In honor of long-standing argument that I am going to win one of these days — if the telling of it or the moral itself is of more value; not that these must be mutually exclusive. The beauty of Shakespeare’s originals, I’ll warrant you, however, surpasses these moralistic reductions as the first of May surpasses the first of December:
(reduced to the bare bones)
Thinking of you cheers me up
(reduced to psychological drawback)
Narcissistic Personality Disorder
(reduced to Christian catch-word)
(reduced to really bad Emo Indie Rock)
I love a girl who is normal.
She’s got frizzy hair.
Never when we’re smoking and the men are passing
Have I seen them stare.
No, no, oh no. She has bad breath and teeth
And when she asked to sing in our band I said:
“my dear, you’re too mediocre. I like your voice
but, darling, others would only if they were dead.”
But I’m singing to say
I love her anyway
And anyway Vogue is a ruse
But my love, my love, it’s true.
(reduced to lawyerese)
Your pulchritude is not of wide repute, albeit that Party 1 (hereafter referred to as amant) has conceived the opinion that it meets the standard of amorous myopia/acceptance insomuch as to render you endeared/capable of social tyranny. Amant proposes that aforementioned lack of reported pulchritude may be due to the latter, executed by you so extensively as to establish this as your reputation.
4 thoughts on “Companion to Shakespeare’s sonnets”
It took twenty seconds to read the reductions and they expressed the same point of view as the author, minus a bit of surplusage.
One vote for reduction.
You honestly think that aesthetics have no bearing on how readily a viewpoint is accepted? Or do you think this slight of hand; cheating, as it were, and therefore wish by your vote to render aesthetic’s sway null and void? If this be the case, espouse ugliness in all you do: make brevity your aim, no matter what the consequence. Say exactly what is on your mind without considering the listener. This is sure to grant you success both in the public and the private sector.
I appreciate your point of view it was concise and to the point.
Thanks. Your point of view, on the other hand, was so concise you forgot to punctuate it. Sometimes less is not more.