# A really damning review of a Shakespeare play **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [May 13, 2012, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763 "2012-05-13T10:44:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2012, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/21 "2012-05-14T19:34:27Z")
> [@newcomer](#): > > Agreed. It doesn’t. > > [Tolstoy essay does it.](http://www.gutenberg.org/files/27726/27726-h/27726-h.htm) Pffft. Tolstoy’s essay is basically one non-native English speaker’s reaction to a dramatic genre from an unfamiliar place and time. He doesn’t get it and he doesn’t like it. In particular, he objects to what he considers the _immorality_ of Shakespeare’s work (“their tendency is of the lowest and most immoral […] The fundamental inner cause of Shakespeare’s fame was and is this: that his dramas […] corresponded to the irreligious and immoral frame of mind of the upper classes of his time.”) Okay. Tastes differ, and nobody’s required to like or admire Shakespeare just because he’s widely regarded as a literary titan. However, explaining why you personally don’t admire Shakespeare doesn’t count as any kind of objective refutation or rebuttal of his reputation as a literary titan. Not even if you’re Leo Tolstoy. Tolstoy’s opinion of Shakespeare, **as an objective assessment** , is worth just about as much as his assessment of Darwin in the same essay: > [@Tolstoy](#): > > So within my recollection, in the forties, there was in the sphere of art the laudation and glorification of Eugène Sue, and Georges Sand […] in the philosophical sphere, Comte and Hegel; in the scientific sphere, Darwin. […] > > Hegel, who justified the existing order, and Comte, who denied the necessity of religious activity in mankind, and Darwin with his law of struggle, still hold on, but are beginning to be forgotten, being replaced by the teaching of Nietzsche […] Thus sometimes artistic, philosophic, and, in general, literary crazes suddenly arise and are as quickly forgotten. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2012, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/22 "2012-05-14T19:40:46Z")
OMG - I’m at work and I lost it just at the title! ---
**Author:** ![Stelios](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@Stelios](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stelios)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2012, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/23 "2012-05-14T21:41:52Z")
> [@Kenm](#): > > With any luck. > > Shakespeare not only is boring, it’s pretentious twaddle. _De gustibus non est disputandum_ Me? I fucking love Shakespeare. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2012, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/24 "2012-05-14T22:13:56Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Tolstoy’s opinion of Shakespeare, **as an objective assessment** , is worth just about as much as his assessment of Darwin in the same essay: Wihle I completely agree with you regarding Tolstoy’s issues with Shakespeare, he _was_ correct regarding Darwin, Hegel, and Comte being replaced by Neitzche. It may seem strange today, but everything from culture to science in the early 20th century was heavily (and indirectly) influenced by Nietzche, often in awesomely stupid ways. In fact, it’s interesting that this came up, because Shaw was a part of that nonsense. It’s largely forgotten now, partly because it was basically stomped on heavily post-WW2, and in English-speaking literature Chesterton may be less famous than Shaw, but he won the argument and Shaw did not, and won it so fully that most of Shaw’s views are simply not remembered at all. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2012, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/25 "2012-05-14T22:21:26Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > Wihle I completely agree with you regarding Tolstoy’s issues with Shakespeare, he _was_ correct regarding Darwin, Hegel, and Comte being replaced by Neitzche. It may seem strange today, but everything from culture to science in the early 20th century was heavily (and indirectly) influenced by Nietzche, often in awesomely stupid ways. But Tolstoy wasn’t just claiming that a current craze for Nietzsche was temporarily swamping the recognition due to other thinkers. Rather, he was claiming that the respect accorded thinkers like Hegel, Comte and Darwin was essentially _nothing but a temporary intellectual fad_ which was now on the point of oblivion. Again, if Tolstoy personally doesn’t think much of Hegel, Comte or Darwin, or Shakespeare for that matter, that’s fine with me. But I think his criticisms show that his ability to judge intellectual heft or staying power was not his best feature. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2012, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/26 "2012-05-14T23:56:21Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > It should be impossible to go wrong with A Midsummer Night’s Dream, right? [Wrong](http://www.thelmagazine.com/newyork/a-midsummer-nights-clusterfuck/Content?oid=2231348). > > Of course, not being in New York, I’m in no danger of seeing this production. > > I just enjoy flow of the language he uses. Every word counts. Dear God - the picture looks like a high school musical production of _Avatar_. ---
