We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
SCARUS On our side like the tokened pestilence Where death is sure. Yon ribaudred nag of Egypt— Whom leprosy o’ertake—i’ th’ midst o’ th’ fight, When vantage like a pair of twins appeared, Both as the same, or rather ours the elder, The breese upon her, like a cow in June, Hoists sails and flies.
Poetic language is an intensification of the use of words. Prof Booth likes to look at the "physics" of poetic language. When a person gets into a poetry state, whether writing or reading, the mind can take over and let the inner physics of the thing just happen the same way you can hit a moving car with a snowball without knowing the math and the brain physiology of it.
I found this essay to be fascinating, and had to re-read it: Shakespeare’s Genius Is Nonsense - What the Bard can teach science about language and the limits of the human mind. One quote:
As a playwright and businessman, of course, Shakespeare had a serious interest in shielding his audiences from the mechanics of his verse. In addition to its concordance with the 16th-century concept of sprezzatura—lightness, ease, the ability to make even the most difficult things look effortless—a play crafted to maximize delight helped Shakespeare fill theatres in a way that a lot of visible sweating over the lines might not have. For every ingenious device that Booth describes in the verse, he brings as much attention to the effort that went into keeping it unobtrusive. His theory may explain the ineffable mind-states that poetry creates in us: poetic experience as the interaction of barely perceptible mental processes whose delicate, scintillating play is usually washed out by the spotlight of conscious attention.
What Booth so elegantly shows us is how Shakespeare can free us from ourselves. His lush, prismatic verse grants us “a small but metaphysically glorious holiday” from how we usually comprehend language, a holiday that is in turn “a brief and trivial but effectively real holiday from the inherent limitation of the human mind.” Rather than plunging into the abyss of not-knowing, we soar above it. We are not falling, but flying.
Used to be that way, but I think that was my reaction to reading his works as part of an academic requirement: you're straining to gather enough information and detail to answer rather trivial exam questions about a subject matter remote from everyday experience.
Now, thirty years removed from academic pretension and drudgery, I enjoy Will's efforts as much as any literature.
For me the key to reading enjoyment is to garner enough base information to understand the plot and straighten out the roles of the characters before reading the actual text of a play. Wikipedia is good for that and I'm not afraid of "spoilers" as the plots and characters are so well known.
Armed with that base information, I can then more easily concentrate on the language and its context as well as interplay of the characters. Its much more enjoyable to read when you can fall easily into the word flow of the play, without straining to recall who is related to whom and in what fashion or even where the play is set and the manners and customs of that setting.