AIBU to think that it isn't necessary to teach Shakespeare like this?

[Cortina]

Shakespeare

I think most children are capable of understanding Shakespeare and deserve a teacher who can bring the plays to life in an intelligent, lively and enthusiastic manner. Even if a teacher personally believes children aren't smart enough to grasp the ideas, message and the subject matter is too far removed from their lives to be relevant they should give it a go and see if the children surprise them. Even if a teacher despises Shakespeare and thinks him dull and irrelevant this shouldn't influence their teaching surely?

I can see it might be fun to re-write the words as an exercise afterwards and do a spot of filming but not with the mindset that this is because most are incapable of grasping it otherwise.

Still cringing at the girl that wants to 'change it into modern'.

green, what I was getting at was that, yes, students of 15 won't know what it's like to be Cleopatra. Thank god, I have no clue what it's like to be most of the characters in most tragedies. It's not relevant. I think it's a mistake to say students can't enjoy these plays just because they can't be expected to understand all the emotions and all the concepts - who could?

I think if someone can follow the plot of Neighbours, they can get something out of Shakespeare, so why not teach it?

YABU.
This is PART of a process, not the whole journey.
Don't be snotty, sneery and narrow minded!

Yes, I can see if you have EAL it might be challenging/a different story. What happens if you are just an average 15 or 16 year old as I once was? In the sense you are in the bottom english GCSE (O'level as I am so old) set. Have things changed so vastly that this group are now labelled 'less able' and people can't really expect too much from the poor things?

I've just been looking at some past GCSE questions, they don't demand knowledge of 'intricate meanings behind the language of Shakespeare' as far as I can see. They actually look very straightforward and if you'd been paying attention throughout the course shouldn't present too much of a problem i'd have thought? Especially if you'd asked for help when you'd got stuck, used self-help skills and the internet if you needed clarification etc. They seem to expect you to re-tell the story by and large? If so then I can see why acting it out in a modern context makes sense.

It's a long time since I took O'level but we were expected to have a huge amount of quotations off by heart & to be able to use them in context. What's the format for the English Lit exams these days? Is there still coursework? If so what percentage and is this taken under exam conditions at school?

LittleRedDragon

I don't think it should be just about getting "something" out of it - education (and particularly Shakespeare) is more important than that. So many children are turned off Shakespeare because it's tackled when they're too young - they might get something out of it (other than a dislike for Shakespeare) but if it had been introduced at a more appropriate stage in their development - they might just get a lot more out of it.
I wouldn't necessarily say that young students "can't" enjoy Shakespeare - I would argue that they don't (relative to other contemporary writers in English).
But that can be changed, by using Branagh's adaptations for example, the ability to freeze and replay the action makes understanding Shakespeare a heck of a lot easier for most people - children and adults alike.
I think if you can come to Shakespeare later in life, with the capacity to understand him and his place in the canon of literature, then there's a better chance you will come away with a positive experience.

Agree with Cookie Monster that starting from a position it's dull and uninteresting is self defeating. Blu my school was pretty rough but the difference was the teachers seemed much more passionate (as I said I want to go and see more before I jump to conclusions) and it was assumed that even us apparently dim ones could do it. We'd have to work very hard but there was no reason why we couldn't get incrementally better. I had a teacher that taught me Hardy for O'level. She was amazing and pointed out a link between Old paintings and the scenes he describes. Damon and Clym play dice illuminated by thousands of glow worms, this could be an old master painting. I began to see how everything was illuminated from the outside or within. She later taught me Barchester Towers for A'level, she adored Trollope (or so I thought) she told us how he was seen as a dull post office clerk but brought characters to life just as well as Dickens. I bumped into her years later and she told me she didn't much care for either Dickens or Trollope. What a brilliant woman, you can imagine what she was like on writers she loved.

I sort of see what you're saying green - I just don't like it very much. I hated being told 'oh, you can't possibly understand this properly, you're far too young'.

