Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Required reading: 'Atlas Shrugged'

Posted by   + Show Post

Found this on FB, I know its fox news and won't be passed, but I'm curious about the subject matter: Do you think this would be a good required reading for high schoolers?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/07/symbolic-idaho-bill-would-require-students-to-read-atlas-shrugged/

Idaho bill would require students to read 'Atlas Shrugged'

In a symbolic move to teach “personal responsibility,” an Idaho lawmaker has proposed requiring every high school student in the state to read Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged.”

State Sen. John Goedde introduced legislation on Tuesday that would require Idaho secondary students to read and pass an examination on the iconic 1957 novel touted by conservatives like Rep. Paul Ryan and Rush Limbaugh. 

The lawmaker, though, says the bill is meant more as a statement than an actual proposed policy. Goedde, in a statement to FoxNews.com, said media outlets have thus far “totally missed the point” of the bill — he described the bill as a protest to a state Board of Education decision to roll back online class requirements. 

“Traditionally in Idaho, the State Board of Education sets graduation requirements in rule,” Goedde wrote in an email Thursday. “They recently repealed a rule dealing with online class requirements and failed to move another rule forward dealing with administrators demonstrating proficiency in evaluating teachers. I felt both were important and wanted to remind them that the legislature could also set graduation standards.”

“I have no intention of pursuing this requirement. I am sorry but I don’t see a story here.”

- State Sen. John Goedde

The “Atlas Shrugged” requirement, Goedde said, was simply a vehicle to deliver that message. He said he has "no intention" of establishing this requirement. 

Still, the bill was formally introduced Tuesday. 

The bill reads: “The student shall obtain a passing grade on the examination in order to satisfy the graduation requirement provided for in this section. Such examination shall be approved by the state department of education.”

Goedde told The Spokesman-Review the legislation was merely a “shot over their bow” to indicate other ways to adopt high school graduation requirements.

The book — Rand’s fourth and final novel — is touted as her masterwork and explores her “unique vision of existence and of man’s highest purpose and potential in life,” according to the California-based Ayn Rand Institute (ARI).

Yaron Brook, ARI's executive director, said it's not the job of lawmakers to dictate what high school students read.

"However, every student in America would benefit from reading Atlas Shrugged," Brook said in a statement to FoxNews.com. "Not only does the book explain, in economic, political and philosophical terms, the challenges facing this country, but it also shows what's required to restore the ideals of the Founding Fathers. Atlas Shrugged is not a Republican or conservative book, but an American book: a hymn to the ideals of individualism, capitalism, and the free human mind."

 Sexy If its unladylike, fattening or fun, I'm in!
  

by on Feb. 8, 2013 at 11:21 AM
Replies (121-130):
tambrathegreat
by on Feb. 9, 2013 at 11:30 PM

Getting back to you on the comment about Julius Caesar:  Please re-read what I wrote.  I said that Shakespeare used the history in common usage at the time to create his version of the Julian story.  That does not mean I think that his story is as accurate as something that was written with 500+ centuries of archeological/historical study. 

The whole point I'm actually trying to make, is literature, especially the classics, are read to give students the tools to converse intelligently.  And honestly, if you look to theatre to bring some absolute historical accuracy to any play, then you're going to be sadly disappointed in all instances.  Theatre, by it's very nature, is meant to explore universal truths (mostly in the dramatic form, but sometimes in comedy) rather than portray historical accuracy.  It is a limited medium, one that is really only a two dimensional facade, and thus can only give snapshots of characters/histories. 

I really do find it odd that you chose any of the works to deride.  Each one has its own merit, whether you like them or not.  To call them 'crap' makes you appear pretentious at best, given the scope of influence that each of the listed works have attained culturally and artistically.

Quoting talia-mom:



Quoting tambrathegreat:


Quoting talia-mom:

Metaphysical poetry:

Too dependent on conceits and focused on minute problems or ideas.  They simply were not enjoyable poems to read. I don't really know what poets to which you are referring. Please list some and then we can discuss the relative merit of each one, otherwise, your argument is invalid.


