#williamshakespeare — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #williamshakespeare, aggregated by home.social.
-
King Lear review – Ian McDiarmid is a titanic, heartbreaking wonder
By Mark LawsonCrucible theatre, Sheffield The 82-year-old actor gives a performance of absolute authenticity and clarity as the erratic demagogue in a uniformly impressive production
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2026/sep/06/king-lear-review-ian-mcdiarmid-sheffield-crucible
#Theatre #WilliamShakespeare #Culture #Stage #IanMcDiarmid #TheGuardian #MarkLawson
-
Experiencing Shakespeare’s Globe
By Christine Swan
Although I have now returned to work and the weather is turning its back on the summer, I still have plenty of stories to tell of my holidays. Before the end of August, I was excited to visit Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre for the very first time. Even I am surprised that I have visited prior to this year.
In truth, I have visited the Swan Theatre in Stratford Upon Avon, and, this year, watched A Midsummer Night’s Dream at the Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre. The evenings are becoming increasingly chilly so I was prepared for being somewhat exposed to the elements.
Tudor theatre-goers would have experienced similar conditions – the groundlings would have paid an affordable price but would have baked in the sunshine, and been soaked by the rain. London had a choice of venues, including the Curtain Theatre in Shoreditch, now the site of the new Museum of Shakespeare. The Globe was built on the southern banks of the Thames but was moved from another site in Shoreditch when the land owner called in the lease. The Theatre, as it was known, was demolished in 1598 but the timber carefully and stored in a warehouse, before being transported to the Bankside area on the southern shore. When rebuilt, this became the original Globe, just one year later, in 1599. It is believed that the first play performed was Julius Caesar.
The Globe burned to the ground in 1613 and William Shakespeare retired to his home in Stratford Upon Avon, to die in 1616, just three years later. The wooden construction and thatched roof caught alight
The Globe was rebuilt after it burned down. This is a sketch dated 1638 of the new building. By Wenceslaus Hollar – https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Wenceslaus-Hollar-The-second-Globe-playhouse-detail-from-A-View-from-St-Marys_fig16_254362678, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=149975427
It is incredible that the current Globe Theatre stands close to the site of the original. it is testament to the incredible vision and resilience of the late Sam Wanamaker who researched the original theatre, but sadly passed away before construction finished in 1997.
Bankside, including the Globe Theatre, from Southwark Bridge
I walked through the City on a warm late summer evening. Workers were standing outside every pub spilling out onto the pavements, along with their beer. I crossed Southwark Bridge and considered how much more difficult it would have been for early seventeenth century theatre goers from North of the River. They would only have had the choice of crossing crowded London Bridge, or, more likely, have crossed by ferry, rowed by many of the watermen working that stretch.
Arriving in Bankside
I arrived to enjoy the general hubbub of a pre-performance theatre. The entrance forum feels very modern, with attached restaurants, cafe, and excellent shop.
An announcement encouraged us to take our seats for the performance of As You Like It. I had booked a seat cushion so collected this first. “Please bring it back after the performance. “, was the final instruction. Seated patrons can either brave the wooden benches or, as I did, opt for a little more comfort. Groundlings mill about before the performance, and, as I discovered, some like to move about during too.
Before the performance
The auditorium is breathtaking. The plasterwork is decorated with ornate and delicate painting. The timber columns, thatched roof, and metal gutters are exceedingly impressive. They give visitors plenty to talk about and to look at, prior to the performance beginning.
The detailing is exquisite
When the music begins and the actors arrive, we are transported to the most exaggeratedly embellished or Georgian era dress. Enormously wide skirts coupled with gravity-defying hair, transported viewers to the eighteenth century and muddled our minds and transports us somewhere else.
The play is beautiful, and fun. It is witty and results in everybody allocated their correct partner – “No sooner met than they looked, no sooner looked than they loved.”
As with other outdoor theatres, as the sun sets, the light shifts and the stage lighting shifts the focus and increases contrast. I never notice this in an indoor venue. The frequent passing of aeroplanes overhead is a minor distraction which the actors acknowledge with a joke.
The use of the set was very clever, turning white canvases into the Forest of Arden during the performance using paint, and then adding more leaves and flowers as the season blooms. This simple transition focuses the eye and changes the scenery. Musical interludes, with audience participation keeps everybody involved.
The Forest of Arden is created during the interval
After the performance ended, to rapturous applause, the groundlings filed out first, and I followed, with my cushion, and returned it to the cushion shed. The throng moved to Bankside and gradually spread out towards their various destinations. I recrossed Southwark Bridge, passed through the City, where some workers were still celebrating Friday night. past the Aldgate pump, that marked the end of the City and the beginning of the East End. The night was clear with only a light breeze. Autumn was definitely on its way but not yet at the front door.
St Paul’s Cathedral lit for the evening
I wondered what Shakespeare might have made of the night’s performance. Would he have approved? Would he be pleased to think that an Elizabethan-style theatre was still to be found in London’s Bankside.
I retired to my non-Elizabethan hotel and dreamt of the world as a stage and all of the people merely players.
#england #history #literature #London #shakespeare #Theatre #Travel #williamShakespeare -
Experiencing Shakespeare’s Globe
By Christine Swan
Although I have now returned to work and the weather is turning its back on the summer, I still have plenty of stories to tell of my holidays. Before the end of August, I was excited to visit Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre for the very first time. Even I am surprised that I have visited prior to this year.
In truth, I have visited the Swan Theatre in Stratford Upon Avon, and, this year, watched A Midsummer Night’s Dream at the Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre. The evenings are becoming increasingly chilly so I was prepared for being somewhat exposed to the elements.
Tudor theatre-goers would have experienced similar conditions – the groundlings would have paid an affordable price but would have baked in the sunshine, and been soaked by the rain. London had a choice of venues, including the Curtain Theatre in Shoreditch, now the site of the new Museum of Shakespeare. The Globe was built on the southern banks of the Thames but was moved from another site in Shoreditch when the land owner called in the lease. The Theatre, as it was known, was demolished in 1598 but the timber carefully and stored in a warehouse, before being transported to the Bankside area on the southern shore. When rebuilt, this became the original Globe, just one year later, in 1599. It is believed that the first play performed was Julius Caesar.
The Globe burned to the ground in 1613 and William Shakespeare retired to his home in Stratford Upon Avon, to die in 1616, just three years later. The wooden construction and thatched roof caught alight
The Globe was rebuilt after it burned down. This is a sketch dated 1638 of the new building. By Wenceslaus Hollar – https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Wenceslaus-Hollar-The-second-Globe-playhouse-detail-from-A-View-from-St-Marys_fig16_254362678, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=149975427
It is incredible that the current Globe Theatre stands close to the site of the original. it is testament to the incredible vision and resilience of the late Sam Wanamaker who researched the original theatre, but sadly passed away before construction finished in 1997.
Bankside, including the Globe Theatre, from Southwark Bridge
I walked through the City on a warm late summer evening. Workers were standing outside every pub spilling out onto the pavements, along with their beer. I crossed Southwark Bridge and considered how much more difficult it would have been for early seventeenth century theatre goers from North of the River. They would only have had the choice of crossing crowded London Bridge, or, more likely, have crossed by ferry, rowed by many of the watermen working that stretch.
Arriving in Bankside
I arrived to enjoy the general hubbub of a pre-performance theatre. The entrance forum feels very modern, with attached restaurants, cafe, and excellent shop.
An announcement encouraged us to take our seats for the performance of As You Like It. I had booked a seat cushion so collected this first. “Please bring it back after the performance. “, was the final instruction. Seated patrons can either brave the wooden benches or, as I did, opt for a little more comfort. Groundlings mill about before the performance, and, as I discovered, some like to move about during too.
Before the performance
The auditorium is breathtaking. The plasterwork is decorated with ornate and delicate painting. The timber columns, thatched roof, and metal gutters are exceedingly impressive. They give visitors plenty to talk about and to look at, prior to the performance beginning.
The detailing is exquisite
When the music begins and the actors arrive, we are transported to the most exaggeratedly embellished or Georgian era dress. Enormously wide skirts coupled with gravity-defying hair, transported viewers to the eighteenth century and muddled our minds and transports us somewhere else.
The play is beautiful, and fun. It is witty and results in everybody allocated their correct partner – “No sooner met than they looked, no sooner looked than they loved.”
As with other outdoor theatres, as the sun sets, the light shifts and the stage lighting shifts the focus and increases contrast. I never notice this in an indoor venue. The frequent passing of aeroplanes overhead is a minor distraction which the actors acknowledge with a joke.
The use of the set was very clever, turning white canvases into the Forest of Arden during the performance using paint, and then adding more leaves and flowers as the season blooms. This simple transition focuses the eye and changes the scenery. Musical interludes, with audience participation keeps everybody involved.
