This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
William Shakespeare article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
William Shakespeare is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 10, 2007. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-3 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
"William Shakespeare […] widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language and the world's greatest dramatist."
Does anyone else, by any chance, has a problem with this introductory sentence? Is it not, out of courtesy, the common usage to say "one of the greatest (in the world)" for anybody who stands out among his peers (especially an artist), even when a large majority would admit that, indeed, this person is the greatest in their opinions. I find the turn of phrase way too definitive for an encyclopedia.
I, for one, have seen plays written by Shakespeare and of course plays by other writers, and my take on it is that Shakespeare is not the author who moved me or impressed me the most. While writing this, I stumbled upon this very good article about what G. B. Shaw called "bardolatry". It is said in this piece that, among other great writers, Tolstoy, Wittgenstein and Voltaire not only didn't consider him the greatest, but disliked his works.
In any case, I think the first sentence should be changed to "William Shakespeare […] widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language and one of the world's greatest dramatist", as I find the title of "greatest writer in the English language" not as outrageously presumptuous as the one of "world's greatest dramatist".
-- Niouyouseur ( talk) 15:40, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
"Greene's attack is the earliest surviving mention of Shakespeare's work in the theatre. Biographers suggest that his career may have begun any time from the mid-1580s to just before Greene's remarks."
Should read
Green's remarks about an upstart crow possibly refer to Shakespeare, the tigers heart line is from from HenryVI. It is not the first mention of Shakespeare's works, in Green's Menaphon 1589 Nash states "English Seneca read by candle-light yields many good sentences, as Blood is a beggar, and so forth; and if you entreat him fair in a frosty morning, he will afford you whole Hamlets, I should say handfuls of tragical speeches" (STC 12272,1589) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.35.105 ( talk) 19:51, 21 April 2021 (UTC) hiiiiiiiiii idk what this is but cool. haha. . . oops u can delete this now :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.249.118.55 ( talk) 14:03, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Audiobook of Mark Twain's "Is Shakespeare Dead?" --As a cub river pilot, one of Mark Twain’s masters was a pilot named George Ealer, who recited Shakespeare by the hour - from memory - and who was a virulent opponent of the notion that the Shakespeare plays and poems were in truth written by Sir Francis Bacon. At first, young Sam Clemens agreed with his teacher and boss, but he soon realized that it was no fun for the pilot to argue with someone who agreed with him all of the time. And so, young Sam Clemens became quite skilled in defending this position: He said he was not a Shakespearite nor a Baconite, but that he was a "Brontosaurian": he didn't know who did write them, but he knew Shakespeare didn't.
As Twain explained, "It is the very way Professor Osborn and I built the colossal skeleton brontosaur that stands fifty-seven feet long and sixteen feet high in the Natural History Museum, and is the awe and admiration of all the world, the stateliest skeleton that exists on the planet. We had nine bones, and we built the rest of him out of plaster of Paris. We ran short of plaster of Paris, or we'd have built a brontosaur that could sit down beside the Stratford Shakespeare and none but an expert could tell which was biggest or contained the most plaster."
Review: "[T]he entire audio book is a tribute to Twain's comic sense and word-play... If Is Shakespeare Dead? is one of Mark Twain's works that you've resisted reading until now, this audio book is an enjoyable way to experience one of Twain's last autobiographical writings.... Twain's words and Henzel's voice are at perfect pitch." (Kevin McConnell, in The Mark Twain Forum)_____. Is Shakespeare Dead? Narrated by Richard Henzel. (The Mark Twain in Person Audio Library, 2011) GrandpaSnazzy ( talk) 13:05, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
The box says 3 May and the article says 26 April. Where did the 3 May date come from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scotisle ( talk • contribs) 18:51, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
I am adding the information that Shakespeare holds the Guinness World record for Best selling playwright and that he is the third most translated individual author. বিড়ালতপা চক্কোত্তি ( talk) 09:50, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
including guinness book of records is trivial when talking about the most influential english writer in history. its like saying martin luther king won a grammy award for a speech. shakespeare is bigger than guinness so to speak. Shhsbavavaa ( talk) 09:45, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
It says “BaptiSED” when it should be Baptized. Jdietr601 ( talk) 19:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
See above. Please tag the 'signature' as disputed, in the column at right, and also in the text if it is shown there as well. Everything about Shakespeare's personal identity has been disputed at one time or another, but his signature disputes itself, you can provide no 'authoritative' signature of the man, and ought to be honest enough to say it. [Another locked page huh. Funny how the locked ones are always so wrong. Kill this policy, and develop a tehnological solution appropriate for the 2020s, not kludgework of the 1660s.][and PLEASE don't add a signature to my comment, particularly one which publishes my IP. Double the demerit points if you do so hiding behind a bot. Kill all bots, this is a human-edited website.] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.157.18 ( talk) 02:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
The influence section really seems to understate and downplay his influence on virtually every poet, playwright, and novelist in the English language for the past 400 years. True, the vastness of his influence is something gargantuan, but it should be noted in the lead, and expounded upon in the influence section.
