NaNo's the context, but Shakespeare's the subject...

[capri0mni]

Just a prelude: this year (prompted by the piles of books here in the office, from my old house [*mourn*]), I decided to make my protagonist an English Classics prof., so when I'm stuck for ideas or something, I could stick in a juicy quote from Shakespeare, or Chaucer, or Yeats). I probably won't talk about my novel, much, exactly. But you'll probably see a lot of English nerding in this space for a while.

---

So, last night, I was rereading Act 3, scene 1 of Romeo and Juliet -- not one of my favorite plays, by a long shot (can you say "Vastly Overrated," boys and girls?), but you know it's the one play that must be taught in a freshman Shakespeare class.

For those of you who don't remember, this is the scene where the s**t hits the fan. Romeo has just come back from his secret marriage to Juliet. Tybolt wants to fight, Romeo wants to walk away, Mercutio fights in Romeo's stead, even while Romeo is getting between them, trying to break up the fight. Tybolt kills Mercutio. Romeo kills Tybolt in revenge. The lord of the county comes, and banishes Romeo.

Anyway, during his dying tyrade, Mercutio has this one line that I didn't rememmber from when I read the play last (15 years ago, maybe?):

a braggart, a rogue, a villain, that fights by the book of
arithmetic!

(You killed one of my family, so I must kill one of yours, and your dog, and so forth).

And, then, of course, Romeo plays the arithmatic game by turning around and killing Tybolt, whom, just five minutes earlier, he was calling his kinsman.

And I spent a good deal of time distracted after that, mulling over who was the greatest "sinner," in that scene: Mercutio, for assuming the role of fighter, when Romeo asked him not to? Or Benvolio and the other onlookers for being onlookers, and not stepping in to break up the fight, when Romeo pleaded for their help?

Romeo and Juliet is a much more interesting play when it's about an old war, rather than young love.

I'm just saying....

Comments

[spiralsheep.livejournal.com]

Romeo and Juliet is a much more interesting play when it's about an old war, rather than young love.

Well, duh, yes! ;-P

[capriuni.livejournal.com]

I think, the last time I saw this play performed live, we were just coming out of the cold war. It was a new production, one of those Shakespeare-in-the-park performances (a good one), and they did it as set in Italy in the 1950s, I think.

Anyway, after it was over I came away with two impressions: One, the gaping plot hole of "Why the hell didn't friar Lawrence just tell the Capulets that Juliet was already married, and he couldn't wed her to Paris?" and Two: "Why doesn't everyone see this play for what it is: a raging anti-war, pro-peace, political allogory?"

Still, ol' Will did a pretty good job, considering that he was adapting the 16th C. version of a best-seller dime store romance novel.