The Forest of Arden is created during the interval
After the performance ended, to rapturous applause, the groundlings filed out first, and I followed, with my cushion, and returned it to the cushion shed. The throng moved to Bankside and gradually spread out towards their various destinations. I recrossed Southwark Bridge, passed through the City, where some workers were still celebrating Friday night. past the Aldgate pump, that marked the end of the City and the beginning of the East End. The night was clear with only a light breeze. Autumn was definitely on its way but not yet at the front door.
St Paul’s Cathedral lit for the evening
I wondered what Shakespeare might have made of the night’s performance. Would he have approved? Would he be pleased to think that an Elizabethan-style theatre was still to be found in London’s Bankside.
I retired to my non-Elizabethan hotel and dreamt of the world as a stage and all of the people merely players.
#england #history #literature #London #shakespeare #Theatre #Travel #williamShakespeare -
Experiencing Shakespeare’s Globe
By Christine Swan
Although I have now returned to work and the weather is turning its back on the summer, I still have plenty of stories to tell of my holidays. Before the end of August, I was excited to visit Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre for the very first time. Even I am surprised that I have visited prior to this year.
In truth, I have visited the Swan Theatre in Stratford Upon Avon, and, this year, watched A Midsummer Night’s Dream at the Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre. The evenings are becoming increasingly chilly so I was prepared for being somewhat exposed to the elements.
Tudor theatre-goers would have experienced similar conditions – the groundlings would have paid an affordable price but would have baked in the sunshine, and been soaked by the rain. London had a choice of venues, including the Curtain Theatre in Shoreditch, now the site of the new Museum of Shakespeare. The Globe was built on the southern banks of the Thames but was moved from another site in Shoreditch when the land owner called in the lease. The Theatre, as it was known, was demolished in 1598 but the timber carefully and stored in a warehouse, before being transported to the Bankside area on the southern shore. When rebuilt, this became the original Globe, just one year later, in 1599. It is believed that the first play performed was Julius Caesar.
The Globe burned to the ground in 1613 and William Shakespeare retired to his home in Stratford Upon Avon, to die in 1616, just three years later. The wooden construction and thatched roof caught alight
The Globe was rebuilt after it burned down. This is a sketch dated 1638 of the new building. By Wenceslaus Hollar – https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Wenceslaus-Hollar-The-second-Globe-playhouse-detail-from-A-View-from-St-Marys_fig16_254362678, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=149975427
It is incredible that the current Globe Theatre stands close to the site of the original. it is testament to the incredible vision and resilience of the late Sam Wanamaker who researched the original theatre, but sadly passed away before construction finished in 1997.
Bankside, including the Globe Theatre, from Southwark Bridge
I walked through the City on a warm late summer evening. Workers were standing outside every pub spilling out onto the pavements, along with their beer. I crossed Southwark Bridge and considered how much more difficult it would have been for early seventeenth century theatre goers from North of the River. They would only have had the choice of crossing crowded London Bridge, or, more likely, have crossed by ferry, rowed by many of the watermen working that stretch.
Arriving in Bankside
I arrived to enjoy the general hubbub of a pre-performance theatre. The entrance forum feels very modern, with attached restaurants, cafe, and excellent shop.
An announcement encouraged us to take our seats for the performance of As You Like It. I had booked a seat cushion so collected this first. “Please bring it back after the performance. “, was the final instruction. Seated patrons can either brave the wooden benches or, as I did, opt for a little more comfort. Groundlings mill about before the performance, and, as I discovered, some like to move about during too.
Before the performance
The auditorium is breathtaking. The plasterwork is decorated with ornate and delicate painting. The timber columns, thatched roof, and metal gutters are exceedingly impressive. They give visitors plenty to talk about and to look at, prior to the performance beginning.
The detailing is exquisite
When the music begins and the actors arrive, we are transported to the most exaggeratedly embellished or Georgian era dress. Enormously wide skirts coupled with gravity-defying hair, transported viewers to the eighteenth century and muddled our minds and transports us somewhere else.
The play is beautiful, and fun. It is witty and results in everybody allocated their correct partner – “No sooner met than they looked, no sooner looked than they loved.”
As with other outdoor theatres, as the sun sets, the light shifts and the stage lighting shifts the focus and increases contrast. I never notice this in an indoor venue. The frequent passing of aeroplanes overhead is a minor distraction which the actors acknowledge with a joke.
The use of the set was very clever, turning white canvases into the Forest of Arden during the performance using paint, and then adding more leaves and flowers as the season blooms. This simple transition focuses the eye and changes the scenery. Musical interludes, with audience participation keeps everybody involved.
The Forest of Arden is created during the interval
After the performance ended, to rapturous applause, the groundlings filed out first, and I followed, with my cushion, and returned it to the cushion shed. The throng moved to Bankside and gradually spread out towards their various destinations. I recrossed Southwark Bridge, passed through the City, where some workers were still celebrating Friday night. past the Aldgate pump, that marked the end of the City and the beginning of the East End. The night was clear with only a light breeze. Autumn was definitely on its way but not yet at the front door.
St Paul’s Cathedral lit for the evening
I wondered what Shakespeare might have made of the night’s performance. Would he have approved? Would he be pleased to think that an Elizabethan-style theatre was still to be found in London’s Bankside.
I retired to my non-Elizabethan hotel and dreamt of the world as a stage and all of the people merely players.
#england #history #literature #London #shakespeare #Theatre #Travel #williamShakespeare -
Experiencing Shakespeare’s Globe
By Christine Swan
Although I have now returned to work and the weather is turning its back on the summer, I still have plenty of stories to tell of my holidays. Before the end of August, I was excited to visit Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre for the very first time. Even I am surprised that I have visited prior to this year.
In truth, I have visited the Swan Theatre in Stratford Upon Avon, and, this year, watched A Midsummer Night’s Dream at the Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre. The evenings are becoming increasingly chilly so I was prepared for being somewhat exposed to the elements.
Tudor theatre-goers would have experienced similar conditions – the groundlings would have paid an affordable price but would have baked in the sunshine, and been soaked by the rain. London had a choice of venues, including the Curtain Theatre in Shoreditch, now the site of the new Museum of Shakespeare. The Globe was built on the southern banks of the Thames but was moved from another site in Shoreditch when the land owner called in the lease. The Theatre, as it was known, was demolished in 1598 but the timber carefully and stored in a warehouse, before being transported to the Bankside area on the southern shore. When rebuilt, this became the original Globe, just one year later, in 1599. It is believed that the first play performed was Julius Caesar.
The Globe burned to the ground in 1613 and William Shakespeare retired to his home in Stratford Upon Avon, to die in 1616, just three years later. The wooden construction and thatched roof caught alight
The Globe was rebuilt after it burned down. This is a sketch dated 1638 of the new building. By Wenceslaus Hollar – https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Wenceslaus-Hollar-The-second-Globe-playhouse-detail-from-A-View-from-St-Marys_fig16_254362678, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=149975427
It is incredible that the current Globe Theatre stands close to the site of the original. it is testament to the incredible vision and resilience of the late Sam Wanamaker who researched the original theatre, but sadly passed away before construction finished in 1997.
Bankside, including the Globe Theatre, from Southwark Bridge
I walked through the City on a warm late summer evening. Workers were standing outside every pub spilling out onto the pavements, along with their beer. I crossed Southwark Bridge and considered how much more difficult it would have been for early seventeenth century theatre goers from North of the River. They would only have had the choice of crossing crowded London Bridge, or, more likely, have crossed by ferry, rowed by many of the watermen working that stretch.
Arriving in Bankside
I arrived to enjoy the general hubbub of a pre-performance theatre. The entrance forum feels very modern, with attached restaurants, cafe, and excellent shop.
An announcement encouraged us to take our seats for the performance of As You Like It. I had booked a seat cushion so collected this first. “Please bring it back after the performance. “, was the final instruction. Seated patrons can either brave the wooden benches or, as I did, opt for a little more comfort. Groundlings mill about before the performance, and, as I discovered, some like to move about during too.
Before the performance
The auditorium is breathtaking. The plasterwork is decorated with ornate and delicate painting. The timber columns, thatched roof, and metal gutters are exceedingly impressive. They give visitors plenty to talk about and to look at, prior to the performance beginning.
The detailing is exquisite
When the music begins and the actors arrive, we are transported to the most exaggeratedly embellished or Georgian era dress. Enormously wide skirts coupled with gravity-defying hair, transported viewers to the eighteenth century and muddled our minds and transports us somewhere else.
The play is beautiful, and fun. It is witty and results in everybody allocated their correct partner – “No sooner met than they looked, no sooner looked than they loved.”
As with other outdoor theatres, as the sun sets, the light shifts and the stage lighting shifts the focus and increases contrast. I never notice this in an indoor venue. The frequent passing of aeroplanes overhead is a minor distraction which the actors acknowledge with a joke.
