Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Making Elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read

elizabethandrama.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 169 posts

Re: Making Elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read

#51

Post by karaterobot »

kens wrote: post #13

The well-known linguist John McWhorter argues that Shakespeare's plays should be translated into modern English since they are written in a language that we effectively no longer speak. "Indeed, the irony today is that the Russians, the French and other people in foreign countries possess Shakespeare to a much greater extent than we do, for the simple reason that unlike us, they get to enjoy Shakespeare in the langua…

McWhorter's a fun, cantankerous guy, always ready with a hot take. This one is wrong.

We do have access to Shakespeare! Even ignoring productions, which are immediately understandable, a regular person, with no special education, and only a tiny bit of patience, can just sit down and read all of Shakespeare, and understand it. Right now! They may have to look up some of the words, but that's exactly what people have been doing for hundreds of years—without access to the internet, even. I don't know what's changed now to make this task onerous. I mean, I could speculate about our attention spans, but I can't say that with certainty.

A contemporary English translation is unnecessary, wouldn't make the plays even a tiny bit more relevant or meaningful, and I predict most people would prefer the original anyway.

Re: Making Elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read

#52

Post by ahazred8ta »

shortrounddev2 wrote: post #22
AlbertCory wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, he's wrong, and that's why there are so few "modern English" productions put on. And also why Shakespeare plays in the original language continue to live. When you see it performed live, you still get the gist. The language is still beautiful. That's the point. More to the point, the audiences would not increase at all if they were translated into modern terms. On the other hand, no one in the theater minds if…

> and that's why there are so few "modern English" productions put on Modern productions of shakespeare or even victorian era stories constantly make their way into Hollywood. "Clueless" is just a modernized version of "Emma"

The Moonlighting adaptation of Taming of the Shrew with Bruce Willis went over well.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=moonlighting+taming+of+the+shrew

Re: Making Elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read

#53

Post by olddustytrail »

recursive wrote: post #49
olddustytrail wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is possible. Rather than reading it for yourself, why not get other people to read the lines out to you? And maybe even "act out" the story? Obviously it would be expensive to get it done just for you but if you could spread the cost among a larger audience it might be feasible. Get them to record it and you could even watch it on TV! ;)

> why not get other people to read the lines out to you? Among other reasons, that I didn't think it would help. Getting someone else to read it does provide the possible benefit of hearing emphasis and inflection. The downside is that it becomes difficult to go back and re-read a difficult passage. My uninformed guess is that the cumulative result of this is approximately a wash. I can't bring myself to write this w…

Well it was jokey sarcasm so don't worry about it. :) What I mean is trying to get a Shakespeare play by reading it, is like trying to get a film by reading the script!

Sure, if you're an experienced actor or director that'll work but for regular folks just watch it performed!

Seriously, you wouldn't take a film recommendation and start by reading the script would you? You might read it later if you really liked it but you watch it first. Get the details later.

Re: Making Elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read

#54

Post by recursive »

olddustytrail wrote: post #53
recursive wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why not get other people to read the lines out to you? Among other reasons, that I didn't think it would help. Getting someone else to read it does provide the possible benefit of hearing emphasis and inflection. The downside is that it becomes difficult to go back and re-read a difficult passage. My uninformed guess is that the cumulative result of this is approximately a wash. I can't bring myself to write this w…

Well it was jokey sarcasm so don't worry about it. :) What I mean is trying to get a Shakespeare play by reading it, is like trying to get a film by reading the script! Sure, if you're an experienced actor or director that'll work but for regular folks just watch it performed! Seriously, you wouldn't take a film recommendation and start by reading the script would you? You might read it later if you really liked it b…

Well, I mean, it wasn't my idea. I can't take the credit or blame. It was the required reading for my literature class.

But... I still don't think my comprehension would have been great if I had been watching a performance instead. It would establish an upper bound on time investment, which would have been a plus I guess.

Re: Making Elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read

#55

Post by AlbertCory »

scientator wrote: post #46
AlbertCory wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, he's wrong, and that's why there are so few "modern English" productions put on. And also why Shakespeare plays in the original language continue to live. When you see it performed live, you still get the gist. The language is still beautiful. That's the point. More to the point, the audiences would not increase at all if they were translated into modern terms. On the other hand, no one in the theater minds if…

I saw a production of Twelfth Night without ever having read it. Also didn't know the plot. And unfortunately I didn't ever get the gist of what was happening. I have a hard time imagining how other people are able to get the gist of the plays if they haven't read them beforehand. It's not just the Shakespearean language. It's also the constant references to Greek and Roman mythology, via Ovid, that presents a real b…

> It's also the constant references to Greek and Roman mythology, via Ovid

that's a perfect reason to NOT "update" it: the past is a foreign country. They do things differently there.

You can't make it seem like the First World in the 21st Century. You just have to go there.

