The British Government has announced a new initiative to teach Shakespeare to students aged 5 to 16. Are five-year-olds too young to learn about Shakespeare?

On my blog I've spoken often of the fact that I introduced my kids to Shakespeare at the age of 3. Of course I don't read them original text - but I can certainly tell them the stories. They learn plot and character, and when I can find acceptable movies for them, they see those. When the time comes that they do sit down with the actual text, they will have already crossed the biggest hurdle, namely understanding what the heck is going on. If somebody told you ahead of time that Romeo and Juliet starts with an argument and a fight between the Montagues and Capulets, it's much easier to understand it when you read it than to be left reaching for the glossary and trying to figure out what a "collier" is. http://www.shakespearegeek.com

My children both enjoy sharing my plays for my college work (film versions or audio or me reading them out the funny or sad bits), granted they have only been to see a performance of MSND. They are 6 & 9 - bring it on education ministers. If we make the language more familiar to them at 5-6 they will appreciate and understand it more during their statatory testing in Y9 and Y10/12.

My daughters saw Shakespeare at an early age with great enjoyment and powerful outcomes. One of them scripted and directed a version of Dream at seven years (and is now the fellow of an Oxford college). The other has become an expert on Russian theatre at the University of Texas (Austin). Earlier periods shared this approach: see my wife's book, Velma Bourgeois Richmond, Shakespeare as Children's Literature: Edwardian Retellings in Words and Pictures (McFarland,2008) which illustrates previous British experience in this vein. With best wishes, Hugh Richmond UCB

No doubt gifted children under the guidance of enthusiastic teachers and parents will do wonders with the material, but the issue is how much control a national government can exert over a school curriculum. Should promoting Shakespeare really be a national goal with the power of an education ministry enforcing compliance? I have authored modern English translations of Shakespeare plays, so I suppose I am working against my own self-interest. Such translations may sell as schools search for ways to comply, but why the rush? Shakespeare wrote for adults, not five-year-olds.

Has anyone else noticed how our 'democratic' hackles can sometimes be more quickly raised when it comes to enacting policy which might actually be of benefit to the aggregate that is itself that very democracy (--in this case, the Subject of said policy, one William S. and his work, having satisfactorily proven itself to the consensus to be of some benefit over the span of at least a couple of hundred years, no less). Never mind the fact that the notion--to offer that benefit sooner--through the extrapolative efforts of those who no longer view it as an "experiment"--has documented and proven data supporting the idea that it can be, and is, of some additional ongoing and future benefit to the members of that democracy? And the somewhat casual-- but hopefully effective-- toss, that these are only "gifted" children? Having been the instrument of this kind of involvement; having seen it spark the desire in an autistic elementary school student to read; to speak aloud Shakespeare's words, solo, in front of an entire class that rose to their feet, cheering to hear what the "gifted"-- and "not so gifted"-- among them all had never heard before; and they surely believed then, that they heard what they had believed they would never hear.... No, to the very large and looming contrary of the 'gifted' argument I can personally attest--and have done so in our not so distant discussions on The Bard Blog. But since an "Everyman's opinion", (and not just mine it would seem) based upon actual experience, seems not to matter; try a Google of "Stand up for Shakespeare". Watch the video (approx. 8 min.)--read the hundreds of testimonials--peruse the documented data of the results--THEN, if you will, notify Congress of the dire threat to our "freedoms". Please do---funding and/or support for this sort of thing aren't as easy to come by here in the Land of Freedom.

how can any one expect a five year old kid to learn shakespeare when even a 14 year old boy takes soo ling to understand. You'll must be out of your minds to do that. Children should be thought shakespeare only from the age of 13.

*long

Pardon me, I am not a British citizen, And I don't live there. But I think that it will be a bad idea to let children less than 14 years old read about will.Shakespeare specially at the age of 5. The reason : in his stories he let the main characters kill themselves . It is not about a parent who will make sure about telling his son the different But I really don't think that schools IN GENERAL will make a good comments about that. I think that will raise the suicide not 1% more but about 5 persons more and that is still BAD. ALSO they must first understand the differences between writers in general an then the reasons that make him a great writer. They must learn grammars & literature first. At least that is MY OPINION. It is not a good idea to sacrifice children to make a part of William Shakespeare's Fans happy and proud about him.( No offense )