# Do you consider William Shakespeare a plagiarist? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [March 9, 2013, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445 "2013-03-09T00:40:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Civil\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d78d45/32.png) [@Civil\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Civil_Guy)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/21 "2013-03-09T05:25:18Z")
Technically might be plagiarism - no sense in denying that the Bard re-used elements of stories and characters that others had used before. Not plagiarism at the time, though - no one had any notion that any previous authors had any right to keep others from riffing on their work. Certainly not plagiarism in the sense that Shakespeare turned those stories into something completely different than what they had been. ---
**Author:** ![chrisk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@chrisk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chrisk)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/22 "2013-03-09T11:53:20Z")
No, he was not a plagiarist, even based on my modern definition, because plagiarism is stealing somebody else’s words, not their story and character ideas. Shakespeare was adapting the ideas of others with his own words. ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/23 "2013-03-09T12:39:12Z")
Yeah, the argument is stupid. I chose the “more complicated answer” option because the “I don’t agree at all” option doesn’t quite encompass just how stupid the argument that Shakespeare was a plagarist is. By that line of reasoning, \*The Crucible \*was plagerized (historical event), \*Star Wars \*was plagerized (recycled plot), hell 9/10ths of everything is plagerized and the rest walks a very fine line going all the way back to the greeks and _Oedipus_ (based on a well known folk story). Now, if you want to make the argument that SOME of his plays walk a little too closely to their original sorce you can make that argument. It’s still stupid, but less stupid. \*Hamlet \*is more similar to its source material than _Star Wars_ is, it’s also more similar than, say, _Romeo and Juliet_. But in that case you have to ask yourself if things like the hundreds of adaptations of _Le Mis_ count as plagerism? So, you know, still stupid and it only applies to a small handful of his plays in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/24 "2013-03-09T12:45:10Z")
In the original _Hamlet_, the prince survives. And IIRC never acts insane. Macbeth historically was a fairly decent warlord who overthrew one King and also overthrown himself. No where near as compelling as Shakespeare. ---
**Author:** ![don\_t\_ask](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e68b1a/32.png) [@don\_t\_ask](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/don_t_ask)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/25 "2013-03-09T12:53:33Z")
I agree that he was a a plagiairist. Earlier today I, oddly enough, discovered my distaste for William Shakespeare’s plays. Though I have no opinion on his poems, I decided that, when I saw in my studies that virtually all of his plays were based on earlier sources, he was clearly a plagiarist and thus not worth my time. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/26 "2013-03-09T13:02:10Z")
The whole reason Shakespeare is, well, _ **Shakespeare** _ - as Harold Bloom casts him " the first Modern Human" - is precisely because he took time-honored stories familiar to his audience and presented them in a revolutionary way. He gave the characters internal lives and complex individual motivations. His reinterpretation of classic stories in a humanistic way is what makes him essential. Considering that plagiarism is missing the real insight on why he’s so great. ---
**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/27 "2013-03-09T13:17:22Z")
First, I don’t know where anyone gets the idea that plagiarism is limited to the written word- “art plagiarism” and “music plagiarism” are terms that have been around for a long time. Second, taking something old and making a substantive change to it does not appear to me to be plagiarism. So, is Shakespeare a plagiarist? Not even close. ---
**Author:** ![Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tapioca_Dextrin)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/28 "2013-03-09T13:17:41Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Is Richard III plagiarized? Don’t be silly. It was just the final part of the of the “Dick” trilogy. incidentally, Willy Wonka isn’t canon and is disregarded by serious scholars ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/29 "2013-03-09T14:08:38Z")
I’m apparently completely original in believing that option 2 in the poll best encapsulates my feelings. Yes, Shakespeare stole a lot from other artists, so in that sense, there’s a sizable grain of truth in the statement “Shakespeare was a plagiarist”. But I don’t consider the fact of Shakespeare’s thefts to be at all problematic, since he turned what he stole into things far superior. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/30 "2013-03-09T14:24:39Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I’m apparently completely original in believing that option 2 in the poll best encapsulates my feelings. Yes, Shakespeare stole a lot from other artists, so in that sense, there’s a sizable grain of truth in the statement “Shakespeare was a plagiarist”. But I don’t consider the fact of Shakespeare’s thefts to be at all problematic, since he turned what he stole into things far superior. How do feel about Led Zeppelin or Picasso? The same? Boy I am flummoxed that “plagiarism” is even an issue here. ---