We ended up doing Mrs Frisby and the Rats of Nimh for a whole bloody year because it was 'age appropriate' when we were 12 ..... oh my Lord, how bored we were! At least Shakespeare usually has some sex, violence or at least the chance to watch a film or get up and act out parts.

I'd rather people didn't get a sense of Shakespeare and his place in the canon - I think it makes them treat him with too much respect and not enough interest.

But this is probably my own biases coming through!

Greentown, I think you are right about appreciating Shakespeare more later in life. If it wasn't for an early introduction I might not have been receptive at all though, believing it wasn't 'for the likes of me'. Trollope wasn't a wildly popular choice for A'level as I recall but our teacher said we might come back to his other novels later in life, the same for L.P. Hartley. I did.

I have to pop out but will come back to this

yabu the whole point is that shakespeare's characters, themes and plots are timeless and translate very well to modern day

My personal experience of Shakespeare has shaped my feelings profoundly. I'm not English and first encountered Shakespeare at age 13/14 in another country. Julius Caesar was compulsory. I had no background or context for this and couldn't really understand it at all. I think the teacher knew this and really aimed us towards learning by rote so that we would pass the exams - which we did. I never looked at Shakespeare again (did read other fiction though) until years later I saw the Baz Luhrman film and it really was like a veil had been lifted! Suddenly I saw the truth of what was there. Watched it again with the text of the play and used it to translate the language (Arden editions are the best ever!) Did the same with Othello and the Branagh films. The thing is, I know that there is nothing that my original teacher could have done to make me see Shakespeare as worthwhile - I was just too immature. I wish it could have been possible - would have saved me years of painful growing up!

I agree peanutdream and if this is indeed one part of the approach and the plays are delivered without the forgone conclusion they far too difficult, dull and inaccessible otherwise then I'm all for it.

Cortina

"The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there."

LP Hartley - knock your socks off! The Go-Between amazing!

but of course you teach the words. they have to access the actual play. but putting a modern twist on it is a great way in

eg. romeo and juliet act 1 scene 1, read the scene, explore the language, the references, the characters and then as a task, the students can adapt it to a particular time, including references relevant to whatever time they choose to adapt it to

it's actually quite challenging and requires the use of all sorts of skills - they learn a lot and it is a very rewarding activity. apart from anything else they learn that one of shakespeare's interests was people and their motivations - what it means to be a human/the decisions that humans make, right or wrong.

this is a sure fire way to show them this as his plays translate and adapt so well

'The thing is, I know that there is nothing that my original teacher could have done to make me see Shakespeare as worthwhile - I was just too immature'

it is so true with some students. hopeless!

Sorry, meant to write they ARE far too difficult etc.

How lucky were we and what an amazing teacher. I enjoyed Marion, Ted and all the simmering sexual tension as an adolescent! :)

they also learn that greed then is the same as greed now, murder then the same as murder now, guilt, mercy, fate, love, hate yadda yadda yadda

this actually makes them more open to studying the 'real' shakespeare rather than seeing it as completely alien and 'dry' or 'long' as they might say

Young people are able to understand more than they are given credit for.
I remember a programme on Sky a few years ago when children from disadvantaged backgrounds performed 'Romeo and Juliet' in the West End.
They were fantastic and really understood the language.
I don't think there is anything wrong with using different methods to make Skakespeare fun, however , one should never underestimate the abilities of students.

You are not being unreasonable to assume children can experience Shakespeare's language meaningfully, but as others have suggested on here, this is one of a variety of approaches that might be used as a way in by teachers.

It is an approach which may help break down that initial resistance expressed by children who have absorbed, through cultural conditioning,(negative or positive) that Shakespeare is hard/not for them/irrelevant/swotty. His position in the canon can be very intimidating.

It has the benefit of demonstrating the timeslessness of Shakespeare's characters and themes and their relevance to today's audiences.

Better at the very least that children know something of his stories than nothing - complete ignorance of someone who is such a cultural icon serves only to exclude further pupils who are already excluded in so many ways.

Francis Gilbert writes quite a lot about his pedagogy and about education generally: www.mca-agency.com/author.php?id=17