One of the best readings of Romeo and Juliet I’ve heard- although with some of the ridiculously short-sighted interpretations that’s not too hard. I will say though, Romeo and Juliet do not actually have an opportunity to see each other alive and realise the tragedy of it all- Romeo drinks the poison, “thus with a kiss I die”’s and then Friar Lawrence shows up and Balthasar fills him in, Friar Lawrence checks the scene out and realises that Romeo is dead (also Paris but who cares abt him) and it’s only THEN that Juliet wakes up, sleepy, and not remembering where she is, until she asks him where Romeo is- she doesn’t know.
hi ty!! and omg thats so embarrassing, my bad - i was thinking of a change made in the ballet and in the 90s movie! personally rlly like that change, i think it flows nicely, but ur right that it’s not original! lol no wonder i said i always forgot about that part if its literally not even in the play. ty again!!
@@nataliereads.mp4 ofc! and dw abt it, it’s not embarrassing I’m just a huge nerd about Romeo and Juliet in particular. I actually do really like the change too and you explained really well why it’s such a good addition to the story. It kinda adds to the low-key existential horror of the story that comes hand in hand with the fate theme (one of my favourite themes in the play :3).
@@nataliereads.mp4 like when you think about it it’s soooooooo messed up! They were kids! And fated to fall so intensely in love, or at least believe it, and then die! They were all fated to die from before the beginning! From before the prologue, before the actors step on stage, before the audience even show up! It’s sooooo messed up I love it. There’s a really great uquiz that taps into the existential horror aspect of fate in Romeo and Juliet I’ll see if I can find it
THIS!!! Everything about this! I’m autistic and romeo and juliet is my special interest and this is what I’ve always tried to explain! I don’t love romeo and juliet because of the romance, i love it because of the tragedy and how it is caused by the environment of verona. I especially love Tybalt and I relate to him a lot, not as a villain, but as a complex character who was raised in a conflicting and tragic environment. Anyways, sorry for the long comment, i love this video!
As someone doing this play in school at the moment, you’ve read my mind in concern to the play, throughout the play it’s so clear that this is not meant to be just a romance, it’s based in conflict, conflict is the main antagonist that is embodied by most of the characters, an antagonist that causes something so small as a 13 year old having a crush into her own death
definitely!! and it's so much more interesting to view the play as a tragedy in my opinion! there's a reason Shakespeare is so renowned, and you really only get that if you know how to understand his plays. good luck in your play and thanks for watching!
You clearly have a keen sense of detail, exploration and interpretation. Well done. I hope you'll consider a few things regarding Romeo: While there is no concrete evidence of prior conversation between him and Rosaline, there is neither evidence of zero conversation. "She will not stay the siege of loving terms...nor ope her lap to saint seducing gold." Granting that the gold could be a gift (or his own privates, which I don't care for) delivered by a third party, there is an argument for at least the attempt at prior interaction, which opposes the notion of him having this bad habit of pursuing women he has never spoken to. His friends too (Benvolio, Mercutio, the friar) likewise have knowledge of her, as well as her being on the Capulet's guest list, which could create the feeling (in performance at least) that she is known in Verona as more than just the girl Romeo currently "loves". Not that it makes his switch any less potentially concerning or objectionable, but perhaps there is a point where interpretation heaps too much additional criticism on these characters. While Juliet certainly has a sharp, analytical mind, I would argue that Romeo's isn't far behind. Yes, his topic of choice prior to meeting Juliet seems to be nothing but "love", but if we allow for the supposed textual clues (never found them myself) that he is 15 or 16, his thoughts on love are not exactly run of the mill. Sure, they may read as bad poetry, but I see a young mind trying to work its way through an overwhelming phenomenon, however much it is based in his hormones. Likewise, he too has knowledge of the feud, though perhaps not as nuanced as Juliet's: "O me, what fray was here? Yet tell me not for I have heard it all." This suggests an exasperation with the reality of the feud. He's heard it all before. But what has he heard all about? The lines immediately following are open to interpretation: "Here's much to do with hate but more with love. Why, then, O brawling love, o loving hate, or anything of nothing first create?" Now, this can just be written off as more bad poetry ripped off from the author's