By telling me my argument is invalid if I don't respond the way you want, considering you don't even know who they are, isn't really a smart way of arguing.  The biggest of them are John Donne and Andrew Marvell.   However, Anne Bradstreet and George Herbert were terrible as well.


Julius Cesaer:


Bad history.  Focuses too much on Brutus and not Julius Cesaer.  The subplots were not as believable as in other plays. Wow.  just... wow.  Have you actually read the play or are your observations dependant on the Cliff's note version?  Addressing your claim that it was historically inaccurate, well, dear, Shakespeare used as contemporary history as was available at the time, Tacitus' "Annals". 

Setting aside the historical inaccuracies of the play, it contains language and dialogue that we use to this day.  It is studied to introduce young minds to a great writer.


Please go read the actual history of Julius Caesar before you ask if I have just read the Cliff Notes.   There are numerous historical inaccuracies.  Doesn't make it good.


There are several other plays, including other histories, that are much better written, more accurate, and have better developed plots and subplots.


Gene is a horrible character.   I cannot stand him.  He feels nothing about the fact he caused the issues that led to Finny's death.  I found it shallow and whiny and not believable.  While I didn't really like the book, again it was well written and worth exploring. 

I don't think it is worth exploring.  It's dated, shallow character development, and a waste of time if you want to get into the time period of WWII.

\


Catcher in the Rye:


I want to slap Holden.   All he does it whine.   It is a crap story about a selfish, spoiled man whining about phonies when he is phony himself.    Just not the least bit believable, enjoyable, or well written.   Have to agree with you on this one, but again, it is referenced EVERYWHERE, so reading it is almost a must.

Simply being referenced isn't a reason it is a must.   Many things have been musts that are no longer read, and one as poorly constructed as this book doesn't need to be a must.


Quoting Momniscient:

And how are those things crap?

Quoting talia-mom:

Metaphysical Poetry

Julius Cesaer

A Separate Peace

Catcher in the Rye



Quoting Momniscient:

What 'crap' do high school students have to read?

Quoting Redwall:

Absolutely!  With all the crap they have to read, I'd love to see them be required to read a good quality book












Momniscient
by Ruby Member on Feb. 9, 2013 at 11:31 PM
I think Crime and Punishment is one of my favorite books. Conceptually.

I rather hated reading it.


Quoting tambrathegreat:

To be honest, I don't know anyone who actually has read War and Peace all the way through.  I think people claim to, and just skim it. 

I actually find Russian literature a bit ponderous and heavy on geneology that I don't care about.   Maybe it's the translations I've read, but "Yawn!"

Quoting Momniscient:

Lol.

Sometimes books are just that shallow.



Sometimes however... People need to utilize critical thinkin skills in order to evaluate books based on concepts, ideologies and social value not just 'I hated it for surface reasons.'



I will however never ever ever eve ever ever finish War and peace. You just can't make me. I don't even care if it contains the secret of the universe. No.




Quoting tambrathegreat:

In college, for one literature class, we had to read Henry Miller.  Oh my god, what a dunce he was, and he couldn't even write.  Give me DH Lawrence or Anais Nin for erotica. 

I tried reading On the Road again a few years ago and found it just as irritating as I did during highschool.  I also tried to revisit Catcher in the Rye.  It was still just as self-indulgently stupid as it was the first time around. 

I might have to read A Seperate Peace again simply because SOMEONE says it's a horrible, unbelievable book about a self-indulgent, whiny sixteen year old.  LOL!

Quoting Momniscient:

I completely hated On the Road.





I do like a lot of the beat writers but OTR just made me want to kick puppies.






Quoting tambrathegreat:

We had to read it in a Creative writing course I took in highschool.  I thought it was masturabatory at best.

