Well of course. It’s a tragedy. Not a romance. That’s stated upfront even.
I only take issue with “read it”. Shakespeare wrote plays. They were meant to be performed and seen, not read. “Do you bite your thumb at me?” makes a lot more sense when it’s done by a good actor.
If their first introduction to Star Wars was reading the script, kids would hate that, too. Having a script can be useful for analyzing and referencing things–I do have a book of the OG Star Wars trilogy scripts–but it shouldn’t be the default way we enjoy it.
I never thought of it like that. You’ve made me reconsider my positions on Shakespeare.
I think this depends on your level of imagination. When I read books there is definitely a play going on in my head of the events as they unfold.
TIL
IMO even a film adaptation is missing something compared to the experience of a live play, let alone just reading the script.
I know it’s a book shop, but it’s still weird to me putting primacy on reading the script of the play rather than watching it in a theatre. It’s like saying “anyone who’s read the Die Hard novelisation knows how hectic the Christmas holidays can be”.
Thing with Shakespeare plays is there’s no one alive today who has met anyone who was alive to see a play at The Globe. The scripts we have are just people’s lines and the bare minimum stage direction. There’s a lot of information missing, and you can interpret it in many ways.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone interpret Hamlet’s To Be Or Not To Be speech as a mentally disturbed 20 year old stomping down a hallway muttering to himself under his breath; it’s always either this huge proclamation or a weirdly wistful thing. And then, immediately after, two interpretations of the Blasting Ophelia section simultaneously: with and without Hamlet noticing the king and company watching.
Especially since Die Hard is based on a novel.
You’re right. But somehow, you’ve also composed this bookshop’s next sign…
Any historian worth his salt will tell you that romantic love wasn’t invented until the 1800s so Romeo and Juliet can’t have been a love story /s
Thanks for the spoilers.
So, basically a school shooting. Gotcha.
The tv comedy Upstart Crow brilliantly skewers Romeo & Juliet along with Shakespeare. I forget which episode, but it’s only 3 seasons and they’re all fantastic.
Oh yes, the clever young woman points out a few things, eg the plot is VERY similar to a much earlier story, where the girl is 17, not 13. And Romeo’s age is never mentioned. “Bit weird isn’t it, Mr Shakespeare?”
Oh yes, the clever young woman points out a few things, eg the plot is VERY similar to a much earlier story, where the girl is 17, not 13. And Romeo’s age is never mentioned. “Bit weird isn’t it, Mr Shakespeare?”
ThatsTheWholePoint.jpg(This was largely Shakespeare’s criticism of young love)
The tragedy of Romeo and Juliet is not that they died for their love; it’s that they’re too young to realize that their love wasn’t worth dying for. It’s a cautionary tale about the follies and passion of youth, not a love story.
Edit: alright, it’s about a lot of things.
That seems like it still counts as a love story then, or at least “romance” given that that’s primarily what it’s plot and themes revolve around. What qualifies something to be a love story if not that?
Def not worth dying for
I thought it was a cautionary tale about parents who overreact to their children’s relationships without realizing that if they just let them be they’ll break up on their own.
It’s also a story about how feuds are largely arbitrary, and holding grudges against entire families/bloodlines is just tragically pointless eye-for-an-eye behavior that eventually leads to your children being so blind that they commit suicide for basically no reason.
It’s a bunch of themes in a trench coat!
It could also be interpreted as a George Bluth-esque extreme “always leave a note” lesson.
If you’re going to fake your suicide to get your crazy family off your back so you can be with your lover, always leave your lover a note explaining what you’re doing or you’ll both end up dead.
I thought it was about the political intricacies of two gnome families that didn’t like each other
I thought it was about the political intricacies of two gnome families that didn’t like each other
I’ve heard of two KDE families that didn’t like each other….
~$apt install libkromeo Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: libkromeo : Breaks: libkjulia(< 4.4.6-4) E: Broken packages
I was constantly asking why everyone just believed the kids and never assumed they were lying the whole way through The Crucible.
I feel it was made quite clear that the kids testimony was the excuse not the reason.
Romeo and Juliet, Mercutio, Tybalt, Paris, and Lady Montague.
Spoilers!
Literally don’t remember half those deaths. I gotta re read that again. Or watch the DiCaprio flick…
The Baz Luhrmann movie is definitely worth a rewatch.
Nice I’ll have to check it out!
Depends on the production. We didn’t even have Paris in the play – that I recall – when we did it at college. And Lady Montague didn’t have a death, she was just sad at the funeral.
A play that encompasses the entirety of the original would likely take 3 hours to perform. There’s a lot of fat to trim for individual presentation and interpretation (even once saw a Gaza / Israel variant one of my costars was in, that was interesting).
If they were related it would be a sweet home Alabama love story.
