Quote Originally Posted by doc_bean
That's part of the problem; shakespeare never wrote high art, he made entertainment.
Agreed, but his entetainment became art, as did many of the works of the old masters, regardless of their art form.

Quote Originally Posted by doc_bean
But wouldn't it be nice if people could be introduced to Shakespeare in a more accessible way? Wouldn't they appreciate it more or at least more easily ? And wouldn't those that were truly interested learn the middle English required to read it in its original form?
Agreed. That's how I learned about it.

The art class, as I mentioned, has artistic license to modernize his plays. Several movies, some of them good, have done the same thing. I prefer these avenues be used to facilitate people's introduction to Shakespeare, and that the educational system remain true to the purity of what he wrote. The problem with the educational system itself "officially" changing the words is that it becomes very hard to change them back.

The kids know that Hollywood Shakespeare isn't right. But if the teachers start pimping low IQ Shakespeare out of convenience and/or an inability to teach the real thing, then the art (entertainment) suffers as well as those exposed to it. Teach a whole generation to say "Maybe I is and maybe I isn't" and they will begin to believe it. A lie repeated often enough can become the truth. This literary tampering is like putting a fig leaf over the exposed areas of a Michelangelo. Convenient to the moment and always a bad idea.

Quote Originally Posted by doc_bean
And those that don't, well, you can force people into a museum, but you can't force them to appreciate it.
Agreed. And we should still force them. Education is often forced. So is teeth brushing to a three year-old, but it's still beneficial. The end justifies the means.