historical/contemporary sources, not to mention reinforcing Romeo's self-centeredness, but again in (and out of) performance, we can reconsider these lines. Is he saying that the fighting is how both sides express love for their *own* side and that each is unaware of this? Is this acceptable? Or is it anything but? Is he actually raging against what he sees as madness and stupidity? How can violence be an expression of love? How can there *be* "brawling love" and "loving hate"? Contradictions. The tragic irony then becomes that from this place of what might be called "noble naivety", he shows his love for Mercutio by avenging him through committing violence. And to be honest, I think to almost blame and dismiss him for all too easily becoming an instrument of the play's antagonistic force in that very instance is less than fair. He arguably had greater proximity to and familiarity with it, given that his life is less sheltered than Juliet's. Yet he can be seen as trying to avoid it or, yes, simply ignoring it. I think there is dramatic/tragic power in his move from what might be called a pacifist temprament ("lover not a fighter") to committing murder. He tried to pacify Tybalt when challenged (I have since read perhaps rather arrogantly) and urges Tybalt and Mercutio to remember the prince's warnings against public brawling. So, yes, he is or certainly can be seen as a standard romantic lead, but I think there's quite bit more to him than that. Also, while Juliet certainly seeks out the friar *for* a plan to save her marriage to Romeo, after a frightening expression of her own agency no less ("myself have power to die"), isn't it the friar who actually devises said plan? I think you said it was Juliet's plan. Did I mis-hear that? Anyway, thank you for this video. It's wonderful seeing young people being passionate about literature. Hope you'll allow for the fact that I come from a place of performance possibilities, as I am a theatre practitioner. I passionately believe that a play cannot only be understood through reading and literary analysis. We have to go see, hear and feel them.
What a fun surprise to see you in my subscription box!! Welcome back! As someone who didn't go to an English-speaking school and did not read Romeo and Juliet at that age, I found this video super interesting!! I feel like the framing and understanding of stories in the context of their genre is SO important to getting anything meaningful from reading them!
Wow this is amazing, I’ve always been so confused on why I have a love and hate relationship with Romeo and Juliet, this explains everything thank you !!!
After graduating from High School, I’ve always thought R&J as a RomCom due to the juxtapositions in the play. You can argue that the tragic consequences is because of the romance. But to me, it’s more of a farce/comedy. The actions are tragic. And I respect your views on the play. Shakespeare wrote in implied farce elements which can categorise the play as a RomCom. Historically, early RomComs were tragic or have tragic consequences & moments. Also, it’s true, it’s not a love story. It’s a dark farce. I’ve ranted about this on threads when I called it a RomCom. Most of Romeo’s arc is childish due to him falling for Juliet after Rosaline. There’s a musical on Broadway called & Juliet which asks what if Juliet didn’t kill herself. Juliet, to me, is a smart character who doesn’t have to do the dumb thing. She’s also considered as a tragic character by scholars and teachers. There’s a lot of implied farce elements in the play. Look at the material over and over or watch different interpretations of the play. The tragedy is part of the play but not its genre. Shakespeare wrote the play to further explain why feuds are not worth it. And the lessons he teaches throughout the play becomes clearer if you look at what’s implied and what’s happening.
ive seen this interpretation a lot recently, it's interesting! I don't know that I subscribe to it, but I do agree with a lot of its assertions about the comedy of the play :) it's definitely possible to do a reading of the play that leans into the comedy more than the tragedy, which is a really interesting thing
Romeo and his friends snuck into the Capulet party because his friends convinced him that Rosaline would not be the prettiest one there and that there were other girls that would catch his attention. He could not be obsessed with Juliet because he did not even know she existed so I was a bit confused when you said that he was obsessed with her. Did you mean that he was obsessed with Rosaline? And when did Romeo see Juliet wake up? Other than that, thank you for your analysis.
its been a while so idk exactly what you're referring to, but yeah, i prob meant Rosaline, or that he's obsessed with Juliet after meeting her. And Romeo seeing Juliet wake up was corrected in the pinned comment :) it's a change that often gets made in movies/the ballet, so I was mixed up, but I do like that change. Thanks for the comment!
