|
I can only take Shakespeare in mild doses, but I really don't like theatre too much. I do like Kenneth Branagh's versions though. Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Gildenstern are Dead is a great watch/read.
I think Shakespeare is a good writer and a cunning linguist, but I think he lacked in storytelling, which is what I am after when I read a book or watch a movie. He created interesting situations in his plays, but a lot of his stories just lacked something. Take Romeo and Juliet for example- it is very didactic, teaching the lesson "teenagers are stupid" and kills off the only interesting character fairly early on (mercutio). Not to mention that he uses dramatic irony like a crutch.
Compare that to any Dostoevsky novel. Dostoevsky's characters were extremely well developed, and no significant character was lackluster. He was a master of manipulating the reader and used all forms of irony.
My favorite parts of some of his books:
Brother's Karamazov:
Rakitin's betrayal of Alyosha and Grushenka's attempt at seduction.
Dmitri's passage from before Fyodor's death to his arrest for the murder of Fyodor and the reverse irony involved.
Ivan's discussion with the devil.
The Idiot:
The ending- Climax right at the end, with no falling action and barely any denouement. It leaves the reader completely jarred.
Crime and Punishment-
The part with Luzhin and Sonya is really well written, as is Marmaladov's death and the subsequent action's of his wife.
I started reading the Possessed and House of the Dead simultaneously and I have decided to go with House of the Dead, because it is more interesting from the onset, although I am sure the Possessed gets better later, Stavrogin's personality seems to command destruction, which is what I like to read about. I like the intro the House of the Dead because it dives into philosophy fairly quickly.
Shakespear over sex? No? Dostoevsky over sex? Well, I'd tell her to wait for me to finish the chapter and pretend she's grushenka and I'm dmitri and we'd have some fun.
|