone will have a different way of looking at it. So all it assess/examines is how the teacher interprets it, not how the student has done.

And that list of phrases Shakespeare invented, a lot of them I haven't heard before, but I use some of the phrases regularly and before I knew, I had no idea they were from Shakespeare (There's a list like I was given at school)

But then Shakespeare can't have been the only person to shape the English language, there must have been others so why don't we remember them?

I agree he did a lot for English, but as is blatantly obvious when you read his books the language has change a **LOT** since then.

I don't really see how learning Shakespeare can affect you in later life, this is something I have talked with my Mom and she said once she left school she hasn't had a use for since. Also Shakespeare has affected the language, and I can't see it affecting it now.

The point of language is for the other person to understand what you are saying so there is no *need* to know where or why the words came from(sometimes though I admit you can just be curious). If we keep looking back to the past of language the slower it will evolve.

Personally I would much rather read a book I can understand as I read the word, not looking the words up because then you lose the story. He didn't write them to be dissected and nobody will ever be able to understand exactly why he wrote what he did or where it came from. Instead he wrote the books to be enjoyed, so I think if we're going to learn about Shakespeare we should read a practically word for word translation and enjoy it, then as a small side of the topic is looking at the original text just to see what it's like.

Jonathan

[Dark_Jedi06 13]

Originally posted by: warrior

From Dark JediI'd the say the brilliance in his writing is that it is largely open to interpretation, and therefore can adopt a somewhat universal quality. His bending of the meaning of average words (and often eclectic words) allows one to have some leverage in how they choose to accept the overall meaning. That, and the plots and character development in his plays are almost always thoroughly intriguing.quote>

This is one of my points, English teachers give you a test on what extracts mean. How can they mark that if it is open to interpretation, everyone will have a different way of looking at it. So all it assess/examines is how the teacher interprets it, not how the student has done.

And that list of phrases Shakespeare invented, a lot of them I haven't heard before, but I use some of the phrases regularly and before I knew, I had no idea they were from Shakespeare (There's a list like I was given at school)

But then Shakespeare can't have been the only person to shape the English language, there must have been others so why don't we remember them?

I agree he did a lot for English, but as is blatantly obvious when you read his books the language has change a **LOT** since then.

I don't really see how learning Shakespeare can affect you in later life, this is something I have talked with my Mom and she said once she left school she hasn't had a use for since. Also Shakespeare has affected the language, and I can't see it affecting it now.

The point of language is for the other person to understand what you are saying so there is no *need* to know where or why the words came from(sometimes though I admit you can just be curious). If we keep looking back to the past of language the slower it will evolve.

Personally I would much rather read a book I can understand as I read the word, not looking the words up because then you lose the story. He didn't write them to be dissected and nobody will ever be able to understand exactly why he wrote what he did or where it came from. Instead he wrote the books to be enjoyed, so I think if we're going to learn about Shakespeare we should read a practically word for word translation and enjoy it, then as a small side of the topic is looking at the original text just to see what it's like.

Jonathan

quote>

You don't have to "use" Shakespeare in an explicit sense for his work to have an impact. Critical thinking associated with the dissection of his work is what is most important, and I think you would agree that being able to take apart a work of literature, see its parts and then arrive at an informed conclusion as to its meanings and implications is important. And this is exactly why he is studied in school, to foster in students the ability to deduce their own conclusions that stem from critical observation and therefore have the ability to formulate opinions and defend those opinions. This has obvious practical applications in the real world, such as being an informed citizen in the political process.

Outside of that, many of the themes in his plays have become the bedrock of "classical" storytelling. Just as Shakespeare drew on the authors before him, so contemporary authors draw on Shakespeare. Thus common themes that he addressed show up in modern literature as well.

As to teachers marking students work in response to Shakespeare...they should be, and as I experienced it when I was in high school, basing the grade off of the ability of the student to put forth their interpretration, provide a sound explanation for why they believe that to be so and to be able to defend their position. The content itself should not be at issue so long as it is substantiated.

[MayorTim 16]

I hate him nearly as much as I hate poetry in general.

I sometimes wish I was German or Russian or something other than english so I wouldn't have to attempt to read his crap.

[warrior 169]

The marking schemes might say that, but naturally some of the teacher's own opinion will get included. Also in a class of 30 students, 6 classes in a year so that's 180 paper between about 4 teachers and at least 5 minutes to mark each paper at least(as you say it's not like maths where 1+1 always = 2,not that I'm saying maths teachers have it easy my Dad being one of them) that about 4 hours marking. As usual the curriculum (or whatever it is) is theory and doesn't account for humans, and designed by some politician or someone not teaching or being taught.

A lot of things being "taught" at school are hidden so not directly being taught so like doing homework is more to teach you that things need to be done whether you like it or not (but this is not always true judging by the amount of homework I have not done or handed in months late) this particularly annoys me, if you need to teach something then just get on and teach it directly, it's not always possible I admit.

And I don't think Shakespeare is crap btw, just that when something doesn't work you make it better. I can't understand Shakespeare right now so lets make it better by the main focus being a translated version.

Also one other little thing English Lit lesson is practially dedicated to him. We don't have a dedicated Science lesson to Einstein or other incredibly clever people who have a lot more relevance in the modern world today the Shakespeare.

