Is he the most influential figure in storytelling?
Or would that go to somebody like Homer?
Shakespeare gave the English language hundreds of new words. Homer couldn't even think of a single fucking word to describe the concept of "red."
The top 3 are definitely Shakespeare, Homer, and the guys who wrote the Bible.
>>394454
>tfw if Shakey P hadn't existed we'd have no chocolate Hobnobs
Memes aside though, I do wonder how his audience received things like this. Obviously the form of language would have been easier then, but it must have still been a little confusing. Then again, they were incredibly popular at the time so who knows.
>>394454
He was fucking blind, of course he couldn't.
Which is his best anyway? Hamlet? That seems to be the popular agreement.
Romeo and Juliet seems the most accessible.
>>394473
It's possible that a lot of what he "invented" we just don't have print forms of from earlier, but were established slang at the time. While others are pretty obvious compound words or new forms - i.e. deafening from deaf or deafen, or remorseless from remorse and less. I'm sure he made up some words, but not so many that people couldn't comprehend his plays.
![Ferdinand_Keller_-_Scheherazade_und_Sultan_Schariar_(1880)[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ANR6UYZ.jpg "Ferdinand_Keller_-_Scheherazade_und_Sultan_Schariar_(1880)[1].jpg")
I'd go for whoever wrote the 1001 Nights.
Shakespeare was building on Boccaccio and Chaucer, who were themselves borrowing from the Arabs
>>394515
I see where you're coming from, but I'm not entirely sure I agree that they were the most influential. While Shakespeare may have been inspired by them, I think his stories and storytelling have been more relevant over time.
Nah
Homer sounds about right
Shakespeare is important for the English literature and Anglo saxons rule the world, but its influence in the other European countries doesn't seem that great. At least, I think.
>>394454
Radiolab fag?
>>394504
This. One thing to bear in mind is that Shakespeare was from fairly far away from the cultural centers of England, an his English was a little different from that spoken in London/Oxford/Cambridge.
I can't think of any other stories which still resonate like his, so I think so.
>>394486
the scottish play
>>395272
Fuck off
>>395272
It's Macbeth you memester
It's pretty good though, yeah.
>>394486
Or Othello, King Lear
The guy has like 15 absolute GOAT plays. Reminds me of a quote by Francis Ford Coppola: "One thing that distinguishes Akira Kurosawa that he didn't make a masterpiece or two masterpieces, he made, you know,eight masterpieces."
>>394473
Most of his words came from obvious, easily understood roots which made the meanings of the new words very easy to suss out, or were understandable from the context they were being used in.
>>395347
It's not that he's GOAT as much as it is that the did it all first.
>>395709
>It's not that he's GOAT as much as it is that the did it all first.
He also did it well, which helps a lot. Lots of examples of "this was the first" tend to be used to excuse how bad they are.
He is the spawn of ANGLO degeneracy plagueing Aryan countries
>>395731
True, I suppose.
I suppose nobody else felt the need to try after he did it all so perfectly.
>>395709
He didn't though. The Greeks did it first. He was just better than them.
Imagine being Shakespeare, and you know that for nearly two thousand years Sophocles, Aeschylus and Euripides in tragedy and Aristophanes in comedy have been held up as the peak of literature, impossible to improve upon. It's unthinkable that anyone could match the masters of the past. It's universally acknowledged that this art form has been perfected, centuries before you were born.
And you think to yourself: 'I can do better'.
Must have been the biggest thrill. Imagine waking up and realising you were better at music than Mozart. Or you were a greater physicist than Newton. I would have loved to have met Shakespeare. He must have known how good he was.
>>394478
>implying Homer was one person
>>394454
Last chapter of the Iliad. He does.
>>394515
>whoever wrote 1001 Arabian Nights.
So literally most major literary circles of Arabia and Persia? Cuz the story only got bigger the more people told it.
He's definitely the greatest English playwright and poet, but you can't very well argue that anyone has had a more universal impact on storytelling in the occidental tradition than the Greeks.
>>394427
>Is he the most influential figure in storytelling?
>Or would that go to somebody like Homer?
>>>/lit/erally
Shakespeare really didn't influence storytelling, he was just really good at it.
People like Sophocles or Aeschylus actually were innovators of theater.
Why does everyone jump on Homer's dick?
Is the original prose a miracle? Or that it's the first novel of significance
>>397042
Chaucer was one of the only people really writing at the time though.
>Germanic peoples are the best story tellers
You know this to be true.
>>397971
That's wrong.
>>395873
I think he is. Both the stories we have have similarities, like cockteasing the main event for half the damn poem (having Odysseus' kid run around before you ever see the guy, Achilles sulking by his ship)
I find most other epic poems tend to be straightforward to the point of bluntness.
>>394427
Cervantes. He pretty much invented the modern novel.
>>394427
>Is he the most influential figure in storytelling?
IMO, Shakespeare's greatness lies in his command of language; his plots have never struck me as particularly groundbreaking.
>>398659
His plots are excellent though.
>>395737
/pol/ pls, get over Dresden