The lead should certainly note: "widely regarded as the greatest and most influential writer in the English language", even at the expense of "world's greatest dramatist", which seems slightly redundant when it's already stated he is the greatest writer in the English language. Thoughts? Michael0986 ( talk) 21:28, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Is Edward de Vere or William Shakespeare the same person. If not then the Wikipedian article is right and if both are referring to the same person then why there are two entries for the same person. These are what I tackled from the book The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History by Michael H. Hart. See entry 32 in the above book. Sultan Abdul sultan ( talk) 02:49, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
You have not given a list of works by shakespare 2409:4053:E89:3488:0:0:5989:5A13 ( talk) 11:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Surely this article is incomplete without mention of his lyrics, some of the most beautiful in any language. E.g., Take, O take, those lips away, O Mistress mine, Under the greenwood tree, Come away death, Full fathom five, Fear no more the heat o' the sun? Esedowns ( talk) 14:11, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
His birthday was not the 26th it was the 23rd this is common knowledge as he died on his birthday 76.10.97.27 ( talk) 02:30, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Did Shakespeare write the play Romeo and Juliet just for fun or did it have purposes and connections to his days 41.74.49.20 ( talk) 16:53, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
What are his books 2409:4073:2E85:5CF2:B5CE:EF35:4921:E9D1 ( talk) 14:55, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
. 105.12.1.4 ( talk) 14:34, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
where is the source saying he is english? 88.109.91.6 ( talk) 22:02, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
If Shakespeare was born on 26th April 1642 (as stated in the article) and died on 23rd April 1616 (as stated in the article) then he was not 52 (as stated in the article) when he died: he died a few days before his 52nd birthday. At least one of those pieces of information has to be wrong. 86.20.64.62 ( talk) 21:01, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
hello i would like to edit pls thank u. 9Obito ( talk) 10:09, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
I was half-planning to change the primary article image to Droeshout, so before I bother figuring out how to do that, I figured I'd write my argument for changing it since I assume there'll be an argument. Maybe I'll lose it and I'll never have to figure out how to change the image!
Anyway, User:Xover (who I presume has a good understanding of the prior editorial consensus) said the image was "chosen for aesthetic reasons" by which I presume he means he thinks it looks nice. Just considered as a painting, I guess it's ok, but the main thing I think when I see it is "Some random guy, not Shakespeare." He also said that it was the image most commonly associated with Shakespeare, which I disagree with. I always associated the Droeshout engraving with Shakespeare even before I knew what it was called, since it was the image that appeared on my parents' copy of the works of Shakespeare and every book about Shakespeare I ever found growing up. The first time I ever saw the Chandos portrait was on Wikipedia. He also said it was the image with the best claim to have been painted from life, which I agree with, but that's not the same as having a strong claim to have been painted from life. The way I read Tarnya Cooper's book, it definitely doesn't have a strong claim, and I think she's way too credulous towards Vertue. And in any case, strength-of-claim-to-have-been-painted-from-life is a criterion which excludes Droeshout by definition and isn't motivated as the obviously correct criterion. He also said that Droeshout looked "Alien to modern readers." I disagree. I think it looks like Shakespeare. Maybe I'm a post-modern reader or something, I dunno.
Anyway,
User:Xover (who I presume has a good understanding of the prior editorial consensus)
said the image was "chosen for aesthetic reasons" by which I presume he means he thinks it looks nice. Just considered as a painting, I guess it's ok, but the main thing I think when I see it is "Some random guy, not Shakespeare." He also said that it was the image most commonly associated with Shakespeare, which I disagree with. I always associated the Droeshout engraving with Shakespeare even before I knew what it was called, since it was the image that appeared on my parents' copy of the works of Shakespeare and every book about Shakespeare I ever found growing up. The first time I ever saw the Chandos portrait was on Wikipedia. He also said it was the image with the best claim to have been painted from life, which I agree with, but that's not the same as having a strong claim to have been painted from life. The way I read Tarnya Cooper's book, it definitely doesn't have a strong claim, and I think she's way too credulous towards Vertue. And in any case, strength-of-claim-to-have-been-painted-from-life is a criterion which excludes Droeshout by definition and isn't motivated as the obviously correct criterion. He also said that Droeshout looked "Alien to modern readers." I disagree. I think it looks like Shakespeare. Maybe I'm a post-modern reader or something, I dunno. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
50.232.16.86 (
talk) 17:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
By contrast, Ben Johnson saw Droeshot and said it was a good likeness. Vertue never saw Shakespeare, so even if we trust the chain of provenance (which Cooper doesn't think we necessarily should), we have no idea if it was accurate or not. Like maybe Shakespeare sat for a portrait, saw the result and said "The fuck is this? You made me look like a chimney sweeper with jaundice. I'm not paying for this shit, you keep it" and that's why the portrait wasn't in the hands of Shakespeare's family, but William "No srsly guys I'm Shakespeare's illegitimate son" Davenant. There's no source which says Chandos is a good likeness, there's only the chain of provenance as reported by Vertue, which if it was accurate would only establish that some artist tried to depict Shakespeare, not that the artist succeeded. And maybe Vertue got the provenance wrong, like he did with the "Agas" map. Maybe it's a picture of some other guy. It's all so tenuous. Maybe it's the least tenuous of the potential life portraits, but we don't have to restrict ourselves to potential life portraits when we have something which was attested as accurate by someone who had actually seen Shakespeare, even if it definitely wasn't from life. This seems like a better option to me. Dingsuntil ( talk) 10:19, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
