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 thoughtâone 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 pastânot a fruitless obsession with assessmentâthat 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 timelessâand timelyâways to stretch your mind and hone your words.
Domande frequenti
Come faccio ad annullare l'abbonamento?
Ă semplicissimo: basta accedere alla sezione Account nelle Impostazioni e cliccare su "Annulla abbonamento". Dopo la cancellazione, l'abbonamento rimarrĂ attivo per il periodo rimanente giĂ pagato. Per maggiori informazioni, clicca qui
Ă possibile scaricare libri? Se sĂŹ, come?
Al momento è possibile scaricare tramite l'app tutti i nostri libri ePub mobile-friendly. Anche la maggior parte dei nostri PDF è scaricabile e stiamo lavorando per rendere disponibile quanto prima il download di tutti gli altri file. Per maggiori informazioni, clicca qui
Che differenza c'è tra i piani?
Entrambi i piani ti danno accesso illimitato alla libreria e a tutte le funzionalitĂ di Perlego. Le uniche differenze sono il prezzo e il periodo di abbonamento: con il piano annuale risparmierai circa il 30% rispetto a 12 rate con quello mensile.
Cos'è Perlego?
Perlego è un servizio di abbonamento a testi accademici, che ti permette di accedere a un'intera libreria online a un prezzo inferiore rispetto a quello che pagheresti per acquistare un singolo libro al mese. Con oltre 1 milione di testi suddivisi in piÚ di 1.000 categorie, troverai sicuramente ciò che fa per te! Per maggiori informazioni, clicca qui.
Perlego supporta la sintesi vocale?
Cerca l'icona Sintesi vocale nel prossimo libro che leggerai per verificare se è possibile riprodurre l'audio. Questo strumento permette di leggere il testo a voce alta, evidenziandolo man mano che la lettura procede. Puoi aumentare o diminuire la velocità della sintesi vocale, oppure sospendere la riproduzione. Per maggiori informazioni, clicca qui.
How to Think like Shakespeare è disponibile online in formato PDF/ePub?
SĂŹ, puoi accedere a How to Think like Shakespeare di Scott Newstok in formato PDF e/o ePub, cosĂŹ come ad altri libri molto apprezzati nelle sezioni relative a Education e Education Theory & Practice. Scopri oltre 1 milione di libri disponibili nel nostro catalogo.
âI will not cease from mental fight,â Blake wrote. Mental fight means thinking against the current, not with it.
âVirginia Woolf, âThoughts on Peace in an Air Raidâ (1940)
Thinkingâs 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 donât take my word for it:
⢠Nothing pains some people more than having to think.
âMartin Luther King Jr. (1963)
⢠Most people would die sooner than thinkâin fact they do so.
âBertrand Russell (1925)
⢠Remember how many pass their whole lives and hardly once think and never learned themselves to think.
âWalt Whitman (1855)
⢠What is the hardest task in the world? To think.
âRalph Waldo Emerson (1841)
⢠the very painful Effort of really thinking
âSamuel Taylor Coleridge (1811)
⢠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,âthe real labour of thinking.
âSir Joshua Reynolds (1784)2
Thinking about thinking might be easier to caricature than to capture, whether in iconic images of Rodinâs Thinker or Hamlet holding Yorickâs skull. The novelist William Golding relates how he was chastised as a delinquent student:
âDonât you ever think at all?â
No, I didnât think, wasnât thinking, couldnât thinkâI was simply waiting in anguish for the interview to stop.
âThen youâd better learnâhadnât you?â
On one occasion the headmaster leaped to his feet, reached up and plonked Rodinâs masterpiece on the desk before me.
âThatâs what a man looks like when heâs really thinking.â
I surveyed the gentleman without interest or comprehension.3
Lewis Carroll mocks the faith that a mere pose will induce insight: when the Dodo canât 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. Weâve imposed educational programs that kill the capacity to think independently, or even the desire to do so. While we point to thinkersâLeonardo, Galileo, Newton, Darwin, Curieâ 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 âthink,â âthinking,â or âthoughtâ outnumber âfeel,â âfeeling,â or âfelt,â 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 whirlèd like a potterâs wheel, or the quick forge and working-house of thoughtâas if one were hammering mental metal on an anvil.
He even coins an adjective for thinking, âforgetive.â âForgetiveâ looks as though it ought to mean something like, well, âforgetful.â But the emphasis is instead on the kinetic activity in that root âforgeâ: 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 Shakespeareâs 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
Hereâs a recent example of not thinking about Shakespearean thinking.
Ken Robinsonâs âDo Schools Kill Creativity?â is a popular TED talk, with more than sixty million views. The title primes your answer: yesâyes, of course schools kill creativity. And Robinsonâs 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 donât line up, right from his disarming opening joke:
. . . you donât 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 somebodyâs English class, wasnât he?
How annoying would that be?
âMust try harder.â
Sir Ken gets the laughs. But Shakespeare never studied in an âEnglish classâ; 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 achievementâin English.
Robinson is right about one thing: Shakespeare would have been enrolled at around the age of sevenâlong 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. Itâs the age that Michael Aptedâs 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 collegeâs incoming students. My summer was consumed with fretting that the last thing theyâd 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 âmillennialsâ in magazine headlines with the phrase â43-Year-Old White Men,â9 exposing fatuous generational generalizations:
âHow 43-Year-Old White Men Are Ruining the Workforceâ
âWhy Are So Many 43-Year-Old White Men Having Zero Sex?â
âThe Hot New 43-Year-Old White Men Trend Is Hating 43-Year-Old
White Menâ
and my favorite:
âMartha Stewart Still Confused about What 43-Year-Old White
Men Are Exactlyâ
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...