Quoting DivingDiva:









Quoting tambrathegreat:




Why are they wanting to make kids read that poorly written peice of garbage?  It's as bad as making kids read "On the Road" by Kerouac.  Another dumb book with no literary merit. 








 Do some teachers actually assign "On the Road"?  I thought it was a ton of fun but I would very much look askance at any teacher who assigned that for a class. 




Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
talia-mom
by Gold Member on Feb. 9, 2013 at 11:59 PM

It's pretentious not to like Catcher in the Rye and A Separate Peace?   Really?

Far from it.   I personally find that most people who love Catcher in the Rye can do no real discussion of the novel.

You asked what I didn't like about Julius Caesar.    It is inaccurate, JC dies in Act 3, and I find the subplots not developed.    It doesn't matter what Shakespeare based it on.   You asked a question.   I answered that it is inaccurate and I don't like the plot development.



Quoting tambrathegreat:

Getting back to you on the comment about Julius Caesar:  Please re-read what I wrote.  I said that Shakespeare used the history in common usage at the time to create his version of the Julian story.  That does not mean I think that his story is as accurate as something that was written with 500+ centuries of archeological/historical study. 

The whole point I'm actually trying to make, is literature, especially the classics, are read to give students the tools to converse intelligently.  And honestly, if you look to theatre to bring some absolute historical accuracy to any play, then you're going to be sadly disappointed in all instances.  Theatre, by it's very nature, is meant to explore universal truths (mostly in the dramatic form, but sometimes in comedy) rather than portray historical accuracy.  It is a limited medium, one that is really only a two dimensional facade, and thus can only give snapshots of characters/histories. 

I really do find it odd that you chose any of the works to deride.  Each one has its own merit, whether you like them or not.  To call them 'crap' makes you appear pretentious at best, given the scope of influence that each of the listed works have attained culturally and artistically.

Quoting talia-mom:



Quoting tambrathegreat:


Quoting talia-mom:

Metaphysical poetry:

Too dependent on conceits and focused on minute problems or ideas.  They simply were not enjoyable poems to read. I don't really know what poets to which you are referring. Please list some and then we can discuss the relative merit of each one, otherwise, your argument is invalid.


By telling me my argument is invalid if I don't respond the way you want, considering you don't even know who they are, isn't really a smart way of arguing.  The biggest of them are John Donne and Andrew Marvell.   However, Anne Bradstreet and George Herbert were terrible as well.


Julius Cesaer:


Bad history.  Focuses too much on Brutus and not Julius Cesaer.  The subplots were not as believable as in other plays. Wow.  just... wow.  Have you actually read the play or are your observations dependant on the Cliff's note version?  Addressing your claim that it was historically inaccurate, well, dear, Shakespeare used as contemporary history as was available at the time, Tacitus' "Annals". 

Setting aside the historical inaccuracies of the play, it contains language and dialogue that we use to this day.  It is studied to introduce young minds to a great writer.


Please go read the actual history of Julius Caesar before you ask if I have just read the Cliff Notes.   There are numerous historical inaccuracies.  Doesn't make it good.


There are several other plays, including other histories, that are much better written, more accurate, and have better developed plots and subplots.


Gene is a horrible character.   I cannot stand him.  He feels nothing about the fact he caused the issues that led to Finny's death.  I found it shallow and whiny and not believable.  While I didn't really like the book, again it was well written and worth exploring. 

I don't think it is worth exploring.  It's dated, shallow character development, and a waste of time if you want to get into the time period of WWII.

\


Catcher in the Rye:


I want to slap Holden.   All he does it whine.   It is a crap story about a selfish, spoiled man whining about phonies when he is phony himself.    Just not the least bit believable, enjoyable, or well written.   Have to agree with you on this one, but again, it is referenced EVERYWHERE, so reading it is almost a must.

Simply being referenced isn't a reason it is a must.   Many things have been musts that are no longer read, and one as poorly constructed as this book doesn't need to be a must.


Quoting Momniscient:

And how are those things crap?

