Rome & Juliet...and Romeo AND Juliet...and Romeo and Juliet ON ICE

Wow, I didn't think I'd have to reread Romeo and Juliet again as the last time I did I was only 14 and saying how much I was "not like other girls like Juliet" (technically I didn't read it but let's skip that). When I read the play, in class I remember watching two variations of the play itself: the one that looked like it was going for the original style of the play in Shakespeare's time, and the one with Leo DiCap. Suffice to say, the gif below will show which one I preferred over the other. There was even an episode on The Proud Family that was basically done on it which I HIGHLY prefer.Sure my views on the play has changed over time, and revisiting those feelings I held for both those young lovers  was a bit of a shock, but, the movies are what really gave the story a spark for me. But, as with Star Wars remakes and the unoriginal originality of stories, is this story of death, love, and partying worth being retold over and over again? It is a classic, but what about the authenticity of a classic? Even the play we know isn't even original. The redoing and reposting of this classic story, in my opinion is overdone and makes the original theme of the play: don't be stupid, don't rush into love, make it even more of a joke overall. The variations make a parody of the original that seems to have lost some meaning over time of what was meant in the first place. For the sake of this story alone, we should've stopped at Mercutio in drag! P.S. Lion King 2 is based on Romeo and Juliet.

Romeo and Juilet, more like Lancelot and Guinevere

When I was reading about how terribly sad Lancelot and Guinevere were in last weeks reading, I couldn't help but think of Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet". Lancelot was rejected by Guinevere, so he attempted to kill himself (if I'm remembering correctly). When Guinevere hears of this, she is so sad that she also wants to take her own life, BUT, what she doesn't know at the time is that Lancelot is still alive. How is this not the plot of "Romeo and Juliet"? He thinks she's dead, so he kills himself, but WAIT, she wasn't dead. I know there are some differences, but the similarities are impossible to ignore. This makes me ask the question I never wanted to ask myself; is Shakespeare not even original? Are all of his plays reminiscent of other works?

Romeo & Juliet original vs remix

While reading Romeo & Juliet for another time, (I don't even know how many times I've read it) it was simply familiar. I have an appreciation for Shakespeare, but I am not the type of person to go out of my way to read his plays willingly. In all honesty, the language used in it still confuses me and I get lost trying to understand it that I miss things. I do much better with it when it is discussed and acted out and there is a visual appeal. Personally, that makes it easier for me to understand it. I also believe that the updates and modern twists can help students when reading it in school, I know they helped me. One of the comments screenshot said that students will begin to forget about the original, but that cannot be the case because the original is what is taught, the other versions are just shown to help students comprehend and understand it. 

Another one of the comments says that we should leave it the way he read it, but that would end up really boring and confusing and not a lot going on. I think this because I remember in Sandona's Shakespeare class, him talking about how some of the stage directions didn't exist and were added in. Things have been added so it made more sense and so it was interpreted correctly. Also, I don't think anyone wants a real live bear running across the stage while watching The Winter's Tale. 

bring on the lesbians!

I should not have gone to read the comments on the NYT article, "To Renovate or Not to Renovate?" I know you suggested we do, so I did, but I still found myself getting quite annoyed, as I always do when I sift through comments on anything that could be seen as controversial. The one that caught my eye the most was this one:

I just cannot imagine what makes people so uptight and almost elitist about maintaining things the way they were originally. Most of the things we have today would not exist if not for works that came before. Particularly for Romeo and Juliet--there are so many things we see reused today, again and again and again. They are things we see in real life, too, not just in literature. Obviously it doesn't have to be something as extreme as the situation in Romeo and Juliet, but it could be something like, me and my crush live in different states so we can't really be together, not in the way you would be in an ideal world. 

I just figure if we're going to see these types of situations in real, modern life, then why not try to make it more accessible to people in real, modern life? If you truly enjoy reading the original Romeo and Juliet story, then by all means, have at it. More lesbian content for me!

Regulating behavior

Regulating behavior

Romeo and Juliet still speaks to us today because the primary idea behind the play is not so much love as it is regulating youthful behavior. Both noble families seek to control the sexual and romantic desires of their children by regulating their Proto sexual and sexual behavior.
Anxieties abound in this work by Shakespeare pure of invasion by the Muslim hordes drama competition among Italian city states, the meat into peace order and good government in Verona. But pride but primarily the anxiety is centered on the fear and the eventual reality that Romeo and Juliet will engage in sexual Congress without the consent of their families.

