/lit/ - Literature

He was a slaming saggot

>>10977833
im just kidding by the way, just wanted to the do f/s thing

>>10977849
whats the f/s thing?

>>10977854
look at the bottom of the page of OP image right above the date 1609:

to be folde by william a(l?)pley

we assume it is sold(e?)
Some S's changed to F

F's not changed to S's, but I did in my attempt at humor

>>10977823
Shakespeare? "Shakespeare" was a secret society of Elizabethian art cognoscenti, who created the biggest literary forgery in history.

>>10977833
Kek

Also Marlowe was the true faggot but in a good way God bless him

>>10977823
They’re unbelievably gay, every single sonnet that references a lover reeks of ambiguatious deflection from the object of desire. Beautiful masterpiece, and the only work I appreciate of his, but its rather obvious, like with Plato, that he’s a homosexual

>>10977928
it's not an f it's a long-s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_s

you ſuckers

>>10977961
this is slander. shakespeare couldn't have wrote such great poetry if he didn't love women. no one can

>>10977950
you wish this was true to make your own lack of individual accomplishment seem palpable

>>10977994
it's nothing as bad as that, most regular people just have a hard time understanding genius

>>10977994
*palatable

>>10977950
>Elizabethian
>he still thinks elizabeth was a person and not three chinese midgets on a unicycle that created the greatest royal impersonation in history

>>10977823
>wrote 126 love poems to a dude
>was he gay?

nah he just lost 126 bets

>>10978024
>Ohhhh Robert, careth to placeth another bet with this saucy wench under the dauntless moonbeam?

>>10977823
People are just too fucking dumb to understand simple Elizabethan poetry these days, OP. There's nothing gay in the sonnets. If you need translations, I can help.

>>10977823
you have no idea how deep it goes
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xHiad18ZwcY

Shit poems imo.

>>10977823
>he
obviously she was not gay, the sonnets are addressed to a man

>>10978344
Shit taste imo.

>>10978395
No, they are too wordy. It interrupts the flow of the poetry. Also, the conceits are often kind of lame, and he repeats himself endlessly. Often he's just being clever for the sake of it, it's obnoxious. I don't get why they are rated so highly.

>>10977994
this
>>10978001
also this

>>10978420
t. dan schneider
go back to cosmoetica no one wants you here
shakesgod is the GOAT

>>10978420
please don’t say any more or i’m going to be ill.

>>10978430
I read a translation of Catullus the other day that surpasses all the Sonnets put together.

>>10978420
The triangle drama is complete nonsense.
The poem about his name being will probably the worst thing shakespeare has written. But you can't argue against shakespeare mastering the sonnet, unless you rank milton higher or something.

>When to the sessions of sweet silent thought
>I summon up remembrance of things past,
>I sigh the lack of many a thing I sought,
>And with old woes new wail my dear time’s waste:
>Then can I drown an eye, unus’d to flow,
>For precious friends hid in death’s dateless night,
>And weep afresh love’s long since cancell’d woe,
>And moan the expense of many a vanish’d sight:
>Then can I grieve at grievances foregone,
>And heavily from woe to woe tell o’er
>The sad account of fore-bemoaned moan,
>Which I new pay as if not paid before.
>But if the while I think on thee, dear friend,
>All losses are restor’d and sorrows end.

Find me a better sonnet, i dare you.

>>10978466
>translation

>>10978420
>I don't get why they are rated so highly.
for the same reason rare hard to find cuts of the beatles, elvis, and bob dylan may be rated highly, a great artists masterpieces can get consumed so much there may begin to be a seeping into their lesser known, and still due to them being attached to the master, automatically possess significance.

Also perhaps Shakespeare benefited by the form and characteristics (pun intended) of the play, to come from all the angles and fit in flourishes where he wanted and could, more breath and breadth, then simply a single characters poetic ramblings in vacuum

and also maybe the drama and gravitas and action of the plays, as well as him with his setting the bar so high, it was impossible to approach that in the poems, they were fated to pale in comparison

>>10978475
Too wordy. My mind switches off the moment he expects me to "decipher" his shitty syntax. No, it's not because I'm a retard, it's because poetry should be pleasing not pointlessly baffling - so I refuse out of principle. This is called "good taste".
This is also why Sonnet 18 is the best one: it flows the best, with the clearest imagery.

