Home
Politics
Shakespeare
As it happens, the author of these pieces, Martin Baum, likes to call himself an "accredited satirical writer"; and, despite being 48, "Baumski". You can see some of his satirical songs, which are embarrassing drivel, on his website. You can also see the thought processes behind his updating Shakespeare (his abridged Hamlet is, as you might have guessed, called To Be Or Not to Be, Innit. Oh, our aching sides): besides the generation of some useful publicity, that is. No, this is the standard "if Shakespeare were writing now" trope, used by purveyors of cultural trash to justify their produce; normally soap operas.
But yoofspeak is another matter. Apparently he's also trying to get gangstas n hoodies and people who can only communicate by text into Shakespeare. Yes, fine, and someone called Jacqui O'Hanlon, the RSC's director of education, has broadly welcomed the book, saying, "Shakespeare is much more than a masterful story teller, it's the way he uses his stories and the language he uses."
The two striking things about this statement are (1) its total linguistic and even syntactical poverty, and (2) the fact that it seems to contradict completely the thrust of Baum's project. Yes, it is about the language Shakespeare uses, and while we appreciate that it's not easy for modern ears (the miracle is that so much of it is comprehensible after 400 years), without the language he is nothing special.
In fact, we are all determined by what subset of the language we choose to speak, and you'll notice that even writers who operate on the bleeding edge of the contemporary world do not use yoofspeak to the exclusion of all other dialects, because it's determinedly anti-literary. It's about the evasion of nuance; whereas literature relies rather a lot on nuance.
Were I one of Baum's supposed target audience, I'd feel a little patronised. I don't think I'd be picking up a copy of To Be Or Not to Be, Innit in a hurry, either. No, if you want to update Shakespeare, don't do it on the page, do it the way Baz Luhrmann did with Romeo + Juliet: use the original dialogue.
But yoofspeak is another matter. Apparently he's also trying to get gangstas n hoodies and people who can only communicate by text into Shakespeare. Yes, fine, and someone called Jacqui O'Hanlon, the RSC's director of education, has broadly welcomed the book, saying, "Shakespeare is much more than a masterful story teller, it's the way he uses his stories and the language he uses."
The two striking things about this statement are (1) its total linguistic and even syntactical poverty, and (2) the fact that it seems to contradict completely the thrust of Baum's project. Yes, it is about the language Shakespeare uses, and while we appreciate that it's not easy for modern ears (the miracle is that so much of it is comprehensible after 400 years), without the language he is nothing special.
In fact, we are all determined by what subset of the language we choose to speak, and you'll notice that even writers who operate on the bleeding edge of the contemporary world do not use yoofspeak to the exclusion of all other dialects, because it's determinedly anti-literary. It's about the evasion of nuance; whereas literature relies rather a lot on nuance.
Were I one of Baum's supposed target audience, I'd feel a little patronised. I don't think I'd be picking up a copy of To Be Or Not to Be, Innit in a hurry, either. No, if you want to update Shakespeare, don't do it on the page, do it the way Baz Luhrmann did with Romeo + Juliet: use the original dialogue.