**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/31 "2013-03-09T14:59:12Z")
> [@WordMan](#): > > How do feel about Led Zeppelin or Picasso? The same? > > Boy I am flummoxed that “plagiarism” is even an issue here. I feel like Led Zeppelin stole music without crediting the original musicians. ---
**Author:** ![Fretful\_Porpentine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fretful_porpentine/32/2873_2.png) [@Fretful\_Porpentine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fretful_Porpentine)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/32 "2013-03-09T15:08:03Z")
Adaptation =/= plagiarism. If I were to write a play about the life of George Washington, that would certainly not be plagiarism, even by modern standards. (It would, of course, be considered gracious for me to acknowledge the historians and biographers whose work I used in researching the play, but I don’t think I would be under any absolute obligation to do so, as long as I wasn’t using their exact words.) If I were to write a romantic comedy with stock elements that I’d seen in lots of other romantic comedies, that would also not be plagiarism, even if I lifted a few plot points or situations wholesale from other works (like, say, writing something that is recognizably a “Cinderella story” but set in modern times). The first example is almost exactly analogous to what Shakespeare is doing in his history plays and many of his tragedies; the second example is closer to what he does in the comedies (most of which are _not_ adapted point by point from an existing source, but much more loosely). ---
**Author:** ![Fretful\_Porpentine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fretful_porpentine/32/2873_2.png) [@Fretful\_Porpentine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fretful_Porpentine)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/33 "2013-03-09T15:15:35Z")
**ETA:** There are a few comedies that are more closely adapted from an existing source (e.g., _As You Like It_ is a fairly close adaptation of Thomas Lodge’s prose romance _Rosalynde_, although Shakespeare throws in a few characters that are entirely his own invention), but even here, he isn’t doing anything that a modern-day screenwriter wouldn’t do – except he presumably didn’t pay Lodge for the rights. Still, it’s not as if he were living in a culture where anyone would be _expected_ to pay for the right to adapt a published work. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/34 "2013-03-09T17:04:35Z")
> [@Fretful\_Porpentine](#): > > Adaptation =/= plagiarism. If I were to write a play about the life of George Washington, that would certainly not be plagiarism, even by modern standards. (It would, of course, be considered gracious for me to acknowledge the historians and biographers whose work I used in researching the play, but I don’t think I would be under any absolute obligation to do so, as long as I wasn’t using their exact words.) If your play about George Washington closely followed the structure and content of an existing biography then that might get you into trouble, but simply using existing biographies for research would not. A few years back the authors of the book _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_ accused Dan Brown of plagiarizing their work in _The DaVinci Code_ and sued for copyright violation. The [judge ruled](http://www.today.com/id/12202180#.UTtpzWf1ZK0) that Dan Brown did nothing wrong in making use of their ideas in his novel. Had _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_ been published as a novel instead of a non-fiction work then they might have had a stronger case as they could have said they’d invented the ideas themselves rather than just uncovering (supposed) historic events, but either way copyright law doesn’t cover ideas but rather specific expressions of ideas. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/35 "2013-03-09T17:43:04Z")
> [@don\_t\_ask](#): > > I agree that he was a a plagiairist. > > Earlier today I, oddly enough, discovered my distaste for William Shakespeare’s plays. Though I have no opinion on his poems, I decided that, when I saw in my studies that virtually all of his plays were based on earlier sources, he was clearly a plagiarist and thus not worth my time. Would you mind defining plagiarism, then? Because that’s not what plagiarism is. Nor is it a sensible way to evaluate art, but that’s another question. ---
