The Al Realpolitik Institute of Sulfur Mining & Extraction

[Torie]

Dumping on Shakespeare should not be protected by the First Amendment. I consider that akin to treason - worse because it disrespects the English language (which he more than anyone else in its modern form gave birth to), rather than a mere political entity.

He was also gratuitous and whiny (setting myself up for something, i get it) and is placed on a pedestal for being the inventor of the cliche as well as the master of unoriginality before it was original. Essentially, he was the world's first bullsh*tter and is treated like a God for it.

You need to read Shakespeare when you become an adult. That is one of the most ludicrous things I have ever read. Sure some of what Shakespeare wrote are cliches - cliches that he invented, and are still used because they are so good.  No rage hath a women scorned, and oh the tangled webs we weave intending to deceive; all the world's a stage, but neither a borrower or a lender be for he has a lean and hungry look. Off damn spot!

With a mature mind, start with King Lear. And try reading the plays out loud with friends. We do that in my clan.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

No rage hath a women scorned, and oh the tangled webs we weave intending to deceive; all the world's a stage, but neither a borrower or a lender be for he has a lean and hungry look. Off damn spot!

The first two parts of this are William Congreve and Sir Walter Scott, respectively.

[Torie]

No rage hath a women scorned, and oh the tangled webs we weave intending to deceive; all the world's a stage, but neither a borrower or a lender be for he has a lean and hungry look. Off damn spot!

The first two parts of this are William Congreve and Sir Walter Scott, respectively.

You need to be banned.   See, even olds can use some good teachin' sometimes.

[Donerail]

Dumping on Shakespeare should not be protected by the First Amendment. I consider that akin to treason - worse because it disrespects the English language (which he more than anyone else in its modern form gave birth to), rather than a mere political entity.

He was also gratuitous and whiny (setting myself up for something, i get it) and is placed on a pedestal for being the inventor of the cliche as well as the master of unoriginality before it was original. Essentially, he was the world's first bullsh*tter and is treated like a God for it.

There's always the No Fear Shakespeare versions.

[traininthedistance]

With a mature mind, start with King Lear. And try reading the plays out loud with friends. We do that in my clan.

King Lear is one of Shakespeare's mightiest achievements, it's my third favorite play of his after Hamlet and Twelfth Night, but it's also one of his more difficult.  

Macbeth is probably the best starting point for young'ns.

[Lambsbread]

Macbeth is probably the best starting point for young'ns.

And I enjoyed it, though not thoroughly.

[Vosem]

Macbeth is probably the best starting point for young'ns.

And I enjoyed it, though not thoroughly.

It's an excellent play -- I currently am playing a relatively minor character (Young Siward) in Shakespeare Club's production of Macbeth.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Dumping on Shakespeare should not be protected by the First Amendment. I consider that akin to treason - worse because it disrespects the English language (which he more than anyone else in its modern form gave birth to), rather than a mere political entity.

He was also gratuitous and whiny (setting myself up for something, i get it) and is placed on a pedestal for being the inventor of the cliche as well as the master of unoriginality before it was original. Essentially, he was the world's first bullsh*tter and is treated like a God for it.

There's always the No Fear Shakespeare versions.

First time I've seen someone post directly into the Sulfur Mine. Good show, SJoyce. Good show.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The only Russian thing Snowstalker has read is Pussy Riot's liner notes.

This one doubles as a reference to a TV show nobody here watches except for me.

ooo . . . I love Bunheads    I just hadn't seen that episode yet.

[Antonio the Sixth]

First time I've seen someone post directly into the Sulfur Mine.

Really? Look just 17 posts ahead of yours.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

First time I've seen someone post directly into the Sulfur Mine.

Really? Look just 17 posts ahead of yours.

Anybody not Al. To the best of my recollection. Yes, I'm hedging now.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

eh, what do you call this?

No rage hath a women scorned, and oh the tangled webs we weave intending to deceive; all the world's a stage, but neither a borrower or a lender be for he has a lean and hungry look. Off damn spot!

The first two parts of this are William Congreve and Sir Walter Scott, respectively.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

eh, what do you call this?

No rage hath a women scorned, and oh the tangled webs we weave intending to deceive; all the world's a stage, but neither a borrower or a lender be for he has a lean and hungry look. Off damn spot!

The first two parts of this are William Congreve and Sir Walter Scott, respectively.

Not intended to be read as a snipe.

[opebo]

eh, what do you call this?

No rage hath a women scorned, and oh the tangled webs we weave intending to deceive; all the world's a stage, but neither a borrower or a lender be for he has a lean and hungry look. Off damn spot!

The first two parts of this are William Congreve and Sir Walter Scott, respectively.

Sibling rivalry?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Judging by your posts, one would suspect you have spent a lot of time smelling paint dry.

[Torie]

eh, what do you call this?