The regulation of sexual and romantic behavior Would remain a mainstay of culture and society until the 1900s. The idea that a human being had the right to choose their own romantic person was completely alien the 17th century society particularly among the upper classes. When we reconcile the fear of sexual and romantic indiscretion with the general upheaval of the reformation and the age of discovery We can better contextualize Romeo and Juliet as a work primarily about anxiety anxiety about a changing world anxiety about basic principle that young adults will have sex and achieve sexual maturity. And with that the obvious fear of unintended pregnancy and uncertainty about paternity. If young Adults were able to carry out their own sexual desires and do as they please unintended paternity was a very real possibility which would lead to uncertainty about paternity which would lead to further uncertainty about inheritance and the maintenance of the estate.
It is very easy to pigeonhole this particular work by Shakespeare into the category romance I believe we should understand it as a psychological drama centering around anxiety uncertaintyAnd general upset

I'm not a purist. I like remakes. I like wacky interpretations. I like when I recognize the skeletal remains of a classic in some bizarre crime scene of a modern version. I believe in living documents. But I do wonder if we're underestimating the general public's ability to engage with original material because the language or syntax is different, or because the original text takes place in an unfamiliar time or place. AND I wonder if the general public underestimates its own ability to engage with those same texts. A lot of times being pushed out of our comfort zones can be mistaken for being disinterested. It almost seems like a kind of literacy is being lost - if we can't see how this directly relates to us here and now, the text is no longer meaningful.

In a related note, season two of Sex Education has one of the most hilarious productions of Romeo and Juliet ever.
"Sex Education Season Two: Sexy Shakespeare." YouTube, uploaded by coffee & tv, 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE85C9lNedQ

Perfection?

Something that stood out to me while reading the comments to Isherwood’s “To Renovate or Not to Renovate” was just how passionate people are about maintaining the original. It’s not just that the remixes bother them because they distort their interpretation of a beloved work; they believe any remix is “messing with perfection” (cagy- fourth screenshot) and that “Shakespeare was a genius, updaters are not” (A.G.- first screenshot). But what is it about Romeo and Juliet that is so deserving of that “perfection” label? Is it out of cultural habit? Is it because Shakespeare’s name is on it? I enjoy reading the text because it does entertain. In some ways, however, how is it any better than a CW show? There’s plenty of angst (simultaneously relatable and annoying), love at first sight, fight scenes, and it all wraps up in moral at the end. Are these the necessary qualities to make a story timeless? (I hope not.) The characters are well-imagined, and the dialogue is beautifully written. But, when I finish reading the play, I’m left wondering why this is the version of love that we idolize so much and constantly reference in our culture. Is it truly a work of “genius”?  

Angsty love: https://kindledimagines.tumblr.com/post/162101269301/the-birds-and-the-bees-part-3-jughead-x-reader

Interesting AND Humorous

I find the entire idea of updating Shakespeare's plays as both interesting and humorous at the same time.  Interesting because I do love seeing what fresh ideas talented directors can do with the text.  Choices about what theme to lean on is always, at times, interesting.  Do you make the show about bad parenting?  How about bad timing?  Do you view the Friar as holy, or do you view him as a bumbling religious figure?  What about the role of the common people in the play compared to "both houses"?  What about the idea of friendship and love?  There are so many ways you can move that play towards a thematic pulse that makes it a wonderful script filled with timeless ideas!

Humorous because often those choices have nothing to do with reclaiming the story, but everything to do with trying to be "hip" or "relevant," script and themes be damned!  Why can't directors today just "trust the script"?  I can't tell you how many times I keep coming back to that quote when I am directing my own shows.  Trust the script!  It's NOT a love story, it's a play filled with MANY emotions!  Romeo rides a motorcycle, then become an uban hipster?  Why?  For what purpose thematically?  I don't mind the motorcycle if it serves as a purpose to the plot/theme the director is going for in his idea.  From what I read, this was not the case at all.  "Fundamentally, a great Shakespeare production will rise or fall not on what the actors are wearing, and whether they are barking into cell phones or slinging swords at each other, but on whether they can infuse these magnificent, challenging texts with the life blood of honest feeling and formal beauty."