I went through some of the other arguments in favor of Chandos, which focus on the prevalence of copies of Chandos close to living memory of Shakespeare, which supposedly implies that people at the time thought it was accurate. Or something. I don't really buy this. I don't really know how all these supposed copies of Chandos are established. Like Cooper says that some painting "Early copy after the Chandos portrait" is a copy of it, but gives no indication of why she thinks it's a copy. It could just be a somewhat similar painting. Different articles here assert that either the bust or the statue of Shakespeare were done from a copy of Chandos, which may or may not be lost (definitely some cleanup needed), and it's not clear how anyone knows it was even a copy of Chandos. It's all very weird. But even if all these and more are true, they're all from around the time (1719) that Vertue said this was of Shakespeare because provenance. Maybe a few people trusted Vertue and other people trusted those people and this just led to cloud of yeah-this-is-probably-what-he-looked-like. It's definitely not "the only portrait that definitely provides us with a reasonable idea of Shakespeare's appearance" (i.e. Droeshout). Dingsuntil ( talk) 11:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
My reading of the existing consensus is that you all are (incorrectly) opposed to changing the image. Unfortunately, Wikipedia runs on consensus rather than the recognition of my personal genius & correctness, so I won't be changing the image. I still think you are all wrong, and I urge you to actually address the counterarguments I make. In particular, nobody has explained whether their opinions about what effect the image will have on modern readers are supported by any evidence, and if so what this evidence is. Like, seriously, if you've already hashed this out you could just post a link to it. I'll read it. It might even change my mind.
Obviously you are under no obligation to address my arguments or change your opinions if you can't, you can always just ignore me. But I still think you should address them. We should strive to make our consensus an informed and correct one.
Pings: SouthernNights Xover Tom Reedy
Dingsuntil ( talk) 02:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
ISBN 9789464437539 2A02:A03F:80FA:1100:6D14:ACBB:BB1F:F956 ( talk) 07:44, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
The article does not say, as it should, that he's known by his momonym, Shakespeare.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.183.110.20 ( talk) 13:11, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Very minor issue, but if you feel like having an opinion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 18:09, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
What was he famous for 5.107.234.224 ( talk) 10:38, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi, not sure on the exact process for challenging a source, but I don't want to edit the article unilaterally so I figured I'd ask for what we think of this issue first. Surely such claims as the two seen below cannot be made on Wikipedia without substantiation:
His plays have been translated into every major living language and are performed more often than those of any other playwright
I find this statement overly broad on both assertions, and the citation (#7) doesn't have any substantive evidence to back up these claims. The relevant paragraph says:
Translated into every language of consequence, often by men of considerable poetic talents themselves, Shakespeare has long had a devoted following among French, Spanish, Italian, German, and Scandinavian, as well as English-speaking readers. And if his popularity in Russia were not evidence enough, the enthusiasm with which he has been embraced by the Japanese attests to his extraordinary cross-cultural appeal. His trans-historical allure has been similarly proven: nearly four centuries after they were written, his plays continue to be performed at a rate greater than those of any dozen other playwrights combined. Indeed, special theatres have been constructed for their performance at locations all around the world,from Texas to Tokyo, Perth to Berlin.
Craig, Leon H. (2001). Of philosophers and kings: political philosophy in Shakespeare's Macbeth and King Lear. University of Toronto Press. p. 03.
I think that the claim of translation in "every major living language" suffers first from a difficulty in determining its scope (what is a major living language?, according to who?). For example, the source makes no mention of China, which based on its population alone should be a strong contender for "major living language" or "language of consequence". Surely its omission from this paragraph does not make it an inconsequential or minor language. Perhaps a source exists that can definitively list all the languages with translations of Shakespeare, but there remains the issue of whether a language is major or not. What this boils down to for me is thus that the assertion is flawed to begin with.
The second claim of the frequency in which his plays are performed is likewise not demonstrated in the source. At least not to the level of certainty that I would normally expect.
Possible rework: His plays have been translated into numerous languages and are frequently performed in theatres internationally.
I admit that this rework doesn't solve the problem with proving the amount of different translations, nor does it remove the need for a source for the frequency of the plays' performances. I am interested in hearing what others may suggest. Is the celebrity of Shakespeare and his plays so "common knowledge" that a rigorous reference is not necessary? Can we find a sentence that is not as problematic as the original, something less biased and more easily verifiable? Perhaps the source itself should be removed?
