quote:

Originally posted by CoffeeOwl:
Just how do you compare Shakespeare and Russin literature of a much later period?

Good question.

I do not know who said it (if anyone) but I think it is correct to say that Shakespeare wrote everything that could be. This is to be taken at the root level, but when you compare any piece, either earlier, or later, you can usually find a Shakespeare piece that conveys the same message.

Though some also say that Shakespeare did not write his own stuff. ^^

quote:

Originally posted by CoffeeOwl:
Just how do you compare Shakespeare and Russin literature of a much later period?

That's easy, the people that I listed have been considered some of the greatest writers in history, so naturally a comparison was made.

quote:

Originally posted by -GhOst-:

quote:

Originally posted by CoffeeOwl:
Just how do you compare Shakespeare and Russin literature of a much later period?

Good question.

I do not know who said it (if anyone) but I think it is correct to say that Shakespeare wrote everything that could be. This is to be taken at the root level, but when you compare any piece, either earlier, or later, you can usually find a Shakespeare piece that conveys the same message.

Though some also say that Shakespeare did not write his own stuff. ^^

I think he wrote his own stuff; I find it hard to believe that someone would be able to mimic his writing style so eloquently.

quote:

Originally posted by CoffeeOwl:

quote:

Originally posted by Nihilis:
I wish I could have had the opportunity to have read those books for school...it's beautiful.

Be glad that you didn't have to read those books for school. Be very glad. School would ruin them for you. School would not let you savor and think about what you were reading, it would try to guide you through, suggesting meanings and points of perception, and what's advisable to put into essays to get a better grade, and keep it all on schedule. Meh. Thse books should not be read like that.

I absolutely agree with you; although my degree in college is in English/Literature. A few of my text books were written in such a way that half the page was text, and the bottom half was an explanation of what you just read. What does that leave to open interpretation?

When I was in high school I wrote an essay about Animal Farm. Boy I totally missed the whole point of that story. My teacher failed me on it,told me what it was about and made me rewrite the paper. As silly as I feel admitting it, it still irks me because I feel that a student should be able to form their own opinions. I told one of my professors about it and he thought it would be interesting to see a "non political" view point of the story and agreed with me.

quote:

When I was in high school I wrote an essay about Animal Farm. Boy I totally missed the whole point of that story. My teacher failed me on it,told me what it was about and made me rewrite the paper. As silly as I feel admitting it, it still irks me because I feel that a student should be able to form their own opinions. I told one of my professors about it and he thought it would be interesting to see a "non political" view point of the story and agreed with me.

I feel your pain. I failed the both AP English exams because I got something different out of the texts than the AP readers wanted me to. I found it very annoying to be told I was wrong about everything I though was in the text. That's why I'm a writing major now.

**** son, I always got A's in English; I'm a F_cking lyrical genius.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by -GhOst-:
I do not know who said it (if anyone) but I think it is correct to say that Shakespeare wrote everything that could be. This is to be taken at the root level, but when you compare any piece, either earlier, or later, you can usually find a Shakespeare piece that conveys the same message.[QUOTE]

That could be very true for English/European literature and to what later was created in places where Europeans migrated. The culture in general stays the same, so a range of emotions and situations to which everyone can relate are the same too. The further you wonder into a different culture though, the less of common ground will be left until it shrinks to very basics. For the basics, the saying would hold true, for the rest - not so much.

quote:

Originally posted by Nihilis:

quote:

Originally posted by CoffeeOwl:
Just how do you compare Shakespeare and Russian literature of a much later period?

That's easy, the people that I listed have been considered some of the greatest writers in history, so naturally a comparison was made.

So cultural differences, different perception levels don't get in the way?

There's a ranking system that critics have for "the best author's of all time," and it just so happens that those authors are amongst the very top; Shakespeare being at the absolute top of the spectrum ):P

I mean, come on, how can you put Shakespeare above Dostoevsky? He's way more entertaining than flippin Chaucer or Shakespeare, though that's just a matter of personal opinion.

Who do you think is better? I mean...if someone forced you to sit down and read one of the books written by any of those authors, who would you choose?

I think to some extent people pick the "best authors" based upon their influence to the literary tradition. If we speak in terms of influence Chaucer and Shakespeare were "better" because their works have held more influence over the ages.


If someone forced me to read one of the books from the authors, I have no idea who I would choose (okay probably not Chaucer since reading in Middle English is really hard), but they are all so good in their own ways.

quote:

Originally posted by Nihilis:
There's a ranking system that critics have for "the best author's of all time," and it just so happens that those authors are amongst the very top; Shakespeare being at the absolute top of the spectrum ):P

Oh. I don't believe in such ranking systems, they are as pointless as "pick you 5 whatevers" on Facebook.

quote:

I mean, come on, how can you put Shakespeare above Dostoevsky? He's way more entertaining than flippin Chaucer or Shakespeare, though that's just a matter of personal opinion.

Dostoyevsky? Entertaining? Who would think. And Chaucer is wonderful. Granted, my first experience was in Russian, but when years later I got a hold of the original stuff it was still damn good.

quote:

Who do you think is better? I mean...if someone forced you to sit down and read one of the books written by any of those authors, who would you choose?

None of the above. The only author that I would gladly read under such conditions is Mikhail Uspenskiy. I could read him ad nauseam if I had time. He was never published in English AFAIK, and if anyone would try to translate his works, it would be as hopeless of a task as translating Alexander Milne or Lewis Carroll.

Dostoevsky would kick Chaucer's ass.

Ah-ha. If a lion and a shark would fight, who would win. You compare uncomparable.

What kind of shark would it be? Would it be injured? And would it be on land or in the water?

Whatever kind is of a comparable size and a carnivore, perfectly healthy, just like a lion, and how about a seashore for a meeting place.