I've got an idea:  Hey Boomers. . . Leave it alone.  Let the kids be the creative ones, not the grown adults who think they are doing something "fresh."  It's like finding out your parents have a TikTok account to keep their daily life "up to date" and "hip" so you can look at it and relate to them.  Yeah, it may be funny the first time, but after awhile it's just cringeworthy.  More importantly, you quickly realize that your parent's TikTok has no substance, purpose, or meaning, it's just fluff!  You know. . . like most TikTok posts.  No matter how cool they seem.

Now get off my lawn and let the actual script take over!

 

Don't Renovate, Definitely Don't Renovate

Leave Shakespeare and his creations alone! No, seriously, while reading "To Renovate or Not to Renovate" I detested the possible sight of Macbeth picking up an iPad or Orlando Bloom aka Romeo taking off a motorcycle helmet! Call me a purist, but any "modern" rendition I've seen of any Shakespeare play has typically fallen flat for me, as said similarly by the author of this article. (However, I am very excited to watch the 1990's version of Romeo and Juliet for class next week because I've heard very good things, so I might be soon completely contradicting myself!) But really, something neither of the articles really hinted much at--is that I think the best modern "versions" of any Shakespeare plays are ones where the stories are inspired by Shakespearean stories rather than direct remakes of. A Romeo and Juliet play where Romeo is an edgy pop-punk fan and Juliet is a rich valley girl who loves mainstream pop and their musical differences can't stop them from being together? No thanks. But an HBO show called Succession REMIXED and obviously heavily inspired by King Lear but with new, modern, and complicated characters? GOLD. The problem with direct modernization of these play productions is that honestly, I think they just really don't make sense. Shakespeare wrote his plays in ways that made sense for the time. In my opinion, keep the live productions traditional to the original writing, and be inspired by, and write new, modern stories of his plays instead. Is that boring? Maybe! But it's better than Orlando Bloom wearing torn jeans as Romeo and declaring his cheesy love for Juliet.

Not for the Purists

I found Isherwood's article to be pretty compelling, specifically towards the end, where he states, "It’s not for purists, to be sure, but it is showing people a very good time, and maybe, just maybe, inspiring some of them to pick up the play and see what inspired all that spooky, interactive fun."

While I do consider myself to be a "purist" when it comes to some stories and texts, I do believe that "updates" really could potentially create more buzz around original works. What Isherwood touches on in the final words of his text is the fact that a story that has been reworked is certainly not for those who practically worship the original.

That doesn't necessarily mean that an updated version is bad though, and I do believe that it could be beneficial for the same reason that Isherwood states here: it gives more attention to the original, and maybe, intrigues the audience enough to pick up a copy of the original text.

My question is, however, what about those audience members who are affected in the opposite way? Meaning, what about those people who watch something like Baz Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet and just think, "absolutely not, this is terrible. I'm never picking up a Shakespeare play because of this." Could this possibly be an indication as to how the updates sometimes "may not work?"

Update GIF from giphy.com

True Reflections

Image Source: http://immeasurablyvacant.blogspot.com/2014/08/week-05.html

                   Image Source: http://queenelizabethsfantasy.blogspot.com/2014/09/gnomeo-and-juliet-arousing-childrens.html

As I was reading the comment section for the "To Renovate or Not to Renovate" article, I was struck by one particular comment made by H5.  They wrote, "I always think of Shakespeare as they(the) mirror people crave to see themselves. But of course, he states this best: "And since you know you cannot see yourself, so well as by reflection, I, your glass, will modestly discover to yourself, of yourself which you yet know not of." WS  

Is the reason Romeo and Juliet and MacBeth as well as Shakespeare's other plays redone and re-imagined because the core ideas, characters and themes are timeless?

The Big Picture

Romeo and Juliet contribute to modern opinions of what defines love. Love can be shown in many ways. Romeo and Juliet have a strong sense of infatuation of love. Love in the later 1500s is different from love in the 2000's. Hate also exists as long as love has. The hate from the Montague and Capulet families essentially bring Romeo and Juliet together. The love they have for one another is stronger than the hate their families have toward one another. This is ultimately why they kill themselves. If they cannot be together in present life, then they will be together in the afterlife. The belief of afterlife has also been around for an infinite amount of years. Romeo and Juliet are dramatic, but there are realistic and timeless elements to the storyline. For example, in current times, parents can be particular about who their children marry or date. They can hold prejudices in race or ethnic background and socioeconomic status. Some families will disown their children if their stipulations are not in place. This is perhaps what Romeo and Juliet believed, and may be one of the reasons they fled their homes. I am unsure of how popular the belief of love at first sight is, but Romeo and Juliet feel intense feelings for one another upon their first meeting. Some people still hold this belief nowadays. My Dad told me that he felt this when he first met my Mom, which I found ironic.

