Racist William Shakespeare (5 Viewers)

[rob9872]

Was Shakespeare a racist and should his work be banned or changed to fit in with modern times?

Storm brews over Shakespeare’s ‘colonial’ Tempest

William Shakespeare’s portrayal of violent colonial ideas in The Tempest could be harmful to modern audiences, a writer has claimed in a project to examine all

www.thetimes.co.uk

Tbh I find this quite amusing as it’s upsetting the luvvies who are coming out with excuse about him being a ‘classic’ and ‘of his time’. I read this last night and then heard Phil Upton mention it this morning on CWR - even defended him saying he couldn’t be racist as Othello was cast as a black king – that’s like the 16th century version of ‘but I’ve got black friends’.

In fairness I doubt he was actually racist, but his works now are inappropriate and should therefore be consigned to history imo. Classic or not, if the language is outdated and in this case not only racist, but sexist and misogynistic too, then it shouldn’t be taught. You could argue Love Thy Neighbour, The Minstrel Show or Til Death Do Us Part were all of their time, but rightly no longer shown so I don’t see how this is different simply because boring twunts like my old English teacher think he’s the dogs bollocks.

 

---

[shmmeee]

Of course he was racist. It was the 1500s or whatever, everyone was racist.

He’s also one of the greatest writers of all time. People can understand times change and the context it was written under.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

As you say stuff like Taming Of The Shrew, Merchant of Venice and Othello are very uncomfortable in a modern context. Some of Agatha Christie's stuff is horrible too (having to change the name of Then There Were None TWICE because the title was offensive).

But they're valuable as they give an insight into how people thought at that time. Shakespeare was probably pretty liberal for the time.

 

[chiefdave]

Of course he was racist. It was the 1500s or whatever, everyone was racist.

He’s also one of the greatest writers of all time. People can understand times change and the context it was written under.

We seem determined to go back and find issue with everything. I was watching a show from the 90s yesterday and it came up with a warning that the content would 'reflect the times'.

 

[shmmeee]

Should we also update all the incorrect science we now know better about?

 

[Skybluefaz]

What Shmeee said + we know for certain that Phil Upton is an absolute whopper so it's no surprise he's talking shit again.

 

[rob9872]

I understand the point and not purposefully trying to be argumentative (perhaps it's becuase I can't stand Shakespeare) but I don't see how it differs from the old sitcoms I mentioned. Whether they were ever even funny in the first place is questionable, but surely it shouls be one rule either all in or all out and not only allow WS becuase he's classic and it was ok but then ban Alf Garnett.

 

[Nick]

Do people not get the context of the times things happened in? You can't go back and change it.

 

[skybluetony176]

You’ve got to look at it as social commentary from that period in time. Most people are clever enough to work out that yes it was racist and it was a different time.

My worry is that to change it is like the “patriots” who don’t want too much history as it’s woke. Don’t tell us Churchill was involved in the atrocities of the Boer war, don’t tell us this country house was built on the proceeds of the slave trade, don’t tell us this street is named after a rich slave trader etc.

You shouldn’t cancel history because you don’t like what it says. If for no other reason we can’t learn and grow as a nation.

 

[rob9872]

You’ve got to look at it as social commentary from that period in time. Most people are clever enough to work out that yes it was racist and it was a different time.

My worry is that to change it is like the “patriots” who don’t want too much history as it’s woke. Don’t tell us Churchill was involved in the atrocities of the Boer war, don’t tell us this country house was built on the proceeds of the slave trade, don’t tell us this street is named after a rich slave trader etc.

You shouldn’t cancel history because you don’t like what it says. If for no other reason we can’t learn and grow as a nation.

Agreed on all points. But then the 70s was a period in time and social commentary from that is equal to social commentary in the 16th century. So again I ask, why is it ok to cancel one like it never happened and not the other? I think we're all just repeating the same points.

 

[Skybluefaz]

Agreed on all points. But then the 70s was a period in time and social commentary from that is equal to social commentary in the 16th century. So again I ask, why is it ok to cancel one like it never happened and not the other? I think we're all just repeating the same points.

I suppose it's down to the medium on a practical sense, I don't particularly agree with the 'cancelling' of the tv shows but that is more a wider censorship thing. Shakespeare's works were not TV shows and the things you mention are and as such have been subjected to different regulation. I think.

