3 ms·
Good history, glad Bowdlerization was brought up. Of particular note, from the final paragraph: >What is genuinely radical in the commission is not the proces
by Amorymeltzer 11y ago
Good history, glad Bowdlerization was brought up. Of particular note, from the final paragraph:
>What is genuinely radical in the commission is not the process but the people involved... more than half of the selected playwrights will be women, and more than half will be writers of color. Shakespeare’s scripts have always resulted from collaborations among playwrights, actors, and editors... those collaborators were white men.
I'm a very big Shakespeare fan, and think his words are among if not the greatest words written in English, but this whole debate is absurd. It's art. Let artists create art. People who will enjoy it will enjoy it, those who won't won't. I don't expect every Jane Austen fan to enjoy "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies" or Doris Kearns Goodwin to appreciate "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter" (actually, I bet she loves it), but so what? The source material is public domain, so let's enjoy the beauty of the commons.
- mef 11y agoIt's not clear what debate you're referring to. Was not the point of the quoted paragraph that, in the past, collaborators on Shakespeare's works were restricted to white men but that's no longer the case? Is there a debate there or is that uncontroversial?
- Amorymeltzer 11y agoSeparate thoughts. Quoting it as particularly of note/value, then giving a thought on the article's issue as a whole.