Lucius Annaeus Seneca is one of the most talented playwrights in Rome, but his literature is not frequently studied in world literature classes. Both the reading passage and the lecture discuss whether or not Seneca’s literature is suitable to be mentioned in world literature classes. The reading passage believes that the literature of Seneca is underrated in these days. However, the lecture contradicts the reading’s points with opposing views.
To begin with, while the reading passage argues that Seneca’s works influenced a lot of later authors, especially Shakespeare who directly imitated his Seneca’s style in one of his own works. However, the lecture actually points out that it is not an enough to be a reason for studying Seneca’s works in world literature classes. He says that even though studying various kinds of work is helpful to students, class time is limited and choices have to be made. Thus, most professors focus on Shakespeare’s works. Also, he states that most readers do not have any difficulty to enjoy enjoying what they saw even without learning about Seneca’s works. (의미가 정확하지 않은 것 같아요. 그들이 본다는 것이 어떤 것인지 정확히 표현이 안되있네요. Confusion을 일으킬 수 있을 것 같아요)
On top of that, the reading passage suggests that Seneca (Seneca가 그런 것인지 Seneca’s work가 그런것인지 정확히 해 주세요) has great importance on tragedies. However, the lecture denies the reading’s idea by saying that the beauty illustrated in his works is undercut. The madness and the logic stated in his works are disgusting and too violent. The lecturer insists that the details he gives are too gruesome, which and makes his literature totally impossible to focus on anything but violence. He talks about one of his works describing an evil uncle who cooked his two nephews and served to their father for dinner as an example. (굳이 안 쓰셔도 되는 문장 같아요.)
Furthermore, the reading passage maintains that his works are worthwhile since (because가 더 좋을 것 같아요) his plays are the only complete examples of Roman tragedy. However, the lecture claims that with the only reason that he is a Roman tragedian is not an adequate reason to omit his works in general literature lectures. for students to learn in general world literature lectures. It (이것이 가르키는 것을 정확하게 해 주시는게 좋아요) is mostly for those students who major in ancient history or ancient Roman civilization. The lecturer asserts that professors should carefully make syllabus and Seneca’s plays do not fit the bill.
For these reasons, the lecture refutes the reading’s idea that Seneca’s literature is worthy of studying in general world literature sessions as an ancient Roman playwright.
전반적으로 reading과 lecture의 비교가 잘 되어 있는 에세이 같아요. 깔끔하게 각자의 의견을 서술하셨습니다. 하지만 문법적으로 살짝 터치해줘야 할 부분이 있는 것 같아요. 다시한번 proof reading을 하면서 자잘자잘한 실수를 고쳐주시는게 좋을 것 같아요.