The use of the set was very clever, turning white canvases into the Forest of Arden during the performance using paint, and then adding more leaves and flowers as the season blooms. This simple transition focuses the eye and changes the scenery. Musical interludes, with audience participation keeps everybody involved.
The Forest of Arden is created during the interval
After the performance ended, to rapturous applause, the groundlings filed out first, and I followed, with my cushion, and returned it to the cushion shed. The throng moved to Bankside and gradually spread out towards their various destinations. I recrossed Southwark Bridge, passed through the City, where some workers were still celebrating Friday night. past the Aldgate pump, that marked the end of the City and the beginning of the East End. The night was clear with only a light breeze. Autumn was definitely on its way but not yet at the front door.
St Paul’s Cathedral lit for the evening
I wondered what Shakespeare might have made of the night’s performance. Would he have approved? Would he be pleased to think that an Elizabethan-style theatre was still to be found in London’s Bankside.
I retired to my non-Elizabethan hotel and dreamt of the world as a stage and all of the people merely players.
#england #history #literature #London #shakespeare #Theatre #Travel #williamShakespeare -
Experiencing Shakespeare’s Globe
By Christine Swan
Although I have now returned to work and the weather is turning its back on the summer, I still have plenty of stories to tell of my holidays. Before the end of August, I was excited to visit Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre for the very first time. Even I am surprised that I have visited prior to this year.
In truth, I have visited the Swan Theatre in Stratford Upon Avon, and, this year, watched A Midsummer Night’s Dream at the Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre. The evenings are becoming increasingly chilly so I was prepared for being somewhat exposed to the elements.
Tudor theatre-goers would have experienced similar conditions – the groundlings would have paid an affordable price but would have baked in the sunshine, and been soaked by the rain. London had a choice of venues, including the Curtain Theatre in Shoreditch, now the site of the new Museum of Shakespeare. The Globe was built on the southern banks of the Thames but was moved from another site in Shoreditch when the land owner called in the lease. The Theatre, as it was known, was demolished in 1598 but the timber carefully and stored in a warehouse, before being transported to the Bankside area on the southern shore. When rebuilt, this became the original Globe, just one year later, in 1599. It is believed that the first play performed was Julius Caesar.
The Globe burned to the ground in 1613 and William Shakespeare retired to his home in Stratford Upon Avon, to die in 1616, just three years later. The wooden construction and thatched roof caught alight
The Globe was rebuilt after it burned down. This is a sketch dated 1638 of the new building. By Wenceslaus Hollar – https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Wenceslaus-Hollar-The-second-Globe-playhouse-detail-from-A-View-from-St-Marys_fig16_254362678, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=149975427
It is incredible that the current Globe Theatre stands close to the site of the original. it is testament to the incredible vision and resilience of the late Sam Wanamaker who researched the original theatre, but sadly passed away before construction finished in 1997.
Bankside, including the Globe Theatre, from Southwark Bridge
I walked through the City on a warm late summer evening. Workers were standing outside every pub spilling out onto the pavements, along with their beer. I crossed Southwark Bridge and considered how much more difficult it would have been for early seventeenth century theatre goers from North of the River. They would only have had the choice of crossing crowded London Bridge, or, more likely, have crossed by ferry, rowed by many of the watermen working that stretch.
Arriving in Bankside
I arrived to enjoy the general hubbub of a pre-performance theatre. The entrance forum feels very modern, with attached restaurants, cafe, and excellent shop.
An announcement encouraged us to take our seats for the performance of As You Like It. I had booked a seat cushion so collected this first. “Please bring it back after the performance. “, was the final instruction. Seated patrons can either brave the wooden benches or, as I did, opt for a little more comfort. Groundlings mill about before the performance, and, as I discovered, some like to move about during too.
Before the performance
The auditorium is breathtaking. The plasterwork is decorated with ornate and delicate painting. The timber columns, thatched roof, and metal gutters are exceedingly impressive. They give visitors plenty to talk about and to look at, prior to the performance beginning.
The detailing is exquisite
When the music begins and the actors arrive, we are transported to the most exaggeratedly embellished or Georgian era dress. Enormously wide skirts coupled with gravity-defying hair, transported viewers to the eighteenth century and muddled our minds and transports us somewhere else.
The play is beautiful, and fun. It is witty and results in everybody allocated their correct partner – “No sooner met than they looked, no sooner looked than they loved.”
As with other outdoor theatres, as the sun sets, the light shifts and the stage lighting shifts the focus and increases contrast. I never notice this in an indoor venue. The frequent passing of aeroplanes overhead is a minor distraction which the actors acknowledge with a joke.
The use of the set was very clever, turning white canvases into the Forest of Arden during the performance using paint, and then adding more leaves and flowers as the season blooms. This simple transition focuses the eye and changes the scenery. Musical interludes, with audience participation keeps everybody involved.
The Forest of Arden is created during the interval
After the performance ended, to rapturous applause, the groundlings filed out first, and I followed, with my cushion, and returned it to the cushion shed. The throng moved to Bankside and gradually spread out towards their various destinations. I recrossed Southwark Bridge, passed through the City, where some workers were still celebrating Friday night. past the Aldgate pump, that marked the end of the City and the beginning of the East End. The night was clear with only a light breeze. Autumn was definitely on its way but not yet at the front door.
St Paul’s Cathedral lit for the evening
I wondered what Shakespeare might have made of the night’s performance. Would he have approved? Would he be pleased to think that an Elizabethan-style theatre was still to be found in London’s Bankside.
I retired to my non-Elizabethan hotel and dreamt of the world as a stage and all of the people merely players.
#england #history #literature #London #shakespeare #Theatre #Travel #williamShakespeare -
The Debate Over This Writing Thing
Several weeks ago there was quite a debate bouncing around about what writing is or might or might not become in this era of Artificial Intelligence. Quite a lot was written about the subject. I watched and read most of it beginning with John Gruber’s piece on Daring Fireball about Anthropic’s use of watermarks for AI-generated writing. Gruber called it a “perversion of writing.” Many others weighed in with words, words, words. And more words.
I particularly liked Dan Moren’s piece in response, primarily because it lines up with what I’ve learned and currently think about AI-writing. Here’s a quote:
That might be the case if AIs were writing. But they are not; they are simply generating text. Those two things are not the same. As per the premise of John’s piece, writing is about carefully picking the words and crafting the meaning of what you’re saying, things that AI do not—and patently cannot—do.
In case you’re wondering, I’m in the camp that says that AI isn’t capable of “writing.” If you know anything about the tech at all, you should be too. AI might be able to predict the next word, but that’s a mathematical equation not writing. If you insist otherwise, I hope the kool-aid tasted good on the way down.
Back in the days of my youth, one of the many rituals of sorting wheat from the chaff in childhood education was teaching us to to write mechanically, moving slowly but steadily up to writing things with meaning (remember book reports?) and once we moved into college there was Freshman Comp. Do they still teach Freshman Comp these days?
It wasn’t until later in college when I actually learned what I came to believe writing was all about. Dr. Ralph Cohen, an English professor who taught courses on Shakespeare, film as a narrative art, and surveys of literature, was one of the few professors who kicked my butt. He challenged me in ways others didn’t and I ended up taking most of the classes he offered.
In teaching Shakespeare, he laid out what the physical act and monetary cost of writing during the Bard’s time actually required. There was a real cost to committing an idea to the paper he made out of rags and old linens. Simply put, it meant the work of writing happened in the man’s brain and soul either before or as he was scribbling away with his quill and ink.
I was never good at writing with pen/pencil and paper. Nevertheless, I fought my mother tooth and nail when she insisted I take a typing class in high school. She won. I’m glad she did. Writing for me did become easier on a keyboard and a keyboard has been the primary medium of committing my thoughts to paper or digital bits ever since.
In thinking about this debate I pulled a dust covered dictionary off of one of my book shelves to look up the definition of writing. It’s The American College Dictionary published by Random House copyrighted in 1961. Here’s what that says below:
I also looked up the word “write.”
And the word “writer.”
Google Gemini’s AI summary provides the following:
The highlights in that result are Google’s. Certainly there are many other dictionaries with differing and distinct definitions spelled out. I’d wager that most, like those above, focus on the mechanical. Perhaps that would steer the debate more towards those who think AI can “write.” Frankly, I find that devaluing when I think of the act, or dare I say the art of writing.
Having spent a life in the theatre, written a few plays and musicals along the way, and heard the chimes at midnight with many a playwright and composer searching for the right words or notes, I believe there’s an element that’s missing when most engage in this debate. I’d call it the soul.
Otherwise the infinite monkey theorem comes into play and renders all writing reductive to a fault. Or if The Simpsons is more your cup of tea, 1000 monkeys with a 1000 typewriters.
