Why the Shakespeare Requirement Matters

ANNE NEAL: I think the question that needs to be asked is, why are our colleges and universities no longer requiring Shakespeare? It's as if someone got an M.D. without a course in anatomy. I think it's just educational malpractice when students are not required to be exposed to these greatest of works.

Shakespeare, I think we'll all agree, has been very much part of our culture, it's part of our tradition, it's who we are. But our students are now coming out of colleges and universities with no guaranteed exposure. They won't be able to recognize "the unkindest cut of all." They won't know "Et tu, Brute" and these phrases that have become part and parcel of our heritage.

And when we look at the consequences of not requiring it, they are considerable for our society. High schools that hire English majors have a right to assume that they are prepared to teach Shakespeare and other great authors. They have a right to assume that these teachers will be able to analyze language, analyze poetry, and introduce their students to the essence of that. But in fact, if our English graduates are now coming out of college without any guaranteed exposure, we risk having multiple generations of students who will not be introduced to the great themes and the beautiful language of William Shakespeare.

Colleges and universities will argue that students today still take Shakespeare in great numbers. And that may in fact be the case. But I think the issue for parents, the issue for taxpayers, the issue for students is not that, by some good fortune the student will teach himself or will go to a course on Shakespeare. But the question is: What is the responsibility of the academy when it comes to transmitting the heritage of our own culture, when it comes to transmitting the best that has been done and said?