A lively and engaging guide to vital habits of mind that can help you think more deeply, write more effectively, and learn more joyfully How to Think like Shakespeare is a brilliantly fun exploration of the craft of thoughtāone that demonstrates what we've lost in education today, and how we might begin to recover it. In fourteen brief chapters that draw from Shakespeare's world and works, and from other writers past and present, Scott Newstok distills enduring practices that can make learning more creative and pleasurable.Challenging a host of today's questionable notions about education, Newstok shows how mental play emerges through work, creativity through imitation, autonomy through tradition, innovation through constraint, and freedom through discipline. It was these practices, and a conversation with the pastānot a fruitless obsession with assessmentāthat nurtured a mind like Shakespeare's. And while few of us can hope to approach the genius of the Bard, we can all learn from the exercises that shaped him.Written in a friendly, conversational tone and brimming with insights, How to Think like Shakespeare enacts the thrill of thinking on every page, reviving timelessāand timelyāways to stretch your mind and hone your words.
Frequently asked questions
How do I cancel my subscription?
Simply head over to the account section in settings and click on āCancel Subscriptionā - itās as simple as that. After you cancel, your membership will stay active for the remainder of the time youāve paid for. Learn more here.
Can/how do I download books?
At the moment all of our mobile-responsive ePub books are available to download via the app. Most of our PDFs are also available to download and we're working on making the final remaining ones downloadable now. Learn more here.
What is the difference between the pricing plans?
Both plans give you full access to the library and all of Perlegoās features. The only differences are the price and subscription period: With the annual plan youāll save around 30% compared to 12 months on the monthly plan.
What is Perlego?
We are an online textbook subscription service, where you can get access to an entire online library for less than the price of a single book per month. With over 1 million books across 1000+ topics, weāve got you covered! Learn more here.
Do you support text-to-speech?
Look out for the read-aloud symbol on your next book to see if you can listen to it. The read-aloud tool reads text aloud for you, highlighting the text as it is being read. You can pause it, speed it up and slow it down. Learn more here.
Is How to Think like Shakespeare an online PDF/ePUB?
Yes, you can access How to Think like Shakespeare by Scott Newstok in PDF and/or ePUB format, as well as other popular books in Education & Education Theory & Practice. We have over one million books available in our catalogue for you to explore.
āI will not cease from mental fight,ā Blake wrote. Mental fight means thinking against the current, not with it.
āVirginia Woolf, āThoughts on Peace in an Air Raidā (1940)
Thinkingās tough. We all want shortcuts; you probably picked up this book because you thought it would give you shortcuts. Thinking taxes us, because our brains are designed not for thought but for the avoidance of thought.1 No wonder we dodge it! But donāt take my word for it:
ā¢ Nothing pains some people more than having to think.
āMartin Luther King Jr. (1963)
ā¢ Most people would die sooner than thinkāin fact they do so.
āBertrand Russell (1925)
ā¢ Remember how many pass their whole lives and hardly once think and never learned themselves to think.
āWalt Whitman (1855)
ā¢ What is the hardest task in the world? To think.
āRalph Waldo Emerson (1841)
ā¢ the very painful Effort of really thinking
āSamuel Taylor Coleridge (1811)
ā¢ A provision of endless apparatus, a bustle of infinite enquiry and research, or even the mere mechanical labour of copying, may be employed, to evade and shuffle off real labour,āthe real labour of thinking.
āSir Joshua Reynolds (1784)2
Thinking about thinking might be easier to caricature than to capture, whether in iconic images of Rodinās Thinker or Hamlet holding Yorickās skull. The novelist William Golding relates how he was chastised as a delinquent student:
āDonāt you ever think at all?ā
No, I didnāt think, wasnāt thinking, couldnāt thinkāI was simply waiting in anguish for the interview to stop.
āThen youād better learnāhadnāt you?ā
On one occasion the headmaster leaped to his feet, reached up and plonked Rodinās masterpiece on the desk before me.
āThatās what a man looks like when heās really thinking.ā
I surveyed the gentleman without interest or comprehension.3
Lewis Carroll mocks the faith that a mere pose will induce insight: when the Dodo canāt answer a question
without a great deal of thought . . . it stood for a long time with one finger pressed upon its forehead (the position in which you usually see Shakespeare, in the pictures of him), while the rest waited in silence.4
Even Plato failed to settle upon one apt image for thinking, calling forth, in turn, the sting of a gadfly; the midwifing of a notion; the paralysis induced by an electric ray; an inward conversation; a sudden, invisible wind.
