The Shakspeare effect.

[A Forgotten Legend]

"Edgar Allan Poe was a great mystery writter. But how far would you get nowadays with such plot twist as "it was an orangutan"?"

...with me very.

*loves Edgar Allen Poe stories*

EDIT:  Ayn Rand's Anthem = Amazing

[X_marks_the_ed]

This thread is null. Shakespeare never existed.

[Drace]

This thread is null. Shakespeare never existed.

Agreed.

[Razor]

Silly me, and all this time I thought Rowling was a woman!

[Red Giant]

This thread is null. Shakespeare never existed.

and the 9/11 was done by the fake moon landing NOTHING IS EVER REAL

[Archem]

"Edgar Allan Poe was a great mystery writter. But how far would you get nowadays with such plot twist as "it was an orangutan"?"

...with me very.

*loves Edgar Allen Poe stories*

Yes. Hell, if it weren't for all the "borrowing" that so many other fiction used from Poe's works, he'd still easily be original and haunting.

The old man's heart beating, even in death, just to drive the guilt-ridden young man into the clutches of madness... Chilling.

[Emerates]

TWILIGHT.

[Archem]

*ass flies away in distaste*

[Uberpwn_w00t]

EMERATES DO NOT SPEAK OF SUCH ABOMINATIONS OR I WILL HAVE TO DESTROY YOU THANK YOU KINDLY SIR.

[Emerates]

I AM SUPRISED THAT IT HAD NOT BEEN BROUGHT UP BY NOW SINCE WE ARE DISCUSSING 'BAD WRITING' (AND SUBSEQUENTLY THEIR ATROCIOUS FILM KNOCK-OFFS) AND FURTHERMORE I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT SHAKESPEARE

[Archem]

"THAT SHAKESPEARE"?

That he what? Wrote? Lived? Loved?

Did those three things simultaneously? With a robot wife?







Ol' Billy Shakespeare is suddenly much, much cooler in my book. The one I wrote whilst making love to a robot wife I brought life to with my writings.

[Shady Ultima]

WOOOT ALL CAPITALS AND NOT FINISHING OUR

[fruckert]

Forsooth, the purple monkeys brillig.

[Alex]

I have to say i sense something wrong here.

As Drace and others stated, Shakespeare was from a different time frame.
Not only he wrote plays and not books, but he wrote them for peoples of his time.

What i really find fascinating is to read how modern a "writer" who lived between 1564 and 1616 could be.
With all of our modern experience it's just too easy, just like saying we all perfectly knows Earth is not flat.

However, the simple fact we still know who he was should mean something.
While i agree that Rowling's style is more readable by actual generations, i would be curious to see if, around year 2509, she will still be known.

It's not just a matter of writing style: it's also about being creative and "cool" for your times.
Undubitably Shakespeare's subjects are immortal: lovers, liars, traitors, etc are still a core part of our modern movies and novels too. But that's not enough, the "Columbus egg" (as usual) is just to be the first one leaving something that deserves to be remembered.

Talking about something more recent, You may say that Finding Nemo is far better than Toy Story: but Toy Story still is the very first one entirely made with computer graphics only, and everyone looking at it should always consider how beautiful it was for its times.
For the very same reason i surely like much more the 1st Neverending Story movie against all of the Harry Potter's ones.

Same rules would apply to modern music: today everyone would be able to do Pink Floyd's like music, but by their time...
This thing is really true for every Art genre, at the end: books, paints, music, moviles, theatre works, poetry.

Such a subject would require pages over pages to be fully explained, so i would just set one general rule i feel very important.
I think the only way to fully appreciate past artists is not only to compare them with today's examples, but especially to try turning our mind and knowledge into the average ones the audience that specific Artist was creating his works for had.
At the end, try to become one of his usual listener to understand for real what he was able to say.

P.S.: one of my "modern" favs will always be Michael Ende, dear Rowling!

[X_marks_the_ed]

I AM SUPRISED THAT IT HAD NOT BEEN BROUGHT UP BY NOW SINCE WE ARE DISCUSSING 'BAD WRITING' (AND SUBSEQUENTLY THEIR ATROCIOUS FILM KNOCK-OFFS) AND FURTHERMORE I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT SHAKESPEARE DID NOT EXIST.

True. But, there are just some lows no one should ever bring up. Like discussions on fighting for polygamy/gay marriage.