Romeo and Juliet |
Review by |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
first staged circa 1595, London |
February 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Love's intensity redoubled
William Shakespeare wrought so well his version of love at first sight that Romeo and Juliet is the archetype. The stageplay's title and titular characters remain household words, four centuries later, for intense young lovers and for tragically blocked love. So at least the basics of the plot are widely known. Yet even knowing how the Trojan War turns out does not stop ongoing reading of the Iliad, a tale so old that Romeo and Juliet is youthful beside. I'd like to talk a little about marriage and about language in the play, but first let's glance at that point of youthfulness. Romeo is a very young man, with only one conventional infatuation (with Rosaline) so far; Juliet is not quite fourteen. The youthfulness of the protagonists goes far to explain how they are swept away by their first deep wave of true love. Stephen Greenblatt's fine introduction to the play in The Norton Shakespeare lists five antecedent stories about Romeo and Juliet: Italian, French, and English, over the preceding 120 years. He points out that Shakespeare lowered the age of Juliet, given in his sources as eighteen or sixteen, down to the last weeks of thirteen for his heroine. Franco Zeffirelli's film Romeo and Juliet (1968) has the great merit of casting lead actors aged seventeen and fifteen, helping us to visualize their teenage intensity neither moderated by experience, nor governed by wisdom. Near the beginning of the play Romeo and friend Benvolio by chance read Capulet's invitation-list to the masked ball at which Romeo will meet (or truly notice) Juliet of the Capulet family for the first time. The list names Veronese gentry, and Capulet friends and family including: Mine uncle Capulet, his wife and daughters, The list is Capulet's own, the head-of-family who is Juliet's father. I read this as Rosaline being a Capulet relation also. If so, it may be relevant to Rosaline's spurning (before the play opens) the attentions of Romeo, scion of their arch-rivals the Montague family. It also suggests that poor Romeo, right after being drawn by the candle-flame of one socially-impossible girl, Rosaline — is furnace-blasted by Juliet, socially-impossible for the same reason of inter-family hostility. Rosaline does not appear on-stage, but at Benvolio's urging Romeo goes masked to that party to see her "With all the admired beauties of Verona", and perhaps transfer his affections to someone more responsive. It works: Romeo sees Juliet. There are great pressures against their happiness. Their families' deadly feud; love's confusing intensity; parental obtuseness; exile out of Verona for Romeo; forced marriage to a parental favorite impending for Juliet; their own impetuosity — I think shown as less reasonable in Romeo than in Juliet. Marriage is of course the goal here, the point of contention being: to whom? This bundles other questions: who chooses? and on what basis? Marry for love and attraction, but never for money or position? The Elizabethan era had different emphases:
Of course, both currents flow simultaneously to some depth in societies as in individuals, then as now. For a contrasting and real-life romance of a fifteen-year-old girl, eighty years after 1595, see Sarah Churchill and The Rules for Dating. Wordplay of all sorts flirts and kisses all through Romeo and Juliet. Much of the comic, and some of the serious, dialogue is absolutely thrust full of licentious puns and allusions; I misdoubt that even the editors of The Norton Shakespeare have annotated the half of them. But William Shakespeare's amazing power in English is serious and hard-working even in fun. Stephen Greenblatt credits it thusly: Love and words: the world of the marriage of hearts Northrop Frye points up the tremendous contrast, at the big Capulet party, between Capulet's cornily-joking public welcome to his guests, and love's first encounter:
So we have in Romeo and Juliet not a marriage manual in blank verse, not a reformist tract about wayward youth, not gritty Socialist Realism, and not even Elizabethan Realism. What we do have is love and words together, both at their keenest pitch; and through this extra-real, extraterritorial realism, we share something of love and words that despite all create the world of the marriage of hearts. We have The Most Excellent and Lamentable Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2004 Robert Wilfred Franson |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Note: The rainbow effect on the outdoor high-school stage R. W. Franson's review of |
Poetry at Troynovant Romance at Troynovant |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|