Yet like the famous judge faced with obscenity, we claim to know thinking when we see it, despite the difficulty of definition. And if we believe cultivating it is a good thing, then we are often perverse. Weāve imposed educational programs that kill the capacity to think independently, or even the desire to do so. While we point to thinkersāLeonardo, Galileo, Newton, Darwin, Curieā who model the disciplined, independent, questing intellect we claim to revere, we enforce systems ensuring that our own young people could never emulate them.
Shakespeare earned his place in our pantheon of minds by staging thought in action. Across his works, terms like āthink,ā āthinking,ā or āthoughtā outnumber āfeel,ā āfeeling,ā or āfelt,ā by a nearly 10:1 ratio. He raises ideas into a quasi-physical reality,5 vivifying their dynamic power as a palpable force. When staging thinking, Shakespeare adopts images from a craft workshop, whether as thoughts whirlĆØd like a potterās wheel, or the quick forge and working-house of thoughtāas if one were hammering mental metal on an anvil.
He even coins an adjective for thinking, āforgetive.ā āForgetiveā looks as though it ought to mean something like, well, āforgetful.ā But the emphasis is instead on the kinetic activity in that root āforgeā: to make or grasp. We must be ready to fly like thought to catch it in the act, for nimble thought can jump both sea and land.6 (When Helen Keller placed her hands on Merce Cunningham to feel him leap, she marveled: How like thought. How like the mind it is.)7
As Shakespeareās contemporary Michel de Montaigne put it, thinking about thinking is a thorny undertaking, and more so than it seems, to follow a movement so wandering as that of our mind.8
Hereās a recent example of not thinking about Shakespearean thinking.
Ken Robinsonās āDo Schools Kill Creativity?ā is a popular TED talk, with more than sixty million views. The title primes your answer: yesāyes, of course schools kill creativity. And Robinsonās pitch follows his self-confirming template:
schools are _______ [hierarchical/industrialist/outdated]; this is a _______ [crisis/crime/catastrophe]; and the answer is _______ [creativity/innovation/technology].
Yet his diagnoses and his prescriptions donāt line up, right from his disarming opening joke:
. . . you donāt think of Shakespeare being a child, do you? Shakespeare being seven?
I never thought of it.
I mean, he was seven at some point.
He was in somebodyās English class, wasnāt he?
How annoying would that be?
āMust try harder.ā
Sir Ken gets the laughs. But Shakespeare never studied in an āEnglish classā; no such class would exist until centuries after his time. Instead, his Stratford grammar school was conducted in Latin. And his regimented Latin curriculum proved to be the crucible for his creative achievementāin English.
Robinson is right about one thing: Shakespeare would have been enrolled at around the age of sevenālong considered a pivotal developmental stage for children, as lasting patterns of thinking take hold. Aristotle held that children should leave home and enter school when they turned seven. At seven, medieval pages would enter the household of a knight. Itās the age that Michael Aptedās Seven Up documentary commences its remarkable chronicle of the life-determining effects of social class, summoning the motto attributed to Loyola: Give me the child for the first seven years, and I will give you the man.
In 2016, I was invited to address my collegeās incoming students. My summer was consumed with fretting that the last thing theyād want to hear would be a lecture from some forty-three-year-old white man.
Indeed, my microdemographic had just become a reverse meme! An irritated millennial journalist had replaced the word āmillennialsā in magazine headlines with the phrase ā43-Year-Old White Men,ā9 exposing fatuous generational generalizations:
āHow 43-Year-Old White Men Are Ruining the Workforceā
āWhy Are So Many 43-Year-Old White Men Having Zero Sex?ā
āThe Hot New 43-Year-Old White Men Trend Is Hating 43-Year-Old
White Menā
and my favorite:
āMartha Stewart Still Confused about What 43-Year-Old White
Men Are Exactlyā
So I was cautious about being the cranky old prof hectoring the youth.
But it dawned on me: these students would have been seven years old just around the moment that our obsession with shallow forms of evaluation was kicking into high gear. Their cohort was the first to have been marched through their entire primary and secondary schooling under a testing-obsessed...