 

[Otis]

Do people not get the context of the times things happened in? You can't go back and change it.

I watched an old TV programme on Talking Pictures TV yesterday, murder mystery and the local cop there was accusing everyone in the village of the murder and everyone was a suspect.

Th police chief came in to talk to the local cop and said to him "you must have fingered everyone in the village by now"

Of its time, obviously.

 

[rob9872]

I watched an old TV programme on Talking Pictures TV yesterday, murder mystery and the local cop there was accusing everyone in the village of the murder and everyone was a suspect.

Th police chief came in to talk to the local cop and said to him "you must have fingered everyone in the village by now"

Of its time, obviously.

Unless it was a Katie Price documentary and you've missed the word 'been' from your quote.

 

[chiefdave]

Agreed on all points. But then the 70s was a period in time and social commentary from that is equal to social commentary in the 16th century. So again I ask, why is it ok to cancel one like it never happened and not the other? I think we're all just repeating the same points.

Is it something along the lines of the Alf Garnett argument? Is it popular because people are laughing at how stupid racists are or because people share the same views?

 

[rob9872]

Is it something along the lines of the Alf Garnett argument? Is it popular because people are laughing at how stupid racists are or because people share the same views?

Both I think although tbh it's not really that funny either way, but that's a different reason for banning it.

 

[skybluetony176]

Agreed on all points. But then the 70s was a period in time and social commentary from that is equal to social commentary in the 16th century. So again I ask, why is it ok to cancel one like it never happened and not the other? I think we're all just repeating the same points.

I agree. The Woke BBC recently got into trouble for showing an episode of Dads Army and didn’t delete a line from it that was racist. I say don’t delete it. Show it but acknowledge at the start of the broadcast that the show contains language that at the time it was made was considered socially acceptable but no longer is. People can then make their own mind up then whether to watch it or not.

 

[Nick]

We chucking the statue into the Avon?

 

[skybluetony176]

Is it something along the lines of the Alf Garnett argument? Is it popular because people are laughing at how stupid racists are or because people share the same views?

I actually now find Allo Allo funny (shocking I know) but it the sense that it was social commentary of the time when it was made not the time it was set. Funny thing is I know people who think it should be banned because it’s misogynistic and and anti french and people who think it should be banned because it’s woke and makes the British out to be stupid. Good moaning. Although the British airmen in it look clever next to Boris lad.

Carry on films are the same. The social commentary of how attitudes have rightly changed is the best joke in them, it’s funny to watch them and see what used to be acceptable and it’s educational to see how far things have moved on.

 

[skybluetony176]

We chucking the statue into the Avon?

It was very symbolic and a correction of its history. It’s right that it’s been dragged out and it would be right to put it back. But with a new plaque that contains the cancelled history of the previous one.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

He is racist, and it's not a new thing to discover he's a bit racist! This writer is about 35 years too late to be in the vanguard of this critical revelation... and he's missing the fact that critical theory has moved to audience agency now anyway, so audiences are able to reject said racism. In that respect, the author of this is a little bit amateur...

As an aside, the Mechant of Venice is classed as a comedy, the reason being we can laugh at the evil Jew getting his cummupence...

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I agree. The Woke BBC recently got into trouble for showing an episode of Dads Army and didn’t delete a line from it that was racist. I say don’t delete it. Show it but acknowledge at the start of the broadcast that the show contains language that at the time it was made was considered socially acceptable but no longer is. People can then make their own mind up then whether to watch it or not.

Lockdown saw me watch Only Fools and Horses right through on Britbox. Genuinely shocked me how casually racist and homophobic it is in places... especially as I didn't notice it at the time!

 

[hill83]

Bring back Bo’ Selecta please

 

[hill83]

I’m not one for banning stuff really, and I love a bit of Shakespeare. Some things I wouldn’t be popping on prime time BBC 1 of course, but outright banning things shouldn’t happen.

 

[hill83]

Lockdown saw me watch Only Fools and Horses right through on Britbox. Genuinely shocked me how casually racist and homophobic it is in places... especially as I didn't notice it at the time!

“P*ki shop” bit floored me.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

“P*ki shop” bit floored me.

Yeah, just said so casually I thought I'd misheard it first time, but then he doubled down on it!

 

[rob9872]

“P*ki shop” bit floored me.