It being just a love story is wrong. I think it everything you said and that. With it mainly being a tragedy. But, I’d be lying if as a straight man I said I didn’t cry in the Leo version when they first meet, the balcony, the anger when he kills Tybalt, Juliet wanting to die unless she has a way out of marrying Paris, Mercutio dies, when Juliet wakes up and Leo’s face is terrified for what he just did realizing she’s not dead, The way Claire cries...ya know what I cry youth the whole damn thing. For sad reasons and bc I am a hopeless romantic 😂
without putting sugar on it. Romeo is a PDF file grooming a minor (Juliet) nothing else. its just written by a PDF and masked as something (romantic) people forget their age difference and how young Juliet really was.
@@TheShaqii In Shakespeare's original story, Romeo is given the age of 16 years and Juliet is given the age of 13 years going on 14. Paris is in his 20's. But regardless, marriage for a girl of 13 or 14 was commonplace at the time. Though it's not stated explicitly, Romeo is implied to be a teenager just a few years older than Juliet.
One of the best readings of Romeo and Juliet I’ve heard- although with some of the ridiculously short-sighted interpretations that’s not too hard. I will say though, Romeo and Juliet do not actually have an opportunity to see each other alive and realise the tragedy of it all- Romeo drinks the poison, “thus with a kiss I die”’s and then Friar Lawrence shows up and Balthasar fills him in, Friar Lawrence checks the scene out and realises that Romeo is dead (also Paris but who cares abt him) and it’s only THEN that Juliet wakes up, sleepy, and not remembering where she is, until she asks him where Romeo is- she doesn’t know.
hi ty!! and omg thats so embarrassing, my bad - i was thinking of a change made in the ballet and in the 90s movie! personally rlly like that change, i think it flows nicely, but ur right that it’s not original! lol no wonder i said i always forgot about that part if its literally not even in the play. ty again!!
pinning for the correction :)
@@nataliereads.mp4 ofc! and dw abt it, it’s not embarrassing I’m just a huge nerd about Romeo and Juliet in particular. I actually do really like the change too and you explained really well why it’s such a good addition to the story. It kinda adds to the low-key existential horror of the story that comes hand in hand with the fate theme (one of my favourite themes in the play :3).
@@lcst-at-5ea859 I agree! and soooo so true about existential horror being hand in hand with themes of fate, that's such a good way of putting it
@@nataliereads.mp4 like when you think about it it’s soooooooo messed up! They were kids! And fated to fall so intensely in love, or at least believe it, and then die! They were all fated to die from before the beginning! From before the prologue, before the actors step on stage, before the audience even show up! It’s sooooo messed up I love it. There’s a really great uquiz that taps into the existential horror aspect of fate in Romeo and Juliet I’ll see if I can find it
THIS!!! Everything about this! I’m autistic and romeo and juliet is my special interest and this is what I’ve always tried to explain! I don’t love romeo and juliet because of the romance, i love it because of the tragedy and how it is caused by the environment of verona. I especially love Tybalt and I relate to him a lot, not as a villain, but as a complex character who was raised in a conflicting and tragic environment. Anyways, sorry for the long comment, i love this video!
hi ty for the comment! so glad u liked the video!!
also omg don't apologize for long comments!! I appreciate them!
As someone doing this play in school at the moment, you’ve read my mind in concern to the play, throughout the play it’s so clear that this is not meant to be just a romance, it’s based in conflict, conflict is the main antagonist that is embodied by most of the characters, an antagonist that causes something so small as a 13 year old having a crush into her own death
definitely!! and it's so much more interesting to view the play as a tragedy in my opinion! there's a reason Shakespeare is so renowned, and you really only get that if you know how to understand his plays.
good luck in your play and thanks for watching!