Blackjackrobo ( talk) 22:27, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
His plays have been translated into many (major) languages, such as x [1], y [2], and z [3], ... .If that's too much detail for a lead section, we could do with just
His plays have been translated into many (major) languages [1] [2] [3], ... .We could incorporate your 3 sources in there as well.
Articles may make an analytic, evaluative, interpretive, or synthetic claim only if it has been published by a reliable secondary source.
1. The popularity of Shakespeare in Japan reportedly surpasses even that of Beethoven. Akira Kurosawa's acclaimed film adaptations of Macbeth (Throne of Blood) and King Lear (Ran, 'Chaos') are merely representative of Shakespeare's extensive penetration of Japanese culture. Similarly, Grigori Kozintsev, one of Russia's most eminent stage and film directors, acquired his international reputation mainly on the basis of his cinematic productions of Hamlet and King Lear (featuring musical scores by Shostakovitch, whose opera Katerina Ismailova was originally titled Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk). There have been film versions of most of Shakespeare's plays, and in several different languages (Hamlet has been rendered over two dozen times).
2. Allan Bloom, introducing a selection of his Shakespeare commentaries in Love and Friendship (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993), 270-1.
References
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
i found a typo in the shakespear wikipedia page where it says he produced most of his work from:1589 and 1613 that is a typo because i looked it up and did my reasearch and its actually 1590-1611 so if i could edit i woul change that miss information. Chesse5000 ( talk) 11:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
I propose changing to the second image (pictured right). The new picture is of a much higher resolution and gives a clearer impression of the building without the flowerbeds and other details in the first image. @ Chris PTR:, since you reverted my edit, perhaps you have an opinion? 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 ( talk) 11:21, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Can we give some thought to this paragraph?
The first two sentences seem to me to be correct. Given the context of the preceding sentence, perhaps "Many of the plays..." could become "The others..." (or "Most of the others..." to allow for Octavos [If indeed there are any to which this would apply, I haven't checked]). But more importantly:
Does anyone have any thoughts? AndyJones ( talk) 09:22, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
References
AndyJones ( talk) 09:22, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
In the absence of any comments, I'll take the following action in the next day or so:
Unless anyone has a comment? AndyJones ( talk) 12:27, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
He was indian 111.93.187.213 ( talk) 09:51, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
@ Astrophobe, I agree with you [7], but this should have a place somewhere, Florida Parental Rights in Education Act perhaps? Here's more sources: [8] [9] [10]. @ Jenhawk777, any thoughts? Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 18:24, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
I say, how helpful: RSC gives extensive examples of “slang or sexual language which were clearly understood by Shakespeare’s original audiences but may be less obvious to audiences today”. Patrick Stewart's old gang to the rescue. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 18:31, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I'd like to add an image and information about folio production and editions Southport1639 ( talk) 20:08, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Been doing a bit on the Guildhall of St George, King's Lynn. Can anyone point me to any detailed academic discussion on the evidence for Shakespeare having performed there in the 1590s? Much appreciated. KJP1 ( talk) 10:17, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Shake spear has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 12 § Shake spear until a consensus is reached. Seawolf35 ( talk - email) 22:23, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Why are the dates of William Shakespeare's baptism and death presented in the Julian calendar format rather than the Gregorian calendar format? This appears to contradict information found in other articles. MaxwellWinnie102 ( talk) 03:16, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
It is inappropriate for the "Chandos Portrait", an image which most likely isn't Shakespeare, to be used as the lead image. There is no proof or direct evidence that the portrait depicts Shakespeare. It may depict an entirely different person. With that said, if there are no reasonable rebuttals, I am going to remove the image, due to the flawed logic of using a speculative, potentially inaccurate image as a lead, and will put it further down in the article. -- Deedman22 ( talk) 07:50, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
[17] - This is quite an interesting discussion. But is Simon Andrew Stirling more of a "popular historian" and less of an academic, [18]? KJP1 ( talk) 08:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Based on the information given on the Wikipedia page itself, Shakespeare was 51 when he died, not 52; he was born 26 April, 1564 and died 23 April, 1616. He was 3 days off from being 52. Please change his age when he died from 52 to 51 ("aged 52" -> "aged 51"). Spacebound5800 ( talk) 02:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
With his quill as his sword and the stage as his battlefield, Shakespeare crafted tales that have transcended time leaving an lasting mark on the world of literature and beyond.From the star-crossed lovers of Romeo and Juliet to the tortured prince of Hamlet,Shakespeare's chracters the page embodying the full spectrum of human emotion,Shakespeare crafted tales that have left a lasting mark on the wall of literature.
Shakespeare's plays extend from tragedies like Hamlet and Macbeth to comedies like A Midsummer Night's Dream and Twelfth Night, resonate with audiences of all ages and backgrounds.His greatness lies not only in his poetic language but also in his ability to explore the depths of human experience as well as emotions. 43.249.185.9 ( talk) 03:08, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request to
William Gerald Tooth-Penny Shakespeare has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change william shakespear to William Shakespeare Rileyrocker8 ( talk) 13:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
'''[[
User:CanonNi]]'''
(
talk|
contribs) 13:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC)This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
William Shakespeare article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
William Shakespeare is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 10, 2007. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-3 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
"William Shakespeare […] widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language and the world's greatest dramatist."