There are some that are trying to define parameters of this debate as being about process. But that’s any creator’s thing. Some want to frame the discussion about how the march of technological progress always presents change. So, why resist it?
If writing, or any other art form was supposed to be easy or easier that’s when the devaluing kicks in. The playing fields of creation have never be level. Why start doing so now?
That last link above is from a piece from Tim O’Reilly on the subject. I’m not sure if he wrote it or he coached an AI to do so. You’ll understand that if you do read the piece. Regardless, it’s worth your time if you have interest in the debate. Here’s a quote:
We’re in the early days, still shooting filmed stage plays. The masters of this instrument will uncover themselves. When they do, what they produce isn’t going to be slop. In the meantime, I don’t think we should be shooting down people who are trying to push AI’s limits in writing or art. Writers should be trying to figure out the medium, just as software developers are doing in coding.
We may indeed be in the early days. I translate that in our current moment to folks paying for and investing a lot of money to use beta software that promises much, doesn’t always work, and more often than not yields different responses to the same prompt. But that’s the slippery slope we’ve fallen down with most tech these days.
Early filmmakers may have indeed been constantly adapting and evolving the technology they used and the way they used it. Although to pick a nit, the early filmmakers analogy doesn’t really hold up, as most early films were shot outdoors until lighting technology caught up, allowing for better filming of interiors. That’s when filming stage plays really began. (Thanks, Dr. Cohen.)
The distinction is that those early filmmakers were pushing their technology envelopes to better tell a story in a new medium of motion pictures. Not mimic one that had existed since man first painted tales of the hunt on cave walls. That assumes you accept the pieces of the definitions of writing that describe it as a method of using symbols, characters or words on some surface in order to communicate an idea.
But back to my thoughts on writing in opposition to those I disagree with. It’s safe to say that my bet is anything AI writes, no matter how well prompted, won’t endure for 400 or so years the way Shakespeare has. Or in later generations, Chekov, Ibsen, Miller, Mamet or Shepard. Not even the summaries. Of course, who knows what will endure 400 years into this wacky future we seem hell bent on creating? Or is that erasing?
I’ll end this with a quote from Mr. Shakespeare:
Write till your ink be dry, and with your tears
Moist it again, and frame some feeling line
That may discover such integrity.Two Gentlemen From Verona, Act 3, Scene 2
A 1000 monkeys indeed.
(Images from KinoMasterskaya on Shutterstock. Dictionary photos by the author.)
Thanks for reading. You can subscribe to this blog if you care to. You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. This site does not use affilate links.
#ai #ArtificialIntelligence #DanMoren #JohnGruber #technology #TimOReilly #Watermarking #williamShakespeare #Writing -
The Debate Over This Writing Thing
Several weeks ago there was quite a debate bouncing around about what writing is or might or might not become in this era of Artificial Intelligence. Quite a lot was written about the subject. I watched and read most of it beginning with John Gruber’s piece on Daring Fireball about Anthropic’s use of watermarks for AI-generated writing. Gruber called it a “perversion of writing.” Many others weighed in with words, words, words. And more words.
I particularly liked Dan Moren’s piece in response, primarily because it lines up with what I’ve learned and currently think about AI-writing. Here’s a quote:
That might be the case if AIs were writing. But they are not; they are simply generating text. Those two things are not the same. As per the premise of John’s piece, writing is about carefully picking the words and crafting the meaning of what you’re saying, things that AI do not—and patently cannot—do.
In case you’re wondering, I’m in the camp that says that AI isn’t capable of “writing.” If you know anything about the tech at all, you should be too. AI might be able to predict the next word, but that’s a mathematical equation not writing. If you insist otherwise, I hope the kool-aid tasted good on the way down.
Back in the days of my youth, one of the many rituals of sorting wheat from the chaff in childhood education was teaching us to to write mechanically, moving slowly but steadily up to writing things with meaning (remember book reports?) and once we moved into college there was Freshman Comp. Do they still teach Freshman Comp these days?
It wasn’t until later in college when I actually learned what I came to believe writing was all about. Dr. Ralph Cohen, an English professor who taught courses on Shakespeare, film as a narrative art, and surveys of literature, was one of the few professors who kicked my butt. He challenged me in ways others didn’t and I ended up taking most of the classes he offered.
In teaching Shakespeare, he laid out what the physical act and monetary cost of writing during the Bard’s time actually required. There was a real cost to committing an idea to the paper he made out of rags and old linens. Simply put, it meant the work of writing happened in the man’s brain and soul either before or as he was scribbling away with his quill and ink.
I was never good at writing with pen/pencil and paper. Nevertheless, I fought my mother tooth and nail when she insisted I take a typing class in high school. She won. I’m glad she did. Writing for me did become easier on a keyboard and a keyboard has been the primary medium of committing my thoughts to paper or digital bits ever since.
In thinking about this debate I pulled a dust covered dictionary off of one of my book shelves to look up the definition of writing. It’s The American College Dictionary published by Random House copyrighted in 1961. Here’s what that says below:
I also looked up the word “write.”
And the word “writer.”
Google Gemini’s AI summary provides the following:
The highlights in that result are Google’s. Certainly there are many other dictionaries with differing and distinct definitions spelled out. I’d wager that most, like those above, focus on the mechanical. Perhaps that would steer the debate more towards those who think AI can “write.” Frankly, I find that devaluing when I think of the act, or dare I say the art of writing.
Having spent a life in the theatre, written a few plays and musicals along the way, and heard the chimes at midnight with many a playwright and composer searching for the right words or notes, I believe there’s an element that’s missing when most engage in this debate. I’d call it the soul.
Otherwise the infinite monkey theorem comes into play and renders all writing reductive to a fault. Or if The Simpsons is more your cup of tea, 1000 monkeys with a 1000 typewriters.
There are some that are trying to define parameters of this debate as being about process. But that’s any creator’s thing. Some want to frame the discussion about how the march of technological progress always presents change. So, why resist it?
If writing, or any other art form was supposed to be easy or easier that’s when the devaluing kicks in. The playing fields of creation have never be level. Why start doing so now?
That last link above is from a piece from Tim O’Reilly on the subject. I’m not sure if he wrote it or he coached an AI to do so. You’ll understand that if you do read the piece. Regardless, it’s worth your time if you have interest in the debate. Here’s a quote:
We’re in the early days, still shooting filmed stage plays. The masters of this instrument will uncover themselves. When they do, what they produce isn’t going to be slop. In the meantime, I don’t think we should be shooting down people who are trying to push AI’s limits in writing or art. Writers should be trying to figure out the medium, just as software developers are doing in coding.
We may indeed be in the early days. I translate that in our current moment to folks paying for and investing a lot of money to use beta software that promises much, doesn’t always work, and more often than not yields different responses to the same prompt. But that’s the slippery slope we’ve fallen down with most tech these days.
Early filmmakers may have indeed been constantly adapting and evolving the technology they used and the way they used it. Although to pick a nit, the early filmmakers analogy doesn’t really hold up, as most early films were shot outdoors until lighting technology caught up, allowing for better filming of interiors. That’s when filming stage plays really began. (Thanks, Dr. Cohen.)
The distinction is that those early filmmakers were pushing their technology envelopes to better tell a story in a new medium of motion pictures. Not mimic one that had existed since man first painted tales of the hunt on cave walls. That assumes you accept the pieces of the definitions of writing that describe it as a method of using symbols, characters or words on some surface in order to communicate an idea.
But back to my thoughts on writing in opposition to those I disagree with. It’s safe to say that my bet is anything AI writes, no matter how well prompted, won’t endure for 400 or so years the way Shakespeare has. Or in later generations, Chekov, Ibsen, Miller, Mamet or Shepard. Not even the summaries. Of course, who knows what will endure 400 years into this wacky future we seem hell bent on creating? Or is that erasing?
I’ll end this with a quote from Mr. Shakespeare:
Write till your ink be dry, and with your tears
Moist it again, and frame some feeling line
That may discover such integrity.Two Gentlemen From Verona, Act 3, Scene 2
A 1000 monkeys indeed.
(Images from KinoMasterskaya on Shutterstock. Dictionary photos by the author.)
Thanks for reading. You can subscribe to this blog if you care to. You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. This site does not use affilate links.
#ai #ArtificialIntelligence #DanMoren #JohnGruber #technology #TimOReilly #Watermarking #williamShakespeare #Writing -
The Debate Over This Writing Thing
Several weeks ago there was quite a debate bouncing around about what writing is or might or might not become in this era of Artificial Intelligence. Quite a lot was written about the subject. I watched and read most of it beginning with John Gruber’s piece on Daring Fireball about Anthropic’s use of watermarks for AI-generated writing. Gruber called it a “perversion of writing.” Many others weighed in with words, words, words. And more words.