                                                                 Romeo Must Die

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&id=104BAE62F88A2EBACB92FF6238E75C5935D959C6&thid=OIP.s3_kMf3jD-T-svUuCi0hYgHaE4&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fs24195.pcdn.co%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F06%2FAMBW_romeomustdie.jpg&exph=462&expw=700&q=romeo+must+die&selectedindex=14&ajaxhist=0&vt=0

Wherefore art thou adapting?

Sir Ian McKellen in the "Nazis vs British soldiers" themed film production of Richard III

"...the production was really a new musical inspired by the Shakespeare comedy, in no sense an actual production of the play." writes Charles Isherwood in his 2013 New York Times article Updates Work, Except When they Don't. Isherwood is refering to a musical adaptation of Love's Labor's Lost but the point can be made in the broader context of adaptation as a whole. There seem to be three different paths that get taken; direct reproductions that re-create the original point for point with minimal alterations (if any), remixes that alter things like dress and setting. In the context of Shakespeare, this is things like the 1995 cinematic production of Richard III pictured above, or the 2010 TV film version of Macbeth starring Patrick Stewart, "remixed" to evoke 1960's Romania and the brutality of Nicolae Ceaușescu. In both cases, the original language is maintained, with minimal alterations for time. Finally there are adaptations which abandon both setting and text for updated dialogue, costuming, setting, and other aditions like musical numbers, the most famous example being West Side Story. There is a lot of leeway within those three categories, but they broadly encompass the three ways I believe we creatively interact with a source text and turn it into popular culture; recreation, adaptation, and inspiration.

What is Romeo and Juliet about?

(Frederic Leighton)

One of the constant themes in Romeo and Juliet is that of teen angst.  This, perhaps just as much as the romance in the play, is a feeling to which readers of any era are able to relate.  On more than one occasion (and with a variety of levels of snark), I've heard this play described as being about teen rebellion more so than love.  This argument may hold some truth.  From Juliet describing her situation as "past hope, past care, past help" (4.1. 46), to Romeo unleashing an anti capitalist tirade on an innocent apothecary (5.2. 84-91), the text is certainly ripe with teen angst and knowitallness.  But does this attitude take away from the love story built around it?  Which aspect of the text has led to its constant retelling and re-imagining? 

Remixing Classics Makes them More Accessible

"Are the most memorable Shakespeare productions you’ve seen modern or “classical”? Do you find it jarring when Hamlet picks up an iPad? What did you make of Mr. Leveaux’s 'Romeo and Juliet'/" (Isherwood, "To Renovate or Not to Renovate").

"Beyond that, performances must be shaped line by line and scene by scene. Given the remoteness of some of the language, and the sheer complexity of the plays, I would guess that most actors are immensely grateful to directors for helping them shape their performances" (Isherwood, "Updates Work, Except When They Don't")

Is the point of reworking classics to be innovative? To keep the work alive for modern audiences? To allow audiences to understand the plot before cycling back to the original work? All of the above?

I once argued with a classmate on the merit of works like the "Lizzie Bennett Diaries" when taking the Jane Austen course here at Hood. Her point was that the work warped and misconstrued one of Austen's most beloved works; my point, that a side from being entertaining, it is re-telling stories that keeps them alive, in conversation, and in the best case peaks peoples interest in reading the original--while allowing them to understand otherwise complex language they may not have understood previously. Remixes can also highlight points of a work that can otherwise go unnoticed by audiences who have worked with them time and time again. So perhaps as a scholar of Hamlet you uncover a new interpretation when the namesake picks up an iPad as opposed to a skull.

Constant Themes of Romeo and Juliet Question

Dr. MB encouraged us to think about why this iconic story has stuck for centuries as we read the text. After reflecting on the text (and being thankful it was over) I was left considering three major themes that draw in the reader. Is it Love, the desire to have something that we cannot or rivalry that keeps us coming back to the central plot of the story? Ultimately these draw on many of the complexities of human nature and pull at many of the things that motivate us in our current lives.