Does anyone else, by any chance, has a problem with this introductory sentence? Is it not, out of courtesy, the common usage to say "one of the greatest (in the world)" for anybody who stands out among his peers (especially an artist), even when a large majority would admit that, indeed, this person is the greatest in their opinions. I find the turn of phrase way too definitive for an encyclopedia.
I, for one, have seen plays written by Shakespeare and of course plays by other writers, and my take on it is that Shakespeare is not the author who moved me or impressed me the most. While writing this, I stumbled upon this very good article about what G. B. Shaw called "bardolatry". It is said in this piece that, among other great writers, Tolstoy, Wittgenstein and Voltaire not only didn't consider him the greatest, but disliked his works.
In any case, I think the first sentence should be changed to "William Shakespeare […] widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language and one of the world's greatest dramatist", as I find the title of "greatest writer in the English language" not as outrageously presumptuous as the one of "world's greatest dramatist".
-- Niouyouseur ( talk) 15:40, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
"Greene's attack is the earliest surviving mention of Shakespeare's work in the theatre. Biographers suggest that his career may have begun any time from the mid-1580s to just before Greene's remarks."
Should read
Green's remarks about an upstart crow possibly refer to Shakespeare, the tigers heart line is from from HenryVI. It is not the first mention of Shakespeare's works, in Green's Menaphon 1589 Nash states "English Seneca read by candle-light yields many good sentences, as Blood is a beggar, and so forth; and if you entreat him fair in a frosty morning, he will afford you whole Hamlets, I should say handfuls of tragical speeches" (STC 12272,1589) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.35.105 ( talk) 19:51, 21 April 2021 (UTC) hiiiiiiiiii idk what this is but cool. haha. . . oops u can delete this now :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.249.118.55 ( talk) 14:03, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Audiobook of Mark Twain's "Is Shakespeare Dead?" --As a cub river pilot, one of Mark Twain’s masters was a pilot named George Ealer, who recited Shakespeare by the hour - from memory - and who was a virulent opponent of the notion that the Shakespeare plays and poems were in truth written by Sir Francis Bacon. At first, young Sam Clemens agreed with his teacher and boss, but he soon realized that it was no fun for the pilot to argue with someone who agreed with him all of the time. And so, young Sam Clemens became quite skilled in defending this position: He said he was not a Shakespearite nor a Baconite, but that he was a "Brontosaurian": he didn't know who did write them, but he knew Shakespeare didn't.
As Twain explained, "It is the very way Professor Osborn and I built the colossal skeleton brontosaur that stands fifty-seven feet long and sixteen feet high in the Natural History Museum, and is the awe and admiration of all the world, the stateliest skeleton that exists on the planet. We had nine bones, and we built the rest of him out of plaster of Paris. We ran short of plaster of Paris, or we'd have built a brontosaur that could sit down beside the Stratford Shakespeare and none but an expert could tell which was biggest or contained the most plaster."
Review: "[T]he entire audio book is a tribute to Twain's comic sense and word-play... If Is Shakespeare Dead? is one of Mark Twain's works that you've resisted reading until now, this audio book is an enjoyable way to experience one of Twain's last autobiographical writings.... Twain's words and Henzel's voice are at perfect pitch." (Kevin McConnell, in The Mark Twain Forum)_____. Is Shakespeare Dead? Narrated by Richard Henzel. (The Mark Twain in Person Audio Library, 2011) GrandpaSnazzy ( talk) 13:05, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
The box says 3 May and the article says 26 April. Where did the 3 May date come from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scotisle ( talk • contribs) 18:51, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
I am adding the information that Shakespeare holds the Guinness World record for Best selling playwright and that he is the third most translated individual author. বিড়ালতপা চক্কোত্তি ( talk) 09:50, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
including guinness book of records is trivial when talking about the most influential english writer in history. its like saying martin luther king won a grammy award for a speech. shakespeare is bigger than guinness so to speak. Shhsbavavaa ( talk) 09:45, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
It says “BaptiSED” when it should be Baptized. Jdietr601 ( talk) 19:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
See above. Please tag the 'signature' as disputed, in the column at right, and also in the text if it is shown there as well. Everything about Shakespeare's personal identity has been disputed at one time or another, but his signature disputes itself, you can provide no 'authoritative' signature of the man, and ought to be honest enough to say it. [Another locked page huh. Funny how the locked ones are always so wrong. Kill this policy, and develop a tehnological solution appropriate for the 2020s, not kludgework of the 1660s.][and PLEASE don't add a signature to my comment, particularly one which publishes my IP. Double the demerit points if you do so hiding behind a bot. Kill all bots, this is a human-edited website.] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.157.18 ( talk) 02:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
The influence section really seems to understate and downplay his influence on virtually every poet, playwright, and novelist in the English language for the past 400 years. True, the vastness of his influence is something gargantuan, but it should be noted in the lead, and expounded upon in the influence section.
