Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> One such person whom I know actually watches Shakespeare productions for entertainment.

You make it sound like this is some kind of rarity. That’s ridiculous: Shakespeare plays are incredibly common and popular, and lots of people watch them for fun – because they’re fun! You can probably find one in any major metropolitan area on any given weekend.



> You can probably find one in any major metropolitan area on any given weekend.

I can also find dog fighting in any major metropolitan area on any given weekend, this doesn't necessarily mean its common and popular. The most common plays performed are in the public domain and most of the time still struggle horribly to survive. Despite (A) being easily recognizable and (B) cheaper to produce.

The plays people actually go see, and I hear regular people discuss are like Mama Mia and Spamalot. Basically, if it wasn't on broadway you have no hope of getting a general audience in.

It is some kind of rarity, because the list of things that 99% of the population do in their free time does not include 'enjoy shakespeare'. I rarely watch a movie twice, and I haven't seen a shakespeare film since I was forced to in high school. But get this, I actually enjoy the writings of shakespeare it's just that there's things that are culturally relevant today.


I can also find dog fighting in any major metropolitan area on any given weekend, this doesn't necessarily mean its common and popular. The most common plays performed are in the public domain and most of the time still struggle horribly to survive.

You're speaking, of course, solely for the US.


Are you claiming there is no dog fighting in Europe?


I think he's claiming that plays are more popular in Europe.


I would be very surprised to find dog fighting in most of Western Europe. (The UK might have some)

But in Eastern Europe, sure.


You're totally right, but like any old, "high" art, Shakespeare's popularity partially includes people who actually get it and enjoy them and partially includes people who are self-congratulatory about how "cultured" they are. In Shakespeare's time, it was basically popular entertainment with lots of violence and dirty jokes, but there's centuries of difference in language and cultural context that provides a barrier to entry for contemporary audiences, and likewise there's an air of artistic prestige to it that's grown in the intervening centuries, so the way someone in Elizabethan England would watch a Shakespeare play for fun is extremely different from the cultural practice of Shakespeare productions today.

Music's another good example--from any objective standpoint, there's music being produced today that matches or exceeds the artistic merit of any of the old composers; likewise, tons of the old composers were popular musicians in their own day. But there's an awkward separation between high culture and popular culture, mostly based on how old something is.

It might come off as silly to actually portray this in science fiction, but it's interesting to wonder how people a century or two from now will approach the art we're producing today. Will there be cover bands performing Metallica's "Master of Puppets" who are treated with the same reverence as contemporary orchestras performing Wagner operas? Will people wear formal clothing and sit quietly, not realizing that it was meant to be music for sweaty teenagers to run around and body-slam each other to?


> there's an awkward separation between high culture and popular culture, mostly based on how old something is.

That's an interesting notion that may prove true in the future, but a few exceptions aside, I don't think it accurately describes the history of what you'd call "the western canon." The reality is that in the past, most popular art has been completely forgotten a few generations out. Of course there are exceptions, but the overwhelming number of plays, songs, novels, paintings, etc are dust. Your example of Shakespeare was a bit off the mark, because while he certainly had and has popular appeal, Shakespeare was in no way 'basically popular entertainment'; Lord Chamberlain's Men, The Kings Men—they were not performing for the sole benefit of the groundlings, they were performing primarily for very wealthy patrons.

Also, Shakespeare created perhaps the finest and most elevated art in the English language, and was recognized for it then, even more so today; the plays that were basically popular entertainment in his time are footnotes or worse today.

And as a side note, I'm one of those people who enjoys seeing Shakespeare performed. I think you'd be surprised how much audiences enjoy it, and not just in that insufferable, look-how-cultured-I-am, self-congratulatory way.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: