[Shaun J. Russell]

Originally Posted by N. Matheson

No, my opinion on that hasn't changed.

But how does that square with what you just wrote three days ago?

We can applaud Shakespeare for his inventiveness in his visual imagery, but that doesn't mean every attempt he made was good, much less perfect.

Honestly, that sentiment is the gist of what I was trying to convey throughout much of this thread: that we can love Shakespeare, and even acknowledge that he's the "best" playwright of Western literature, but can simultaneously acknowledge he's not beyond reproach in countless ways. There's a reason why the wealth of literary criticism on Shakespeare isn't just 10000 monographs talking about how great he is. It's a circular thread at this point, I suppose, but I just can't wrap my head around thinking that "the best" means faultless or that none else are worth reading because they're not the best.

For what it's worth, I'm teaching Marlowe's Edward II alongside Macbeth and Othello in my intro to drama course this spring. I'll be curious to know how my students feel Marlowe compares to Shakespeare, and I suspect that even if they think that the two Shax plays are "better," they're not so much better that Marlowe's isn't worthwhile. But we'll see!