this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2025
18 points (100.0% liked)

Books

12511 readers
37 users here now

Book reader community.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml
wraptile@lemmy.ml
18
Should I read the Tempest? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/books@lemmy.ml
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I am trying to get into reading and I started with Brave New World, I have been reading the book for a year and have about 60 pages remaining. Before anyone mentions I am aware it is a small book that can be finished in a week, I am not used to reading. I normally read short stories, comics, and manga. I finshed the machine stops quickly, but I couldn't get into Brave New World, it has a lot of boring parts.

After finishing Brave New World should I read the Tempest, the main character made me interested in the story. I only read one other shakespeare book Romeo and Juliet the sparksnote version, it was great.

top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] GreyShuck@feddit.uk 15 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I am always a little surprised that people are so keen to 'read' the plays. People don't seem to have a similar desire to read film scripts.

To me, the obvious thing to do would be to watch a performance. There are plenty available online and, depending on where you live, stage performances are not too hard to find.

Reading it without seeing a performance lacks about 90% of the impact, I'd say. Reading it AFTER you see a perfomance is another matter: then you can pull out the language and take a deeper dive, but see a performance first.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 days ago

Heavy disagree here. It has been completely normal to read plays since forever, many dramatists were aware that their texts will be read - extremely obviously in dramatic texts from late 19th c. until today, and it has even been speculated that the variants in the early editions of Shakespeare's plays are a result of him writing one version for reading and the other one, slightly simplified, for performance. Shakespeare himself most definitely read plays (e.g. the influence of Seneca is obvious in Titus Andronicus, and I don't believe anyone was performing his works back in the 17th c.; Seneca is also believed by some to have intended his plays primarily for reading as well).

As for the experience/impact itself, that's very subjective but I have been as affected emotionally and intellectually by plays as any other sort of literary writing. And if you read plays, you don't rely on what the local theaters decide to produce and how they decide to do it - modernised, cut up, badly or well performed..., with the repertoire limited in language and culture of origin. (And I don't mean this to be a criticism of theater, it's just a different beast, a different art form. A lot of interesting contemporary theater doesn't have a dramatic text as its basis at all...)

If something has a diminished impact, it's recorded performances - they're useful as documents and awkward (IMO - unwatchable) as films, I've no idea how people can enjoy them.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

For Shakespeare and other older works, the footnotes in an annotated copy go a long way. Otherwise you're going to miss a lot of allusions and such. You won't get them in a performance, either.

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

A decent production will account for the audience's ability to digest the Shakespearean language and allusions. There are limits, but if the director and cast did their jobs, then as an audience member you should understand more than enough of the show to account for any particular idioms that you miss. There are a few mistakes that a Shakespeare production can make along the way.

  • They can produce a completely uncut script. Most Shakespeare will not benefit from a "100% faithful original" production. There will be a ton of references and jokes that were hilarious and totally known to audiences in the 1600s, but which are utterly lost to a modern audience. Or there might be thematic aspects of the text that the director wants to emphasize or diminish. Or the play might just be unmanageably long in its original form. Any of the above are good reasons to do some judicious cutting.

  • They can take the material too seriously. Shakespeare wanted to put butts in seats, sell meat pies during the intermissions, and please the wealthy patrons. There may well be some high language, but there's plenty of dick and fart jokes, pratfalls, and silly wordplay, even in the tragedies and serious histories. Any production that isn't entertaining the audience isn't doing its job right.

  • The actors can not fully understand the material. Some of the most important work actors have to do is to study their own lines, not merely for memorization, but for meaning. They have to understand the historical context of what they're saying, they have to understand the exact jokes they're telling, they have to understand that "wherefore art thou Romeo" is not a question about Romeo's current physical location. If the actors aren't intimately familiar with their own words, then they won't understand them, and the audience certainly won't understand them, either.

A production that gets the above right, along with a number of other considerations, will be accessible and enjoyable for any audience that is at least passing interested in what's going on onstage. Reading the text with footnotes is good, and it can certainly give the reader more time to chew on and digest the text, but it's not how it was originally meant to be consumed. One could just as well read an annotated book of Beatles lyrics without listening to the music itself.

Source: over twenty years of theatre performance, mostly Shakespeare.

