To think that Shakespeare is a little intense for Yr 7 English?

[mids2019]

My daughter is studying Romeo and Juliet for Yr 7 English. Am I being unreasonable that this play may have more impact at A level when pupils have greater critical analysis techniques and possibly a greater appreciation for English literature?

I think Shakepeare is a genius of English literature but the language is so dense and tied to contemporary Elizabethian society that I think a Yr 7 pupil could struggle and in some cases actually put pupils off a more gradual approach to literature appreciation.

I also find it difficult explaining to a 12 year old daughter how Juliet (13) is capable of making so such life changing choices such as marriage and ultimately suicide and with the perspective of 21st century society the play does seem remote in experience.

Is the bard best taught at a slightly older age?

To be clear - the low expectations come from your posts, @mids2019. Those of us who do this for a living are having a brilliant time introducing children to wonderful, rich texts and helping them to access them at their level, right the way down to three-year-olds giggling at Bottom in the CBeebies Midsummer Night’s Dream.

As someone who started their career as an English teacher I absolutely revere Shakespeare - I want to be clear about that. But I hate the way Year 7s are so often put through the silliness of A Midsummer Night's Dream. I always found it a difficult play to teach and not a great introduction to Shakespeare. The plot is very complicated and exceptionally silly, and the scene in which the Rude Mechanicals do their Wall Play very unfunny indeed (sorry - just a personal opinion and a reaction to so many instances of 11 year-olds performing it over the years). I think the Victorian's obsession with fairies is partly to blame for the popularity of this play.

I really think a short play like the Scottish one, despite (or even because of) it's goriness would be better. Instead of vapid fairies, you get terrifying witches, vengeful ghosts and the weird idea of Burnham Wood coming to Dunsinane. Much more fun! I'm not for a minute suggesting that Y7s could grasp the complexities of this play, but on the level at which they can engage with it (plot, sensation, supernatural thriller, the moral danger of corrupting ambition etc) they could get much more out of it than thinking Shakespeare is all about fairies.

There is an odd theme to some of the 'don't do Shakespeare until GCSE/A level posts of children needing to avoid Shakespeare until they can 'fully appreciate' it, which suggests a one-and-done approach to the plays, and that there is one 'right' understanding of them - rather than accessing the material at different ages and getting something different out of it each time.

I think the way many of us were taught Shakespeare was quite dry and formulaic and doesn't demonstrate how Shakespeare can be taught in a way that is much more engaging and vibrant. I was lucky enough to have an absolutely brilliant teacher for a few years who made Shakespeare an utter joy. All sorts of kids who wouldn't have thought Shakespeare was 'for them' became really engaged in debates around the themes, motivations, what Shakespeare wanted us to take away.

That teacher died last year. Nearly 30 years after she taught us, many of my old classmates reminisced about our fondness for her and how much she brought Shakespeare to life for us and kindled a lifelong love. Not just the academic kids, not just the readers and the drama geeks, either.

I agree with this. I only started to adore A Midsummer Night’s Dream once I realised the play- within-a-play was just a huge in-joke for the acting company. A bit beyond Yr 6s.

@CulturePigeon Y6 at my kids' primary do Macbeth as their 'treat' for English after SATS, my eldest is in Y6 now and cannot wait for it. The buzz around it from the previous years has made it almost legendary for the kids. You're right, for a generation raised on Horrible Histories it's accessible and huge fun, and gets them into interesting discussions.

I was trying to explain the plot of AMND to my pair last night after their theatre teacher announced that's what they're doing next term (adapted of course) and I'll admit they looked at me like I was a bit nuts. I do love the Wall play when it's done well, though.

Shakespeare in secondary school is pretty normal I think? I don't remember which I did in Yr 7 but I'm sure we did one most years

The plays were intended to be performed, , not to be read, so I do think it’s good to show children a film of the play at the same time - or take them to a performance - but theatre tickets are £££.

It was way back in the Dark Ages when we were doing Henry V at school, but even then we were shown the old (colour) version, with Laurence Olivier - which really brought it to life.

My parents used to take us to see plays from when we were little. They lived going to the theatre and opera and we would go too. Tickets weren’t hugely expensive then and much more affordable (I’m sure the costs have gone up loads more than inflation).

Midsummer nights dream is an easier introduction to Shakespeare imo

I think your remarks about lofty 'quoting of the bard' by public schoolboys vs typical British comp kids not getting it is a silly stereotype which doesn't reflect reality and does a disservice to kids in both camps. I say that someone who has taught for nearly 30 years in private schools, comps, a few primaries and now a grammar school.

School kids don't waft around 'quoting the bard', wherever they go to school. And there are many intelligent, insightful students in all schools who are perfectly capable of understanding Shakespeare. You don't wait until they're old enough for it to be easy. You teach them to understand, evaluate and appreciate things that challenge them. That's the whole point.

There will be plenty students in any school who won't develop a liking for Shakespeare, from posh public schoolboys who think it's a load of bollocks and would rather be on the rugby pitch to working class teenagers who don't find it relevant to their lives. That doesn't mean they shouldn't get the chance to experience it. It's not as if they all appreciate maths, geography or physics!

No an average year 7 is unlikely to get a ‘full’ appreciation of Romeo and Juliet but they absolutley should be reading it!

They can read it again when they are 16 or 18 or 75 and get more out of it then. Heck they could even go see the play!

People nowerdays seem to forget that they can enjoy things more than once. I think it’s because most mass-consumed entertainment is drivel that people only read /watch to see what happens next. Shakespeare has stood the test of time on more than plot alone. I expect most of us knew what happened in R&J before reading it even for the first time!

