harry potter or shakespeare?

Originally Posted by Diamond

I thought this was a subject orientated at language not sociology/psychology?

So basically what you're saying is that if people aren't interested in it then they haven't understood it properly? That everyone who understands it will always enjoy it?

lol - no, I am saying that anyone will struggle to 'understand' it, 'it' is too large a concept - that is why we classify into genre - Sci Fi, Romance, Detective - ?
__________________

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

<snip>


p.s. Space Cadet (heinlein - well I was young) got me into reading.

'Tunnel in the Sky'

[dilli-theclaw]

Originally Posted by homealone

'Tunnel in the Sky'

Not read it - but I've got it in an ebook (54 heinlein books in one ) - So I'll give it a read

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

Not read it - but I've got it in an ebook (54 heinlein books in one ) - So I'll give it a read

watch out for stobor

[Graham]

Originally Posted by homealone

watch out for stobor

Except that me, being a smartarse looked at that word and was then expecting something completely different from the plot which never happened and left me very disappointed.

Personally, however, I'd recommend "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" as one of RAH's best, ie after he stopped writing "Boys Own" stories, but before he wanted to have sex with his mother (and it *doesn't* feature bloody "Mary Sue"/ RAH's w**k fantasy Lazarus Long!!)

[dilli-theclaw]

Originally Posted by Graham

Personally, however, I'd recommend "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress"

I have this within my ebook too so I'll no doubt give it a go. Thanks

[MetaWraith]

Originally Posted by Graham

Personally, however, I'd recommend "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" as one of RAH's best.

I'll second that, it's a Dinkum Thinkum of a book. (In joke for those that have read it.

Originally Posted by MetaWraith

I'll second that, it's a Dinkum Thinkum of a book. (In joke for those that have read it.

I hated it.But then I hate RAH with every fibre of my being.Clunky 50's dialogue and a totally unrealistic vision of women is the norm in his books.

[Nemesis]

I have to ask ... but why is shakespeare the yardstick by which everything else is judged.

Children and Adults need to have a broad reading base, and I'm sorry but shakespeare should be dropped in favour of more modern authors.

Shakespeare has it's place for those studying English lit, but mainstream should offer a much wider choice.

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by Incognitas

Shakespeare is wonderful.I first read his work when I was 14 and thought it was marvelous.How can anyone say Macbeth is boring.It's a fantastic tale of vanity,corruption,madness and betrayal with a wonderful come uppance at the end.Romeo and Juliet HAS to be the most romantic love story of them all and where would West Side Story come from without Shakespeare having written the original.

Shakespeare's stories are still contemporary today.All we need do is apply modern language and idiom and they come to life.His characters are wonderful and larger than life.

Indeed IF Shakespeare was a contemporary he'd be in the West End or out in Hollywood hopefully turning out better stuff than we get at present.

Wholeheartedly agree with you. Shakespeare is wonderful, truly wonderful.

Originally Posted by Simon M

I have to ask ... but why is shakespeare the yardstick by which everything else is judged.

I always used to wonder that. What kind of 'magic' writing did he do?
Well, eventually, I actually got around to watching the Scottish Play and I was hooked. Wonderful stories beautifully told.

But, at the same time, no comparison can really be made with contemporary authors.

Least of all this Harry Potter guy - never read anything of his...

Originally Posted by Simon M

Children and Adults need to have a broad reading base, and I'm sorry but shakespeare should be dropped in favour of more modern authors.

I don't know about being 'dropped', but perhaps given slightly less prominence...

Originally Posted by Simon M

Shakespeare has it's place for those studying English lit, but mainstream should offer a much wider choice.

Go watch a 'Shakespeare 4 Kidz' production - makes Shakespeare accessible to any audience - down to primary school age!

Originally Posted by Simon M

I have to ask ... but why is shakespeare the yardstick by which everything else is judged.

Children and Adults need to have a broad reading base, and I'm sorry but shakespeare should be dropped in favour of more modern authors.

Shakespeare has it's place for those studying English lit, but mainstream should offer a much wider choice.

the trouble is that the curriculum can never include all literature, so by looking at certain 'milestones', including Shakespeare & Dickens, it is hoped that the student will be inspired to fill in the gaps.

I was an avid reader, myself - all 'traditional' childrens stuff, like Enid Blyton, Swallows & Amazons, The 'Lone Pine' series - Shakespeare added a more 'adult' dimension, while retaining the fundemental of a good story.

I can see how contemporary kids may struggle to comprehend such stuff - but I also think that is a symptom of today, in that they only want to 'graze' on easily accessible media - having to think about something, in order to understand it, doesn't really happen, any more. (I was amazed that my son won't contemplate watching any tv program that is in monochrome - he automatically classified it as 'boring')

[ntluser]

I think that children need to develop a knowledge and appreciation of both traditional and modern literature.

Ideally,the teaching of it should be pitched at a level and time when the pupils would most appreciate it.

Harry Potter is a modern classic with wide appeal. It can be read to younger children and can be read by older children and adults. Shakespeare is pitched at older children and adults, but there are simplified versions for younger children.So both can be enjoyable.

It would be a shame if children were deprived of either.

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by homealone

the trouble is that the curriculum can never include all literature, so by looking at certain 'milestones', including Shakespeare & Dickens, it is hoped that the student will be inspired to fill in the gaps.

I was an avid reader, myself - all 'traditional' childrens stuff, like Enid Blyton, Swallows & Amazons, The 'Lone Pine' series - Shakespeare added a more 'adult' dimension, while retaining the fundemental of a good story.

I can see how contemporary kids may struggle to comprehend such stuff - but I also think that is a symptom of today, in that they only want to 'graze' on easily accessible media - having to think about something, in order to understand it, doesn't really happen, any more. (I was amazed that my son won't contemplate watching any tv program that is in monochrome - he automatically classified it as 'boring')

Enid Blyton!! I love her books! I'm 30 and still read them now

[Stuart]

Why not teach both? I never studied Shakespear at school, but we did read quite a wide range of stuff. Our English teacher said she considered it more important to study a range of authors rather than one.

I found Shakespeare very difficult in my English lessons. I would rather have done about Harry Potter, as I never understood most of the language used by Shakespeare and I find Harry Potter more "interesting".