English - To study or not?

At the beginning of the academic year, at school, we're provided with a highly unwanted sheet of projects that have to be done throughout the year. Our third term English Language project was however very interesting. Now don't get me wrong here. I am CERTAINLY not talking about the content of my project or the topic. But the stupidity in choosing the project topic.

The topic is:

"Should English be a compulsory subject of study? Write for or against."

A subject of great debate... that's not being denied. But god. REALLY. have some common SENSE. The answer is Yes or No. If yes, write five hundred words of irrelevant content. If no, write five hundred words of irrelevant content. But what I'm trying to bring out here is that, English is ALREADY a universal language. And why? Because this topic was discussed in the NINETEENTH CENTURY. It's now the TWENTY FIRST century and our minds are at a standstill continuing to harp on about this same issue being an infinite bug to teenagers around the globe who honestly couldn't care less to go beyond 'yeah' or 'nah'.
I mean, already 90% of popular newspapers are in English; and the same with television sitcoms, movies, notices, signs and blah.
Why on EARTH would they want to torture poor children to DECIDE what they should be tortured with?!
I mean, really, do you SEE ME writing in Portugese here? Do I NOT illustrate a strong point?
Me: Average educated student. SPEAKING ENGLISH. WHY? Because English is a compulsory subject of study. THE END. stop pestering kids. god.
If english was NOT compulsory, a fifty year old woman with graying hair and nothing to do in the day but knit, would NOT have a job teaching english as well as she would not even GIVE us the stupid essay.
THINK a little you mere moronic mortals!
Bah, the Global Board of Education is going DOWN I tell you.

Shake-the-pear

You are NOT in for what you thought you were in for when you decided to read this post seeing the heading.

Now.

Shakespeare (Yes, that is the proper form of the deformed phrase in my heading) was a very very intelligent fellow. Slightly mad, maybe. But intelligent, nevertheless.

Seshpare (as my english teacher might refer to him by) thought of things that no average literary artist might think of today. For example, a knight who had no dignity making a solemn oath that some mustard had gone bad.

See, it's creative, innovative, DIFFERENT certainly, original and......... err.... slightly retarded. No offense Mr. Shakey.

The play concepts were plotted cleverly, although somewhere along the way Mr. Pear lost it. Lost what, you may ask? Not the will to complete the play, not the idea, not the writing talent. His sanity, oh yes.

His plays that he meant to come under the genre of 'Fantasy'..... did come under that and his concepts were sensible..............NOT.

Now, Mr Shakespeare had writing talent, oh yes. That is certainly not being denied here. Just.... eccentric path of thought and.. ok. cutting to the chase here. HE TALKED THE LANGUAGE OF MENTAL. Thee, thou, tho, thy wth!? Instead of going "Thou hath hurt thy innermost feelings that thy hath wrapped and safekept for eternal length of time, thou art banished from the Kingdom, this very land that we step foot upon at this very instant and henceforth shalt never show thyself in this sacred space that we shall be dwelt in.", why can't he just say "Look dude, whatever. get lost."

See? So simple.

Looks like Sir Literary Genius had a couple of minor setbacks with his writing. they were works slightly resembling nonsense.

I would very much like to point out that this is told from the mind of a minor. BUT, if thou could fetch me an adult who can actually read a whole unabridged play of shakespeares and say that that person actually:

i] survived it

ii] has retained the same mental position that he hath started out with

iii] enjoyed it (provided the clause ii is satisfied)

,

Thou shalt be praised.

Whoops. Looks like Shakespearitis is contagious.

;)