[–] C8r9VwDUTeY3ZufQRYvq@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 days ago

If my school teachers had given me meat pies and focused on the dick jokes, I think I would have enjoyed Shakespeare much more than I did.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago

it’s not how it was originally meant to be consumed

Countless plays have been meant to be read, though, perhaps even Shakespeare's. Yours is a purist stance that tells people to avoid reading possibly excellent texts for the sake of looking for some ideal staging. And besides, do you really have great performances of Shakespeare in your city regularly available?

The comparison with Beatles is off the mark. The Beatles were musicians who deliberately created one specific version of their songs that will stay practically the same forever. Shakespeare was a dramatic writer, he set his art down in writing; the staging is outside of his control, and recounting the history of theater from Shakespeare up to today would show that what we see on stage now has surprisingly little to do with "how it was originally meant to be consumed". Not that it's inferior or false, but it's different.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Movie novelizations and published screenplays used to be a lot more popular when I was a kid. I read lots of movies, from Adventures in Babysitting (novel) to Raiders of the Lost Ark (screenplay). And we used to pass around Monty Python scripts like .mp4s.

[–] transscribe9468@literature.cafe 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

yes... but I'm biased because it's my favorite Shakespeare

[–] themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

How would you start reading it? I have tried a few sentences it is hard to grasp. I get the gest that they are in a storm, but it is still confusing.

[–] transscribe9468@literature.cafe 1 points 3 days ago

I think others have suggested this, but you could use a site like Sparknotes if you need help. There might even be some youtube videos out there that help clarify things.

[–] pishadoot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 days ago

Here's some random sci fi recommendations:

The Foundation trilogy

Pandora's Star (and the sequel Judas Unchained)

Starship Troopers (nothing like the movie, but the movie is great also)

Dune (starts pretty slowly but if you can make it through that, it's amazing)

I, Robot

On Shakespeare, it's REALLY hard to read, because SO much of it is dependent on understanding the politics and context of the time it was written. I think another poster recommended reading a script with footnotes - to me that's a minimum. Shakespeare is AMAZING if you take the time to actually study why it's so amazing. Most people who read it are introduced to it in a language arts class in middle school or sometime, they hate it, and never go back. There's so many freaking hilarious or just plain clever parts of his plays, he was a freaking genius, but it's lost to history unless you seek it out.

It's like people 500 years in the future trying to watch South Park, or Saturday Night Live. It will make no sense to them, like at all.

It's not the same, but have you considered listening to audio books? They're a great way to absorb books at first if you're not a huge reader. You can pair them with the physical book so that if you start to lose motivation you can switch to the audio book in the car or something and keep yourself hooked.

[–] fujiwood@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

You don't have to finish every book you start.

It's easier to read books you enjoy than books you don't.

These are free science fiction ebooks that are sorted by length. Start small and gradually build up to longer works.

Since they are free, you won't feel an obligation to finish them if you do not enjoy them.

https://standardebooks.org/subjects/science-fiction?sort=length

[–] yojimbo@sopuli.xyz 6 points 4 days ago

Since English isn't my first language my opinion isn't worth much. Anyway - I would consider Huxley to be much easier to digest than Shakespear. First because of the language, 2nd becase reading a play is IMO more challenging than reading a "regular" novel. It might depend on how "modernized" your version of The Tempest is going to be, but if I was in the process of building my reading habbit, I might aim for slightly lower hanging fruit.

The first book I've ever read in English was Cat's Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut. The first "ebook" I've read (those days it was one looong hard to navigate txt file) was the Hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy. I loved both.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I would recommend reading The Hobbit! It is structured to be very accessible, without all the grinding through pages of descriptive prose like in the rest of Tolkien's works. I think The Hobbit is his best book by far, and it's certainly his most readable book for people who are not yet strong readers. It's intended to be accessible to children, but I certainly would not call it a children's book. It's quite sophisticated if you want to look for depth but it's very interesting and exciting on the surface level as well.

Right now I am reading Peter Pan to my partner. I've never read it before and it's delightful so far.

[–] dom@lemmy.ca 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What else are you interested in?

Fantasy, sci-fi, romance, etc

The tempest is fine. I find it was successful getting back into reading when I started reading something I was nerdy about. So I started with sanderson and it just hooked me.

I had not had that experience with Shakespeare.

[–] themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

I honestly don't like romance, but I liked Romeo and Juliet. So I guess it depends on the story, but I mainly lean towards sci-fi and fantasy.

Some books read: Animal Farm, The Machine Stops, Around the world in 80 Days, And The hunger games book 1.

