While cruising through Yahoo! Answers today I saw that somebody had asked about the theme of destiny in Romeo and Juliet.  Then something hit me.  It’s easy to point to the “star-crossed lovers” right in the prologue, and later Romeo, who is Fortune’s fool, defies to stars, etc etc etc.

But here’s the thing, I’ve also always thought of the play as a lesson to the parents about not being so stubborn in your ancient grudges and your own problems that you don’t realize what you’re about to lose. 

At the end of the play, the prince gives his great “All are punished” speech and the two families shake hands and build statues.  I don’t know about you, but I’m definitely left with a feeling of, “See how stupid you’ve been? If only you’d changed your ways and seen what was happening, this all could have been prevented.”

And there’s the problem.  Which is it?  Is Shakespeare giving us a story where we’re supposed to come away thinking that this tragedy could have been prevented?  Or that it was Fate, and that these kids were going to end up dead no matter what happened?

I’d never really thought of this before, but has anybody ever done an ending to this play where the Prince still gets to give his speech, but rather than the statue building stuff, the two families turn their backs on each other and the grudge continues?  I think that would be genius.  Depressing, but genius.  Then you’ve got the more helpless feeling that no, these kids never had a chance, the feud is never going to end even in the face of such overwhelming tragedy.

This question came up again this morning – why doesn’t Shakespeare ever write an actual wedding ceremony into any of the plays?

The simple answer (historians, fill in the details for me) is that he wasn’t allowed. Marriage was a holy sacrament, a big deal, and having actors depict one would have been considered sacrilege.  The Master of Revels wouldn’t let it happen.  Although, what the punishment would have been I don’t know – would it just get edited out, or would even attempting it have been a swift trip to the Tower?

Anyway, this post is not about that. I started to list in my head all the different ways that Shakespeare gives us “everything but” the actual ceremony.  I’m sure I’ll miss a few, but we have:

• The “eye witness testimony” in Taming of the Shrew where we get to hear, but not see, how Petruchio ruins his own wedding (made very confusing by the fact that most movie versions just go ahead and turn this first-hand account into an actual wedding scene).
• The “wedding that doesn’t happen”, in Much Ado About Nothing.  “Do you, Claudio…” “You’re a whore!”  “Eeeek! *faint*” *chaos* …
• The “rehearsal dinner” scene (well, that’s what we’d call it, but for Shakespeare we’ll call it the “scene before the wedding”) also from Much Ado, which ends literally with a bunch of people saying “We’re going to get married, but first, let’s dance!”
• The Reception.  Midsummer Night’s Dream, of course – a wedding reception scene so hysterical that while I was researching my book I actually found a bride who was trying to get her bridal party to act it out.
• The “does it still count if the marriage is performed by a non-human entity?” dodge.  Well how would you describe As You Like It, where the goddess Hymen comes down to bestow her blessings on the new couples?
• The “blink and you’ll miss it, oh look we’re married now” wedding.  I don’t think that Romeo and Juliet is the only example of this, but it’s the most obvious.  High school students for generations try to figure out where in the play that Romeo and Juliet get married, because for the life of them they can’t find that scene.  That’s because it happens between scenes, kids.  One scene, not married.  Next scene?  Married.

What am I missing?

Speaking of Shakespeare and weddings, everybody knows that I wrote a book on the subject, right?  Hear My Soul Speak : Wedding Quotations from Shakespeare brings together all the most romantic things Shakespeare ever wrote, explained and organized for all your wedding needs – the proposal, the vows, the best man’s / father of the bride’s toast, you name it.  Even if you just want something cool to sign in the guest book.  Available now for Kindle and all e-reader formats!

Just about a year ago I spotted the news that comic god Stan Lee was associated with a graphic novel adaptation of Shakespeare entitled Romeo + Juliet : The War.  At the time I wrote, simply, “Want.”

Well, lucky lucky me tripped into a complete pre-release copy (digital only and heavily watermarked), and just read it cover to cover in one sitting :)!   Yayyy!   Love.

This telling takes place on “a planet you recognize…yet in many ways, you don’t.” It is a war-torn planet, populated by two super races: The Montagues, a race of cyborgs (half human, half machine) and the Capulets, a race of genetically engineered superhumans.  They were both bred and created for the same purpose – defeating a common enemy.  Once that task was complete, they turned on each other. As far as the “two households both alike in dignity” and the “ancient grudge” go, I buy it. 

(Let me just break in here on myself to mention that, in the introduction, it says “Respectfully based on William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet”.  I like that.  None of this “We all know that original boring story blah blah we think our version is better” stuff.  Respect.  Carry on.)

The story they tell is a bit different from Shakespeare’s, as retellings often are (see our West Side Story discussion for more on this topic). This version, like many others, significantly plays up the violence.  Every Montague hates every Capulet, major characters included.  Romeo and Benvolio are both right in the mix and ready to draw Capulet blood at every opportunity.  There is no Lord Capulet moment where he says “It is not so hard for men as we to keep the peace.”