**Author:** ![appleciders](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85f322/32.png) [@appleciders](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/appleciders)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/27 "2012-05-15T01:05:43Z")
> [@newcomer](#): > > _As you know, I have striven hard to open English eyes to the emptiness of Shakespeare’s philosophy, to the superficiality and second-handedness of his morality, to his weakness and incoherence as a thinker, to his snobbery, his vulgar prejudices, his ignorance, his disqualifications of all sorts for the philosophic eminence claimed for him._ > > Bernard Shaw letter to Tolstoy See, I’d have said that about _Shaw_. 😉 Tastes differ. > [@muldoonthief](#): > > Dear God - the picture looks like a high school musical production of _Avatar_. As a lighting guy, I looked at it, and thought it was pretty in a very abstract, indulgent, modern dance kind of way. I’d be at a loss to try to tell that story through _Midsummer_, though. Pretty is all well and good, but you have to support the story being told, not try to drown it out with your own cleverness. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/28 "2012-05-15T02:55:43Z")
Oh, who reviewed it in the NYT? Isherwood, I think. I got the definite feeling from his review that he thought it was terrible but was too polite to say so in as many words. Kenm, I can’t even imagine how badly someone would have to fuck up a production of _A Comedy of Errors_ to make it pretentious. ---
**Author:** ![Kenm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bc79bd/32.png) [@Kenm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kenm)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 7:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/29 "2012-05-15T07:03:11Z")
> [@wheresmymind](#): > > _psst,_ **Kenm** : It’s Eraserhead. With 3 “E’s,” no “U’s.” Oh my. I went back into it to change it from Erasure Head to Erasurehead, and missed the U’s completely. ⭕o:o ---
**Author:** ![kushiel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbce88/32.png) [@kushiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kushiel)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/30 "2012-05-16T18:34:08Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > I remember being 13, too. > Haters gotta hate. Mostly from ignorance, but sometimes because they just can’t handle sublime. Or you could do what my high school teacher did and tell us we’re watching the Playboy version of Macbeth. Mind you, there was nothing Playboy-like in the entire movie and you never would have known it was produced by Playboy without being told, but hell, it made the boys pay attention! ---
**Author:** ![gwendee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/35a633/32.png) [@gwendee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gwendee)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/31 "2012-05-16T20:03:49Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > If you make the “right” choices you can screw anything up. This has me trying to think of the worst Shakespeare productions I’ve seen, but I don’t think I’ve had to sit through any real disasters. There was a production of Taming of the Shrew set in the Old West that I saw about 15 years ago. Sixguns and ten gallon hats, and exagerated “Howdy pardner” accents. ---
**Author:** ![Kenm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bc79bd/32.png) [@Kenm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kenm)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/32 "2012-05-17T13:40:02Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > I remember being 13, too. > Haters gotta hate. Mostly from ignorance, but sometimes because they just can’t handle sublime. Like NASCAR, no doubt. ---
**Author:** ![Unauthorized\_Cinnamon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/bc8723/32.png) [@Unauthorized\_Cinnamon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unauthorized_Cinnamon)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/33 "2012-05-17T14:56:06Z")
Plenty of people are pretentious about Shakespeare, OK. And he’s certainly dated. I sympathize with anyone who comes to the conclusion that struggling to cobble together an understanding of the archaic language and defunct cultural allusions sucks any potential enjoyment out of Shakespeare. But saying Shakespeare’s work is pretentious is silly. It’s like saying Tim Minchin’s work is pretentious, because he likes to play with language and make clever observations and uses poetry. So what - he still goes back to the lyric, “Fuck I love boobs though,” a sentiment Shakespeare also expresses, in somewhat different words. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/34 "2012-05-17T15:15:44Z")
> [@Kenm](#): > > Like NASCAR, no doubt. You’re right, NASCAR probably agrees that Shakespeare is pretentious. And talks all faggy, too. ---
**Author:** ![Esox\_Lucius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/848f3c/32.png) [@Esox\_Lucius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esox_Lucius)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/35 "2012-05-17T20:38:46Z")
> [@Kenm](#): > > Shakespeare not only is boring, it’s pretentious twaddle. _O, would that the playful bard were here To rebut such claims from a stinkard’s rear. Not with a brutish boot to the butt, But clever words to keep his anus shut._ ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763/36 "2012-05-17T21:29:16Z")
> [@Kenm](#): > > Like NASCAR, no doubt. What do Shakespeare and his admirers and NASCAR have in common? This Kenm likes to make broad and goofy statements. Im not a NASCAR fan but the actual racing part of NASCAR takes skill and strategy. Just because Kenm doesnt get it doesnt mean that it isnt there. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-damning-review-of-a-shakespeare-play/621763.md?page=1)