I eagerly await the days everything can just be downloaded into my brain and I know it in an instance

Jonathan

[Merlin of Flyote 8]

Originally posted by: warrior

I eagerly await the days everything can just be downloaded into my brain and I know it in an instance

Jonathanquote>

Experience is the college,

from which we gain our knowledge,

but the price is high that we have to pay,

for we find to our sorrow,

that what we know tomorrow,

we really needed to know today.

[ShortStraw 1]

Originally posted by: warrior

But then Shakespeare can't have been the only person to shape the English language, there must have been others so why don't we remember them?quote>

We do remember them.  There's a ton of information out there attributing particular words and phrases to their contributors.  If those people are not featured in your lessons it may be for the same reason that Shakespeares contemporaries are not included in your grade levels literature classes.  That reason being that no one else has made a contribution to the English language or literature as significant or profound as what Shakespeare did.  There isn't another single literary figure born within, well, forever who has contributed so much to the development of the Modern English language.  If you're gonna focus your english studies on just one man then he is the logical choice.

I agree he did a lot for English, but as is blatantly obvious when you read his books the language has change a **LOT** since then.

I don't really see how learning Shakespeare can affect you in later life, this is something I have talked with my Mom and she said once she left school she hasn't had a use for since. Also Shakespeare has affected the language, and I can't see it affecting it now.

The point of language is for the other person to understand what you are saying so there is no *need* to know where or why the words came from(sometimes though I admit you can just be curious). If we keep looking back to the past of language the slower it will evolve.quote>

When I was 15 I told my trigonometry teacher that I intended to coast through his class with a bare minimum passing grade because I didn't expect to ever have a direct use for the math he was teaching in my forseeable future.  He surprised me by sitting down and explaining to me that although I may not ever again do the particular mathmatic equations he was there to teach, the process of learning and performing those equations would exercise my mind in ways that would have a direct and measurable beneficial effect on my entire thought process.  I may never again use trigonometry to "Solve for X" but knowing how will make me better at evrything I do that requires conscious thought.  This is also how Shakespeare affects you (and your mom and everyone who has studied him). Even if you don't neccesarily see the direct influence, rest assured it is there. This is why math and science are as important for arts students as the arts are for math and science students.

Learning the history of your language (and the history of pretty much everything) is important for more reasons than I can spout off all at once.  We keep looking back to the past to more clearly understand where we are coming from.  We dissemeniate where we have been and what we have done so that we will make informed decisions or predictions about where we are going and what we are doing.  I like that explanation enough to settle with just it.

Personally I would much rather read a book I can understand as I read the word, not looking the words up because then you lose the story. He didn't write them to be dissected and nobody will ever be able to understand exactly why he wrote what he did or where it came from. Instead he wrote the books to be enjoyed, so I think if we're going to learn about Shakespeare we should read a practically word for word translation and enjoy it, then as a small side of the topic is looking at the original text just to see what it's like.

And I don't think Shakespeare is crap btw, just that when something doesn't work you make it better. I can't understand Shakespeare right now so lets make it better by the main focus being a translated version.

quote>

Regarding the bolded text, He did realize that his work would be dissected by his peers and critics.  It is very likely that he could have anticipated being studied posthumously.  His words were carefully crafted with this in mind as well as with the intent of providing entertainment to the masses.  The fact that he succesfully entertained the masses and managed to please his peers and critics (most of the time) all while working with a comparitively new and incomplete language is a testament to his greatness.  It's possible to understand why he wrote what he did and where it camer from, it just requires careful study.

You can't make Shakespeares work better by translating it out of its original wording.  You can make it more accesible to the uneducated mind, but it is not better.  The best solution to not being able to understand Shakespeare is to study harder.  It's worth it, trust me.  That said, there are a ton of modern translations of shakespeares work out there and many teachers use them specifically in the way you suggest.  It is wholly worthwhile to read a modern translation for the sake of studying the story development and characterization and various literary qualities of his work before tackling the admitedly challenging elizabethan language.  I would go a step further and say see his plays performed since they were meant to be seen as plays and not read as novels but it can be tough to find a live production that is skillfully carried off and true to the authors work.  Even watching the latest hollywood versions of his stories is a worthwhile exercise though as they get his points across very well for the most part.

Also one other little thing English Lit lesson is practially dedicated to him. We don't have a dedicated Science lesson to Einstein or other incredibly clever people who have a lot more relevance in the modern world today the Shakespeare.quote>

In my own high school classes we did not study a single individual scientist to the extent that we studied Shakespeare but I would say that the various scientists we did study (including Einstein) all added up amounted to at least equal time as Shakespeare.  If there is a deficiency in your curriculums science courses then the solution is to strengthen your science courses, not to create an equal deficiency in your lit courses.

I eagerly await the days everything can just be downloaded into my brain and I know it in an instance

quote>

Until then, study and learn all that is offered to you and maybe one day your grandchildren will be able to DL The Bard directly into their brains and not have to waste valuable leisure time on our primitive studying methods.

[Merlin of Flyote 8]

Originally posted by: warrior

Also one other little thing English Lit lesson is practially dedicated to him. We don't have a dedicated Science lesson to Einstein or other incredibly clever people who have a lot more relevance in the modern world today the Shakespeare.

Jonathanquote>

I would disagree with you there, think about Chauser (Canterbury Tales) who among others was responsible for elevating the English language from the peasant classes to be the National (now world) language. Think about Dickens our idea of Christmas today is largely down to him, aside from the actual religous aspect.

The reason for talking about Shakespeare now is that it is HIS anniversary.