Visit Your Local PBS Station PBS Home PBS Home Programs A-Z TV Schedules Watch Video Support PBS Shop PBS Search PBS

Reply to comment

Why Shakespeare?

I have spent much of the past year researching Shakespeare, attempting to better understand why he has become the pinnacle of letters in the western world. While I have seen much brilliance in some of his works, I have come to believe that much of what he wrote was really quite weak in terms of strength of plot and development of character. I have difficulty praising him as the height of English theater while reading some of these mediocre works.

Is it the case that Shakespeare has been judged solely on the basis of his masterpieces while being excused from the works that are far from models of excellence and thereby avoiding a real comprehensive review of his work? Does his legacy rest at least somewhat on the myth that has built up around him since his death? Or does his mark as a master come from the fact that he made an evolutionary leap forward in the art of drama from which much of modern theater continues to develop?

Reply

We welcome your comments, and hope to host energetic, civil discussions. As you post, please keep our Community Guidelines in mind.

We reserve the right to remove posts that don't follow these guidelines. By submitting comments, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which include more details.
Your email address is for internal purposes only and will not be published, shared or sold to other entities
Mollom CAPTCHA (play audio CAPTCHA)
Type the characters you see in the picture above; if you can't read them, submit the form and a new image will be generated.