of course they do, he isn’t 400 years dead. why would you expect an 8 year old to know about Shakespeare? Do you think a 10 year old should be reading Hamlet? Primary children should be reading Roald Dahl, Anne Fine, Michael Murporgo etc etc ie. age appropriate, well written children’s literature, not Shakespeare.

Spot on Sham.
Introduce them to the library and let them work out their own preferences. Best way to introduce Bill is some of the excellent BBC dramatisations. Or the modern versions like R&J from Hollywood.

We were reading Macbeth in Year 5, and Hamlet in Year 6, so unless the education system has changed drastically since I was in Primary school all of 13 years ago, I would imagine it’s still taught in Primary Schools.

Certainly not in the eighties. We were barely taught Anne and Barry never mind Shakespeare.

You forget we have moved into an era where, even though it is no longer kosher to say so, it remains the unspoken law of economics that ‘there is no such thing as society’ and ‘greed is good’ for the requisite atomisation into market-servicable labour-units.

Neo-liberalism hasn’t gone away, you know.

Massive digression but …

“there is no such thing as society”, A spectacularly misrepresented quote. What Thatcher actually said was:

“I think we’ve been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it’s the government’s job to cope with it. ‘I have a problem, I’ll get a grant.’ ‘I’m homeless, the government must house me.’ They’re casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It’s our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There’s no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation.”

Which I think could equally well be applied to Irish society today.

No problem there Damocles..

But many of our problems are created by the very governing ideas these marketeers espouse uncritically.

When they stop taxing workers to pay for ‘security’ and infrastructure for privileged tax-evading wealth which pontificates over our airwaves on how our democracy has failed(after corrupt deals with our ‘representatives’ in order to gain control of same licences)…I’ll start to listen to their sermons.
Meantime, she remains Maggot Hatcher to this sceptic. And society still has no place in their ledger of creative accountancy. The bottom line remains numerological.

Basically you’ll stick with the misinterpretation of what she was saying until they start saying what you want them to say.

How enlightened.

If she was saying that people have a tendency to blame government when they have the ability to control their own environments and thus influence what government actually needs to do. Would that be alright? After all if people took responsibility for their own immediate future then government wouldn’t need to interfere in such things and as a result it wouldn’t have the excuse to tax us to try to ineffectively and inefficiently bring about stability.

Misinterpretatation, Damocles??

Before you start mudslinging I suggest you revisit my original comment.
The parenthesized comments were not attributed to any particular ‘she’, never mind your finacial icon. I was referring to generalised and pervasive blinkered ideological mindset.

Appropriate somehow that the topic is literature and standards. Either learn to read, stop misrepresenting my case for your own Tory ends, or just plain troll on.

My original point, which I can only presume Pat had no problem with, was that his ‘pillars’ are grounded on the feudal dispossession of the commons and their airbrushing out of the economic picture by such luminaries as the Chicago Boys school of financial imperialism promulgated by Milton Friedman and his corporate hit-men.
You can go back to your shrine now, secure in the knowledge no blasphemy was intended.

I’m not espousing any particular ideology, I believe in a balance between the various ideologies, socialism and capitalism working together to achieve a balance which is unachievable while they are contending with one another, all I was saying is that Thatcher’s comment is misrepresented.

Sorry. Didn’t mean to offend.

Sound, Damocles.
I’m all for balance. But the balance currrently is way out of kilter, and sliding towards a replay of an earlier blend of lip-service socialism and dominant corporate capital, a la thirties Europe.
My own stance is that capital needs to be subordinated to rational social management, given that the capital accumulation is posited on common social resources, from land and other physical capital through to the labour that is milked for profit by the white collar ‘players’ who see us all as chips in their ‘Great Game’.

And, meantime, back at the topic, no better man for exposing the psychotically savage machinations of the pre-modern capitalist Elizabethan age than our own bould Liam O’Shakespeare himself. Tooth and claw of the vermillion hue.

Most Irish 12 year olds would know who he was? I’m skeptical about that one!

But how many Irish 30 year olds are familiar with even one play of Shaw??
Or Swift’s Modest Proposal?
Or O’Casey’s Silver Tassie?

Shakespeare has his merits, but our Anglophile culture elevates him into mirror cult to the one over the pond.

I’d rather see kids today reading Orwell, if we need an English writer, or Joseph Heller if we have to get carried away on the yankee tide.

Does anyone even read Christy Brown or Flann O’Brien?
Most kids today have graduated to getting their ‘literary’ education from rap artists and other musical dimensions..something the ancient Celtic bardic schools(or Homer himself)might well have approved…their origins having been in pre-literate societies. In many ways we’ve moved into a post-literate (in the academic sense)society.

If King Billy(Shakespeare)were alive today he’d be milking Hollywood and You-Tube. He was nothing if not a shrewd impresario.

Yeah right Doogle.

@ Damien – why does it need to be either/or? Isn’t there enough place for Shaw, O’Brien, Shakespeare and Orwell? That said, because of the content, pushing any of these onto primary school children somewhat misses the point. Too much going on in the texts. No point in reading Chaucer unless you appreciate the value of a filthy imagination.

Nikolas…I did state that Bill the Bard has his merits…and I have time for him myself, right back to schooldays and various productions and readings.
I just don’t see him as the zenith of literary achievement, and reckon the cult needs demystifying. I prefer Dylan Thomas as a poet.

And there is more to Chaucer than his earthy wit. Nor do I equate earthy with filth…a moral deviance fed by an immoral church airbrushing wealth/poverty out of the original ethics of it’s founder for its own temporal ends.

I simply think Irish writers should take precedence. Its bad enough we have internalised an imperial contempt for our Irish teanga and the accompanying intinn, without forever neglecting the contribution our people have made to the supplanting tongue. Enough with the forelock-tugging. The neighbours appreciate our contribution; we should ourselves. We might yet make a fist of our shoddy nation if we could recover what we ignore. There is more in Swift of Ireland than is often admitted, and more of Ireland in Swift than he was himself comfortable with.

Damien – I’m a bit mixed up here. English literature by Irish writers should be highlighted in the Irish school system, and it is. There is always a novel, play, a range of poetry on the syllabus that positively discriminates on behalf of Irish writing. The article was about the British school system, and I think it’s stretching it a bit to demand that the British educational syllabus should favour Irish writers over other nationalities. As for Shakespeare, his work is on the syllabus not because he is considered the zenith of writing, but because his work has been standardized. Almost everything has been written that could be written, so his work acts a practical benchmark. It’s a pragmatic choice when viewed, not as art. but as material by which you judge a student. There’s also the added bonus that Shakespeare’s work contains the classic 3 act to 5 act structure, and follows a narrative pattern that has been used ever since, up to and including Hollywood movies and modern TV. Like you said, Shakespeare was the Spielberg of his day, he was all about bums on seats, and his plays are worth studying for their structure. Understand the structure of a Shakespeare play, and you can easily understand the structure of any modern novel, film or stageplay. Lastly, I totally disagree with you about the difference between “filthy” and “earthy”. “Earthy” is a Victorianism, a polite was of saying “filthy” without saying “filthy”. It’s the difference between “terrorist” and “freedom-fighter”, it less about the word itself, more about your own point of view. With both Chaucer and Shakespeare, I’d imagine teachers “play down” the more “adult” content and subtexts, but that sells the work short. Of course no-one’s going to “get” Chaucer if you gloss over half-of-it, you’re butchering the work and not giving an accurate interpretation of what made the work so highly regarded in the first place. You can’t remove the “Carry on..” elements of earlier English literature, it’s a integral part of it. It’d be like trying to teach Portrait of the Artist and whitewashing over anything to do with Catholicism.

@Nikolas

I was replying to two comments about Irish kids..not writing a syllabus. It is only literature, and as such should never be seen as a ‘national’ endeavour.
I was not introduced to Shaw, Wilde, Beckett or any Irish playwrite in school. I reckon Shaw’s wit and social commentary would make a far greater introduction for youngsters than the density of Shakespeare. I’ve never even seen a production of his work, but when I stumbled into his work in a library I read most of his plays. far more accessable. I was lucky, I had good English teachers,..they led us into it, but I’m not sure everyone drew as much benefit as I did.
Just an opinion, not a promulgation.

But Shaw, Wilde and Beckett have been on the Irish Syllabus for donkey’s years, as has Singe, O’Casey and Friel. So it’s not the syllabus’ that you didn’t come into contact with these writers when you were in school ( that said, Beckett is a slightly newer edition, early 1990s I think ).

As I said, Shakespeare is not on the syllabus because he’s easy or wonderfully exicting, he’s on the syllabus because his work acts as a standard benchmark. He’s the equivalent of one of those Leaving Cert “how long does it take an irregular-sized water tank to fill…. ” Part of the course is to introduce students to literature, but another part of the course is to train critical and analytic thinking. And that why there are standardised texts. Liking the play itself is not relevant, they want to see if you can break it down.

If your point is that you don’t like Shakespeare as much as Irish playwrights, that’s your opinion and that’s fine. You’re entitled to it. Beyond that, I’m not really sure what your point is, I’m afraid.

Perhaps if you read what I actually wrote instead of reading into it some straw argument you can pedantically demolish it might clarify my comments.
Try it. And good luck.

Just because you don’t like something doesn’t make it wrong.

Very true, Nikolas.

And just because you can produce trite truisms twisting someone’s statements doesn’t mean you are right.

I have enjoyed Shakespeare since first encountering Touchstone’s 8 stages of argument and 7 ages, in what was then the Inter Cert. I have already stated I have time for Bill the Bard among others.
Strange how someone as literate as you obviously are seems incapable of reading.

Or is it that you seek an occasion to display your erudition and preen for its own sake?
Either address what I write, or desist from your trolling.

It’s hard to address your point, because your point isn’t clear. You’ve said you have read Shakespeare since you were a child, and that you’ve enjoyed it and gained something from it, but It shouldn’t be taught in school. Instead, only Irish playwrights should be taught in the English course, or at least they should be emphasised. Was that your point?

Nikolas
Where have I written Shakespeare ‘shouldn’t be taught’ or ‘only Irish playwrights should be..’.??

I’m afraid you are projecting interpretations that are not in my comments and observations.

The curriculum has changed since I was in school. I am aware of that, and do not pretend to be up to date with detail. You seem to be reading non-existant criticisms into my opinions. A little textual attention might be in order.
If it mattered.

Damien -

On downgrading Shakepeare on the syllabus ( from your first post: )

“Shakespeare has his merits, but our Anglophile culture elevates him into mirror cult to the one over the pond.
I’d rather see kids today reading Orwell, if we need an English writer, or Joseph Heller if we have to get carried away on the yankee tide.” – You’d rather that kids read Orwell or Heller is they must read non-Irish writers.

On positively discriminating for Irish writers ( from your second post: )

“I simply think Irish writers should take precedence. Its bad enough we have internalised an imperial contempt for our Irish teanga and the accompanying intinn, without forever neglecting the contribution our people have made to the supplanting tongue. ”

On the current syllabus: “I was not introduced to Shaw, Wilde, Beckett or any Irish playwrite in school. I reckon Shaw’s wit and social commentary would make a far greater introduction for youngsters than the density of Shakespeare.” All of the writers you named are on the syllabus, and, unless you are older then I ( 62 ), most were on the syllabus when you attended school.”

“But how many Irish 30 year olds are familiar with even one play of Shaw??
Or Swift’s Modest Proposal?
Or O’Casey’s Silver Tassie?”

Both are on the syllabus – you can’t blame the educational system for this.

Please keep in mind that the subject is “English”, not just “Hiberno-English” or “English literature”. I would be like saying that kids should only study Irish history or mathematics discovered by Irish mathematicians.

So, I’ve quoted directly from your posts, so please don’t claim I’m misrepresenting you. Of course there is a place for Irish achievements in the English language, but not to the extent that we ignore other aspects of the subject.

Your semantic equations do not equate.

I don’t have the interest to elaborate. And I suspect that should I stick your nose in your contradictions you’d still insist on being blind to the difference between my written statements and your perverse interpretations. I belief the evidence is there for any honest reader to make their own decisions.

I’ll refrain from from further voicing of my suspicions of your motives. I find pedantry tiresome, there happening to be important issues elsewhere. Slan leat.

Watching xfactor kills brain cells? Really?

Agreed. Watching any “reality tv” kills brain cells. bring back Father Ted.

If you still have a tele at this stage…I’m unplugging your life support.

yes rachael, really! mind numbing crap, and if you disagree i feel sorry for you.

so true, some upcoming children are led to believe these idiots are role models and celebrities. the world is heading down the toilet in this regard. what ever happened to the days when someone became famous for having talent and charisma.
reality tv sh1t

Shakespeare, John Shakespeare, 1530-1601.
He was a glover and wool merchant from Warwickshire.
Had a young fellah named Billy, played centre back for Stratford Players. Catch up there at the back.

Ar an tairne.

and even more concerned that your comment has now got 6 thumbs down to 3 up.

What does that say about the internalisation of colonial self-hate?
Behan hit the nail when he said ‘..other people have a nationality; the Irish and Jews have a psychosis’.
Anglified to psychological conformity, with a little help from a deference-inducing church.
Strange how the posse of down-thumbers(echoes of the Roman circus maximus there too)seldom articulate an intelligent argument.

..and they haven’t even the wit to realise each down-thumb makes my point.

The best have surely emigrated.

He’s suspected of murdering Hamlet’s da apparently…big story in Elsinore.

Or bring them by the bus load to the Globe Theatre! After the experience there they will never forget Shakespeare! Magical!!!