I particularly liked Dan Moren’s piece in response, primarily because it lines up with what I’ve learned and currently think about AI-writing. Here’s a quote:
That might be the case if AIs were writing. But they are not; they are simply generating text. Those two things are not the same. As per the premise of John’s piece, writing is about carefully picking the words and crafting the meaning of what you’re saying, things that AI do not—and patently cannot—do.
In case you’re wondering, I’m in the camp that says that AI isn’t capable of “writing.” If you know anything about the tech at all, you should be too. AI might be able to predict the next word, but that’s a mathematical equation not writing. If you insist otherwise, I hope the kool-aid tasted good on the way down.
Back in the days of my youth, one of the many rituals of sorting wheat from the chaff in childhood education was teaching us to to write mechanically, moving slowly but steadily up to writing things with meaning (remember book reports?) and once we moved into college there was Freshman Comp. Do they still teach Freshman Comp these days?
It wasn’t until later in college when I actually learned what I came to believe writing was all about. Dr. Ralph Cohen, an English professor who taught courses on Shakespeare, film as a narrative art, and surveys of literature, was one of the few professors who kicked my butt. He challenged me in ways others didn’t and I ended up taking most of the classes he offered.
In teaching Shakespeare, he laid out what the physical act and monetary cost of writing during the Bard’s time actually required. There was a real cost to committing an idea to the paper he made out of rags and old linens. Simply put, it meant the work of writing happened in the man’s brain and soul either before or as he was scribbling away with his quill and ink.
I was never good at writing with pen/pencil and paper. Nevertheless, I fought my mother tooth and nail when she insisted I take a typing class in high school. She won. I’m glad she did. Writing for me did become easier on a keyboard and a keyboard has been the primary medium of committing my thoughts to paper or digital bits ever since.
In thinking about this debate I pulled a dust covered dictionary off of one of my book shelves to look up the definition of writing. It’s The American College Dictionary published by Random House copyrighted in 1961. Here’s what that says below:
I also looked up the word “write.”
And the word “writer.”
Google Gemini’s AI summary provides the following:
The highlights in that result are Google’s. Certainly there are many other dictionaries with differing and distinct definitions spelled out. I’d wager that most, like those above, focus on the mechanical. Perhaps that would steer the debate more towards those who think AI can “write.” Frankly, I find that devaluing when I think of the act, or dare I say the art of writing.
Having spent a life in the theatre, written a few plays and musicals along the way, and heard the chimes at midnight with many a playwright and composer searching for the right words or notes, I believe there’s an element that’s missing when most engage in this debate. I’d call it the soul.
Otherwise the infinite monkey theorem comes into play and renders all writing reductive to a fault. Or if The Simpsons is more your cup of tea, 1000 monkeys with a 1000 typewriters.
There are some that are trying to define parameters of this debate as being about process. But that’s any creator’s thing. Some want to frame the discussion about how the march of technological progress always presents change. So, why resist it?
If writing, or any other art form was supposed to be easy or easier that’s when the devaluing kicks in. The playing fields of creation have never be level. Why start doing so now?
That last link above is from a piece from Tim O’Reilly on the subject. I’m not sure if he wrote it or he coached an AI to do so. You’ll understand that if you do read the piece. Regardless, it’s worth your time if you have interest in the debate. Here’s a quote:
We’re in the early days, still shooting filmed stage plays. The masters of this instrument will uncover themselves. When they do, what they produce isn’t going to be slop. In the meantime, I don’t think we should be shooting down people who are trying to push AI’s limits in writing or art. Writers should be trying to figure out the medium, just as software developers are doing in coding.
We may indeed be in the early days. I translate that in our current moment to folks paying for and investing a lot of money to use beta software that promises much, doesn’t always work, and more often than not yields different responses to the same prompt. But that’s the slippery slope we’ve fallen down with most tech these days.
Early filmmakers may have indeed been constantly adapting and evolving the technology they used and the way they used it. Although to pick a nit, the early filmmakers analogy doesn’t really hold up, as most early films were shot outdoors until lighting technology caught up, allowing for better filming of interiors. That’s when filming stage plays really began. (Thanks, Dr. Cohen.)
The distinction is that those early filmmakers were pushing their technology envelopes to better tell a story in a new medium of motion pictures. Not mimic one that had existed since man first painted tales of the hunt on cave walls. That assumes you accept the pieces of the definitions of writing that describe it as a method of using symbols, characters or words on some surface in order to communicate an idea.
But back to my thoughts on writing in opposition to those I disagree with. It’s safe to say that my bet is anything AI writes, no matter how well prompted, won’t endure for 400 or so years the way Shakespeare has. Or in later generations, Chekov, Ibsen, Miller, Mamet or Shepard. Not even the summaries. Of course, who knows what will endure 400 years into this wacky future we seem hell bent on creating? Or is that erasing?
I’ll end this with a quote from Mr. Shakespeare:
Write till your ink be dry, and with your tears
Moist it again, and frame some feeling line
That may discover such integrity.Two Gentlemen From Verona, Act 3, Scene 2
A 1000 monkeys indeed.
(Images from KinoMasterskaya on Shutterstock. Dictionary photos by the author.)
Thanks for reading. You can subscribe to this blog if you care to. You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. This site does not use affilate links.
#ai #ArtificialIntelligence #DanMoren #JohnGruber #technology #TimOReilly #Watermarking #williamShakespeare #Writing -
The Debate Over This Writing Thing
Several weeks ago there was quite a debate bouncing around about what writing is or might or might not become in this era of Artificial Intelligence. Quite a lot was written about the subject. I watched and read most of it beginning with John Gruber’s piece on Daring Fireball about Anthropic’s use of watermarks for AI-generated writing. Gruber called it a “perversion of writing.” Many others weighed in with words, words, words. And more words.
I particularly liked Dan Moren’s piece in response, primarily because it lines up with what I’ve learned and currently think about AI-writing. Here’s a quote:
That might be the case if AIs were writing. But they are not; they are simply generating text. Those two things are not the same. As per the premise of John’s piece, writing is about carefully picking the words and crafting the meaning of what you’re saying, things that AI do not—and patently cannot—do.
In case you’re wondering, I’m in the camp that says that AI isn’t capable of “writing.” If you know anything about the tech at all, you should be too. AI might be able to predict the next word, but that’s a mathematical equation not writing. If you insist otherwise, I hope the kool-aid tasted good on the way down.
Back in the days of my youth, one of the many rituals of sorting wheat from the chaff in childhood education was teaching us to to write mechanically, moving slowly but steadily up to writing things with meaning (remember book reports?) and once we moved into college there was Freshman Comp. Do they still teach Freshman Comp these days?
It wasn’t until later in college when I actually learned what I came to believe writing was all about. Dr. Ralph Cohen, an English professor who taught courses on Shakespeare, film as a narrative art, and surveys of literature, was one of the few professors who kicked my butt. He challenged me in ways others didn’t and I ended up taking most of the classes he offered.
In teaching Shakespeare, he laid out what the physical act and monetary cost of writing during the Bard’s time actually required. There was a real cost to committing an idea to the paper he made out of rags and old linens. Simply put, it meant the work of writing happened in the man’s brain and soul either before or as he was scribbling away with his quill and ink.
I was never good at writing with pen/pencil and paper. Nevertheless, I fought my mother tooth and nail when she insisted I take a typing class in high school. She won. I’m glad she did. Writing for me did become easier on a keyboard and a keyboard has been the primary medium of committing my thoughts to paper or digital bits ever since.
In thinking about this debate I pulled a dust covered dictionary off of one of my book shelves to look up the definition of writing. It’s The American College Dictionary published by Random House copyrighted in 1961. Here’s what that says below:
I also looked up the word “write.”
And the word “writer.”
Google Gemini’s AI summary provides the following:
The highlights in that result are Google’s. Certainly there are many other dictionaries with differing and distinct definitions spelled out. I’d wager that most, like those above, focus on the mechanical. Perhaps that would steer the debate more towards those who think AI can “write.” Frankly, I find that devaluing when I think of the act, or dare I say the art of writing.
Having spent a life in the theatre, written a few plays and musicals along the way, and heard the chimes at midnight with many a playwright and composer searching for the right words or notes, I believe there’s an element that’s missing when most engage in this debate. I’d call it the soul.
Otherwise the infinite monkey theorem comes into play and renders all writing reductive to a fault. Or if The Simpsons is more your cup of tea, 1000 monkeys with a 1000 typewriters.
There are some that are trying to define parameters of this debate as being about process. But that’s any creator’s thing. Some want to frame the discussion about how the march of technological progress always presents change. So, why resist it?
If writing, or any other art form was supposed to be easy or easier that’s when the devaluing kicks in. The playing fields of creation have never be level. Why start doing so now?