You clearly have a keen sense of detail, exploration and interpretation. Well done. I hope you'll consider a few things regarding Romeo:
While there is no concrete evidence of prior conversation between him and Rosaline, there is neither evidence of zero conversation. "She will not stay the siege of loving terms...nor ope her lap to saint seducing gold." Granting that the gold could be a gift (or his own privates, which I don't care for) delivered by a third party, there is an argument for at least the attempt at prior interaction, which opposes the notion of him having this bad habit of pursuing women he has never spoken to. His friends too (Benvolio, Mercutio, the friar) likewise have knowledge of her, as well as her being on the Capulet's guest list, which could create the feeling (in performance at least) that she is known in Verona as more than just the girl Romeo currently "loves". Not that it makes his switch any less potentially concerning or objectionable, but perhaps there is a point where interpretation heaps too much additional criticism on these characters.
While Juliet certainly has a sharp, analytical mind, I would argue that Romeo's isn't far behind. Yes, his topic of choice prior to meeting Juliet seems to be nothing but "love", but if we allow for the supposed textual clues (never found them myself) that he is 15 or 16, his thoughts on love are not exactly run of the mill. Sure, they may read as bad poetry, but I see a young mind trying to work its way through an overwhelming phenomenon, however much it is based in his hormones. Likewise, he too has knowledge of the feud, though perhaps not as nuanced as Juliet's: "O me, what fray was here? Yet tell me not for I have heard it all." This suggests an exasperation with the reality of the feud. He's heard it all before. But what has he heard all about? The lines immediately following are open to interpretation: "Here's much to do with hate but more with love. Why, then, O brawling love, o loving hate, or anything of nothing first create?" Now, this can just be written off as more bad poetry ripped off from the author's historical/contemporary sources, not to mention reinforcing Romeo's self-centeredness, but again in (and out of) performance, we can reconsider these lines. Is he saying that the fighting is how both sides express love for their *own* side and that each is unaware of this? Is this acceptable? Or is it anything but? Is he actually raging against what he sees as madness and stupidity? How can violence be an expression of love? How can there *be* "brawling love" and "loving hate"? Contradictions. The tragic irony then becomes that from this place of what might be called "noble naivety", he shows his love for Mercutio by avenging him through committing violence. And to be honest, I think to almost blame and dismiss him for all too easily becoming an instrument of the play's antagonistic force in that very instance is less than fair. He arguably had greater proximity to and familiarity with it, given that his life is less sheltered than Juliet's. Yet he can be seen as trying to avoid it or, yes, simply ignoring it. I think there is dramatic/tragic power in his move from what might be called a pacifist temprament ("lover not a fighter") to committing murder. He tried to pacify Tybalt when challenged (I have since read perhaps rather arrogantly) and urges Tybalt and Mercutio to remember the prince's warnings against public brawling.
So, yes, he is or certainly can be seen as a standard romantic lead, but I think there's quite bit more to him than that.
Also, while Juliet certainly seeks out the friar *for* a plan to save her marriage to Romeo, after a frightening expression of her own agency no less ("myself have power to die"), isn't it the friar who actually devises said plan? I think you said it was Juliet's plan. Did I mis-hear that?
Anyway, thank you for this video. It's wonderful seeing young people being passionate about literature. Hope you'll allow for the fact that I come from a place of performance possibilities, as I am a theatre practitioner. I passionately believe that a play cannot only be understood through reading and literary analysis. We have to go see, hear and feel them.
What a fun surprise to see you in my subscription box!! Welcome back!
As someone who didn't go to an English-speaking school and did not read Romeo and Juliet at that age, I found this video super interesting!! I feel like the framing and understanding of stories in the context of their genre is SO important to getting anything meaningful from reading them!
tysm!!!!!!