**Author:** ![Lilacs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Lilacs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lilacs)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/36 "2013-03-09T17:44:03Z")
> [@Elmer\_J.Fudd](#): > > The interesting thing about such claims is that the stories Shakespeare borrowed are pretty hokey and preposterous when stripped of the masterful verse and prose he created to tell them. With his words Shakespeare gave immortality to tales that would have otherwise been only known today by a few crusty old scholars. This is how I feel. Just because Shakespeare used earlier sources for inspiration, doesn’t make him a plagiarist. He improved on those works. Enriched them, in most respects. Just because it was written earlier, it doesn’t automatically make it better. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/37 "2013-03-09T17:46:48Z")
> [@don\_t\_ask](#): > > I agree that he was a a plagiairist. > > Earlier today I, oddly enough, discovered my distaste for William Shakespeare’s plays. Though I have no opinion on his poems, I decided that, when I saw in my studies that virtually all of his plays were based on earlier sources, he was clearly a plagiarist and thus not worth my time. > [@Marley23](#): > > Would you mind defining plagiarism, then? Because that’s not what plagiarism is. Nor is it a sensible way to evaluate art, but that’s another question. I’m pretty sure that’s a joke – **don’t ask** plagiarized the complaint of the woman described in the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/38 "2013-03-09T18:10:14Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **WordMan** : > > How do feel about Led Zeppelin or Picasso? The same? I don’t know enough about either of those situations to make an informed judgment on them. In fact, this is the first I’ve heard of either being seriously accused of plagiarism. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/39 "2013-03-09T18:11:25Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > I’m pretty sure that’s a joke – **don’t ask** plagiarized the complaint of the woman described in the OP. Ah. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2013, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445/40 "2013-03-09T18:29:32Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > Here’s a counter argument: The one Shakspeare play that doesn’t have sources written by others is _The Merry Wives of Windsor_. While it’s a perfectly fine play, I don;t think you’ll find ayone swho will say that it’s Shakespeare’s best play. It is one of the few plays that is actually set in the conteporary setting of Elizabethian England, and anachronistically featuring the popular character of Sir John Falstaff. (Some argue that the appearnace of Falstaff dates the play during the reign of Henry IV, but aside from a brief reference of Prince Hal by one character there is no other indication and the other clues from the play contract this, so it appears that Shakespeare yanked Falstaff into the play without consideration for canon.) Shakespeare clearly wrote it on the quick to satisfy audience and patron with little concern for plotting or consistency. Fully a third of Shakespeare’s plays are historical interpretations, and most others are either set in quasi-historical settings (Denmark, Verona, Athens, Sicily, et cetera) or in blatently fantastical settings, so there is a certain amount of borrowing of local legend and history that goes along with that (and taking great liberaliations to make them work as stories). In the medieval and Renissance theatre playrights and producers often worked for a single patron who would commission plays based upon historical events, mythology, or other plays; indeed, the entire notion of intellectual property–particularly in the sense of artistic expression in literaure and theatre–didn’t really exist until the 19th century. A playright who fully cribbed dialogue from another play might be seen as uninspired, but merely borrowing locations, plot developements, and even wholy named characters was hardly seen as any kind of ethical or intellectual failing; the only failing was doing something uninteresting with them. It also needs to be understand that fiction in the modern sense, i.e. a story rendered from whole cloth without reference to prior legond–was still developing as an art form, and was mostly relegated to satire and other forms of allegory. Regardless, however unoriginal Shakespeare may or may not have been with regard to basic stories, it is unambiguous that as a user of language and coiner of neologisms he is unsurpassed in history. A list of some of the most common works either created or popularized in Shakespeare’s writing can be found [here](http://www.shakespeare-online.com/biography/wordsinvented.html). There is a reason that “A ll quotations were either from the Bible or Shakespeare,” (bonus points for the reference); just a perusal through _Hamlet_ shows many common phrases which originated in that play alone. In plays good and bad, the Bard’s use of language and innuendo was innovative and inspired, not only for its depth but for the way it rolls off the tongue. Orson Welles would never have to complain about Shakespeare being unpleasent and unrewarding to read. Next up: why Einstein didn’t just rip off a bunch of other peoples’ ideas about relativity and quantum physics, wrap them up in a series of hastily written plageristic papers, and stormed into Stockholm demanding a dinner and his prize money. Stranger [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-consider-william-shakespeare-a-plagiarist/652445.md?page=3)