Twelfth Night
Comments(5) I am someone who needs an aid in reading Shakespeare, something simple preferably cliff notes, in book format, so I can take it with me on the train. But how simple is too simple? Or how condensed should Shakespeare become in order for his works to be understandable by all ages? These days many books can now be read in a graphic novel format. Below is the link for an excerpt from Twelfth Night in the context of a graphic novel. This specific book is categorized as children’s literature, most likely in the 10-12 year old age bracket. After reading a bit of the excerpt do you believe that it is a good idea for children to even be introduced to Shakespeare. Also is it even worth while to give children, or even teenagers, a version of Twelfth Night, or any other Shakespeare work, that is different from the original version and does the condensed version come anywhere near close to justifying Shakespeare’s original?
I believe that children shouldn’t be exposed of old English too early in their lives. They should have a taste of the original version of Shakespeare’s play and then introduce the condensed version.
Simpler re-tellings of Shakespeare’s plots have a long history. One of the best-known examples is *Tales from Shakespeare* by the essayist Charles Lamb and his sister Mary, which was written around 1807. The stories are meant for children, so they’re heavily revised–cleaned up, really–and they’re fascinating to read. Here’s a link to the Lambs’ version of *Twelfth Night*:
http://www.bartleby.com/1012/15.html
I don’t see a reason why younger children shouldn’t be exposed to Shakespeare? Honestly, his stories are entertaining and even though they obviously wouldn’t get the full “real” experience of reading a simplified version, I feel they would enjoy some of the comedies. It would be a very good starting point for their future literature classes 🙂
I absolutely think people of all ages should be exposed to Shakespeare. Okay, maybe it’s because I am a huge fan and I’ve been reading him for years, but I am also not saying that a three-year-old kid should be reading Macbeth or even Twelfth Night. Obviously, there should be a level of understanding there, but A Midsummer Night’s Dream, for example, is sorta perfect for little kids. That was when I was introduced to it. It’s about fairies and magic and, if they can’t understand the really complex stuff, that’s why they tend to read them again later in high school or college. I mean kids read and watch Peter Pan, which is steeped in psychological meaning, and they don’t understand that stuff, but they connect to the magic and the idea of Neverland (yes okay I’ve read the book, I’ll admit it). Shakespeare is like anything else–you can read it and find one thing and then approach it again years later and find a hundred other things.
I feel that children should be exposed to reading Shakespeare. I started when I was about in 7th grade and I enjoyed every minute of it, and understood it. I know that old english may be difficult but that’s why these condensed versions of Shakespeare’s work were released. If there was something that I couldn’t understand, I would go to these sources and get a better understanding of the story and re-read the play again in order to see how Shakespeare said it in his language. Also, by exposing Shakespeare to children, they can learn about his culture, and have a expanded view on different parts of the world in different time periods. This is something that children should be encouraged to learn.