[–] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

I honestly don’t like romance, but I liked Romeo and Juliet.

That actually makes sense. Romeo and Juliet isn't really a romance. It's a tragedy. People just think it's a romance because the main characters think they're in love. I normally don't recommend reading Shakespeare's plays as they are much easier to follow when performed. But if you read and enjoyed Romeo and Juliet, you may enjoy The Tempest too. The Tempest is a comedy, rather than a romance or tragedy, if that matters.

Since you like sci-fi and fantasy, I would second the recommendation of reading The Hobbit. It is fairly easy reading and a good story. For more modern material in the sci-fi vein, you might enjoy Leviathan Wakes by S. A. Corey. I found it to be straight forward reading with a good story and engaging characters. Like the Hunger Games book you mentioned, it is also the first book in a series. If you enjoy it, there are another 8 books in the Expanse series.

Another reason I recommend Leviathan Wakes is that it is more modern than many of the books you mentioned. While the books you listed are good (The Machine Stops by E. M. Forster is amazing!) they can be a bit of effort to read because of outdated terminology and older writing styles. It occurred to me that more modern titles might be a better option for you because the writing style could be closer to what you are used to with comics and manga.

[–] dom@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago

Try mistborn, or the hobbit, or project hail mary

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

If you aren't used to reading, jumping into Shakespeare is like "So I'm not really good at swimming, I think I'll start with the English Channel." :)

The Tempest, even for Shakespeare, is challenging.

Plus, reading a play is a completely different skill set than reading prose. The Sparks Notes versions give you an overall feel of the characters and plot, but narratively it's very different from reading a play.

So here's what I'd do... You need to work up to Shakespeare.

First you need to get used to reading, then you need to get used to reading plays, then you need to get used to Elizabethan English, then you can tackle Shakespeare.

Start with something light like Merchant of Venice, Much Ado About Nothing, or Taming of the Shrew, and work up from there.

Edit My wife also notes, Shakespeare wasn't meant to be read, it was meant to be spoken aloud.

Check youtube for "Redneck Shakespeare" for people making it accessible.

https://youtube.com/shorts/2RaiAxVXOcQ

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Don't feel obligated to finish books you aren't keen on, as seems to be the case with Brave New World. Have you given Light Novels a go? Plenty of manga and anime (Mushoku Tensei immediately springs to mind as one) came from those roots.

[–] themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 days ago

I have read light novel before, but all of them are clichéd so I drop them after 20 to 50 chapters. As for Mushoku Tensei I am not going anywhere near it, the main character is an awful person. I do read a lot of manga, I am trying to get into normal novels. I want to start with the classics for example the brothers Karamazov.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

You didn't ask, but I really love:

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Poe%27s_Tales_of_Mystery_and_Imagination/A_Descent_into_the_Maelstrom

This is among Poe's several stories that are now considered proto-scifi. I recall one where a balloonist becomes the first person to reach the moon, and I was fascinated when I read it as a kid.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What are your goals, exactly?

And what is your current reading level (in English, or whatever language you want to read in)?

[–] themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I am very good at english, I spend my time reading comics, manga, webtoons, and short stories in english. I won't say I am shakespeare level though.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What are your goals, though? Do you want to understand more idioms and references? Learn more history? See other people's perspectives? Read weird stuff?

[–] themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

If you want a goal, I guess I want to read the classics for example the brothers Karamazov, Fahrenheit, tempest, Othello, etc.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago

If it's taken you a year just to read BNW, you'll read Karamazovs until the end of your life (and who knows if you'll even like it). Definitely focus on easier and shorter reads for now, I'd second the guy who recommended Hobbit and Poe (try his poetry too).

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I don't know if the tempest is really top of the charts for classics. I doubt most adults have read it or even know it.

The Lord of the rings is probably a good one if you like fiction. It's hugely influential on fantasy. 1984 is also a classic and timely. Lord of the flies, too.

There's probably a lot of lists out there if you do some searching. Some of the options I'm seeing there aren't my jam though.

[–] pishadoot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 days ago

As much as I don't care for Tolkien's voice I would second the recommendation for LOTR simply because after you read it you'll see how many other writers, movies, and games pretty much pulled from the genre that he defined with his writing.

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 days ago

Sure.

Seaech The Pirate Bay for 'BBC Shakespeare' for the performance.