3 ms·
Which is funny, because that would not have been true at the time. Shakespeare was pop culture.
by santoshalper 7y ago
Which is funny, because that would not have been true at the time. Shakespeare was pop culture.
- soneca 7y agoSome big literature classics in Brazil (I suspect other places too, Dickens maybe?) were published as weekly columns on newspapers. Kind of the soap opera of the times. Now they are treated as high brow art, with the good and bad parts of this stereotype (e.g. sophisticated/boring).
- bear8642 7y agoDickens' novels were most definitely compiled from newspapers - that's part of the reason for some unnecessarily verbose sentences
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- blaser-waffle 7y agoAs were many US sci-fi classics. A Canticle for Libowitz was published as three short stories. Lots of Asimov was the same.
- Chathamization 7y agoIn addition, my understanding is that while Shakespeare was well regarded during his life, he wasn't particularly held in much higher regard than many of his contemporaries. The excessive elevation of Shakespeare (Bardolatry) seems to have been a process that occurred over decades and centuries. It's gotten to the point where it's hard to have a unbiased opinion. People aren't given a copy of King Lear and Tamburlaine and asked which one they prefer. People are usually told ahead of time that Shakespeare plays are wonderful works, that viewing them as wonderful is a sign of intelligence, and people are usually exposed to many plays by Shakespeare and none by his contemporaries. Our society probably has a much larger impact on how we view these works than the works themselves.
- beardyw 7y agoYou would enjoy Upstart Crow on BBC, a comedy series about Shakespeare. He is told by everyone his plays are way too long, the plots are often ridiculous, and the comedies are just not funny.