Published Online:

The Play's the Thing

Article Tools
  • PrintPrinter-Friendly
  • EmailEmail Article
  • ReprintReprints
  • CommentsComments
Despite Shakespearean literature's standing in the curriculum, some teachers had begun to understand why students found it irrelevant.

For 14 years, veteran teacher Joette Conger has taught Shakespeare the way it was taught to her. She admits her classes at Downers Grove High School in Downers Grove, Ill., have been a little dull. "My classes have been very text-based. My students were reading Shakespeare; they weren't experiencing it," Conger says. "Until recently, that was enough for me, but now I want something more."

But at Gibson's session at the NCTE conference, Conger sat on the sidelines while more than 70 of her peers from across the country mimicked characters in various Shakespearean scenes. "I am not an actor, so this is quite a stretch for me," she explains. But Conger says she is willing to break out of the old ways that have bound teachers for decades. "I think I can do this, but I will have to do it in small steps."

More teachers are starting to get the guidance they need. Many Shakespeare festivals and theaters, which have proliferated in cities large and small, have launched education campaigns. The Shakespeare Repertory Theater here has been one of the leaders, inviting thousands of students and teachers each year to productions and workshops designed to foster understanding through performance.

Instructional materials that help teachers put theory into practice also are more readily available. The recent NCTE conference on teaching Shakespeare drew more than twice the number of teachers as the first one two years ago in Louisville, Ky. And teachers such as Napa High School's Zunin travel throughout their home states sharing their ideas.

The Folger Shakespeare Library has put on workshops each summer for the past decade with the help of grants from the National Endowment for the Arts. The handful of teachers selected for the workshops are encouraged to go back and work with colleagues in their schools and districts to help others incorporate the techniques.

"Once you get to a teacher, you get to all that teacher's students forever," says Peggy O'Brien, who started the Folger workshops and other education programs in the early 1980s when she was the library's director of education.

"For a long time, teachers have been translating this stuff for their kids. Now, teachers realize the kids have to learn to translate it for themselves," adds O'Brien, who is currently in charge of education programming for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting in Washington.

The Folger produces guides designed to enhance classroom instruction, including one called Shakespeare Set Free, that can be purchased from the library. And new editions of texts geared toward high school and middle school students have appeared in recent years. Among several offered by Cambridge University Press, Gibson's Teaching Shakespeare provides explanations and activities to help students understand the complicated language and structure of Shakespeare's plays and sonnets. The Internet has provided dozens of other resources.

Lessons on Shakespeare are even gaining favor in younger grades, with more middle and elementary schools including some of the playwright's more comical works in the curriculum.

"Younger children still have a sense of wonder about language, so they're not as overwhelmed by Shakespeare," Field-Pickering says. "They view these plays as musical, rhythmical, and magical."

Even the older students seem to have a soft spot for the increasingly popular active teaching methods.

Gilberto Hinojosa, by his own account, is a tough guy. Although generally a good student, the 17-year-old says he would rather tell jokes in class than ponder the value of fine literature. So there was no way he would appreciate the passion and poetry of Shakespeare. Or so he thought.

Almost against his will, Hinojosa was sucked into the carefully prepared lessons his teacher, Mark Onuscheck, designed for his class of seniors at Waukegan High School north of Chicago. Starting with hands-on activities that had students exploring the meanings of unfamiliar words and phrases, and exercises that warm up the voice and body for lively readings of the scripts, Onuscheck has won over his students.

And Hinojosa has become a spokesman of sorts for the power of the plays.

"From this different view, I really feel what Shakespeare was trying to get across," he says. "It's no longer just a jumble of weird words. It's no longer irrelevant to me."

Despite Shakespearean literature's standing in the curriculum, some teachers had begun to understand why students found it irrelevant. Why should this long-dead white man dominate English courses, many teachers wondered, when there is a proliferation of great literature from a more diverse group of writers?

"I was really beginning to question whether it was still relevant for today's students," says Patty Slagle, the chairwoman of the English department at Seneca High School in Louisville, Ky. "But then I'd see those same students who dreaded coming to class watching the local Shakespeare company perform in the park, and they had a ball."