The lead should certainly note: "widely regarded as the greatest and most influential writer in the English language", even at the expense of "world's greatest dramatist", which seems slightly redundant when it's already stated he is the greatest writer in the English language. Thoughts? Michael0986 ( talk) 21:28, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Is Edward de Vere or William Shakespeare the same person. If not then the Wikipedian article is right and if both are referring to the same person then why there are two entries for the same person. These are what I tackled from the book The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History by Michael H. Hart. See entry 32 in the above book. Sultan Abdul sultan ( talk) 02:49, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
You have not given a list of works by shakespare 2409:4053:E89:3488:0:0:5989:5A13 ( talk) 11:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Surely this article is incomplete without mention of his lyrics, some of the most beautiful in any language. E.g., Take, O take, those lips away, O Mistress mine, Under the greenwood tree, Come away death, Full fathom five, Fear no more the heat o' the sun? Esedowns ( talk) 14:11, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
His birthday was not the 26th it was the 23rd this is common knowledge as he died on his birthday 76.10.97.27 ( talk) 02:30, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Did Shakespeare write the play Romeo and Juliet just for fun or did it have purposes and connections to his days 41.74.49.20 ( talk) 16:53, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
What are his books 2409:4073:2E85:5CF2:B5CE:EF35:4921:E9D1 ( talk) 14:55, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
. 105.12.1.4 ( talk) 14:34, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
where is the source saying he is english? 88.109.91.6 ( talk) 22:02, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
If Shakespeare was born on 26th April 1642 (as stated in the article) and died on 23rd April 1616 (as stated in the article) then he was not 52 (as stated in the article) when he died: he died a few days before his 52nd birthday. At least one of those pieces of information has to be wrong. 86.20.64.62 ( talk) 21:01, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
hello i would like to edit pls thank u. 9Obito ( talk) 10:09, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
I was half-planning to change the primary article image to Droeshout, so before I bother figuring out how to do that, I figured I'd write my argument for changing it since I assume there'll be an argument. Maybe I'll lose it and I'll never have to figure out how to change the image!
Anyway, User:Xover (who I presume has a good understanding of the prior editorial consensus) said the image was "chosen for aesthetic reasons" by which I presume he means he thinks it looks nice. Just considered as a painting, I guess it's ok, but the main thing I think when I see it is "Some random guy, not Shakespeare." He also said that it was the image most commonly associated with Shakespeare, which I disagree with. I always associated the Droeshout engraving with Shakespeare even before I knew what it was called, since it was the image that appeared on my parents' copy of the works of Shakespeare and every book about Shakespeare I ever found growing up. The first time I ever saw the Chandos portrait was on Wikipedia. He also said it was the image with the best claim to have been painted from life, which I agree with, but that's not the same as having a strong claim to have been painted from life. The way I read Tarnya Cooper's book, it definitely doesn't have a strong claim, and I think she's way too credulous towards Vertue. And in any case, strength-of-claim-to-have-been-painted-from-life is a criterion which excludes Droeshout by definition and isn't motivated as the obviously correct criterion. He also said that Droeshout looked "Alien to modern readers." I disagree. I think it looks like Shakespeare. Maybe I'm a post-modern reader or something, I dunno.
Anyway,
User:Xover (who I presume has a good understanding of the prior editorial consensus)
said the image was "chosen for aesthetic reasons" by which I presume he means he thinks it looks nice. Just considered as a painting, I guess it's ok, but the main thing I think when I see it is "Some random guy, not Shakespeare." He also said that it was the image most commonly associated with Shakespeare, which I disagree with. I always associated the Droeshout engraving with Shakespeare even before I knew what it was called, since it was the image that appeared on my parents' copy of the works of Shakespeare and every book about Shakespeare I ever found growing up. The first time I ever saw the Chandos portrait was on Wikipedia. He also said it was the image with the best claim to have been painted from life, which I agree with, but that's not the same as having a strong claim to have been painted from life. The way I read Tarnya Cooper's book, it definitely doesn't have a strong claim, and I think she's way too credulous towards Vertue. And in any case, strength-of-claim-to-have-been-painted-from-life is a criterion which excludes Droeshout by definition and isn't motivated as the obviously correct criterion. He also said that Droeshout looked "Alien to modern readers." I disagree. I think it looks like Shakespeare. Maybe I'm a post-modern reader or something, I dunno. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
50.232.16.86 (
talk) 17:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
By contrast, Ben Johnson saw Droeshot and said it was a good likeness. Vertue never saw Shakespeare, so even if we trust the chain of provenance (which Cooper doesn't think we necessarily should), we have no idea if it was accurate or not. Like maybe Shakespeare sat for a portrait, saw the result and said "The fuck is this? You made me look like a chimney sweeper with jaundice. I'm not paying for this shit, you keep it" and that's why the portrait wasn't in the hands of Shakespeare's family, but William "No srsly guys I'm Shakespeare's illegitimate son" Davenant. There's no source which says Chandos is a good likeness, there's only the chain of provenance as reported by Vertue, which if it was accurate would only establish that some artist tried to depict Shakespeare, not that the artist succeeded. And maybe Vertue got the provenance wrong, like he did with the "Agas" map. Maybe it's a picture of some other guy. It's all so tenuous. Maybe it's the least tenuous of the potential life portraits, but we don't have to restrict ourselves to potential life portraits when we have something which was attested as accurate by someone who had actually seen Shakespeare, even if it definitely wasn't from life. This seems like a better option to me. Dingsuntil ( talk) 10:19, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