Here's a better sonnet. A translation of Petrarch (I guess it must be even more superior in the original Italian):

She ruled in beauty o'er this heart of mine,
A noble lady in a humble home,
And now her time for heavenly bliss has come,
'Tis I am mortal proved, and she divine.
The soul that all its blessings must resign,
And love whose light no more on earth finds room,
Might rend the rocks with pity for their doom,
Yet none their sorrows can in words enshrine;
They weep within my heart; and ears are deaf
Save mine alone, and I am crushed with care,
And naught remains to me save mournful breath.
Assuredly but dust and shade we are,
Assuredly desire is blind and brief,
Assuredly its hope but ends in death.

>>10978489
That's what I mean. Even in translation Shakespeare is easily surpassed.

>>10978501
stop shitting up this thread, dumbass

>>10978501
>shitty syntax
Shakespeare is as english as english gets. What's next, chaucer has bad syntax? Petrarch wasn't even the best sonneteer in his langauge, step up.

My lady carries love within her eyes;
All that she looks on is made pleasanter;
Upon her path men turn to gaze at her;
He whom she greeteth feels his heart to rise,
And droops his troubled visage, full of sighs,
And of his evil heart is then aware:
Hate loves, and pride becomes a worshiper.
O women, help to praise her in somewise.
Humbleness, and the hope that hopeth well,
By speech of hers into the mind are brought,
And who beholds is blessèd oftenwhiles,
The look she hath when she a little smiles
Cannot be said, nor holden in the thought;
'Tis such a new and gracious miracle.

>>10978466
>I read a translation of Catullus
where, if online post it

>>10978501
>Too wordy
How in the fuck does a sonnet with a set number of syllables per line possibly become too wordy? Fucking contrarians

>>10978475
>unless you rank milton
People that rank Milton above Shakespeare are the biggest cucks in all of literature.

>>10978943
I don't even disagree that Shakespeare was better but seeing anybody unironically toss around the word cuck or soyboy makes their opinion lose all value instantly

>>10978951
No it doesn't.

>>10978876
Catullus LXXVI

If there is any pleasure in remembering past good deeds
for a man, when he believes that he is dutiful,
nor he has violated any sacred trust, nor in any pact
of the gods to have abused divine power to deceive men,
then many joys remain for you in your long life, Catullus,
prepared from this thankless love.
For anything that a man is able to do or to say well to another
these have been done and said by you.
All of which things have died entrusted to this ungrateful mind.
So why do you keep torturing yourself further?
Why not be firm in the mind and lead yourself out from there,
and stop being miserable with the gods unwilling?
It is difficult to suddenly put away a long love
It is difficult, but you must effect this in some way or other:
it is the one salvation, this must be conquered by you
You must do this, whether it is impossible or possible.
Oh gods, if it is yours to feel pity, or if ever
you have saved someone in the nick of time in death itself
Look upon pathetic me! And, if I have lived life purely,
take away this pestilence and ruin from me,
which creeping down to my inner most self like a paralysis
takes away happiness from my whole heart.
Now I do not seek, that she loves me in return
or, (that which is not possible), that she chooses to be chaste
I wish myself to be well, and to put down this foul disease
Oh Gods! return this to me in return for my piety.

>>10978501
>Too wordy
You're like a little baby
Watch this


0

Harold Hart Crane Follow
The Broken Tower
The bell-rope that gathers God at dawn
Dispatches me as though I dropped down the knell
Of a spent day - to wander the cathedral lawn
From pit to crucifix, feet chill on steps from hell.

Have you not heard, have you not seen that corps
Of shadows in the tower, whose shoulders sway
Antiphonal carillons launched before
The stars are caught and hived in the sun's ray?

The bells, I say, the bells break down their tower;
And swing I know not where. Their tongues engrave
Membrane through marrow, my long-scattered score
Of broken intervals… And I, their sexton slave!

Oval encyclicals in canyons heaping
The impasse high with choir. Banked voices slain!
Pagodas, campaniles with reveilles out leaping-
O terraced echoes prostrate on the plain!…

And so it was I entered the broken world
To trace the visionary company of love, its voice
An instant in the wind (I know not whither hurled)
But not for long to hold each desperate choice.