No rage hath a women scorned, and oh the tangled webs we weave intending to deceive; all the world's a stage, but neither a borrower or a lender be for he has a lean and hungry look. Off damn spot!

The first two parts of this are William Congreve and Sir Walter Scott, respectively.

Not intended to be read as a snipe.

I just got it wrong. Being called out on it is just fine.

[Insula Dei]

eh, what do you call this?

No rage hath a women scorned, and oh the tangled webs we weave intending to deceive; all the world's a stage, but neither a borrower or a lender be for he has a lean and hungry look. Off damn spot!

The first two parts of this are William Congreve and Sir Walter Scott, respectively.

Not intended to be read as a snipe.

Am I enough of a would-be pedant to point out that the first one really isn't Congreve, but almost entirely Torie's own invention? Stay tuned to find out.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Inks has actually become a lot better ever since he quit being such a control freak in moderation:

OK, so at 33.5 miles, if you work 24 hours, that's $155/week that you keep.  If it's 40 hours, that's $295/week that you keep.

That's ridiculous to turn down.

I find this incredibly hypocritical, selfish, illogical, stupid, and irrational:

Random guy offers you money to take a trip to Kenya, and you think you absolutely must take that money.  But you go out and ASK for money from employers, and they offer you a job, and you would turn it down.

The latter is a lot bigger insult and a bigger ball of saliva in the case, because you went out and applied for that job, just to reject it.  No, what you're doing doesn't have to be conventional, but when you're stealing from people, which is what you are doing by mooching off your parents, you at least have to try to be ethical.

Does your anonymous donor follow you on Facebook?  Because if he/she does, we know you've lied on Facebook... they probably feel sorry for you and think you're genuinely in need of money for this trip.  Guess what!?  You're not in need of donors... you're in need of some self control to quit being lazy and to go out and find a job.

You play the victim, but you are one of the biggest Internet con artists I've ever personally observed.  And you're doing it in the name of charity and Christianity, making it all the more shameful.

[minionofmidas]

Dumping on Shakespeare should not be protected by the First Amendment. I consider that akin to treason - worse because it disrespects the English language (which he more than anyone else in its modern form gave birth to), rather than a mere political entity.

He was also gratuitous and whiny (setting myself up for something, i get it) and is placed on a pedestal for being the inventor of the cliche as well as the master of unoriginality before it was original. Essentially, he was the world's first bullsh*tter and is treated like a God for it.

You need to read Shakespeare when you become an adult. That is one of the most ludicrous things I have ever read. Sure some of what Shakespeare wrote are cliches - cliches that he invented, and are still used because they are so good.  No rage hath a women scorned, and oh the tangled webs we weave intending to deceive; all the world's a stage, but neither a borrower or a lender be for he has a lean and hungry look. Off damn spot!

With a mature mind, start with King Lear. And try reading the plays out loud with friends. We do that in my clan.

In all fairness, as with anybody who wrote that much (which is why you fairly judge all such people by their best works, and we seem to all agree they're the Tragedies - Macbeth, King Lear, Hamlet, I'd add Romeo and Juliet), quite a few of Shakespeare's plays actually do suck.

[traininthedistance]

In all fairness, as with anybody who wrote that much (which is why you fairly judge all such people by their best works, and we seem to all agree they're the Tragedies - Macbeth, King Lear, Hamlet, I'd add Romeo and Juliet), quite a few of Shakespeare's plays actually do suck.

It's probably more accurate to say that Shakespeare's later work tends to be better, which generally means tragedies because he wrote more of them later on.  But I think that most of us can agree that Twelfth Night is in the upper echelon while Titus Andronicus really isn't.

I actually think Romeo and Juliet is among Shakespeare's weaker works, though obviously it's still a fine play, and its influence speaks for itself.  The three parts of Henry VI, otoh, could be lost to history and we woudn't be particularly worse off.

And that's not even getting into the romances.

[minionofmidas]

Never read Twelfth Night, so can't judge.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The Tweflth Night is epic. We played it in a theater class I took last year, and we all laughed our asses off.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

eh, what do you call this?

No rage hath a women scorned, and oh the tangled webs we weave intending to deceive; all the world's a stage, but neither a borrower or a lender be for he has a lean and hungry look. Off damn spot!

The first two parts of this are William Congreve and Sir Walter Scott, respectively.

Not intended to be read as a snipe.

Am I enough of a would-be pedant to point out that the first one really isn't Congreve, but almost entirely Torie's own invention? Stay tuned to find out.

You are of course entirely right. Even the most commonly quoted version is a slight perversion. The original couplet is:

Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned
Nor Hell a fury, like a woman scorned.

[opebo]

Inks has actually become a lot better ever since he quit being such a control freak in moderation

Did that actually happen?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Inks has actually become a lot better ever since he quit being such a control freak in moderation

Did that actually happen?

Yes, and I agree with BRTD