Well Noel Whelan knows nothing about football.According to hitc and a couple of others Leeds have given up on White and now want to sign Duffy
https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/sport/leeds-united/leeds-united-news-today-benrahma-18790441
https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2020/08/...ns-react-to-links-with-2017-promotion-winner/
According to hitc and a couple of others Leeds have given up on White and now want to sign Duffy
https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/sport/leeds-united/leeds-united-news-today-benrahma-18790441
https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2020/08/...ns-react-to-links-with-2017-promotion-winner/
We can only talk to our own experience.
I went to a bog standard comprehensive school in the 70's and studied Macbeth, Midsummer Night's Dream, The Merchant of Venice, Henry IV Part One, Othello and Hamlet in full and in great depth.
My son, who went to a (non fee paying) Grammar School studied Macbeth and Othello and part of Romeo and Juliet. He studied no Chaucer, and wasn't offered Latin as an option. When we were playing charades at Christmas it became clear that he didn't know Coriolanus is a play.
His school was much better than mine, but the curriculum wasn't.
The irony is that he went to Oxford to study French. There of course the teaching is superb but they have to start from scratch with literature. My French A Level involved the study of L'Etranger, Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme, Candide, Rhinoceros and Le Grand Meaulnes all in full and in depth. His French A Level had no literature to speak of at all! He had to bone up on a bit of Ionesco and Camus for the interview. They were rather surprised he had even read that, that is how low their expectations of A Level are.
His French is way way better and his knowledge of French literature is now fantastic and far surpasses mine. But O and A Level literature is a joke compared to how it used to be. And it isn't the schools, his school was very good. It is the exam boards and the system itself.
The decline is hardly likely to have been improved by this year's fiasco btw. Where you don't even have to take an exam you just get whatever grade the teacher thinks you deserve. Meaning the number of A star and A grades have increased by 38% year on year...
According to hitc and a couple of others Leeds have given up on White and now want to sign Duffy
https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/sport/leeds-united/leeds-united-news-today-benrahma-18790441
https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2020/08/...ns-react-to-links-with-2017-promotion-winner/
Meaning the number of A star and A grades have increased by 38% year on year...
You have fallen into the trap of using false data to support an argument that would otherwise possibly have some merit.
This, from Ofqual:
Summer 2020 results
Overall, A level results at grade A and above are higher than in 2019, by 2.4%.
You weaken your argument, and cast doubts on your credibility.
To be fair to that chap, he is actually concluding that White is not for sale.
Colour/gender etc. blind casting seems to be the best way to go for drama. It's fairly silly for anyone to get upset that someone who is ultimately playing dress up isn't actually real and ensuring that real world performers have equal opportunity seems far more desirable than pandering to people who struggle to suspend their disbelief. Actors should be supported to bring whatever they have to a piece without fear of exclusion. The adaptability of Shakespeare is one of its greatest strengths. The more interpretations, the better.
According to hitc and a couple of others Leeds have given up on White and now want to sign Duffy
https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/sport/leeds-united/leeds-united-news-today-benrahma-18790441
https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2020/08/...ns-react-to-links-with-2017-promotion-winner/
That certainly is the mainstream view.
Of course there were no women on the stage in Shakespeare's time, and the female characters were played by boys whose voices hadn't broken, but that would hardly have made it easier for me to suspend my disbelief. Female characters being played by women and male characters by men was "definitely the best way to go" as you put it. Admittely it makes the cross dressing in some of the comedies a little harder to accept.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Hamlet's schoolfellows, the whole dynamic is of male bonding. The most famous speech he delivers to them is completely stripped of its normal meaning if they are lesbians. It adds nothing, and is totally distracting. The very definition of directorial vanity in fact...
"What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty!
In form and moving how express and admirable! In action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god! The beauty of the world.
The paragon of animals. And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me. No, nor woman neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so."
Do you think this is the official let's decide where we think we should finish. Then just claim we did no matter where we actually finish.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Hamlet's schoolfellows, the whole dynamic is of male bonding. The most famous speech he delivers to them is completely stripped of its normal meaning if they are lesbians. It adds nothing, and is totally distracting. The very definition of directorial vanity in fact...
Nope, lost me again. The monologue you quote is about Hamlet's disappointment with mankind. Like many of his monologues, when you boil it down, it doesn't really matter who on stage he is addressing. He's really addressing the audience. R&G are just stooges. Their casting doesn't change anything about the meaning of the play, nor the speech you quote. Even the joke, such as it is, doesn't depend for meaning on who Hamlet may be addressing. R&G's emptiness as characters and lack of agency was obviously one of the motivations for Stoppard to choose them as suitable characters for his comedy.
Please never delete this thread.
We'll need it come end of the season or when Bielsa leaves, etc.
Some good material in here.
R & G, had they be alive, would have been waiting for Godot.