sicko-yes hobbes-pounce

  • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Well i meant i like iliad and Odyssey, Polish translations are very good imo.

    I’m pretty mid on Shakespeare, he’s ok, but my two most liked pieces are actually adaptations and a loose ones at that: Throne of Blood and Titus Andronicus (that with Hopkins). What i find funny about Shakespeare is that where i find quotes form him the most often, is the murican sci-fi slop books, they seem to think he’s the absolute pinnacle of entire human culture.

    Also fun fact, his name is easily translatable into Polish: Wilhelm Trzęsidzida

      • ChestRockwell [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Michael Bay movies of the Renaissance

        Oh come-on, he was more of a Tarantino. Remixer of other more artistic playwrights to make mass culture.

        Also equally purient and into the lowbrow. Which is part of why he’s notable, he was the first real “pop” culture that was made for all classes, rather than just either aristocracy or peasants/tradesmen (i.e. medieval cycle dramas were for the later, the poetry the former).

          • ChestRockwell [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            Oh yeah the regime propaganda is an issue, and we can never fully “absolve” any artist of the time for their monarchist propaganda.

            Of course Dollimore’s Radical Tragedy is a good thing to keep in mind here - thanks to the existence of the state censor, the degree one could radically oppose monarchy was circumscribed by the conditions of artistic production. You can do a Richard II and present Bolingbroke as politicking (casting doubt on Tudor and later Stuart ideology about divine right in the process), but unfortunately the peasant uprisings are always dealt as if they are beyond the pale and the most you might get is some good rhetoric from their leaders.

            But we can’t forget this was all produced under a state censor (indeed we should emphasize it!) since it shows the limits of imagination imposed on Shakespeare, and if you’re into his “genius” then you can point to the radical elements he did include in spite of this regime.

            However I really don’t think he’s more than a great mixtape artist, mashing up good bits in pleasing ways. He was an artist for the people, and that’s the thing worth celebrating.

              • ChestRockwell [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                the opportunity he had to solidify the humanization of Shylock and the injustice he faced but no that was a comedy and yes audiences of his time thought it was joyous that Shylock lost his livelihood

                I assume you’ve read Marlowe’s Jew of Malta, at once 1000x more horrible but also more radical since it’s a tragedy and not a comedy.

                And yeah bardolotry is cringe and I feel ppl that actually study Shakey nowadays are way less prone to it (though it’s still there). If nothing else, there’s a deep Marxist tradition in the academy now that pushes back on great man theory.

                Say what you will about the new historicisists, they gave us that at least