gonna start using the term "shakespearean mythology" to refer to all of shakespeare's plays and also subsequent media derived from/influenced by them
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from Canada
seen from Russia
seen from Canada

seen from United States
seen from Yemen

seen from United States
seen from Argentina
seen from United States

seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from China

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Morocco
gonna start using the term "shakespearean mythology" to refer to all of shakespeare's plays and also subsequent media derived from/influenced by them

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
my favorite demon girls
sometimes i think we confuse the matter of how we define a story by allowing form and subject to be collapsed together but like. aeschylus's plays might be ABOUT a myth but they are in and of themselves ancient greek tragedies and referring to them as such is a correct description of their literary form without passing any judgment on their content. and so when i say a story is a medieval text, i'm describing the literary form of the material that we, as readers, are engaging with, rather than the content of it. whether or not the content is about a myth is rather a separate issue, i think. because aeschylus's tragedies are about myths but so are euripides's tragedies and they can be the same myths but they are separate tragedies. and so when we have a medieval text and an early modern text about the same story, they are texts in the same way those plays are plays, and that has no bearing on their being myths or not.
and when i say i'm interested in them as medieval texts and not as myths per se it's not that i'm precluding the possibility of the content being mythological but it's that i'm interested in the literary construction of the text that we have. just like i could study aeschylus as a tragedeian completely separately from using aeschylus to understand, like, the furies as a concept or something. i can talk about those plays as a literary construction and in doing so have no interest in their mythological component and that isn't, by itself, a claim that there *is* no mythological component. it just means i'm not interested in it. and so too when i look at a medieval text as a text and a literary construct and a piece of artistic composition i'm not inherently saying that there is no myth in there but i *am* saying that's not what i'm there for.
and so because i'm not there for the myth, it really doesn't matter to me if it's there or not, because that doesn't change the level on which i'm engaging with a story. i am there for a tale that belongs to a specific cultural and literary milieu, which is informed by its historical context and intertextual references and authorial interests. i am there, in the end, for the medieval text. if there is a myth swallowed in it, that's fine, but that's also... not relevant to me. i'll leave that to others.