Shakespeare poetry is overrated it is clever but emotionless

Shakespeare poetry is overrated it is clever but emotionless Shakespeare as a lover would have been boring his love is in his head not his lions he is clever without being passionate he is clever without being emotionl his poems have no soul no spirit no life or fire all they have is cleverness Shakespeare poetry is only valued because western scholars value the mind over the lions they value intelligence cleverness over emotion emotion scares and unsettles most Western people western scholars value the Appolonium over the Dyonisium the history of the Christan West is the history of undervaluing emotion passions [the Dyonisium] and valuing intelligence cleverness [Appolonium] that is why Shakespeare poetry is considered good and that is why they are overrated and emotionless you only says Shakespeare poetry is good because you have been told by authorities it is good If a scholar of English literature said Shakespeare poetry is over ated it is emotionless he/she would lose or not get an academic position It is only because of tradition that Shakespeare poetry is said to be good when people says Shakespeare poetry is good they are only parrots repeating the catechism they were taught at school -without any real idea why he is good as this Debate org poster said http://www.debate.org... "You are correct. All art is equal in artistic value" "Debating poetry is pointless. Art is subjective, so the argument always comes down to "I feel this way." I will give an example from Shakespeare and Dean Shakespeare sonnet SONNET 18 Shall I compare thee to a summer's day? Thou art more lovely and more temperate: Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May, And summer's lease hath all too short a date: Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines, And often is his gold complexion dimm'd; And every fair from fair sometime declines, By chance or nature's changing course untrimm'd; But thy eternal summer shall not fade Nor lose possession of that fair thou owest; Nor shall Death brag thou wander'st in his shade, When in eternal lines to time thou growest: So long as men can breathe or eyes can see, So long lives this and this gives life to thee. first its rhythm and lyrical nature are poor when compared to Dean -when you recite the poem you come across like a dead fish second it is meant to be about love yet its tone is emotionless no passion only clever words compared to Dean thirdly its language is prosaic and commonplace compared to Dean From Dean Layla-and-Majnun http://www.scribd.com... give thy lips that I can kiss stare into my eyes to give me bliss press thy breast against my breasts that I can hear the palpitating of thy heart send shudders through my veins with the flutter of thy eye-lids oh oh the never ending fires of my desires which all my tears canst put out my heated flesh scorches the hot desert wind as the fire to the wood my desires consume me o"er thee with moans of love I shout with the pain of love I shout crazy with love for thee I long for thee alone this poem is superior to SONNET 18 this poem is more lyrical than Shakespeare -when you recite the poem you sing with emotion unlike SONNET 18 this poem has a more passionate/emotional tone-this is a true love song-unlike SONNET 18 the language imaginative and alive and full of imagery-unlike SONNET 18 now you will just say sonnet 18 is better only because you have been told it is a good poem also no one on here is going to say Shakespeare poetry is overrated it is emotionless for fear of seeming ridiculous -by going against received tradition but we can have a bit of fun in debating-all you will really give is catechism you were taught at school -without any real idea why he is good