Quoting talia-mom:

Metaphysical Poetry

Julius Cesaer

A Separate Peace

Catcher in the Rye



Quoting Momniscient:

What 'crap' do high school students have to read?

Quoting Redwall:

Absolutely!  With all the crap they have to read, I'd love to see them be required to read a good quality book













unspecified42
by Bronze Member on Feb. 10, 2013 at 12:12 AM
I think it was a dull and poorly written book with little literary value and inane messages. Personally.


Quoting Veni.Vidi.Vici.:

I think it's a great book and worthy of class time.


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Veni.Vidi.Vici.
by on Feb. 10, 2013 at 12:14 AM


Quoting unspecified42:

I think it was a dull and poorly written book with little literary value and inane messages. Personally.


Quoting Veni.Vidi.Vici.:

I think it's a great book and worthy of class time.


okay

tambrathegreat
by on Feb. 10, 2013 at 12:36 AM

You're rather good at twisting words, or missing points, I can't tell which.  What I said, was that it's pretentious to call them crap.  For instance, I hated Kerouac's piece that I was forced to read, but it has social and literary significance, therefore it is not crap.   I may not agree with the message, may not like the voice, the characters or the plot, but who am I to say that it's utter garbage?  I'm just one reader.

As for the play Julius Caesar, I disagree with your assessment.  It is an important work and it needs to be read, otherwise young minds won't understand the people who have read them and reference the words and works every day. 


Quoting talia-mom:

It's pretentious not to like Catcher in the Rye and A Separate Peace?   Really?

Far from it.   I personally find that most people who love Catcher in the Rye can do no real discussion of the novel.

You asked what I didn't like about Julius Caesar.    It is inaccurate, JC dies in Act 3, and I find the subplots not developed.    It doesn't matter what Shakespeare based it on.   You asked a question.   I answered that it is inaccurate and I don't like the plot development.



Quoting tambrathegreat:

Getting back to you on the comment about Julius Caesar:  Please re-read what I wrote.  I said that Shakespeare used the history in common usage at the time to create his version of the Julian story.  That does not mean I think that his story is as accurate as something that was written with 500+ centuries of archeological/historical study. 

The whole point I'm actually trying to make, is literature, especially the classics, are read to give students the tools to converse intelligently.  And honestly, if you look to theatre to bring some absolute historical accuracy to any play, then you're going to be sadly disappointed in all instances.  Theatre, by it's very nature, is meant to explore universal truths (mostly in the dramatic form, but sometimes in comedy) rather than portray historical accuracy.  It is a limited medium, one that is really only a two dimensional facade, and thus can only give snapshots of characters/histories. 

I really do find it odd that you chose any of the works to deride.  Each one has its own merit, whether you like them or not.  To call them 'crap' makes you appear pretentious at best, given the scope of influence that each of the listed works have attained culturally and artistically.

Quoting talia-mom:



Quoting tambrathegreat:


Quoting talia-mom:

Metaphysical poetry:

Too dependent on conceits and focused on minute problems or ideas.  They simply were not enjoyable poems to read. I don't really know what poets to which you are referring. Please list some and then we can discuss the relative merit of each one, otherwise, your argument is invalid.


By telling me my argument is invalid if I don't respond the way you want, considering you don't even know who they are, isn't really a smart way of arguing.  The biggest of them are John Donne and Andrew Marvell.   However, Anne Bradstreet and George Herbert were terrible as well.


Julius Cesaer:


Bad history.  Focuses too much on Brutus and not Julius Cesaer.  The subplots were not as believable as in other plays. Wow.  just... wow.  Have you actually read the play or are your observations dependant on the Cliff's note version?  Addressing your claim that it was historically inaccurate, well, dear, Shakespeare used as contemporary history as was available at the time, Tacitus' "Annals". 

Setting aside the historical inaccuracies of the play, it contains language and dialogue that we use to this day.  It is studied to introduce young minds to a great writer.