That last link above is from a piece from Tim O’Reilly on the subject. I’m not sure if he wrote it or he coached an AI to do so. You’ll understand that if you do read the piece. Regardless, it’s worth your time if you have interest in the debate. Here’s a quote:
We’re in the early days, still shooting filmed stage plays. The masters of this instrument will uncover themselves. When they do, what they produce isn’t going to be slop. In the meantime, I don’t think we should be shooting down people who are trying to push AI’s limits in writing or art. Writers should be trying to figure out the medium, just as software developers are doing in coding.
We may indeed be in the early days. I translate that in our current moment to folks paying for and investing a lot of money to use beta software that promises much, doesn’t always work, and more often than not yields different responses to the same prompt. But that’s the slippery slope we’ve fallen down with most tech these days.
Early filmmakers may have indeed been constantly adapting and evolving the technology they used and the way they used it. Although to pick a nit, the early filmmakers analogy doesn’t really hold up, as most early films were shot outdoors until lighting technology caught up, allowing for better filming of interiors. That’s when filming stage plays really began. (Thanks, Dr. Cohen.)
The distinction is that those early filmmakers were pushing their technology envelopes to better tell a story in a new medium of motion pictures. Not mimic one that had existed since man first painted tales of the hunt on cave walls. That assumes you accept the pieces of the definitions of writing that describe it as a method of using symbols, characters or words on some surface in order to communicate an idea.
But back to my thoughts on writing in opposition to those I disagree with. It’s safe to say that my bet is anything AI writes, no matter how well prompted, won’t endure for 400 or so years the way Shakespeare has. Or in later generations, Chekov, Ibsen, Miller, Mamet or Shepard. Not even the summaries. Of course, who knows what will endure 400 years into this wacky future we seem hell bent on creating? Or is that erasing?
I’ll end this with a quote from Mr. Shakespeare:
Write till your ink be dry, and with your tears
Moist it again, and frame some feeling line
That may discover such integrity.Two Gentlemen From Verona, Act 3, Scene 2
A 1000 monkeys indeed.
(Images from KinoMasterskaya on Shutterstock. Dictionary photos by the author.)
Thanks for reading. You can subscribe to this blog if you care to. You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. This site does not use affilate links.
#ai #ArtificialIntelligence #DanMoren #JohnGruber #technology #TimOReilly #Watermarking #williamShakespeare #Writing -
The Debate Over This Writing Thing
Several weeks ago there was quite a debate bouncing around about what writing is or might or might not become in this era of Artificial Intelligence. Quite a lot was written about the subject. I watched and read most of it beginning with John Gruber’s piece on Daring Fireball about Anthropic’s use of watermarks for AI-generated writing. Gruber called it a “perversion of writing.” Many others weighed in with words, words, words. And more words.
I particularly liked Dan Moren’s piece in response, primarily because it lines up with what I’ve learned and currently think about AI-writing. Here’s a quote:
That might be the case if AIs were writing. But they are not; they are simply generating text. Those two things are not the same. As per the premise of John’s piece, writing is about carefully picking the words and crafting the meaning of what you’re saying, things that AI do not—and patently cannot—do.
In case you’re wondering, I’m in the camp that says that AI isn’t capable of “writing.” If you know anything about the tech at all, you should be too. AI might be able to predict the next word, but that’s a mathematical equation not writing. If you insist otherwise, I hope the kool-aid tasted good on the way down.
Back in the days of my youth, one of the many rituals of sorting wheat from the chaff in childhood education was teaching us to to write mechanically, moving slowly but steadily up to writing things with meaning (remember book reports?) and once we moved into college there was Freshman Comp. Do they still teach Freshman Comp these days?
It wasn’t until later in college when I actually learned what I came to believe writing was all about. Dr. Ralph Cohen, an English professor who taught courses on Shakespeare, film as a narrative art, and surveys of literature, was one of the few professors who kicked my butt. He challenged me in ways others didn’t and I ended up taking most of the classes he offered.
In teaching Shakespeare, he laid out what the physical act and monetary cost of writing during the Bard’s time actually required. There was a real cost to committing an idea to the paper he made out of rags and old linens. Simply put, it meant the work of writing happened in the man’s brain and soul either before or as he was scribbling away with his quill and ink.
I was never good at writing with pen/pencil and paper. Nevertheless, I fought my mother tooth and nail when she insisted I take a typing class in high school. She won. I’m glad she did. Writing for me did become easier on a keyboard and a keyboard has been the primary medium of committing my thoughts to paper or digital bits ever since.
In thinking about this debate I pulled a dust covered dictionary off of one of my book shelves to look up the definition of writing. It’s The American College Dictionary published by Random House copyrighted in 1961. Here’s what that says below:
I also looked up the word “write.”
And the word “writer.”
Google Gemini’s AI summary provides the following:
The highlights in that result are Google’s. Certainly there are many other dictionaries with differing and distinct definitions spelled out. I’d wager that most, like those above, focus on the mechanical. Perhaps that would steer the debate more towards those who think AI can “write.” Frankly, I find that devaluing when I think of the act, or dare I say the art of writing.
Having spent a life in the theatre, written a few plays and musicals along the way, and heard the chimes at midnight with many a playwright and composer searching for the right words or notes, I believe there’s an element that’s missing when most engage in this debate. I’d call it the soul.
Otherwise the infinite monkey theorem comes into play and renders all writing reductive to a fault. Or if The Simpsons is more your cup of tea, 1000 monkeys with a 1000 typewriters.
There are some that are trying to define parameters of this debate as being about process. But that’s any creator’s thing. Some want to frame the discussion about how the march of technological progress always presents change. So, why resist it?
If writing, or any other art form was supposed to be easy or easier that’s when the devaluing kicks in. The playing fields of creation have never be level. Why start doing so now?
That last link above is from a piece from Tim O’Reilly on the subject. I’m not sure if he wrote it or he coached an AI to do so. You’ll understand that if you do read the piece. Regardless, it’s worth your time if you have interest in the debate. Here’s a quote:
We’re in the early days, still shooting filmed stage plays. The masters of this instrument will uncover themselves. When they do, what they produce isn’t going to be slop. In the meantime, I don’t think we should be shooting down people who are trying to push AI’s limits in writing or art. Writers should be trying to figure out the medium, just as software developers are doing in coding.
We may indeed be in the early days. I translate that in our current moment to folks paying for and investing a lot of money to use beta software that promises much, doesn’t always work, and more often than not yields different responses to the same prompt. But that’s the slippery slope we’ve fallen down with most tech these days.
Early filmmakers may have indeed been constantly adapting and evolving the technology they used and the way they used it. Although to pick a nit, the early filmmakers analogy doesn’t really hold up, as most early films were shot outdoors until lighting technology caught up, allowing for better filming of interiors. That’s when filming stage plays really began. (Thanks, Dr. Cohen.)
The distinction is that those early filmmakers were pushing their technology envelopes to better tell a story in a new medium of motion pictures. Not mimic one that had existed since man first painted tales of the hunt on cave walls. That assumes you accept the pieces of the definitions of writing that describe it as a method of using symbols, characters or words on some surface in order to communicate an idea.
But back to my thoughts on writing in opposition to those I disagree with. It’s safe to say that my bet is anything AI writes, no matter how well prompted, won’t endure for 400 or so years the way Shakespeare has. Or in later generations, Chekov, Ibsen, Miller, Mamet or Shepard. Not even the summaries. Of course, who knows what will endure 400 years into this wacky future we seem hell bent on creating? Or is that erasing?
I’ll end this with a quote from Mr. Shakespeare:
Write till your ink be dry, and with your tears
Moist it again, and frame some feeling line
That may discover such integrity.Two Gentlemen From Verona, Act 3, Scene 2
A 1000 monkeys indeed.
(Images from KinoMasterskaya on Shutterstock. Dictionary photos by the author.)
Thanks for reading. You can subscribe to this blog if you care to. You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. This site does not use affilate links.
