So, since that Twitter-sation last week, a lot of blogs, journals, even publications have been talking about - even defending - texts like SparkNotes "No Fear" Shakespeare and the Cliffs Notes cartoons (7min parodies that reduce R&J's wooing to "OMG, you are totes hot!").
[drags soapbox centerstage] Lights, please?
Shakespeare isn't famous because of his plots or characters. He's famous because his words - his magical, poetic words - moved his audience. Not readers - an audience is a part of a present piece of theater, whether that's Kevin Spacey limping at BAM as Richard III, or Timmy Smith reading Hamlet's sixth soliloquy aloud in class. If you change the words, you are NOT doing Shakespeare. You can be "inspired by" Shakespeare, or "based on" Shakespeare, but you can't do NOTShakespeare instead of Shakespeare and call it "Shakespeare."
People argue that these materials are supplemental. I argue that they are detrimental. They define where they should explore. To say that "to be thus is nothing," means "To be king is nothing" you are taking away the power of that word and removing all manner of meaning from it. You are stating to your readers that this is the one meaning of that word, of that line, and removing any room for discussion or exploration.
By even translating it in the first place these "resources" are telling students AND teachers that they cannot understand the original words. "Shakespeare is hard," you say with a pouty face, "our resource makes it easy." You neglect to say 90% of Shakespeare's original text is modern English, the other 10% is easily figured out from context or even just playing around.
More people argue that anything that gets students interested in Shakespeare is a good thing. I was once among their ranks. But anything that bastardizes Shakespeare in order to appeal to a more mass audience is not helping anyone. It's sending the wrong message. It's insulting the intelligence of anyone who approaches the pedestal Shakespeare's been placed on and telling them in as few small words as possible, YOU WON'T GET IT. DO NOT TRY. Instead of creating more levels for that pedestal to sit higher on, remove it altogether - it isn't there. If you come to the text thinking there's something to fear, you will be afraid.
And BAD ENOUGH that the plays are mistreated like this, but I find out that the POEMS are getting "translated" as well! Seriously? WHY?!
If you're looking for resources with original language, THEY EXIST. FIND THEM. Here are just a few:
Here's how: Shakespeare's plays, when adapted for screen, stage, and page, take on a new life there. They grow by these adaptations. They're further explored, further depths of character and multiple meanings of words are plumbed. The books and films and miscellany I've read - thus far at least - respect the original plays, and it is out of love for those works that these new and vital pieces were born. Not out of any need to "update" or "modernize" or "translate" what is there to be learned or to discussed. These works actually do enhance the plays they were built on by continuing a 400 year old discussion of what they could mean. Not what they do mean. They do not seek to define, as these "no fear" editions do. They come at the play believing there's nothing to fear in the first place, and prove it.
Stop believing that these plays require these translations in order to be understood. Stop assigning them in class, or telling students they're a good resource if they're having trouble. Take them to see a play, watch a film version with clear acting choices, talk them through it if they have questions, read scenes aloud together, discuss!
A great man once said, "There is nothing to fear but fear itself," and, Twitterverse, it wasn't Shakespeare. Take away the pedestal, take away the fear, and read the plays as they were meant to be read: ALOUD, as PERFORMANCE, as PLAYS. We're not studying his work because we should, we're studying his works because the words endure. They will outlive us all, and deserve to be discussed intelligently.
Thank you. [drags soapbox off stage left. Exeunt]
[drags soapbox centerstage] Lights, please?
What is there to fear of Shakespeare in the first place?
People argue that these materials are supplemental. I argue that they are detrimental. They define where they should explore. To say that "to be thus is nothing," means "To be king is nothing" you are taking away the power of that word and removing all manner of meaning from it. You are stating to your readers that this is the one meaning of that word, of that line, and removing any room for discussion or exploration.
By even translating it in the first place these "resources" are telling students AND teachers that they cannot understand the original words. "Shakespeare is hard," you say with a pouty face, "our resource makes it easy." You neglect to say 90% of Shakespeare's original text is modern English, the other 10% is easily figured out from context or even just playing around.
More people argue that anything that gets students interested in Shakespeare is a good thing. I was once among their ranks. But anything that bastardizes Shakespeare in order to appeal to a more mass audience is not helping anyone. It's sending the wrong message. It's insulting the intelligence of anyone who approaches the pedestal Shakespeare's been placed on and telling them in as few small words as possible, YOU WON'T GET IT. DO NOT TRY. Instead of creating more levels for that pedestal to sit higher on, remove it altogether - it isn't there. If you come to the text thinking there's something to fear, you will be afraid.
And BAD ENOUGH that the plays are mistreated like this, but I find out that the POEMS are getting "translated" as well! Seriously? WHY?!
If you're looking for resources with original language, THEY EXIST. FIND THEM. Here are just a few:
Want to show a short animation? BBC's Shakespeare the Animated Tales
Want to read a brief novelization with lines from the play? Shakespeare Stories by Leon Garfield
Want a play's summary with lines to read aloud? 15 min Plays from Folger (Pages 10-11 for OTHELLO).
Want more? DO RESEARCH! Explore Folger Library, Royal Shakespeare Co, the Globe, your local Shakespeare Theatre's Education pages for resources, performances, recommendations, classes, professional development opportunities - GET OUT THERE and LEARN!
But, CGriff, I hear you crying, you read and watch and love adaptations of Shakespeare - how is that different?
Here's how: Shakespeare's plays, when adapted for screen, stage, and page, take on a new life there. They grow by these adaptations. They're further explored, further depths of character and multiple meanings of words are plumbed. The books and films and miscellany I've read - thus far at least - respect the original plays, and it is out of love for those works that these new and vital pieces were born. Not out of any need to "update" or "modernize" or "translate" what is there to be learned or to discussed. These works actually do enhance the plays they were built on by continuing a 400 year old discussion of what they could mean. Not what they do mean. They do not seek to define, as these "no fear" editions do. They come at the play believing there's nothing to fear in the first place, and prove it.
Stop believing that these plays require these translations in order to be understood. Stop assigning them in class, or telling students they're a good resource if they're having trouble. Take them to see a play, watch a film version with clear acting choices, talk them through it if they have questions, read scenes aloud together, discuss!
A great man once said, "There is nothing to fear but fear itself," and, Twitterverse, it wasn't Shakespeare. Take away the pedestal, take away the fear, and read the plays as they were meant to be read: ALOUD, as PERFORMANCE, as PLAYS. We're not studying his work because we should, we're studying his works because the words endure. They will outlive us all, and deserve to be discussed intelligently.
Thank you. [drags soapbox off stage left. Exeunt]
0 ladies doth protest too much:
Post a Comment