Please go read the actual history of Julius Caesar before you ask if I have just read the Cliff Notes.   There are numerous historical inaccuracies.  Doesn't make it good.


There are several other plays, including other histories, that are much better written, more accurate, and have better developed plots and subplots.


Gene is a horrible character.   I cannot stand him.  He feels nothing about the fact he caused the issues that led to Finny's death.  I found it shallow and whiny and not believable.  While I didn't really like the book, again it was well written and worth exploring. 

I don't think it is worth exploring.  It's dated, shallow character development, and a waste of time if you want to get into the time period of WWII.

\


Catcher in the Rye:


I want to slap Holden.   All he does it whine.   It is a crap story about a selfish, spoiled man whining about phonies when he is phony himself.    Just not the least bit believable, enjoyable, or well written.   Have to agree with you on this one, but again, it is referenced EVERYWHERE, so reading it is almost a must.

Simply being referenced isn't a reason it is a must.   Many things have been musts that are no longer read, and one as poorly constructed as this book doesn't need to be a must.


Quoting Momniscient:

And how are those things crap?

Quoting talia-mom:

Metaphysical Poetry

Julius Cesaer

A Separate Peace

Catcher in the Rye



Quoting Momniscient:

What 'crap' do high school students have to read?

Quoting Redwall:

Absolutely!  With all the crap they have to read, I'd love to see them be required to read a good quality book















turtle68
by Mahinaarangi on Feb. 10, 2013 at 12:41 AM

 poor kids.  I hated the forced text that we were made to read and then supposedly discuss.

Moby dick was the worse book I ever read and yet is touted as the best english literature of all time.

The only book that entralled me to read cover to cover without break was To kill a mockingbird.

This books sound boring...anything boring and nothing is taught.

Clairwil
by Ruby Member on Feb. 10, 2013 at 2:41 AM
1 mom liked this
Quoting talia-mom:

Julius Cesaer:


Bad history.  Focuses too much on Brutus and not Julius Cesaer.  The subplots were not as believable as in other plays.

Believable subplots?  As in no witches or faries?  Are we talking about the same Bard here?  :-)

Of course Shakespearean plays are bad history.  That's the point.  He wasn't trying to be 'fair' or a historian or even accurate.  He was trying to entertain but, also, it was propaganda - to understand them, especially the ones set in England nearer his time, you have to know which royal factions he was pandering to.   (By the way, have you been following the stuff over Richard III's body being discovered?)

Shakespeare was an assassin.  And rather a good one.  *grins*


So, once again, let's listen to him forever slaying Brutus' reputation for all time...


ANTONY

    For Brutus' sake, I am beholding to you.

    Goes into the pulpit

Fourth Citizen

    What does he say of Brutus?

Third Citizen

    He says, for Brutus' sake,
    He finds himself beholding to us all.

Fourth Citizen

    'Twere best he speak no harm of Brutus here.

First Citizen

    This Caesar was a tyrant.

Third Citizen

    Nay, that's certain:
    We are blest that Rome is rid of him.

Second Citizen

    Peace! let us hear what Antony can say.

ANTONY

    You gentle Romans,--

Citizens

    Peace, ho! let us hear him.

ANTONY

    Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
    I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.
    The evil that men do lives after them;
    The good is oft interred with their bones;
    So let it be with Caesar. The noble Brutus
    Hath told you Caesar was ambitious:
    If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
    And grievously hath Caesar answer'd it.
    Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest--
    For Brutus is an honourable man;
    So are they all, all honourable men--
    Come I to speak in Caesar's funeral.
    He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
    But Brutus says he was ambitious;
    And Brutus is an honourable man.
    He hath brought many captives home to Rome
    Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill:
    Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?
    When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept:
    Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
    Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
    And Brutus is an honourable man.
    You all did see that on the Lupercal
    I thrice presented him a kingly crown,
    Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?
    Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
    And, sure, he is an honourable man.
    I speak not to disprove what Brutus spoke,
    But here I am to speak what I do know.
    You all did love him once, not without cause:
    What cause withholds you then, to mourn for him?
    O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
    And men have lost their reason. Bear with me;
    My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar,
    And I must pause till it come back to me.

