6 ms·
Yeah Shakespeare and Homer’s works were one time reads. No depth! But let’s compare a non-fiction great work to genre fiction based on a TV show...
by spookybones 8y ago
Yeah Shakespeare and Homer’s works were one time reads. No depth! But let’s compare a non-fiction great work to genre fiction based on a TV show...
- skookumchuck 8y agoYou're never going to find out any more about Romeo or Juliet than the words in the play.
- qntty 8y agoIt's a mistake to think that Romeo and Juliet, or any fiction, is really just about the characters in the story. You might not learn more about Romeo or about Juliet but you can learn more about what people will do for love. You don't have to read fiction for this, you can learn it from psychological studies if you want.
- Retra 8y agoYes, I think that's the point. What fiction offers is less than what non-fiction offers.
- qntty 8y agoWhat I'm saying is that they basically offer the same thing, in different rhetorical modes.
- skookumchuck 8y ago> you can learn more about what people will do for love Not from reading R+J, you won't, any more than you will learn about how utopias work by watching Star Trek. If you want to learn about what people will actually do for love, read one of the many biographies of Henry VIII. (And there's always more to learn about him, if you're interested.) Or you could read about Cleopatra & Antony.
- qntty 8y agoA piece of literature is an argument. If it fails to convince you, then it must not be very good. I think Romeo and Juliet says interesting things about love and I think that Star Trek says interesting things about utopias.