Baz Luhrmann more like Bad Luhrmann

"Even in the classroom, the dominant definition of the legitimate way of appropriating culture and works of art favours those who have had early access to legitimate culture, in a cultured household, outside of scholastic disciplines, since even within the educational system it devalues scholarly knowledge and interpretation as 'scholastic' or even 'pedantic' in favour of direct experience and simple delight." (499)

This "early access" to legitimate culture, whether at home or in school, that is mentioned in this quote from Pierre Bourdieu reminded me a lot of our class conversation from last week. Today, less and less children are reading Romeo and Juliet seemingly than ever before. If they're exposed to this story at all, it is likely through one of the adaptations produced in the twentieth or twenty-first centuries, whether it be West Side Story or Romeo and Juliet the film, or something of the like. I still find these adaptations to be less enriching of an experience than reading the original play, or seeing a live performance of it. But less enriching doesn't make these films or only seeing this story through the lenses of these films any less "legitimate" or favorable, rather they are just...not as aesthetically good, in my opinion. There were some choices made in both West Side Story and Romeo and Juliet (1996) and phew were they something. But I guess they are not any less legitimate...although we really should continue to challenge our children with what they read.

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.

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.

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?