/lit/ - Literature

LMAOOOOOOOOOOO AAAAAAAAA why are you the best poster

I legit cannot understand why people pretend to like theater, I can't think of a single fucking playwright that is not better as literature.

>>10173148
How many times have you gone to the theater?

>>10173202
I was a theater musician for a while, so quite a few.

>>10173148
You're either an autistic pleb who can't into theater or you simply don't go to theater. I pity you.

>>10173148
i can't think of a single one that is better as literature

>>10173211
>I was a talentless hack surrounded by talentless hacks.
Kill yourself, uncultured pig.

>>10173214
>>10173262
What am I missing? I can't see how any of their words are elevated by being performed.
>>10173278
It wasn't like a student theater or anything, it was an institutional theater, all professionals.

>>10173299
You better read aloud when you read or you literally don't get Shakespeare

The people who say that are just too lazy to learn Shakespearean English and read his plays.

>>10173148
Agreed. Theater involves actors which are wicked type of people and dillutes the vision of the actual artist. Litteratura, like all legitimate art, gives total control to the artist.

>>10173148
I really hate it when they try to "modernize" or "give an alternate take" on a certain work.

>>10173433
Yes I read all poetry and plays aloud the first time I read them, but if it's an actually profound piece it is strong enough on its own.
>>10173475
Legit, I've increasingly taken the same attitude to music. It's rare to hear a performance that can match or surpass what I hear in my head when studying the score.
>>10173482
I don't necessarily mind, it can work in films for example, but that is of course because film's strength is not in its script.

>>10173148
It's less about the literary experience and more about the sense of immersion. I don't think there will ever be a play with the same depth as something like War and Peace or Middlemarch, but sometimes it's just fun to watch actors do cool shit.

Shakespeare was essentially the Tarantino of his time, so I don't see why approaching his work as popcorn entertainment is a problem.

Since a lot of dirty great atmosphere is used to tell the story of Shakespeare's works, you are in fact leaving out a layer when you simply read it, yes.

you're not wrong. that being said, going to the theater is a snoozefest.

>>10173639
But Shakespeare is a great poet and Tarantino is a shit filmmaker (with "cool", "jewish" scripts that appeal to American critics)

I despise actors so I make a point of avoiding performances. Reading only for me.

>>10173678
>shit filmmaker
Ed wood was a shitty filmmaker. Tarantino is a fine director with mediore/borrowed ideas but has a certain knack for charm and staying power. Pulp fiction is watchable forever, even if it is spammed by every teenager ever.

>>10173701
Pulp Fiction may as well have been a radioplay, Tarantino is an extremely weak filmmaker.

>>10173639
did you just compare shakespeare to tarantino you absolute fucking mongoloid?

>>10173639
>Shakespeare was essentially the Tarantino of his time
How dare you

>>10173148

>I legit cannot understand why people pretend to like theater

Theater's been relegated to an old fart medium, with tha kidz preferring YouTube and Netflix. But great theater (I recall being blown away by August: Osage County and Brief Encounter) is an altogether unique experience. As Brook as said, the theater tends to price itself out, keeping all but a small subset of the community (the rich, mostly) away from it

>I can't think of a single fucking playwright that is not better as literature

Shakespeare

>>10173696
>>10173475
Holden was right. What IS it about actors that makes them so unpleasant?

>>10173678
>>10173775
>>10173789
>His writing bridged the gap between popular entertainment and art.
>He emphasizes themes of love, loss, human folly, justice, and power.
>He injects semi-philosophical discourse into conversations between his characters.
>His mis-en-scene isn't hyper important because he knows his talent lies in monologue and dialog.
>He kills off a higher-than-average number of his characters.
Huh, I wonder why someone would make that comparison.

>>10175287
>Huh, I wonder why someone would make that comparison.
Because they are ignorant of both literature and cinema

>>10172845
But this is literally true.

>>10175287
>>10175300
>samefagging
absolutely howling at you lad

>>he injects semi-philosophical discourse into conversation
H O W L I N G

>shakespeare made enormous contributions to the english vernacular, helped stabilise the english language
>shakespeare's mastery of poetics and language have never been matched even today
>incredible philosopher, took influence from montaigne, many figures from antiquity

you can't compare the two, they aren't similar at all

>>10173148
kys pls

>>10173482
every fucking play I see is like this
seeing a play done without some kind of contrived modernisation would be a novelty in itself for me

>>10176243
>samefagging
k well I only posted the latter quote so try again next time, or rather don't because those two quotes completely contradict eachother

>>10176243
Fucking retard, instead of howling you should settle down and grab a book to try and increase your reading comprehension.

>>10176292
>>10176297
yeah i was a bit hasty in my replying, w/e
my points still stand

>>10172845
idiot.

>>10173148
Brecht.

>go see macbeth
>the prop is a skateboard ramp
>protagonist is a woman in white overalls
>shouts and screams and throws herself around

wtf i hate shakespeare since then

>>10176243
I'm not trying to elevate Tarantino to Shakespeare's level, just saying that they have similar tendencies and are both exemplary of the limits of their respective mediums.

You could even argue that a Tarantino film is actually more unified than a modern production of Shakespeare, because it will have been directed by the same person who wrote it, and he will have had intimate relationships with everyone involved (cast, DP, producers, etc.).

Again, Shakespeare is better than Tarantino by a long shot, but they're both constrained by their mediums. The overall point is that a novel, because the author has absolute control over everything but the cover and the font size, has more potential for breadth, depth, and unity than any play or film.

>>10173144
upvoted and retweeted

I read Julius Caesar the other day because I love Rome and it was great. Where do I go from here?

(I read Hamlet, Macbeth, Othello and Lear in high school, so I guess I must reread those too ASAP.)

>>10176358
No, you fucking autist, they don't. Neck yourself instead of shitposting.

>>10173639
Daaamn these basket weavers...

>>10173482
Shakespeare did a bit of both himself.

>>10173148
>if I don't like something then everyone else is pretending

>>10177953
Just get a copy of his Complete Works and read in chronological order.

But, of course, you should know the Greeks and the Bible first.