Dr. Seuss Is Better Than Shakespeare
Pages
- 1
- 2
| Author | Topic: Dr. Seuss Is Better Than Shakespeare |
|---|---|
|
Agent
Member # 2210
|
written Saturday, July 3 2004 15:26
Profile
I've been pondering literature lately and am definitely thinking Dr. Seuss is far better than Shakespeare. I think Dr. Seuss will eventually eclipse Shakespeare in his importance if he hasn't already. -------------------- Wasting your time and mine looking for a good laugh. Star Bright, Star Light, Oh I Wish I May, I Wish Might, Wish For One Star Tonight. Posts: 1084 | Registered: Thursday, November 7 2002 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4389
|
written Saturday, July 3 2004 16:15
Profile
Homepage
Oh, of course. But Rowling is rather preferable to Seuss, in my opinion. -------------------- fame fame fatal fame it can play hideous tricks on the brain Posts: 407 | Registered: Friday, May 14 2004 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 1220
|
written Saturday, July 3 2004 16:26
Profile
Homepage
I hate the Harry Potter Books. She is more popular now but after she is dead I don't think anyone will remember her like they do Dr. Seuss. They say she inspired a new generation to read well our beloved Doctor has had us reading since early childhood. Posts: 484 | Registered: Monday, May 27 2002 07:00 |
|
Bob's Big Date
Member # 3151
|
written Saturday, July 3 2004 16:49
Profile
Homepage
quote:Kicking you in the groin now. -------------------- The biggest, the baddest, and the fattest. Posts: 2367 | Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 1046
|
written Saturday, July 3 2004 17:24
Profile
Homepage
you better be using heavy metal boots. :P Seuss is cool. Rowling is not. -------------------- Polaris - Weather balloons, ninjas, and your big daddy Wise Man. What more could you want? Undead Theories - Don't Ask, Don't Tell Posts: 3323 | Registered: Thursday, April 25 2002 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 2242
|
written Saturday, July 3 2004 17:34
Profile
Suess... now there was a man... However, Rowling can never quite be the man Suess is :P -------------------- "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster... when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss also gazes back into you." -Friedrich Nietzsche "There is no dodging the quad laser." -Ignignok Posts: 469 | Registered: Thursday, November 14 2002 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 1220
|
written Saturday, July 3 2004 17:46
Profile
Homepage
quote: quote:I'm not alone :eek: . Well if you really look at it you can't compare the two. Shakespeare wrote epic poems when Seuss wrote beloved childhood books. [ Saturday, July 03, 2004 17:53: Message edited by: A guy with pretty good grammar ] Posts: 484 | Registered: Monday, May 27 2002 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 65
|
written Saturday, July 3 2004 18:21
Profile
Homepage
I am betting that in the future Harry Potter will end up becoming one of the 'Classics' and High School students will be forced to read them for the grade. As for Suess, I still have all his books carefully packed away. My favourite Suess book was "Would you rather?" it brought to light all these important questions I had never even thought of before, like would I rather have purple hair or green. -------------------- "He's mine, go get your own human plaything!" Bernard Black (Black Books) Also look at my sitehere This is also a good site Posts: 650 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Saturday, July 3 2004 23:57
Profile
Homepage
Rowling made her career by ripping off Roald Dahl at every turn. The fact that more children are now reading the former author than the latter adds insult to injury. Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Bob's Big Date
Member # 3151
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 00:22
Profile
Homepage
I really didn't know she was ripping off Dahl. How badly does she do so? I've never read her work and Dahl was my favorite author as a child, hands-down. -------------------- The biggest, the baddest, and the fattest. Posts: 2367 | Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 04:50
Profile
Homepage
What, you're telling me Bertie Bott's Every Flavour Beans didn't remind you of Dahl at all? :P Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 154
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 04:58
Profile
Maybe parts of the HP series are slighly Dahl'ish, but I don't think it's a ripoff of Dahl. Anyway, who the hell is Dr. Seuss? -------------------- Inconsistently backward. SWOH. IM, PATF, ND. Posts: 612 | Registered: Saturday, October 13 2001 07:00 |
|
This Side Towards Enemy
Member # 3098
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 04:59
Profile
She isn't ripping off Dahl very blatantly. Which is a pity, to my mind. Mind you, she is very readable. It's just that if she's 'inspiring a generation to read' serious effort needs to be put in to make sure they read other things as well. Dolney, Shakespeare didn't write epic poetry. He wrote plays and sonnets. Epic poetry is Paradise Lost, the Iliad, the Odyssey, Beowulf, Gilgamesh and things of that ilk. Personally, I'm no great fan of Shakespeare, but I like Seuss still less. In Britain, they aren't read as much (I never saw one im my primary school) but when I later compared them to the books I did read at that age, I wasn't impressed in the slightest. -------------------- Voice of Reasonable Morality Posts: 961 | Registered: Thursday, June 12 2003 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 05:00
Profile
Homepage
The thing to note is that Harry Potter is addressed to children about 2-3 years older than those reading Seuss's work. The Hobbit is interesting to children 1-2 years older than those reading Harry Potter. Interest in The Lord of The Rings starts perhaps 1-2 years after the Hobbit. Shakespeare maybe (if at all), 2-3 years after Tolkien. To summarize, Seuss is for primary school, Rowling wrote a children's book, Tolkien kicks ass, and neither of the two are a match for Shakespeare. In my very humble opinion, of course. :P [ Sunday, July 04, 2004 05:03: Message edited by: Old Aran ] -------------------- The Encyclopaedia Ermariana <-- Now a Wiki! "Polaris leers down from the black vault, winking hideously like an insane watching eye which strives to convey some strange message, yet recalls nothing save that it once had a message to convey." --- HP Lovecraft. "I single Aran out due to his nasty temperment, and his superior intellect." --- ben Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
This Side Towards Enemy
Member # 3098