I went through some of the other arguments in favor of Chandos, which focus on the prevalence of copies of Chandos close to living memory of Shakespeare, which supposedly implies that people at the time thought it was accurate. Or something. I don't really buy this. I don't really know how all these supposed copies of Chandos are established. Like Cooper says that some painting "Early copy after the Chandos portrait" is a copy of it, but gives no indication of why she thinks it's a copy. It could just be a somewhat similar painting. Different articles here assert that either the bust or the statue of Shakespeare were done from a copy of Chandos, which may or may not be lost (definitely some cleanup needed), and it's not clear how anyone knows it was even a copy of Chandos. It's all very weird. But even if all these and more are true, they're all from around the time (1719) that Vertue said this was of Shakespeare because provenance. Maybe a few people trusted Vertue and other people trusted those people and this just led to cloud of yeah-this-is-probably-what-he-looked-like. It's definitely not "the only portrait that definitely provides us with a reasonable idea of Shakespeare's appearance" (i.e. Droeshout). Dingsuntil ( talk) 11:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
My reading of the existing consensus is that you all are (incorrectly) opposed to changing the image. Unfortunately, Wikipedia runs on consensus rather than the recognition of my personal genius & correctness, so I won't be changing the image. I still think you are all wrong, and I urge you to actually address the counterarguments I make. In particular, nobody has explained whether their opinions about what effect the image will have on modern readers are supported by any evidence, and if so what this evidence is. Like, seriously, if you've already hashed this out you could just post a link to it. I'll read it. It might even change my mind.
Obviously you are under no obligation to address my arguments or change your opinions if you can't, you can always just ignore me. But I still think you should address them. We should strive to make our consensus an informed and correct one.
Pings: SouthernNights Xover Tom Reedy
Dingsuntil ( talk) 02:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
ISBN 9789464437539 2A02:A03F:80FA:1100:6D14:ACBB:BB1F:F956 ( talk) 07:44, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
The article does not say, as it should, that he's known by his momonym, Shakespeare.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.183.110.20 ( talk) 13:11, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Very minor issue, but if you feel like having an opinion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 18:09, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
What was he famous for 5.107.234.224 ( talk) 10:38, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi, not sure on the exact process for challenging a source, but I don't want to edit the article unilaterally so I figured I'd ask for what we think of this issue first. Surely such claims as the two seen below cannot be made on Wikipedia without substantiation:
His plays have been translated into every major living language and are performed more often than those of any other playwright
I find this statement overly broad on both assertions, and the citation (#7) doesn't have any substantive evidence to back up these claims. The relevant paragraph says:
Translated into every language of consequence, often by men of considerable poetic talents themselves, Shakespeare has long had a devoted following among French, Spanish, Italian, German, and Scandinavian, as well as English-speaking readers. And if his popularity in Russia were not evidence enough, the enthusiasm with which he has been embraced by the Japanese attests to his extraordinary cross-cultural appeal. His trans-historical allure has been similarly proven: nearly four centuries after they were written, his plays continue to be performed at a rate greater than those of any dozen other playwrights combined. Indeed, special theatres have been constructed for their performance at locations all around the world,from Texas to Tokyo, Perth to Berlin.
Craig, Leon H. (2001). Of philosophers and kings: political philosophy in Shakespeare's Macbeth and King Lear. University of Toronto Press. p. 03.
I think that the claim of translation in "every major living language" suffers first from a difficulty in determining its scope (what is a major living language?, according to who?). For example, the source makes no mention of China, which based on its population alone should be a strong contender for "major living language" or "language of consequence". Surely its omission from this paragraph does not make it an inconsequential or minor language. Perhaps a source exists that can definitively list all the languages with translations of Shakespeare, but there remains the issue of whether a language is major or not. What this boils down to for me is thus that the assertion is flawed to begin with.
The second claim of the frequency in which his plays are performed is likewise not demonstrated in the source. At least not to the level of certainty that I would normally expect.
Possible rework: His plays have been translated into numerous languages and are frequently performed in theatres internationally.
I admit that this rework doesn't solve the problem with proving the amount of different translations, nor does it remove the need for a source for the frequency of the plays' performances. I am interested in hearing what others may suggest. Is the celebrity of Shakespeare and his plays so "common knowledge" that a rigorous reference is not necessary? Can we find a sentence that is not as problematic as the original, something less biased and more easily verifiable? Perhaps the source itself should be removed?
