CRITICISING Shakespeare is not actually illegal in England, but it is
best left until late in one's career. It is rather like finding fault,
north of the Border, with Robert Burns. One is liable to be set upon in
a dark academic alley and never heard of again. Even Shaw, who preferred
Ibsen, left his disapproval until he was an established playwright
himself. Had his criticism been uttered with only Cashel Byron's
Profession to his credit, he might now be remembered only as ''Corno di
Basseto'', the music critic of the Star. Sir John Gielgud, it will be
recalled, left the revelation that he was bored by Shakespeare until his
90th birthday. ''I'm not proud of it,'' he said. ''But there are quite a
lot of the plays that I've never properly understood.''
It is against this background that John Patten, the Education
Secretary, has been advised by the Royal Society of Arts that pupils
should be introduced to Shakespeare as early as possible. ''By involving
primary schools, Shakespeare will be a friend and not something to be
afraid of,'' said the RSA's Penny Egan. More than 300 children then
watched a professional production of Macbeth. ''It was a bit scary, but
I liked it better than Neighbours,'' said one child. ''Well . . . just
as much.''
A possible solution is being tried at Stratford-upon-Avon itself,
where the Waterside Studio Theatre has opened a series of Shakespeare
plays, each pared down to 30 minutes. Macbeth loses Duncan, Macduff, and
Donalbain, and the cast consists only of the title role, Lady Macbeth,
and Banquo, with the three witches produced by special effects. Local
Shakespearean authorities do not approve, of course. ''It is like paying
#1 at Claridges for a mouthful of goulash,'' said Mr Francis Carr. Like
Burns, the playwright will probably survive it all. ''The remarkable
thing about Shakespeare,'' said Robert Graves, ''is that he really is
very good, in spite of all the people who say he is very good.''
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article