Re: Making Elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read

#56

Post by AlbertCory »

commodoreboxer wrote: post #30
AlbertCory wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is reductive And this is a meaningless insult. One might say it needs translation into Normal People English. > The point here being that one could write a million bowdlerised versions of Emma Who cares? The point is, the plots and characters are readily adaptable into modern settings, and that IS a valid modernization of Shakespeare, as McWhorter wants. There are a million ways to do that, and godspeed to all…

"reductive" isn't an insult. And note the "just" in the parent post. It is an adaptation, but it is more than just that.

it's a pretentious, overblown word that apparently had a burst of interest around 2012 and is completely unnecessary (but sounds scientific).

What does it give you that "oversimplified" or "simplistic" does not?

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=r...

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/reductive

https://mathoverflow.net/questions/321096/what-is-the-defini...

Re: Making Elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read

#57

Post by krapp »

scientator wrote: post #46
AlbertCory wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, he's wrong, and that's why there are so few "modern English" productions put on. And also why Shakespeare plays in the original language continue to live. When you see it performed live, you still get the gist. The language is still beautiful. That's the point. More to the point, the audiences would not increase at all if they were translated into modern terms. On the other hand, no one in the theater minds if…

I saw a production of Twelfth Night without ever having read it. Also didn't know the plot. And unfortunately I didn't ever get the gist of what was happening. I have a hard time imagining how other people are able to get the gist of the plays if they haven't read them beforehand. It's not just the Shakespearean language. It's also the constant references to Greek and Roman mythology, via Ovid, that presents a real b…

>That mythology is no longer part of mainstream culture.

Tell that to Percy Jackson, Disney's Hercules, Hades, God of War, Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Smite, Lore Olympus, Disney Descendants, Immortals, Blood of Zeus, Kaos, numerous Marvel and DC characters and countless other media that still incorporate it.

Re: Making Elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read

#58

Post by AlbertCory »

commodoreboxer wrote: post #29
AlbertCory wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, he's wrong, and that's why there are so few "modern English" productions put on. And also why Shakespeare plays in the original language continue to live. When you see it performed live, you still get the gist. The language is still beautiful. That's the point. More to the point, the audiences would not increase at all if they were translated into modern terms. On the other hand, no one in the theater minds if…

Shakespeare is best appreciated in the original pronunciation (OP). I'm a little disappointed that OP Shakespeare continues to be a little niche, given that it's necessary for many of the rhymes and puns. Personally, I think it just sounds better than received pronunciation (RP). I think that's one of the strongest arguments against modernizing the language. Shakespeare has a flow, and much verse, that is lost in any…

I'd compare that to hearing Bach on period instruments, or Beethoven on a fortepiano. I actually played a modern reproduction of one of those.

Yeah, it IS closer to what people experienced then. I can't argue that.

But we're different; the halls are different; our ears are different. The miracle of Shakespeare (or Beethoven) is that it still means something to us, no matter how much you torture it.

Re: Making Elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read

#59

Post by magnetowasright »

garof wrote: post #32
jimbob45 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shakespeare's plays should be translated into modern English I've been running through the works of Shakespeare translated into modern English[0]. The original text is next to the new stuff and annotations are present when translations are weird or questionable. I'd highly recommend this for anyone who wants to read his stuff but doesn't have the time to look up every third word. https://www.litcharts.com/shakesclear…

I always thought that I should do the translation myself to current colloquial English, for my own better understanding. I didn't know about that link, thanks! Anyone know if there is a printed version that is similar? And, extending that request to other classic works too?

There are some editions, often made for schools, that have the original text on the right hand page with translations/explanations of the language on the left hand page. The description of the jokes, puns, euphemisms, and general turns of phrase that are no longer intuitive today enrich the experience for sure. Ask your local library.

Re: Making Elizabethan plays understandable and fun to read

#60

Post by recursive »

karaterobot wrote: post #51
kens wrote: post #13

The well-known linguist John McWhorter argues that Shakespeare's plays should be translated into modern English since they are written in a language that we effectively no longer speak. "Indeed, the irony today is that the Russians, the French and other people in foreign countries possess Shakespeare to a much greater extent than we do, for the simple reason that unlike us, they get to enjoy Shakespeare in the langua…

McWhorter's a fun, cantankerous guy, always ready with a hot take. This one is wrong. We do have access to Shakespeare! Even ignoring productions, which are immediately understandable, a regular person, with no special education, and only a tiny bit of patience, can just sit down and read all of Shakespeare, and understand it. Right now! They may have to look up some of the words, but that's exactly what people have…

> a regular person, with no special education, and only a tiny bit of patience, can just sit down and read all of Shakespeare, and understand it. Right now!

This just is not my experience. Today, I spent about 20 minutes trying to understand the first sentence of "Romeo and Juliet". When I get to "From ancient grudge break to new mutiny," I cannot reconcile any dictionary definition of "mutiny" with anything this fragment might reasonably mean.

There are a few definitions of "mutiny", but generally, it's "rebellion against any authority". Who is the authority? Is it the heads of the dignified households? Like the staff of the house is trying to seize power? Or younger members of the family? What's civil blood? If I spent eight hours pondering this prologue, I strongly doubt that I would make any more headway than this.

Post reply on HN