Shakespeare final

When I did my response project, I attempted to fiddle with the five act structure in Much Ado About Nothing. To try to do this, I removed conflicts and major characters in order to see if I could screw with the structure of the play. It failed miserably. Anything I did could be mended in a few stitches in the story and it would still be considered a Shakespearean classic. After the presentation, I thought to myself: is this really unique to this play? I began to test this with different books from different genres i.e. Robin Hood, Huck Finn, The Andromeda Strain and Flowers for Algernon. What I found is that in some books, you can do a lot without messing up anything, however, in other books, a minor change is enough to wreck the story. Robin Hood was likely a poor choice, considering that the story consists of multiple unrelated conflicts, but I was surprised that Andromeda Strain still retained its interesting story despite the changes I made. It made much less sense, but could still be construed as enjoyable. Flowers for Algernon fared poorly in this experiment. Some changes i made changed nothing, while others messed up the flow of the story and made the book no longer make sense. What I found is that when there is a large overarching theme or conflict, the changes made affected the story more than if there was not.