My brother is a special breed of human, and I mean this in the best of ways. The child was recently visiting us for Christmas and his birthday, and on the way home from dinner out with family we were discussing Shakespeare.
(By 'we were discussing Shakespeare', I mean my parents, Chris and his girlfriend were trying to convince me that Shakeapeare is the epitome of irrelevance and I passionately declared otherwise.)
Of course, this led to discussions about English/literature studies at school. "Seriously, Tash," said Chris. "Do I really need to know how metaphors and appropriation work to be a well-adjusted human being?"
"With you, all signs point to yes."
"No," he said, continuing over me, "I don't."
"Without Shakespeare and appropriation, you wouldn't have the Lion King. THAT, dear child, is Hamlet."
"You know what I think it is? I think it's actually a metaphor."
"... What? What part's the metaphor?"
"Well, it can't be a real story. Where are the poachers?"
Because singing animals do, in fact, make a story real.
"So I think that Scar's a poacher. It has to be Scar, because he's the only different lion."
"Because he kills Mufasa?"
"But that makes no sense. Why is a poacher hanging around with hyenas?"
"To integrate himself with the lions."
"So then when the sequel rolls around, we're looking at a poacher that desperately wants to live amongst the lions and falls in love with a lion, but then is exiled because he's discovered to be a poacher, but finally when the lead poacher is killed - nearly rescued by the lion it wanted to kill - the poacher is welcomed back into the pride and is given the hearty consent to marry the lion he loved?"
"Exactly, Tash. AND THAT IS WHAT ENGLISH DOES TO YOU."