Is reading plays stupid? Arent they meant to be experienced in theatre?
No.
kinda
Why the fuck does the latter negate the former?
it's just kinda weird is all
watching plays is more conventionally entertaining.
reading is better for analyzation.
i prefer to read them.
>asks that question
>posts a drama that was meant to be read
Anyway, no. Yes, they were created to be experienced in a theater but if you only see the plays performed in your local theaters you won't know shit about the art form and its history, you'll only have a bunch of tidbits. You simply have to read some of them.
>>7664988
Spectacle is one of the least important aspects of drama. Read Aristotle you pleb. Plot, character, thought, and diction can all be enjoyed on the printed page!
>>7664988
It's not stupid but watching plays are for enjoyment while reading is for a slow in depth analysis.
faust was meant to be read you dip
But what about scripts?
