David’s comment > Likes and Comments
Like
David, having enjoyed the plays for yearas and having taught them for fewer, I have to agree with your estimation of "the Scottish play." I love it, along with Richard III, Hamlet, and Taming of the Shrew.
OK about the spelling. I suck at typing and even managed to write a book in spite of it. Yes, the tight construction of Macbeth in which the linear plot has virtually no waste is amazing.
I think it is interesting that this thread starts with Romeo and Juliet which I really don't like much at all and would certainly rank in the lower third. I do understand that it is one of the easiest plays for young people to "get" and relate to.
I also want to badmouth Julius Caesar a little. I like the first three acts--some. The last two are awful and are really hard to teach even trying to apprise students of Roman history. The play was originally taught in schools because Latin was also the standard "foreign" language. Even after Latin was dropped in many schools, the play continued to be taught either because the teacher had become so used to it that they thought that students "needed" it or because they could not come up with a better alternative--which I think is really doubtful. Since a lot of schools teach Romeo and Juliet, Julius Caesar, and either Hamlet or Macbeth in succession (skipping a year in American literature), I would suggest that schools substitute in a comedy. It would be great improvement
I too have taught Macbeth many, many times. I have also seen many adaptations of the play on stage and in film. It is a great play. I have always found something new each time I have revisited this drama, but I do think it works better as a read than when it is put on stage.
William wrote: "I too have taught Macbeth many, many times. I have also seen many adaptations of the play on stage and in film. It is a great play. I have always found something new each time I have revisited t..."
Perhaps you are right, or the definitive version on film has yet to be made. The old BBC plays, when they attmpted to do the entire series, were truest to the originals, but their starkness (due to what seems to be a low budget) was often distracting. Some of them remain among the best. The Tempest is an example.
The new Tempest with Helen M. playing Prospero is excellent. Visually and linguistically engaging.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Karen
(new)
Dec 29, 2012 07:34PM
David, having enjoyed the plays for yearas and having taught them for fewer, I have to agree with your estimation of "the Scottish play." I love it, along with Richard III, Hamlet, and Taming of the Shrew.
reply
|
flag
OK about the spelling. I suck at typing and even managed to write a book in spite of it. Yes, the tight construction of Macbeth in which the linear plot has virtually no waste is amazing.
I think it is interesting that this thread starts with Romeo and Juliet which I really don't like much at all and would certainly rank in the lower third. I do understand that it is one of the easiest plays for young people to "get" and relate to.
I also want to badmouth Julius Caesar a little. I like the first three acts--some. The last two are awful and are really hard to teach even trying to apprise students of Roman history. The play was originally taught in schools because Latin was also the standard "foreign" language. Even after Latin was dropped in many schools, the play continued to be taught either because the teacher had become so used to it that they thought that students "needed" it or because they could not come up with a better alternative--which I think is really doubtful. Since a lot of schools teach Romeo and Juliet, Julius Caesar, and either Hamlet or Macbeth in succession (skipping a year in American literature), I would suggest that schools substitute in a comedy. It would be great improvement
I too have taught Macbeth many, many times. I have also seen many adaptations of the play on stage and in film. It is a great play. I have always found something new each time I have revisited this drama, but I do think it works better as a read than when it is put on stage.
William wrote: "I too have taught Macbeth many, many times. I have also seen many adaptations of the play on stage and in film. It is a great play. I have always found something new each time I have revisited t..."Perhaps you are right, or the definitive version on film has yet to be made. The old BBC plays, when they attmpted to do the entire series, were truest to the originals, but their starkness (due to what seems to be a low budget) was often distracting. Some of them remain among the best. The Tempest is an example.
The new Tempest with Helen M. playing Prospero is excellent. Visually and linguistically engaging.