First Citizen

    Methinks there is much reason in his sayings.

Second Citizen

    If thou consider rightly of the matter,
    Caesar has had great wrong.

Third Citizen

    Has he, masters?
    I fear there will a worse come in his place.

Fourth Citizen

    Mark'd ye his words? He would not take the crown;
    Therefore 'tis certain he was not ambitious.

First Citizen

    If it be found so, some will dear abide it.

Second Citizen

    Poor soul! his eyes are red as fire with weeping.

Third Citizen

    There's not a nobler man in Rome than Antony.

Fourth Citizen

    Now mark him, he begins again to speak.

ANTONY

    But yesterday the word of Caesar might
    Have stood against the world; now lies he there.
    And none so poor to do him reverence.
    O masters, if I were disposed to stir
    Your hearts and minds to mutiny and rage,
    I should do Brutus wrong, and Cassius wrong,
    Who, you all know, are honourable men:
    I will not do them wrong; I rather choose
    To wrong the dead, to wrong myself and you,
    Than I will wrong such honourable men.
    But here's a parchment with the seal of Caesar;
    I found it in his closet, 'tis his will:
    Let but the commons hear this testament--
    Which, pardon me, I do not mean to read--
    And they would go and kiss dead Caesar's wounds
    And dip their napkins in his sacred blood,
    Yea, beg a hair of him for memory,
    And, dying, mention it within their wills,
    Bequeathing it as a rich legacy
    Unto their issue.

Fourth Citizen

    We'll hear the will: read it, Mark Antony.

All

    The will, the will! we will hear Caesar's will.

ANTONY

    Have patience, gentle friends, I must not read it;
    It is not meet you know how Caesar loved you.
    You are not wood, you are not stones, but men;
    And, being men, bearing the will of Caesar,
    It will inflame you, it will make you mad:
    'Tis good you know not that you are his heirs;
    For, if you should, O, what would come of it!

Fourth Citizen

    Read the will; we'll hear it, Antony;
    You shall read us the will, Caesar's will.

ANTONY

    Will you be patient? will you stay awhile?
    I have o'ershot myself to tell you of it:
    I fear I wrong the honourable men
    Whose daggers have stabb'd Caesar; I do fear it.

Fourth Citizen

    They were traitors: honourable men!

All

    The will! the testament!

Second Citizen

    They were villains, murderers: the will! read the will.

ANTONY

    You will compel me, then, to read the will?
    Then make a ring about the corpse of Caesar,
    And let me show you him that made the will.
    Shall I descend? and will you give me leave?

Several Citizens

    Come down.

Second Citizen

    Descend.

Third Citizen

    You shall have leave.

    ANTONY comes down

Fourth Citizen

    A ring; stand round.

First Citizen

    Stand from the hearse, stand from the body.

Second Citizen

    Room for Antony, most noble Antony.

ANTONY

    Nay, press not so upon me; stand far off.

Several Citizens

    Stand back; room; bear back.

ANTONY

    If you have tears, prepare to shed them now.
    You all do know this mantle: I remember
    The first time ever Caesar put it on;
    'Twas on a summer's evening, in his tent,
    That day he overcame the Nervii:
    Look, in this place ran Cassius' dagger through:
    See what a rent the envious Casca made:
    Through this the well-beloved Brutus stabb'd;
    And as he pluck'd his cursed steel away,
    Mark how the blood of Caesar follow'd it,
    As rushing out of doors, to be resolved
    If Brutus so unkindly knock'd, or no;
    For Brutus, as you know, was Caesar's angel:
    Judge, O you gods, how dearly Caesar loved him!
    This was the most unkindest cut of all;
    For when the noble Caesar saw him stab,
    Ingratitude, more strong than traitors' arms,
    Quite vanquish'd him: then burst his mighty heart;
    And, in his mantle muffling up his face,
    Even at the base of Pompey's statua,
    Which all the while ran blood, great Caesar fell.
    O, what a fall was there, my countrymen!
    Then I, and you, and all of us fell down,
    Whilst bloody treason flourish'd over us.
    O, now you weep; and, I perceive, you feel
    The dint of pity: these are gracious drops.
    Kind souls, what, weep you when you but behold
    Our Caesar's vesture wounded? Look you here,
    Here is himself, marr'd, as you see, with traitors.