Slagle helped organize the NCTE conference, knowing that many of her peers also doubted the value of the centuries-old texts for today's students.

Many of the nation's universities have pondered the same politically and culturally charged question, with some going so far as to eliminate the requirement that English majors take courses dedicated exclusively to Shakespeare and other masters.

Georgetown University's announcement a few years ago that English majors could sidestep Shakespeare and choose from a wider array of courses on more-modern writers and issues of popular culture sounded an alarm for some critics of the efforts to revise the curriculum.

"If a guy wants to be a doctor, anatomy isn't an optional course," says Jerry L. Martin, the president of the National Alumni Forum in Washington. The conservative think tank was so alarmed by the move at Georgetown that it conducted a study of other top universities to compare requirements.

Its 1996 report, "The Shakespeare File: What English Majors Are Really Studying," found that most of the 67 institutions surveyed no longer required English majors to take courses devoted to Shakespeare. Although students are likely to study the bard's works in general-literature classes, they could forgo more-specific courses on the works of the Elizabethan age to focus on popular literature.

The result, according to Martin, could be a new generation of English teachers who step into the classroom without ever studying Shakespeare.

"The implication for schools is that they are hiring English teachers who may or may not have ever read the most important author in the language," Martin says. Universities "need to tell students that this is important."

But English majors don't study Shakespeare because it's required, argues Gary Taylor, a Shakespearean scholar. They study it because they love literature and understand Shakespeare's influence on later authors, he says.

"There has been no decline in the numbers of students taking Shakespeare," says Taylor, the director of the Hudson Strode Program in Shakespeare Studies at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa. "Shakespeare should be able to compete on the free market. If he is for all time, we should be able to make him interesting to the next generation of students so that they want to study him and not have him shoved down their throats. Most scholars believe Shakespeare can make it without being compulsory."

Indeed, old Will is far from dead. Pick up any newspaper, watch a popular television show, look around any town, and there is likely to be a reference to some Shakespearean work. Headlines, advertising slogans, and shop names all are apt to steal a word or phrase that has garnered universal understanding. Few will deny Shakespeare's enduring influence.

Few will deny Shakespeare's enduring influence.

Last year, even students who weren't enrolled in Des Jardin's class at Niles West High were begging entrance because of the carrot she held out to them: At the end of the unit she showed the latest film version of "Romeo and Juliet," a modern-day tale with gun-toting gang members set in the seedy fictional Florida city of Verona Beach. Rising stars Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes made the 1996 film a blockbuster in theaters and a favorite rental for home and school.

Profit-minded Hollywood has embraced Shakespeare in the past few years. Just as Laurence Olivier inspired renewed interest in the works through his classic film versions of "Henry V" and "Hamlet" half a century ago, Kenneth Branagh and other contemporary filmmakers have spawned a new Shakespeare chic.

In the past few years Branagh and fellow actors Mel Gibson, Al Pacino, and DiCaprio ensured the popularity of Shakespeare's plays among a variety of age groups with high-cost film versions. Teachers have used those movies to reel in their students.

And though some scholars might balk at such use, those pushing more-active methods of teaching think they have hit their target.

"Only fuddy-duddy, dyed-in-the-wool textual scholars would turn up their noses at these films," says Cambridge's Gibson. The latest version of "Romeo and Juliet" is "done with joy," he says. "It's done with passion. It's a splendid example of using that language and presenting it through a different culture."

The latest media and instructional ideas engage students visually, physically, and intellectually, the advocates of an updated approach say. The most effective activities are not fluff, but project a deeper understanding of the language and themes, they say.

"This is not about dummying the scripts down; we are using better pedagogy," says Zunin. "Because they are the MTV generation, these students are used to a lot of visual stimuli; they are ready to get up on their feet. But that shouldn't be the reason we're doing it. We're doing it because it makes more sense to treat these works as plays."

For students such as Hinojosa, it's about time.

"I don't know who ever thought of just reading the lines. It's a script. It's so obvious," he says "You can't learn to play baseball by just watching it. You have to do it."

Web Only

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login |  Register
Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.

Back to Top Back to Top

Most Popular Stories

Viewed

Emailed

Commented