4 ms·
True. But I think you can agree that the (now) archaic language and cultural context that would have been common knowledge back then gives an extra layer of dif
by PsylentKnight 2mo ago
True. But I think you can agree that the (now) archaic language and cultural context that would have been common knowledge back then gives an extra layer of difficulty over the already poetic/literary nature of the work
Watching Shakespeare has a similar feel to me as watching cartoons in Spanish as an intermediate Spanish learner. I can understand a lot of it. But I have to use so much of my brain power interpreting the language and get so distracted by unfamiliar phrases or words that I can't really get immersed in the story
I don't know, I guess it's just not for me. I think the 1700/1800's are about as far back as I can go
- cwnyth 2mo agoYes, no disagreement there. Some things would have been more commonly said or just common knowledge, but I only wanted to push back on the idea that Shakespeare's writing was just how people talked back then.