First Citizen

    O piteous spectacle!

Second Citizen

    O noble Caesar!

Third Citizen

    O woful day!

Fourth Citizen

    O traitors, villains!

First Citizen

    O most bloody sight!

Second Citizen

    We will be revenged.

All

    Revenge! About! Seek! Burn! Fire! Kill! Slay!
    Let not a traitor live!

ANTONY

    Stay, countrymen.

First Citizen

    Peace there! hear the noble Antony.

Second Citizen

    We'll hear him, we'll follow him, we'll die with him.

ANTONY

    Good friends, sweet friends, let me not stir you up
    To such a sudden flood of mutiny.
    They that have done this deed are honourable:
    What private griefs they have, alas, I know not,
    That made them do it: they are wise and honourable,
    And will, no doubt, with reasons answer you.
    I come not, friends, to steal away your hearts:
    I am no orator, as Brutus is;
    But, as you know me all, a plain blunt man,
    That love my friend; and that they know full well
    That gave me public leave to speak of him:
    For I have neither wit, nor words, nor worth,
    Action, nor utterance, nor the power of speech,
    To stir men's blood: I only speak right on;
    I tell you that which you yourselves do know;
    Show you sweet Caesar's wounds, poor poor dumb mouths,
    And bid them speak for me: but were I Brutus,
    And Brutus Antony, there were an Antony
    Would ruffle up your spirits and put a tongue
    In every wound of Caesar that should move
    The stones of Rome to rise and mutiny.

All

    We'll mutiny.

First Citizen

    We'll burn the house of Brutus.

Third Citizen

    Away, then! come, seek the conspirators.

ANTONY

    Yet hear me, countrymen; yet hear me speak.

All

    Peace, ho! Hear Antony. Most noble Antony!

ANTONY

    Why, friends, you go to do you know not what:
    Wherein hath Caesar thus deserved your loves?
    Alas, you know not: I must tell you then:
    You have forgot the will I told you of.

All

    Most true. The will! Let's stay and hear the will.

ANTONY

    Here is the will, and under Caesar's seal.
    To every Roman citizen he gives,
    To every several man, seventy-five drachmas.

Second Citizen

    Most noble Caesar! We'll revenge his death.

Third Citizen

    O royal Caesar!

ANTONY

    Hear me with patience.

All

    Peace, ho!

ANTONY

    Moreover, he hath left you all his walks,
    His private arbours and new-planted orchards,
    On this side Tiber; he hath left them you,
    And to your heirs for ever, common pleasures,
    To walk abroad, and recreate yourselves.
    Here was a Caesar! when comes such another?

First Citizen

    Never, never. Come, away, away!
    We'll burn his body in the holy place,
    And with the brands fire the traitors' houses.
    Take up the body.

Second Citizen

    Go fetch fire.

Third Citizen

    Pluck down benches.

Fourth Citizen

    Pluck down forms, windows, any thing.

    Exeunt Citizens with the body

ANTONY

   Now let it work. Mischief, thou art afoot,
   Take thou what course thou wilt!

rgba
by Bronze Member on Feb. 10, 2013 at 2:43 AM
I think it is irresponsible for legislators to introduce legislation that they have no intention of backing.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
PestPatti
by on Feb. 10, 2013 at 8:27 AM


  I hated required reading, but I like to read..

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Featured