William Shakespeare, Quentin Tarantino or Lena Dunham

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

'Going into some absurd over the wall things' is actually the best possible ten-word-or-less description of most of Tarantino's movies, BRTD, as well as at least half of Shakespeare's comedies and a few of the tragedies.

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

A big reason Shakespeare comes across as boring is that it has often been performed so boringly.

I think very few people can understand the language today.  Its rather like listening to people from the North of England talking - you get some very rough idea what is going on, but it isn't fun after about five minutes.

^^^^^^^
Biggest waste of high school. And that says a lot. He gets crazy respect because he's old.  The iambic pentameter is an impressive feat, but it's also a pretty stupid literary device that I find very distracting. It's like somebody is dribbling a basketball during every play. His storytelling isn't all that imaginative. He took a lot of ideas from others, as the idea of plagiarism wasn't yet a thing.  

You must have a terminally dull mind. Of course that was an established fact already, but there's nowt wrong with additional confirmation.

My goodness. You are ever so clever.

You're doing most of his work for him.

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

A big reason Shakespeare comes across as boring is that it has often been performed so boringly.

I think very few people can understand the language today.  Its rather like listening to people from the North of England talking - you get some very rough idea what is going on, but it isn't fun after about five minutes.

^^^^^^^
Biggest waste of high school. And that says a lot. He gets crazy respect because he's old.  The iambic pentameter is an impressive feat, but it's also a pretty stupid literary device that I find very distracting. It's like somebody is dribbling a basketball during every play. His storytelling isn't all that imaginative. He took a lot of ideas from others, as the idea of plagiarism wasn't yet a thing.  

You must have a terminally dull mind. Of course that was an established fact already, but there's nowt wrong with additional confirmation.

My goodness. You are ever so clever.

You're doing most of his work for him.

Yes. By definition, anybody who dislikes Shakespeare must have a dull mind. You guys are ever so smart. Nobody else deserves to live on the same planet as the two of you.

Anybody who speaks English as a first language and bitches about iambic pentameter at the very least has a tin ear for anything resembling poetry. It's literally the most generic form of English scansion that there is. It's called 'blank verse' for a reason.

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

You're giving great examples of why I hate identifying with historical culture and ethnic heritage instead of your own affiliations so much...

Historical culture and ethnic heritage are 'one's own affiliations' to most people.

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

think of the characters on Girls.

I would prefer not to.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Having any kind of affiliations at all can result in hatred and people doing nasty things.

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

My point really was that the characters on Girls, even if they are fictitious, are completely representative of millions of people, and those people are unlikely to put any value on culture and heritage.

I know that. Believe me. I do.

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

A big reason Shakespeare comes across as boring is that it has often been performed so boringly.

I think very few people can understand the language today.  Its rather like listening to people from the North of England talking - you get some very rough idea what is going on, but it isn't fun after about five minutes.

^^^^^^^
Biggest waste of high school. And that says a lot. He gets crazy respect because he's old.  The iambic pentameter is an impressive feat, but it's also a pretty stupid literary device that I find very distracting. It's like somebody is dribbling a basketball during every play. His storytelling isn't all that imaginative. He took a lot of ideas from others, as the idea of plagiarism wasn't yet a thing. 

Having unoriginal story elements does not make storytelling unimaginative.  It's in the combination, the use of perspective, theme, dramatic presentation, etc.

So would you consider Avatar an original piece of storytelling?

One of these factors alone isn't usually enough to save an otherwise poorly-done and derivative piece of hack work like Avatar. Avatar's dramatic presentation wasn't even good, only its visual presentation, which isn't the same thing. I don't think anybody can deny that it was if nothing else an original visual piece.

We also have to distinguish between poorly-done derivative hack work, well-done derivative hack work, and derivative material that is not hack work and has some merit precisely as derivative or transformative material (that is, it tells us something new and interesting about a preexisting story or theme). Such material exists, across all arts, and always has. It's not the fault of medieval and early modern writers that they didn't hold perceived originality of the surface text in as high regard as we do.