I noted that in an episode watched more recently too and didn't at the time - probably because at the time it was a phrase we all used, along with eating a ch*nky. Not only racist but usually incorrect too as most of the people owning the shops round our way were Indian and not Pakistani!

 

[hill83]

I noted that in an episode watched more recently too and didn't at the time - probably because at the time it was a phrase we all used, along with eating a ch*nky. Not only racist but usually incorrect too as most of the people owning the shops round our way were Indian and not Pakistani!

I don’t buy that ‘we all used’ phrases like that and I don’t really buy the ‘of its time’ argument either really. Can’t be arsed going into story time for my reasoning.

 

[clint van damme]

He was racist, he used to boo jousters taking thy knee pre tournament.

 

[rob9872]

I don’t buy that ‘we all used’ phrases like that and I don’t really buy the ‘of its time’ argument either really. Can’t be arsed going into story time for my reasoning.

Your prerogative (if I could spell it!) but I'd be amazed if there was a person who posts on here that was around in the 70s & 80s who has never used that term for the shop and it would be quite a leap for me to suggest the entire forum is racist. You hear everyone else saying it including at home and and think it's ok to repeat until it's pointed out otherwise.

 

[hill83]

Your prerogative (if I could spell it!) but I'd be amazed if there was a person who posts on here that was around in the 70s & 80s who has never used that term for the shop and it would be quite a leap for me to suggest the entire forum is racist. You hear everyone else saying it including at home and and think it's ok to repeat until it's pointed out otherwise.

I suppose it comes down to which communities you are a part of or are around.
Neither were something I ever used or even heard growing up.

Saying that though we couldn’t afford a Chinese anyway.

 

[shmmeee]

Your prerogative (if I could spell it!) but I'd be amazed if there was a person who posts on here that was around in the 70s & 80s who has never used that term for the shop and it would be quite a leap for me to suggest the entire forum is racist. You hear everyone else saying it including at home and and think it's ok to repeat until it's pointed out otherwise.

Born in ‘81 so maybe a bit too young for your example but p*ki was clearly always racist. Agree that chi*ky was used a lot “innocently” though.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Your prerogative (if I could spell it!) but I'd be amazed if there was a person who posts on here that was around in the 70s & 80s who has never used that term for the shop and it would be quite a leap for me to suggest the entire forum is racist. You hear everyone else saying it including at home and and think it's ok to repeat until it's pointed out otherwise.

I'd have only been a teenager in the late 80s, but never used that term. Parents didn't either. Not saying that as some kind of anti-racist one-upmanship, but just pointing out the examples I'm closest to didn't!

 

[rob9872]

I'd have only been a teenager in the late 80s, but never used that term. Parents didn't either. Not saying that as some kind of anti-racist one-upmanship, but just pointing out the examples I'm closest to didn't!

In fairness I think the OFAH you watched would have been a few years earlier and mid 80's (AIDS etc) was when things started to change with acceptance and language being one of the first that was picked up on. I'd have said less common place after 83/84. If you're not guilty of that (and tbh I am genuinely surprised at your parents), then I'd still wager good money you and your folk used the term 'coloured' and thought it was ok, which is equally outdated. As we say things move on and so does language. That doesn't make you racist, but if you still used it now would certainly make you ignorant.

 

[hill83]

I don’t consider people saying ‘coloured’ anywhere near the same level as there other 2 phrases personally. At least people saying coloured were trying to be nice.

My mum still calls herself half-caste which is outdated, that’s another one.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

In fairness I think the OFAH you watched would have been a few years earlier and mid 80's (AIDS etc) was when things started to change with acceptance and language being one of the first that was picked up on. I'd have said less common place after 83/84. If you're not guilty of that (and tbh I am genuinely surprised at your parents), then I'd still wager good money you and your folk used the term 'coloured' and thought it was ok, which is equally outdated. As we say things move on and so does language. That doesn't make you racist, but if you still used it now would certainly make you ignorant.

Nope, it runs all through OFAH allt he way through... albeit I didn't watch the comeback specials as they're shit.

And FWIW you can keep going with this, and my parents have their faults, including age related issues with presentation of certain issues, but racist language in any form certainly isn't one of them. It's a bit stupid to keep trying to challenge that when you don't know them really and, as I said, I'm not trying to do some kind of racist one-upmanship - it's just how it was and is with them. Call them progressive in that sense if you like, I don't really care... but it is how it is.