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 05:21
Profile
Shakespeare is for very puerile adults. It is a travesty that Shakespeare is regarded as high-culture. Read him and enjoy him, but throw aside the assertion that his work is the greatest pinnacle of the English language. -------------------- Voice of Reasonable Morality Posts: 961 | Registered: Thursday, June 12 2003 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 09:50
Profile
Homepage
I disagree. Hamlet is one of my favorite books of all time, and whenever I see any of his plays performed well -- in Ashland, Oregon, for instance -- I am absolutely blown away. Few other works do that to me -- Paradise Lost is one -- and no author that I've ever read was consistently at Shakespeare's level. Dr. Seuss is good, but I prefer Shel Silverstein. EDIT: Although the bit about him not being high culture is pretty true. His work is filled with entirely too many penis jokes and that sort of thing to be proper at a formal occasion. [ Sunday, July 04, 2004 09:52: Message edited by: Just Call Me Kel ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 10:05
Profile
Homepage
Dr. Seuss is entertaining, and his books have that remarkable quality of not evincing glaring condescension towards their young readers. He was funny. That's about it. Shakespeare was vastly more prolific and more literary. I'm not sure whether he threw in all the literary devices that cause English teachers to swoon world-wide on purpose or by accident, but they're there. He created words and phrases that have become part of the English lexicon. In other words, regardless of the quality of his works (which I happen to think are quite impressive), he is probably unparalleled in impact on the language itself. —Alorael, who thinks that's a pretty good reason to declare Shakespeare mister big English man. Rowling, sadly, wrote books that were indeed good, but not so good that all the publicity and cult worship is merited. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 22
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 10:43
Profile
That's a rather sweeping statement to make, BtI, that only "puerile adults" can find any enjoyment out of Shakespeare, a statement which is simply not true. Granted, some of the comedies are outdated (though I enjoyed Twelfth Night) and Romeo and Julliet has been warped beyond expression by modern adaptations (though the Baz Lehrman version was a fine film), but many of his plays are inspired, and I'd be hard pushed to name a better playwright. I fail to see the value of high culture anyway. On the matter of Dr. Seuss, I've never been particularly impressed with any of his stories. As for Harry Potter, poorly written as they may be, they are still very readable. [ Sunday, July 04, 2004 10:44: Message edited by: Morgan ] Posts: 2862 | Registered: Tuesday, October 2 2001 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4389
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 13:46
Profile
Homepage
My virtual groin hurts. I don't particularly like Rowling. I don't particularly like Suess. I thought this was a trolling topic. Damn difficult trying to communicate sarcasm in text. :P EDIT: So THIS is how I got this rating all of a sudden. [ Sunday, July 04, 2004 13:51: Message edited by: Shiny Things ] -------------------- fame fame fatal fame it can play hideous tricks on the brain Posts: 407 | Registered: Friday, May 14 2004 07:00 |
|
Babelicious
Member # 3149
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 13:49
Profile
Homepage
Seuss introduced absurdism into children's literature. His imitators are legion, and none of them toe the line he did between staid and vulgar, boring and incomprehensible. -------------------- I've got a pyg in a poke. Posts: 999 | Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 3719
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 17:26
Profile
Homepage
I have always enjoyed Dr. Suess -------------------- Scandalous Stories, fishing,and great photos Posts: 294 | Registered: Monday, November 24 2003 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4389
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 17:28
Profile
Homepage
Probably just a typo, but I like how that sentence has a sense of un-finality (:S) to it, without the period. -------------------- fame fame fatal fame it can play hideous tricks on the brain Posts: 407 | Registered: Friday, May 14 2004 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 2210
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 17:38
Profile
Dr. Seuss invented the low vocabulary childrens primer. Most of the books have a vocabulary of no more than 200 words which are mostly comprehensible to very young children. He started by identifying very commonly understood english then mixed and matched the wording in absurd combinations-- thus coming up with One Fish Two Fish and The Cat In The Hat. For a long time he was an editor at Random House founding the Beginner books series. :D I think this had a tremendous impact on literacy. I also love his artwork-- it is absolutely ridiculous. I find Shakespeare to be extremely overrated. I would much rather read epics than Shakespeare. -------------------- Wasting your time and mine looking for a good laugh. Star Bright, Star Light, Oh I Wish I May, I Wish Might, Wish For One Star Tonight. Posts: 1084 | Registered: Thursday, November 7 2002 08:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Sunday, July 4 2004 18:09
Profile
Homepage
This is not intended as an insult, just a question: do you have difficulty understanding Shakespeare? At least ninety percent of the dislike of Shakespeare I've ever run into has been from people who can't get past the slightly archaic language. A small but noticeable few have a different gripe with it, so I'm just wondering which category you fall into. [ Sunday, July 04, 2004 18:10: Message edited by: Just Call Me Kel ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Triad Mage
Member # 7
|
written Monday, July 5 2004 01:37
Profile
Homepage
I understand it perfectly well, but I still don't really like it. Once you take out the obscurities of the language and try to look at it like a normal book or play, it falls short when compared to pretty much anything else in terms of plot and character development. -------------------- "At times discretion should be thrown aside, and with the foolish we should play the fool." - Menander ==== Drakefyre's Demesne - Happy Happy Joy Joy desperance.net - We're Everywhere ==== You can take my Mac when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the mouse! Posts: 9436 | Registered: Wednesday, September 19 2001 07:00 |
Pages
- 1
- 2