#ai #ArtificialIntelligence #DanMoren #JohnGruber #technology #TimOReilly #Watermarking #williamShakespeare #Writing -
Profits, Prophets, Coaches and Kings by Jared Diamond review – how to change the course of history
By Steven PooleThe author of Guns, Germs and Steels falters in this flawed study of whether individuals really make a difference
#JaredDiamond #Historybooks #Scienceandnaturebooks #Books #Culture #WilliamShakespeare #ChristopherMarlowe #TheGuardian #StevenPoole
-
FOOL: And thus the whirligig of time brings in
his revenges.William Shakespeare (1564–1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 5, sc. 1, l. 399ff (5.1.399-400) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #twelfthnight #karma #outcomes #passageoftime #revenge #time #vengeance
-
FOOL: And thus the whirligig of time brings in
his revenges.William Shakespeare (1564–1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 5, sc. 1, l. 399ff (5.1.399-400) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #twelfthnight #karma #outcomes #passageoftime #revenge #time #vengeance
-
FOOL: And thus the whirligig of time brings in
his revenges.William Shakespeare (1564–1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 5, sc. 1, l. 399ff (5.1.399-400) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #twelfthnight #karma #outcomes #passageoftime #revenge #time #vengeance
-
FOOL: And thus the whirligig of time brings in
his revenges.William Shakespeare (1564–1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 5, sc. 1, l. 399ff (5.1.399-400) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #twelfthnight #karma #outcomes #passageoftime #revenge #time #vengeance
-
Sonnet No. 49
Against that time, if ever that time come,
When I shall see thee frown on my defects,
When as thy love hath cast his utmost sum,
Call’d to that audit by advis'd respects;
Against that time when thou shalt strangely pass
And scarcely greet me with that sun, thine eye,
When love, converted from the thing it was,
Shall reasons find of settled gravity,—
Against that time do I ensconce me here
Within the knowledge of mine own desert,
And this my hand against myself uprear,
To guard the lawful reasons on thy part:
To leave poor me thou hast the strength of laws,
Since why to love I can allege no cause.by William Shakespeare (1564-1616)
#Poet #Poetry #ShakespeareSonnet #ShakespeareSonnets #SonnetNo49 #WilliamShakespeare -
Clowns, corsets and kings: Tim Curry – a life in pictures
The Rocky Horror Picture Show, It and Legend actor has died – we look back at his career
#Film #TimCurry #Culture #RockyHorrorShow #StephenKing #Books #WilliamShakespeare #RidleyScott #TheGuardian #
-
#citation #quote #quotes #quotting #williamshakespeare #thought #culture #literature
"Si je devais aller en enfer après t'avoir embrassé, j'irais. Le paradis, je l'aurais déjà connu sans même y être entré". -
MALVOLIO: In my
stars I am above thee, but be not afraid of greatness.
Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and
some have greatness thrust upon ’em.William Shakespeare (1564–1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 2, Sc. 5, l. 147ff (2.5.147–150) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #twelfthnight #achievement #ambition #circumstance #destiny #fate #greatness #heritage #meme #station
-
These Violent Delights review – Scottish Ballet’s feverish Romeo and Juliet is bold and unsettling
By Peter BradshawEdinburgh film festivalA taut, dreamlike reimagining of Shakespeare’s tragedy strips away romance in favour of dread, creating an engrossing and fiercely physical dance film
#Film #Edinburghfilmfestival #Ballet #RomeoandJuliet #WilliamShakespeare #ScottishBallet #Culture #Dance #Festivals #Stage #TheGuardian #PeterBradshaw
-
Movie Review: William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar (1953)
Title: William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar
Release Date: June 4, 1953
Director: Joseph L. Mankiewicz
Production Company: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
Main Cast:- Marlon Brando as Mark Antony
- James Mason as Brutus
- John Gielgud as Cassius
- Louis Calhern as Julius Caesar
- Edmond O’Brien as Casca
- Greer Garson as Calpurnia
- Deborah Kerr as Portia
- George Macready as Marullus
- Michael Pate as Flavius
- Richard Hale as a Soothsayer
- Alan Napier as Cicero
- John Hoyt as Decius Brutus
- Tom Powers as Metellus Cimber
- William Cottrell as Cinna
- Jack Raine as Trebonius
- Ian Wolfe as Ligarius
- Morgan Farley as Artemidorus
- Bill Phipps as Servant to Antony
- Douglas Watson as Octavius Caesar
- Douglass Dumbrille as Lepidus
- Rhys Williams as Lucilius
- Michael Ansara as Pindarus
- Dayton Lummis as Messala
- Edmund Purdom as Strato
- Paul Guilfoyle as First Citizen
- John Doucette as Second Citizen
- Lawrence Dobkin as Third Citizen
- Jo Gilbert as Fourth Citizen
Synopsis (via Letterboxd):
The growing ambition of Julius Caesar is a source of major concern to his close friend Brutus. Cassius persuades him to participate in his plot to assassinate Caesar but both have sorely underestimated Mark Antony.
My Thoughts:
Julius Caesar receives the full MGM classic era treatment: big sets, big crowds, and big stars! And it’s mostly effective. For it’s cast of thousands, the success of this movie is down to the talents of its three lead actors. Marlo Brando breaks from the mumbler typecast he had at the time to be an inspirational Mark Antony while John Gielgud is imperious as the conspiracy leader Cassius. I have to admit that I usually find James Mason to be very creepy, but his creepiness is toned down here allowing him to play a sympathetic antihero in Brutus. Producer John Houseman decided to break the tradition of an all-British cast in Shakespeare productions and it pays off in performances such as Edmond O’Brien’s very Brooklyn approach to Casca. Joseph L. Mankiewicz is known for being a dialogue director which feels like it should be right for a Shakespeare, but his approach is too faithful in presenting it as a historical drama. For a movie released just after the end of World War II, I had hoped that the crisis of dictators with ambitions would feel more present. While the monologues are strong, the movie lacks an overall sense of urgency and intrigue.
Rating: ***1/2
#AncientRome #BookAdaptation #Drama #History #MovieReviews #Movies #WilliamShakespeare -
Book Review: Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare
Author: William Shakespeare
Title: Julius Caesar
Publication Info: New York : Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2011 [first performed circa 1599]
Summary/Review:Despite the title, this play is not about Julius Caesar. In fact [SPOILERS], Caesar dies at the beginning of Act III. Instead it’s the story of Marcus Junius Brutus, depicted by Shakespeare as a friend of Caesar’s concerned that Caesar’s ambition and appointment as dictator for life threatens the Roman Republic. And it’s the story of Cassius, the zealot who organizes a conspiracy against Caesar and convinces Brutus to join. And it’s the story of Mark Antony, ally of Caesar, who craftily sways the Roman public against the conspirators but maintains a respect toward Brutus. The brilliance of Shakespeare is that while all of these characters are flawed, rash, and entangled in political intrigue, there is no real villain in the piece.
Favorite Passages:
It’s a truism that Shakespeare originated – or at least popularized – numerous words and phrases. But it’s still a surprise to me just how many familiar phrases are in this play. There are some sayings that are obviously from Julius Caesar even if you haven’t read the play, such as:
- Beware the Ides of March (Soothsayer, Act 1, scene 2)
- Et tu, Brutè? (Caesar, Act 3, scene 1)
- Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears (Antony, Act 3, scene 2)
But I was surprised to read these notable phrases in the dialogue as well:
- The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars (Cassius, Act 1, scene 2) – “Brutus” is typically left out when this is quoted in popular culture
- Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look. (Caesar, Act 1, scene 2) – Again, I often hear this without “Cassius”
- But for mine own part, it was Greek to me (Casca, Act 1, scene 2)
- Cry “Havoc!” and let slip the dogs of war (Antony, Act 3, scene 1)
- This was the most unkindest cut of all (Antony, Act 3, scene 2)
Rating: ****1/2
I’m reading every Shakespeare play, one per month, in chronological order. Here’s my progress thus far:
- The Two Gentlemen of Verona
- The Taming of the Shrew
- Henry VI, Part 1
- Henry VI, Part 2
- Henry VI, Part 3
- Titus Andronicus
- Richard III
- The Comedy of Errors
- Love’s Labours’ Lost
- Richard II
- Romeo and Juliet
- A Midsummer’s Night’s Dream
- The Life and Death of King John
- The Merchant of Venice
- The History of Henry IV, Part 1
- The Merry Wives of Windsor
- The History of Henry IV, Part 2
- Much Ado About Nothing
- King Henry V
-
Game of Thrones, Shakespearean? What fools these mortals be!
By Michael BillingtonThe Mad King may bring more dynastic disputes and dotty despots to the RSC – but a ‘mayhap’ or a riddling aphorism does not a Shakespeare play make
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2026/aug/11/game-of-thrones-the-mad-king-royal-shakespeare-company
#Theatre #RoyalShakespeareCompany #GameofThrones #GeorgeRRMartin #Books #Culture #Stage #WilliamShakespeare #DuncanMacmillan #DominicCooke #TheGuardian #MichaelBillington
-
FOOL: Come away, come away, death,
And in sad cypress let me be laid.
Fly away, fly away, breath,
I am slain by a fair cruel maid.William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 2, sc. 4, l. 58ff (2.4.58-61) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #twelfthnight #feste #burial #death #dying #heartbreak #passion #pining #rejection
-
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
-- William Shakespeare (Macbeth)⬆ #Wisdom #Quotes #WilliamShakespeare #Death #Life
⬇ #Photography #Panorama #TheMaze #Dollhouse #Canyonlands #Utah
-
ORSINO: If music be the food of love, play on.
