Better Thinking and Incentives: Lessons from Shakespeare
fs.blog
fs.blog
I don't understand what this is supposed to mean? Latin was certainly not obsolete at the time and would remain relevant for several centuries after. Shakespeare did not write in Latin, but several of his plays are directly based on Latin sources, and so are his narrative poems. So I don't see who would consider Latin "useless"?
I'm just confused about who would even suggest Latin was "useless" in the first place. But maybe something is missing in the quote.
The author is pointing out that there was no audience or need for the type of linguistic creativity that Shakespeare was only able to achieve as a result of his intimate knowledge of Latin, until the professional theater emerged during Shakespeare’s very lifetime. The drilling and study in Latin proved, in the event, to be practical and useful in a new and unexpected way.
Shakespeare was less of a Latin showoff than Marlowe or Kyd. In fact he was mocked for his lack of a university education[1]. But he definitely considered Latin useful, throughout his career, and playwrights continued to reference it for many years.
[1] https://artsci.wustl.edu/ampersand/upstart-crow-shakespeares...
The challenge today would appear to be our need or desire to chase higher salaries. It's not immediately clear to me what brought about this transformation in our prevalent motivation because I'm quite confident it's ubiquity is a recent phenomenon. Maybe it's consumerism and social competitiveness (envy) or maybe it's rampant inflation and subconscious existential dread on our ability to provide for ourselves and our families, or probably something else.