Blackjackrobo ( talk) 22:27, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
His plays have been translated into many (major) languages, such as x [1], y [2], and z [3], ... .If that's too much detail for a lead section, we could do with just
His plays have been translated into many (major) languages [1] [2] [3], ... .We could incorporate your 3 sources in there as well.
Articles may make an analytic, evaluative, interpretive, or synthetic claim only if it has been published by a reliable secondary source.
1. The popularity of Shakespeare in Japan reportedly surpasses even that of Beethoven. Akira Kurosawa's acclaimed film adaptations of Macbeth (Throne of Blood) and King Lear (Ran, 'Chaos') are merely representative of Shakespeare's extensive penetration of Japanese culture. Similarly, Grigori Kozintsev, one of Russia's most eminent stage and film directors, acquired his international reputation mainly on the basis of his cinematic productions of Hamlet and King Lear (featuring musical scores by Shostakovitch, whose opera Katerina Ismailova was originally titled Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk). There have been film versions of most of Shakespeare's plays, and in several different languages (Hamlet has been rendered over two dozen times).
2. Allan Bloom, introducing a selection of his Shakespeare commentaries in Love and Friendship (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993), 270-1.
References
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
i found a typo in the shakespear wikipedia page where it says he produced most of his work from:1589 and 1613 that is a typo because i looked it up and did my reasearch and its actually 1590-1611 so if i could edit i woul change that miss information. Chesse5000 ( talk) 11:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
I propose changing to the second image (pictured right). The new picture is of a much higher resolution and gives a clearer impression of the building without the flowerbeds and other details in the first image. @ Chris PTR:, since you reverted my edit, perhaps you have an opinion? 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 ( talk) 11:21, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Can we give some thought to this paragraph?
The first two sentences seem to me to be correct. Given the context of the preceding sentence, perhaps "Many of the plays..." could become "The others..." (or "Most of the others..." to allow for Octavos [If indeed there are any to which this would apply, I haven't checked]). But more importantly:
Does anyone have any thoughts? AndyJones ( talk) 09:22, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
References
AndyJones ( talk) 09:22, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
In the absence of any comments, I'll take the following action in the next day or so:
Unless anyone has a comment? AndyJones ( talk) 12:27, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
He was indian 111.93.187.213 ( talk) 09:51, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
@ Astrophobe, I agree with you [7], but this should have a place somewhere, Florida Parental Rights in Education Act perhaps? Here's more sources: [8] [9] [10]. @ Jenhawk777, any thoughts? Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 18:24, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
I say, how helpful: RSC gives extensive examples of “slang or sexual language which were clearly understood by Shakespeare’s original audiences but may be less obvious to audiences today”. Patrick Stewart's old gang to the rescue. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 18:31, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I'd like to add an image and information about folio production and editions Southport1639 ( talk) 20:08, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Been doing a bit on the Guildhall of St George, King's Lynn. Can anyone point me to any detailed academic discussion on the evidence for Shakespeare having performed there in the 1590s? Much appreciated. KJP1 ( talk) 10:17, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Shake spear has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 12 § Shake spear until a consensus is reached. Seawolf35 ( talk - email) 22:23, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Why are the dates of William Shakespeare's baptism and death presented in the Julian calendar format rather than the Gregorian calendar format? This appears to contradict information found in other articles. MaxwellWinnie102 ( talk) 03:16, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
It is inappropriate for the "Chandos Portrait", an image which most likely isn't Shakespeare, to be used as the lead image. There is no proof or direct evidence that the portrait depicts Shakespeare. It may depict an entirely different person. With that said, if there are no reasonable rebuttals, I am going to remove the image, due to the flawed logic of using a speculative, potentially inaccurate image as a lead, and will put it further down in the article. -- Deedman22 ( talk) 07:50, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
[17] - This is quite an interesting discussion. But is Simon Andrew Stirling more of a "popular historian" and less of an academic, [18]? KJP1 ( talk) 08:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Based on the information given on the Wikipedia page itself, Shakespeare was 51 when he died, not 52; he was born 26 April, 1564 and died 23 April, 1616. He was 3 days off from being 52. Please change his age when he died from 52 to 51 ("aged 52" -> "aged 51"). Spacebound5800 ( talk) 02:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
With his quill as his sword and the stage as his battlefield, Shakespeare crafted tales that have transcended time leaving an lasting mark on the world of literature and beyond.From the star-crossed lovers of Romeo and Juliet to the tortured prince of Hamlet,Shakespeare's chracters the page embodying the full spectrum of human emotion,Shakespeare crafted tales that have left a lasting mark on the wall of literature.
Shakespeare's plays extend from tragedies like Hamlet and Macbeth to comedies like A Midsummer Night's Dream and Twelfth Night, resonate with audiences of all ages and backgrounds.His greatness lies not only in his poetic language but also in his ability to explore the depths of human experience as well as emotions. 43.249.185.9 ( talk) 03:08, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request to
William Gerald Tooth-Penny Shakespeare has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change william shakespear to William Shakespeare Rileyrocker8 ( talk) 13:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
'''[[
User:CanonNi]]'''
(
talk|
contribs) 13:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC)