In my experience as an English Literature student, I have come to understand the fact that reeling away the hours at the pub may not be the most valuable use of my time, but reading high quality drama is. It is one of the fundamental forms of literature which has shaped the way which we perceive and interact. From Shakespeare to Ibsen to Phoebe Waller-Bridge, drama and their dramatists have formed conventions and innovative language which are crucial to literature. For the most part, Edinburgh seems to be perfectly adequate in its diversity of drama and the way it is taught, from the essentials of Shakespeare to more experimental and modern plays, such as It’s True, It’s True, It’s True; however, that’s all it seems to be at the moment. Perfectly adequate.
Edinburgh seems to be perfectly adequate in its diversity of drama
Of course, it’s true that, particularly for first-year students, there is a level of ‘easing in’ which needs to occur, so that students can acclimatise themselves to studying literature at a university level. Thus, the faculty provide plays such as Ibsen’s A Doll’s House, the mother of naturalist dramas, and Macbeth, the epitome of Shakespearean tragedy, to allow students to slowly immerse themselves. This seems to be brilliant in theory, but the only issue is that every first year has previously read and studied one of these texts in one capacity or another. Furthermore, the lectures seem not to be based much at all on the texts; lectures discuss the texts’ techniques instead of pushing these dramas to their limits in terms of social or political commentary. Is this the best way of allowing students to acclimate to university life, or is this simply another way of confusing the purpose and nature of the degree?
Despite this, questioning the study of these classics in first year seems ridiculous. They are classics, and as I have previously stated — the works (and the playwrights who have penned them) are essential to understanding the world of literature as we know it today. They have inspired an innumerable number of authors to achieve their own literary greatness. However examining these works, and the power which they possess, comes with it a great responsibility. Teaching their meaning in a way that fully articulates their significance, both in literary terms, and contextually, is a challenge. If this does not occur, then why are students being done a disservice and not fully exploring these great works.
We are not fully exploring these texts’ thematic potential
If we continue to study these texts as ‘fundamental’ literature, surely, we should be able to go fully in-depth, and enrich the knowledge which many of us already have, fully intertwining the topic of lectures with the texts which they are being applied to, rather than using them as basic structural springboards. As we are not fully exploring these texts’ thematic potential, should we simply change the texts? Perhaps being able to discover the evolving role of Falstaff in Shakespeare’s lesser analysed plays, or contemporary productions and their part in the ever-evolving world of modern theatre, would do more for the student to enrich their life at university, broadening their knowledge. Or perhaps, would changing the plays on offer be simply ‘much ado about nothing’?
Image by Hulki Oban Tabak via Unsplash