“To be, or not to be, that is the question:
Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
And by opposing end them.”
(Hamlet, Act III, Scene i)
This Shakespearean soliloquy situates us front and centre with the issue at hand; likely you have heard, read, or said Hamlet’s famous line, “to be, or not to be,” yet the following four lines of the quote may mean less than nothing to you. More than likely, as you read the sentence, you can’t tell me the “question” that is being asked—paraphrased, or otherwise. It is one of the Bard’s most well-known quotes, but it remains difficult to make sense of in the original.
Shakespeare writes in an unfamiliar form of the language, which scholars refer to as Early Modern English, and he sacrifices clarity for poetic meter in nearly every line. When I was in high school in the late 2010s, Macbeth, Julius Caesar and The Merchant of Venice had students frequenting Sparknotes.com, an online Shakespeare study guide founded in the early 2000s.
You might also be familiar with its popular predecessor, the Cliff Notes series, founded by Clifton Hillegass in 1958; the Canadian Cole’s Notes began offering the same translation and study-guide services a decade before that. It would seem that, considering the unrelenting demand for Shakespeare study guide services, high-school and college students have been seeking clarity around Early Modern English for generations.
Here is a Modern English version of the quote:
“To live, or not to live: that is the question.
Is it more noble to put up with all the difficulties that fate throws our way,
Or to fight against them,
And, in fighting them, put an end to everything?”
(myShakspeare.com, Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1)
If we may take some poetic licence with it, the quote from Hamlet can serve as an ironic starting point for our discussion around whether or not it is worthwhile to force high-school kids to read Shakespeare: is it “nobler in the mind to suffer” through Shakespearean plays, or should we instead “take arms against” this literary “sea of troubles,” and “end” the tradition of Shakespeare in the classroom altogether?
To read Shakespeare in high school, or not to read Shakespeare in high school?
That is the question.
I don’t advocate for shunning Shakespeare in general: there are plenty of arguments that should compel us to take an interest in his works. Sifting through the rhetorical devices he uses to manipulate language into art is in itself an exercise in creative thinking. Interpreting his complex syntax and language usage can also have cognitive benefits, as if it were a bonus logic puzzle on top of the pleasure and usual benefits of reading.
It’s also important that we understand why his work is held in such reverence and his role as a progenitor of Modern English Literature, for he has contributed extensively to our lexicon of modern idiomatic expressions. If he didn’t entirely invent the plots featured in his plays, his interpretations have become the primary source material of many such legends, and many of his tropes laid the foundation for literature and film today.
Reading Shakespeare is worthwhile: reading Shakespeare in high school is not. I completed an English Literature minor at university, and it wasn’t until the final year of my studies that I finally stopped resenting the required readings of Shakespeare and embraced the works as standalone literature.
Before then, I leaned almost entirely on interpretations that did not belong to me, derived either from my teachers and professors or from the internet. If you give a 15-year-old a Shakespearean play, they are going to want the Sparknotes to go with it. Without a modern translation, they may be able to regurgitate themes and plot points that are externally fed to them, as I did, but in this arduous process, students are getting so little out of the plays, resulting in wasted time, wasted effort and a potentially damaged relationship with literature.
I take issue with Shakespeare in high school because so little intellectual scaffolding is put into place to prepare students for such a massive undertaking. Students should be familiar with the context of the work, such as how the political sphere looked at the time, what values the population may have carried, and be aware of major historical events that preceded the publication of the work.
In this sense, it would seem that Shakespearean literature might helpfully be supplemented with history lessons; however, a high school semester only has so many weeks to cover the necessary curriculum. Such supplementation would cause an even greater waste of limited time.
Furthermore, for many students, reading a play in Grade 9 is an introduction to an entirely new medium of literature. Reading a play out of a book requires a powerful imagination and a strong internal monologue, as manuscripts are meant to be tools for physical, theatrical performances—not to be read as books.
Reading a play aloud in class is not an effective substitute either, for the students’ unfamiliarity with the lines will only add to the confusion as they stammer, mispronounce and deliver each line in monotony. Ineffective means of conveying reading materials would put a larger strain on the academic workload of hardworking students, and to what end? To get very little out of the work? I believe this to be a needless pit of wasted energy.
To hand a student a work in an unfamiliar medium from an unfamiliar time, one on which the ink has been dry for four centuries, is to set even the best of students up for failure. Their negative experience with the works split the earth between them and Shakespeare, and makes them believe, before their brains are properly developed, that Shakespeare “just isn’t meant for them.” Education is about opening doors, yet haphazard exposure to works we consider to be essential pieces of historical literature runs the risk of slamming these doors closed, permanently.
If you consider yourself to be one of these people for whom Shakespeare is not intended, consider this quote from Othello: “Reputation is an idle and false imposition, oft got without merit and lost without deserving. You have lost no reputation at all unless you repute yourself such a loser” (Othello, act II, scene iii).
I’m not calling you a loser for being disinterested in Shakespeare; I only want you to consider that there might be a door within you that is unrightfully shut, one that was closed far before you even considered the worth of keeping it open. People who had an easier time with Shakespeare in high school didn’t necessarily earn the reputation of being academic and highbrow. Similarly, you didn’t earn the reputation that Shakespeare is beyond you—high school English classes let you down. Shakespeare is great literature that has been and can still be enjoyed by the public, at the right time and under the right circumstances. If you are interested in delving into the works of Shakespeare:
- Find a work that has a plot, setting, or conflict that you would find interesting.
- Watch a highly praised movie adaptation of the play and use subtitles to familiarize yourself with the language.
- If you feel inclined to read, find a copy that doesn’t scare you. Modern academic editions offer full pages of definitions and clarifications that run tandem beside the dialogue, which simplifies translation and does not disrupt the pace of your reading.
- Stand up and read out loud. Pace around the room and try your best to imagine the characters delivering their lines on the stage.
- Don’t worry about pronouncing archaic words correctly or committing them to memory. The only thing you should worry about is the correct pronunciation of the characters’ names.
- Read with the flow of a theatrical production and only put the book down when the scene is over, to make picking it back up more natural.
- And remember to take your time. You don’t have anything due, and there isn’t a time crunch for you to finish. It will get easier the further you read as you get used to stepping into the past.
After reading this, if all you do is go watch the 1996 Romeo + Juliet with Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes, I’ll be happy for you. Outside of the classroom, we read for pleasure and to expand our minds in a direction that suits us: reading his plays is great for scratching the curiosity itch of historical literature, but what satisfaction do you get from scratching an itch that isn’t there?
Shakespeare is important, but written plays are not essential for the enjoyment of his art. It is worth exploring his works, even just to confirm it truly isn’t for you: as the Bard writes, “How well he’s read, to reason against reading!”(Love’s Labour’s Lost, act I, scene i).
