Slate Magazine: "The population of Topeka, Kan., today is roughly the same as the population of London in the time of Shakespeare, and the population of Kansas now is not that much lower than the population of England at that time. London at the time of Shakespeare had not only Shakespeare—whoever he was—but also Christopher Marlowe, Francis Bacon, Ben Jonson, and various other men of letters who are still read today. I doubt that Topeka today has quite the same collection of distinguished writers.
Why is this?
7 comments:
An interesting question. While I ultimately agree with the (b) theory, as the writer does, I do tend to pull a little (a) theory in. Genius like Shakespeare is a little magical, or so I like to believe. And I don't know if there is a Shakespeare in Kansas right now. In fact, I would say there most definitely is not. There may be someone of his calibre, but a totally different style is necessary to approaching literature today.
I think the author here misses a key detail when comparing athletes to writers: writing is not something that is outgrown. Athletes have a strict timeline. their bodies can only perform at maximum potential for a small window of time, relatively speaking. Great writers may continue to produce until the day they die. Therefore, since on average a professional athlete may be good until, say, age 42, they have to start young. A writer can realize their potential at age 28 and still go on to have as long a career as the athlete, if not longer, despite the late start.
It is interesting to consider whether it was purely coincidental, or if society is no longer good at manifesting these talents. Perhaps nothing is considered genius unless original, and the original ideas have all been taken up. This I doubt highly, but it's been argued. I don't agree that we no longer need great writers because we have Shakespeare; the times change, and with those changes should come great artists. I hope society can change back from focusing so much on developing great athletes and focus once again on developing great artists.
I agree, this is an interesting question. I'm not going to deny that I will never be an amazing runner or a strongman, but I feel that in some way athletic skills are more easily learned. The body and it's muscles can be very directly worked and improved. True, to a certain extent genetics play a role, but being a good writer is a much more abstract concept and goal.
Bit of an unfair comparison: Topeka and Shakespeare's London. Just because they share population numbers doesn't mean there should be more artists in Topeka. Be interesting to see how many of the Jacobean playwrights were not from London and moved to London because of its cultural draw. A better comparison would be to compare NYC to London. I'm sure you'd find more artists than athletes. But the athletes would make more money. And that raises an interesting question: why does America train its children to be athletes when statistically the chances of them winning the super bowl are just as slim as writing Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf? (This especially true of soccer plays, sorry but not in the US.) So investing in your childrens physical skill is a poor investment, why choose one over the other? Is it nobler to suffer sports or the arts?
Very good debate. Here are my three bits.
Bit 1. America is still producing tremendously talented playwrights but no one has ever heard of them. This does not meant that are not talented, it just means that they are not valued. A average guy can name the top two Quarterbacks in the NFL but could not name the two best Broadway writers.
Bit 2. Shakespeare in his day was not the legend that he is today. Time has elevated him to "Bard" status. Who from our current ranks will be remembered in 100 years, It is hard to predict.
Bit 3. I will assume the author of this article is not an avid baseball fan. If we added just two more teams to Major League Baseball, I would notice a drop in talent. Look at the Pirates, there is clearly a talent difference between us and other teams. Imagine a team of players who could not make the Pirates roster. What I am saying is that being a world class baseball player is a rare accomplishment. So is being a world class playwright.
I think that this article is a little right and a little wrong. I do think that the praise and encouragement for writing is not as as high as it should be, and certainly doesn't compare to the praise given for sports. I do believe talent is everywhere, and that it grows by need or desire, and the simple fact is people don't want to see plays like Shakespeare anymore. Look at the lack of funding for the arts. People want to see Shakespeare, but if someone tries to write works like his today they are seen as pretentious. Also a lot of writers today seem to like fads, which fills bookshelves with drivel. One successful book about a topic and a year later the shelves are filled with 100 bad spin offs and copycats. So on these points I agree with the author on the other hand I do have to agree that so people are so talented they come around once in a great while and no amount of acknowledgement can make someone something they are not.
Post a Comment