My word I poured. But was it cognate, scored
Of that tribunal monarch of the air
Whose thigh embronzes earth, strikes crystal Word
In wounds pledged once to hope - cleft to despair?

The steep encroachments of my blood left me
No answer (could blood hold such a lofty tower
As flings the question true?) -or is it she
Whose sweet mortality stirs latent power?-

And through whose pulse I hear, counting the strokes
My veins recall and add, revived and sure
The angelus of wars my chest evokes:
What I hold healed, original now, and pure…

And builds, within, a tower that is not stone
(Not stone can jacket heaven) - but slip
Of pebbles, - visible wings of silence sown
In azure circles, widening as they dip

The matrix of the heart, lift down the eye
That shrines the quiet lake and swells a tower…
The commodious, tall decorum of that sky
Unseals her earth, and lifts love in its shower.

>>10978979
I said earlier, I have too much good taste to read such rubbish. Poets that make themselves obscure through mere words rather than through the real obscurity of mystery - I have nothing but contempt for.

>>10978974
>>10978556
>>10978501
>Poetry in translation
Absolutely fucking disgusting
Please head back to crabbit

>>10978991
>he doesn't know that all poetry is a translation from the pure Idea into words
get a load of this retard

>>10977823
>Not knowing that the sonnets taken together tell a story
>assuming the voice speaking in the sonnets is Shakespeare

>>10977928
You're retarded.

>>10979011
this isn't even a funny shitpost
it's like you wanted to show off, but only ironically, but you still wanted to show off

>>10978991
If it was good enough for Napoleon it's good enough for me, you faggot brainlet.

>>10979141
Napoleon was a pleb who read books by women and had the equivalent of audio books of his time (he had books read to him).

>>10977987
stupid thought and stupid post

t. homophobic hetero

>>10979178
I am not taking any side or even thinking about what has been said, but who are some great gay poets (I only know Sappho, and she dug women supposedly)

>>10979218
lol’ing at you

the gaying of history is a lot like the post-hoc black face applied by the we wuz kangs crowd.

it's scary how little intellectual achievies you gays have that you need to rip irrelevant dead white males from practically prehistory.

>>10977823
Nether, he is just expressed admiration for the guy. People nowdays are just taking his words for what they mean today, when in fact they had different meaning. Now, parts written about the dark lady, are erotic.

>>10979178
i don't have any issue with homosexuals, but the muses are women. shakespeare wasn't a faggot

>>10978501
>No, it's not because I'm a retard
Got some bad news anon

>>10979231
But unlike black people who might not have geographically been around certain areas, homosexuality is always present.

>>10979373
i think 90% of homosexuality comes about from circumstances in society (say if men & women are generally seperated)

>>10979373
>>10979396
that said history was surely whitewashed

Sonnets are severely overused.
Henry VI and Richard III are where it's at, if you ask me. Some of the best stuff ever written by man

>>10979439
Henry VI...?

That's an... idiosyncratic... choice.

>>10979231
>intellectual achievies

>>10979445
Henry VI's Gloucester is top-notch

>>10977823
There is not the slightest evidence for Shakespeare being gay in the sonnets. Look, when Mary Wriothesley, Countess of Southampton, better known as the woman who's actually providing the cash for her son to be your patron, tells you to write some fucking sonnets to convince said 21 year-old son to stop being such a coy flirt and marry Lord Burghley's eldest granddaughter, Elizabeth Vere, you fucking DO IT. And when the little wretch instead impregnates and then secretly marries Elizabeth Vernon, one of Queen Elizabeth's ladies-in-waiting, and the Queen finds out, has your son and his bride both locked in Fleet Prison and, after their release, never again receives them into her favour, you say "I told you so, you dumbass," and cut Shakespeare off, because obviously his sonnets didn't work. And when your husband dies and Queen Elizabeth sells the wardship and custody of your son to Lord Howard of Effingham for £1,000, you relinquish the administration of your estate to Edward Gage, become the Dowager Countess of Southampton, marry the courtier Sir Thomas Heneage, Vice-Chamberlain of the Queen's Household, get stuck paying off his debts when he dies five measly months after the wedding, marry William Hervey, 1st Baron Hervey, and die in 1607 so Shakespeare can finally publish his sonnet collection without fear. Something like that. Anyway, my point is that this crowd led some pretty exciting lives.