|
|

10-16-2024, 08:10 PM
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 190
|
|
Shakespeare
Some of you may groan to see another comment on this topic now. So--first I'd like to thank all the writers, especially Shaun, who know so much about Shakespeare and other writers of his time. It was educational to read through this thread.
Second, now that Shakespeare's greatness has been established (not that there was any question), I'm wondering if anyone would like to talk about it on a craft level. Since this is a "Musing on Mastery" board, I'd really like to hear those who know Shakespeare's work so well quote some lines and explain how the language techniques he uses create certain effects. Rhetorical techniques? Syntax? Sound effects?
I'm looking for techniques I can learn from and practice in my own work.
Any takers? Or perhaps someone should choose another poet whose craft we can illuminate and discuss?
(I can't make a choice and start a thread because I don't have the necessary expertise. I'm here to learn.)
Barbara
|

10-17-2024, 09:15 AM
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2021
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 351
|
|
I'd be interested in similar. There's got to be some decent books out there that analyze Shakespeare's qualities as a poet. Does anyone know of any?
|

10-17-2024, 10:34 AM
|
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,219
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick McRae
I'd be interested in similar. There's got to be some decent books out there that analyze Shakespeare's qualities as a poet. Does anyone know of any?
|
There are many, though one of the real challenges of academic books that get into anything about Shakespeare's poetry is that there are many baked-in assumptions, based on those scholars' academic biases. For instance, whether a scholar believes that Shakespeare's expressed feelings toward the young man of the first 126 sonnets are fraternal, romantic, fictional, biographical, or [insert perspective here] will inevitably shape how that scholar talks about the sonnets overall. Likewise, for the so-called "dark lady sonnets" (which is a horribly reductive term that should be kicked to the curb), there was stodgy academic resistance against considering the woman appearing throughout sonnets 127-152 might have been Black. Naturally, a distinction like that can make a huge impact on how the poems are read (and discussed). There are many similar caveats that govern why I teach with a reader-response approach. I have my own set of entrenched scholarly opinions, but I never want to impose them on another person's fresh reading.
Those important disclaimers aside, I think Helen Vendler's The Art of Shakespeare's Sonnets is one of the better academic texts out there that truly gets into the form and function of the sonnets, with a lot of time spent exploring concatenation, consistent thematics, meter, and other like concerns. I can be quite critical of Vendler's readings, but I also acknowledge that she was one of the best in the past couple generations at actually looking closely at each poem both individually and as part of a broader collection.
I also bristle a bit at a lot of their baked-in assumptions and baseless claims, but in general, I think Paul Edmondson and Stanley Wells's Oxford Shakespeare Topics: Shakespeare's Sonnets is a decent enough (and accessible) overview of everything related to the sonnets. Again, don't take everything there at face value, but it manages to be reasonably thorough, compact, and readable, which is a pretty good feat for that sort of text.
|

10-17-2024, 10:50 AM
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2022
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 2,059
|
|
How do you feel, Shaun, about “Shakespeare’s Metrical Art” by George Wright? It has a narrower focus, but it was an eye-opener for me, and I need to read it again (and again).
|

10-17-2024, 11:27 AM
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2021
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 351
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun J. Russell
There are many, though one of the real challenges of academic books that get into anything about Shakespeare's poetry is that there are many baked-in assumptions, based on those scholars' academic biases. For instance, whether a scholar believes that Shakespeare's expressed feelings toward the young man of the first 126 sonnets are fraternal, romantic, fictional, biographical, or [insert perspective here] will inevitably shape how that scholar talks about the sonnets overall. Likewise, for the so-called "dark lady sonnets" (which is a horribly reductive term that should be kicked to the curb), there was stodgy academic resistance against considering the woman appearing throughout sonnets 127-152 might have been Black. Naturally, a distinction like that can make a huge impact on how the poems are read (and discussed). There are many similar caveats that govern why I teach with a reader-response approach. I have my own set of entrenched scholarly opinions, but I never want to impose them on another person's fresh reading.
Those important disclaimers aside, I think Helen Vendler's The Art of Shakespeare's Sonnets is one of the better academic texts out there that truly gets into the form and function of the sonnets, with a lot of time spent exploring concatenation, consistent thematics, meter, and other like concerns. I can be quite critical of Vendler's readings, but I also acknowledge that she was one of the best in the past couple generations at actually looking closely at each poem both individually and as part of a broader collection.
I also bristle a bit at a lot of their baked-in assumptions and baseless claims, but in general, I think Paul Edmondson and Stanley Wells's Oxford Shakespeare Topics: Shakespeare's Sonnets is a decent enough (and accessible) overview of everything related to the sonnets. Again, don't take everything there at face value, but it manages to be reasonably thorough, compact, and readable, which is a pretty good feat for that sort of text.
|
Would you consider these books to be relevant to his poetic style in his plays as well? I guess in an ideal world the perfect book would analyze his writing style across all of his texts, not just his sonnets, but we have to take what we can get.
Although the sense that I'm getting from this thread is that a lot his status comes from an intersection between his ability both as a poet and playwright. So maybe when we look at his poetic style alone the divergence between him and other writers isn't as great. In other words, there maybe isn't some kind of secret sauce to be found beyond him being a masterful writer who reached high acclaim with his plays.
|
 |
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Member Login
Forum Statistics:
Forum Members: 8,504
Total Threads: 22,602
Total Posts: 278,823
There are 4097 users
currently browsing forums.
Forum Sponsor:
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|