Wow this is amazing, I’ve always been so confused on why I have a love and hate relationship with Romeo and Juliet, this explains everything thank you !!!
Amazingly interesting video once again, thanks🦋
ty!!!
Romeo any Juliet was always my favorite Shakespeare play. I saw the opera last year at the Kennedy Center. Also, Romeo X Juliet is amazing.
omg missed your vids aaaaaaa
tyyyy hoping to be back semi-regularly now !!!
After graduating from High School, I’ve always thought R&J as a RomCom due to the juxtapositions in the play. You can argue that the tragic consequences is because of the romance. But to me, it’s more of a farce/comedy. The actions are tragic. And I respect your views on the play.
Shakespeare wrote in implied farce elements which can categorise the play as a RomCom. Historically, early RomComs were tragic or have tragic consequences & moments.
Also, it’s true, it’s not a love story. It’s a dark farce. I’ve ranted about this on threads when I called it a RomCom. Most of Romeo’s arc is childish due to him falling for Juliet after Rosaline. There’s a musical on Broadway called & Juliet which asks what if Juliet didn’t kill herself. Juliet, to me, is a smart character who doesn’t have to do the dumb thing. She’s also considered as a tragic character by scholars and teachers. There’s a lot of implied farce elements in the play. Look at the material over and over or watch different interpretations of the play. The tragedy is part of the play but not its genre. Shakespeare wrote the play to further explain why feuds are not worth it. And the lessons he teaches throughout the play becomes clearer if you look at what’s implied and what’s happening.
ive seen this interpretation a lot recently, it's interesting! I don't know that I subscribe to it, but I do agree with a lot of its assertions about the comedy of the play :) it's definitely possible to do a reading of the play that leans into the comedy more than the tragedy, which is a really interesting thing
@@nataliereads.mp4 completely get you as I look at it with a more modern lense
Romeo and his friends snuck into the Capulet party because his friends convinced him that Rosaline would not be the prettiest one there and that there were other girls that would catch his attention. He could not be obsessed with Juliet because he did not even know she existed so I was a bit confused when you said that he was obsessed with her. Did you mean that he was obsessed with Rosaline? And when did Romeo see Juliet wake up? Other than that, thank you for your analysis.
its been a while so idk exactly what you're referring to, but yeah, i prob meant Rosaline, or that he's obsessed with Juliet after meeting her. And Romeo seeing Juliet wake up was corrected in the pinned comment :) it's a change that often gets made in movies/the ballet, so I was mixed up, but I do like that change. Thanks for the comment!
It being just a love story is wrong. I think it everything you said and that. With it mainly being a tragedy. But, I’d be lying if as a straight man I said I didn’t cry in the Leo version when they first meet, the balcony, the anger when he kills Tybalt, Juliet wanting to die unless she has a way out of marrying Paris, Mercutio dies, when Juliet wakes up and Leo’s face is terrified for what he just did realizing she’s not dead, The way Claire cries...ya know what I cry youth the whole damn thing. For sad reasons and bc I am a hopeless romantic 😂
without putting sugar on it.
Romeo is a PDF file grooming a minor (Juliet) nothing else. its just written by a PDF and masked as something (romantic) people forget their age difference and how young Juliet really was.
She was almost 14 and he was 16 so what "grooming" are you talking about exactly?
@ uh. Did you read it at all? He was in his 20s in the story.
@@TheShaqii In Shakespeare's original story, Romeo is given the age of 16 years and Juliet is given the age of 13 years going on 14. Paris is in his 20's. But regardless, marriage for a girl of 13 or 14 was commonplace at the time. Though it's not stated explicitly, Romeo is implied to be a teenager just a few years older than Juliet.
@TheShaqii Provide the passage in the play because his age is alluded to but never actually stated, so enlighten us please.
@@andreaschmall5560 u clearly have never read the original and only know it from modern retelling. Good luck glorifying a story about a pdf