This is a common approach (heck, even Gnomeo and Juliet did it) but I think it takes much of the depth out of the story.  I much prefer an interpretation where the grudge is basically old and buried, and it is only recently “broken to new mutiny” by guys like Tybalt who refuse to let it go.  I think that’s important character development there.  Just making everybody bloodthirsty doesn’t really do it for me.

Anyway, soapbox off.  The rest of the story elements are there – the party, the meeting, the secret wedding, the over -hasty marriage to Paris, Friar Laurence’s plan.  I will say that it takes a very different turn right in the middle (during the Mercutio/Tybalt confrontation) which is definitely in line with their world building, even if it is not exactly what Shakespeare wrote.  For as much as I don’t love some of the liberties that storytellers take with my beloved source material, I do have respect for those that can stand confidently in *their* story and carry it through to the end. The ending is satisfying, based on how they get there.

I’m always torn when digging into a work like this, because my brain says, “Yay! Shakespeare content!” and then I start reading and three pages in my brain says, “Wait a minute, this ain’t Shakespeare.” I don’t really know what I want as a solution to that problem. Sometimes the retelling will sprinkle in direct quote. There’s not too much of that here.  The goal seems to be, “Retell what Shakespeare said, and say it in a way so that the reader knows what we’re doing, but not so that it looks like we just tried to flat-out translate the original into modern text line by line.”  Does that make sense?  Keep it close, but not too close.

Sometimes they try too hard. Every single time there’s an opportunity to say “Ha, the Montagues are clearly the good guys and Capulets the bad guys!” expect there to be somebody who is quick to point out that the Montagues are just as guilty. They really hammer home the whole “these two sides are exactly alike” thing. We get it. Don’t let us develop our own feelings for these characters or anything – tell us exactly how we have to feel.

As far as the visuals go, the artwork is just beautiful (and I think they know it).  On
numerous pages you’ll think that you’re looking at a scene out of
Terminator, The Matrix, or some other hugely successful science fiction
movie that jumps immediately into your brain. They have a very clear idea for the world they want to show, and pull it off brilliantly.  Frequently there’s a shot of nothing but the landscape, just to show how impressive it looks. Honestly if there wasn’t a gigantic watermark across my copy, there’s a handful of pages that would be gracing my laptop’s wallpaper right now.  (UPDATE – They have downloadable wallpaper on the website!) There are a bunch of places where it’s overly violent for my taste, and a number of fight scenes where it’s hard to tell what’s going on, but I think that has more to do with me looking at it primarily as a Shakespeare fan and not a comic fan.  I’d bet that the comic aficionados in the crowd wouldn’t mind it at all.

You know what? I said that it looks like a movie. I think that if somebody tried to tell this version of the story as a movie, it could be pretty awesome.

I can’t wait for this to come out for real. Although there is plenty of bloodshed (and a surprising scene of near nudity which I think was completely gratuitous) I would almost certainly let my kids read it.  Well, at least my oldest.  I’d probably call it borderline PG-13, as there’s a very definite “Romeo and Juliet, now married, are in bed together” moment that’s hard to talk my way around. Relatively speaking I’ll take the gratuitous almost-naked scene if we could leave out the almost-naked-and-in-bed-together scene.

Be on the lookout for this one!  Coming out officially in “late 2011”, but I don’t have word yet on when exactly it will be available. I find no listing in Amazon, not even for pre-order, but that doesn’t prove anything.

This discussion came up on Twitter, and I thought it might be good to put it someplace where it won’t scroll away in a couple of hours.

Question:  Everybody knows that West Side Story is basically a modern retelling of Romeo and Juliet.  Montagues and Capulets, Sharks and Jets.  BUT!  There are some pretty crucial differences.  Juliet lives in WSS, for one.  Discuss the differences, and how they alter your feelings toward the story.  Is WSS an entirely new thing and they can do whatever they want?  Or do they suffer for it, the farther they get from Shakespeare’s original?

Here’s a random thought that came to me while waiting for my wife’s car at the shop (yes, again – don’t buy a VW Routan.)

Of the few things we know about old King Hamlet, we know that he fought Old Fortinbras in honorable one-on-one combat.  True?

Claudius, on the other hand, is a sneaky backstabber who poisons King Hamlet in his sleep, and then later not only tries to pawn off his dirty work on England, but when that fails, he manipulates Laertes into doing it.  Claudius isn’t much for facing his enemies.

So, then, where does Hamlet fall on that family tree?

Thinking Claudius to be behind the arras, he doesn’t exactly say “Come out and face me,” now does he? He blindly runs him through and hopes for the best.

Then, later? When he finds out about Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s secret mission to have him killed (a mission they didn’t even know about), does he do them in? Nope – a little trickier with the note and he, too, lets England do his dirty work.

It is only in his final rage (panic?) that he murders Claudius in front of everybody.  An unarmed Claudius, mind you.  Granted, Claudius didn’t exactly deserve a fair fight after everything he did, but still. You’d like to think that the good guy at least attempts to win a fair fight (I’m thinking Romeo/Tybalt – Romeo didn’t sneak up on him, he came straight at him).

Kind of makes you wonder whether Hamlet’s more like his dad’s brother, than his dad.