Give me excess of it, that, surfeiting,
The appetite may sicken and so die.William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 1, sc. 1, l. 1ff (1.1.1-3) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #twelfthnight #orsino #appetite #excess #gorging #love #music #passion
-
ORSINO: These most brisk and giddy-pacèd times.
William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 2, sc. 4, l. 7 (2.4.7) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #twelfthnight #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #busyness #change #instability #moderntimes #pace #present #speed #times
-
Striving to better, oft we mar what's well.
-- William Shakespeare (King Lear)⬆ #Wisdom #Quotes #WilliamShakespeare #Improvement
⬇ #Photography #Panorama #CoyoteButtesNorth #TheWave #VermilionCliffs #Utah
-
Love’s Labour’s Lost review – paella, bullfighting and flamenco make Shakespeare’s farce a fiesta
By Mark LawsonShakespeare’s Globe, LondonChoreographers Carmen Igarza and Vanessa Guevara deserve to take a bow as spectacular dance and movement add passion to the seemingly unfinished play
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2026/jul/30/loves-labours-lost-review-shakespeares-globe-london
#Stage #ShakespearesGlobe #Culture #WilliamShakespeare #TheGuardian #MarkLawson
-
Book Review: King Henry V by William Shakespeare
Author: William Shakespeare
Title: King Henry V
Publication Info: London : Arden Shakespeare, 1995, 2002 [written circa 1599]
Summary/Review:I may be wrong, but I think Henry V is the most famous and highly-regarded of all of Shakespeare’s English history plays. In the chronology of when they plays were written, it is the last of eight plays in a continuous sequence from the 1390s to the 1480s, albeit in the middle of that historical chronology. Shakespeare saved the best for last.
The drama of the play is conveyed by a Chorus who introduces each act. The structure of the play is fairly simple. In the first act we see that the King has matured since the days of Prince Hal, and is determined to secure his birthright in France. In the next act, he uncovers a plot by members of his court to assassinate him. Act III depicts the English in their successful siege of Harfleur. Now surrounded by the French army, Act IV depicts Henry visiting his soldiers in disguise and then rallies the troops with his St. Crispin’s Day speech. In the final act, having achieved a tremendous victory at Agincourt, Henry charmingly woos the French princess Katharine in a marriage that will seal the peace.
This play is an example of English patriotism and nationalism but it’s complex in a way that goes beyond jingoism. Henry is depicted as a scheming and sometimes flawed leader, and in his speech at Harfleur he threatens war crimes. Shakespeare was writing during the reign of Elizabeth I and the last of the 8 plays ends with her grandfather Henry VII “rightfully” gaining the throne. In this context, it makes sense that Shakespeare is willing to depict previous monarchs as less than great. This is also a war play that doesn’t shy away from the horrors of war. While some adaptations make it an anti-war play, I think it’s most likely that Shakespeare is recognizing that the great achievements of war can come at great moral and mental costs.
Rating: *****
I’m reading every Shakespeare play, one per month, in chronological order. Here’s my progress thus far:
- The Two Gentlemen of Verona
- The Taming of the Shrew
- Henry VI, Part 1
- Henry VI, Part 2
- Henry VI, Part 3
- Titus Andronicus
- Richard III
- The Comedy of Errors
- Love’s Labours’ Lost
- Richard II
- Romeo and Juliet
- A Midsummer’s Night’s Dream
- The Life and Death of King John
- The Merchant of Venice
- The History of Henry IV, Part 1
- The Merry Wives of Windsor
- The History of Henry IV, Part 2
- Much Ado About Nothing
-
VIOLA: O Time, thou must untangle this, not I;
It is too hard a knot for me t’ untie.William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 2, sc. 2, l. 40ff (2.2.40-41) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #twelfthnight #complexity #conundrum #passageoftime #problem #puzzle #tangle #time #untangle
-
OLIVIA: What’s a drunken man like, Fool?
FOOL: Like a drowned man, a fool, and a madman. One
draught above heat makes him a fool, the second
mads him, and a third drowns him.William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 1, sc. 5, l. 128ff (1.5.128-131) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #shakespeare #twelfthnight #alcohol #drinking #drunkenness #intoxication
-
FOOL: Good madonna, why mourn’st thou?
OLIVIA: Good Fool, for my brother’s death.
FOOL: I think his soul is in hell, madonna.
OLIVIA: I know his soul is in heaven, Fool.
FOOL: The more fool, madonna, to mourn for your brother’s soul, being in heaven. Take away the fool, gentlemen.William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 1, sc. 5, l. 64ff (1.5 64-70) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #twelfthnight #afterlife #death #grief #heaven #hell #mourning #paradise #fool #folly
-
TOBY: I am sure care’s an enemy to life.
William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Twelfth Night, Act 1, sc. 3, l. 2ff (1.3.2-3) (1601)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #twelfthnight #anxiety #care #grief #living #mourning #sadness #worry
-
William Shakespeare – A Midsummer Night’s Dream – Judi Dench – Helen Mirren – Diana Rigg – Ian Holm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9Ry0lUghcw
Restored Version by Shakespeare Network. – This was the first live-action version of this play to be filmed in colour.
#AMidsummerNightSDream #DianaRigg #Film #HelenMirren #IanHolm #JudiDench #ShakespeareNetwork #Theater #WilliamShakespeare -
"All that glitters is not gold" is an #aphorism stating that not everything that looks precious or true turns out to be so. While early expressions of the idea are known from at least the 12th–13th century, the current saying is derived from a 16th-century line by #WilliamShakespeare, "All that #glisters is not gold" and, firstly, from the proverbs written by #JohnFlorio on his #SecondFruits (1591).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_Ff7R-h5g4 -
Our Player of the Patchwork Mathias Blackett is playing Sir Toby Belch in Arcadia Theater's production of William Shakespeare's (very commedia dell'arte inspired) "Twelfth Night" this week!
-
RICHARD: And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover
To entertain these fair well-spoken days,
I am determinèd to prove a villain
And hate the idle pleasures of these days.William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Richard III, Act 1, sc. 1, l. 28ff (1.1.28-31) (1592)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #richardiii #badguy #badperson #selfaffirmation #selfawareness #selfdetermination #selfdirection #selfevaluation #selfperception #selfunderstanding #villain
-
To hiss or not to hiss.
-
Grant them removed, and grant that this your noise
Hath chid down all the majesty of England;
Imagine that you see the wretched strangers,
Their babies at their backs and their poor luggage,
Plodding tooth ports and costs for transportation,
And that you sit as kings in your desires,
Authority quite silent by your brawl,
And you in ruff of your opinions clothed;
What had you got? I’ll tell you. You had taught
How insolence and strong hand should prevail,
How order should be quelled; and by this pattern
Not one of you should live an aged man,
For other ruffians, as their fancies wrought,
With self same hand, self reasons, and self right,
Would shark on you, and men like ravenous fishes
Would feed on one another.William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Sir Thomas More, Act 2, sc. 4, l. 55ff (c. 1592)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #anarchy #breakingthelaw #conflict #foreigners #immigration #insecurity #lawbreaking #lawlessness #mob #mobrule #mobviolence #riot #socialcontract #violence #xenophobia
-
Go thou and fill another room in hell.
William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Richard II, Act 5, sc. 1, l. 110 (5.1.110) (1595)More about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #assassin #condemnation #damnation #killer #killing #murderer
-
KING RICHARD: You may my glories and my state depose
But not my griefs; still am I king of those.William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Richard II, Act 4, sc. 1, l. 201ff (4.1.201-202) (1595)More info about this quote: wist.info/shakespeare-william/…
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #shakespeare #williamshakespeare #richardii #autonomy #emotion #glory #grief #innerself #mourning #power #prestige #remorse
-
Stephen Frears – „The Lost King“ (2022)
Hier geht es um Wahrheit, Obsession und die Wiedergewinnung weiblicher Deutungshoheit – und letztlich ist es auch ein Lehrstück über das, was verloren geht, wenn sich ein erfahrener Regisseur zu sehr auf das Kunsthandwerk verlässt und zu wenig auf das politische Jetzt. Dabei hätte dieser Film das Potenzial gehabt, ein feministisches Manifest zu sein.
[…]
-
Ulrich Tukur – Tatort: „Im Schmerz geboren“ (2014)
So geschehen im Jahr 2014: William Shakespeare, Sergio Leone und Quentin Tarrantino gehen in Wiesbaden in eine Bar… und nur Ulrich Tukur kommt wieder heraus, in kugelsicherer Schutzweste, mit einer Maschinenpistole im Anschlag. Wir sehen 54 tote Menschen, die ein großes Zeugnis gegen Rache, für Wahrheit und Vergebung ablegen. (ARD)