@mids2019 I am really shocked by your low expectations, both of primary school children and of their teachers.

Our skill is to introduce the material to the children in a way that they can access.

A child who watches the CBeebies AMND will interact with the material in a different way from a Year 4 child discussing why the Montagues and Capulets might hate each other and how their body language might show that in the street or at the ball.

The Year 5 child following Macbeth’s character changing from loyal super-soldier to traitorous tyrant will enjoy that learning just as much as a Year 10 student will appreciate the themes of the supernatural and male character types.

You don’t watch/read/study Shakespeare once and that’s your lot! You come back and back and gain something new each time. Our job in Primary School is to ensure that when they meet Shakespeare in Secondary School or in adult life, they have a secure expectation that they will enjoy it and understand it - because they did when they were 4, 8 or10!

Shakespeare is a requirement of the national curriculum for the UK - she won't be learning the ins and outs like an A-level student, but she'll be learning the skills required for her GCSEs where they have unseen literary extracts.

Besides, the more alarming issue should be that literacy skills in the UK are falling in high schools so the fact that your DD is learning this is great! Encourage her, but also reassure her that Shakespeare is meant to be hard and puzzling (in a fun way) so if it doesn't make sense now, it could in 2-3years

At my advanced age, I gained an insight into the character of Tybalt from Gary Avis’s performance in the Royal Ballet production of R+J last year. It’s ridiculous to suggest that there is a specific age when Shakespeare becomes comprehensible or ‘appropriate’.

As you develop, your understanding does. If you laugh at Stephano and Trinculo at one age, you revel in Prospero’s powers at another stage and empathise with Caliban still later.

I think the issue here is with engagement. The thread has many contributors who are rightly passionate about Shakespeare and yes I understand that I like Shakespeare but it certainly puts me in a minority where I live

Friends and colleagues mention Shakespeare as something that had to be endured rather than enjoyed bad has in some cases led to a disengagment with literature

My daughter has 3 separate teachers concentrating on R and J at school and I get the impression they aren't enthusing their classes yet. My daughter did fairly well in her SATs for English but now I detect a real apathy with English currently. I try and talk to her about Romeo and Juliet and their piteous overthrows but she is pretty absent of enthusiasm.

I think taking my daughter to see a play is a fantastic idea but I have to say there aren't many families in my neck of the woods that go and see Shakespeare at the theatres as a matter of course (Love Island gets a bit of enthusiasm though).

I know there are many dedicated English teachers out there and probably extremely good at bringing the best out of pupils but my daughter and her peers would rather do a thousand and one things rather than go to the RSC.

I think this is a shame because I think my daughters and her peers are able and ambitious but there is still a perceived element of elitism with Shakepeare that needs challenging so more kids get more drawn into it

Not at all!

I try and talk to her about Romeo and Juliet and their piteous overthrows but she is pretty absent of enthusiasm.

If that is how you actually talk to her about the play then I am not surprised. You sound unbelievably pompous.

Your earlier post summarising her interpretation of the play was pretty accurate. You might not think much of her teachers but they’ve clearly given her a sound understanding of the text.

What you’ve got on your hands, OP, is a pre-teen. Prepare yourself for a lot more absence of enthusiasm over the next few years.

OP You write your posts like you are writing an essay.

I took DD to see an outdoor 'as you like it' aged 11. Did she understand it? Probably not much. But it exposed her to Shakespeare in a fun and relaxed way.

Two years later she played one of the female characters in the same play at school.

Have you heard of building cultural capital? Who cares if no none you know goes to the theatre?

I think taking my daughter to see a play is a fantastic idea but I have to say there aren't many families in my neck of the woods that go and see Shakespeare at the theatres as a matter of course (Love Island gets a bit of enthusiasm though).

You sound exactly, honestly exactly, like Adrian Mole. Is this a parody?

I don't think I can make my daughter the greatest fan of the bard that is all.

How is saying no one goes to see Shakespeare around me necessarily parody? It is simply a fact. Peer pressure plays a part in that my daughter doesn't want to to the theatre because her friends don't.

I think this is a shame because I think my daughters and her peers are able and ambitious but there is still a perceived element of elitism with Shakepeare that needs challenging so more kids get more drawn into it.

I'm not sure the answer to the perception of difficulty/elitism is to make it even more rarefied by saving it for A level, tbh.

Surely better to make it a normal part of the curriculum from early on with the plots and characters and introduce the more challenging aspects over time, rather than not doing any Shakespeare and then Doing Shakespeare.

Example - my 7yo got PROPERLY excited last night when I told him that there was a Julia Donaldson book with the plot of one of the Shakespeare plays they'd recently been talking about (Hamlet, R&J.) I offered a hot chocolate if he worked it out. He did!

So, OP, drag her along to see a couple of productions with decent reviews. Taking your kid to stuff that they don't think they'll enjoy is parenting. That's what we do, regardless of what their mates think. That's why they live with us, not their mates. And if she thinks a production is crap, she can properly tell you why, which is great learning.

Or have her watch the Claire Danes and Leonardo di Caprio 1996 film as it stays true to the original script.
www.imdb.com/title/tt0117509/?ref_=tt_ch

Please, stop referring to Shakespeare as ‘the bard’.

You can’t ‘make’ your daughter a fan of anything. You can introduce her to things and expose her to new ideas but she is becoming a young adult and needs space to form her own tastes. I’m afraid that she’s entering the age where her parents’ enthusiasm is the absolute kiss of death for something.