Am I the only one who finds Romeo and Juliet to be the stupidest excuse for a "love" story ever penned?

Question

Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking old Bill Shakespeare, but Juliet was a rebound chick (just moments before, Romeo was swearing he would never love again).

Their consuming love affair began with a 3 minute conversation, and there were, like, three more short meetings after that. Juliet was also apparently pretty easy (if not experienced), since after two short meetings, she had sex with him.

Now, since they were teenagers, I could see the immediacy of everything, and how they mistook lust for true love worth doing what they did, but how on God's green earth have generations of people come to think Romeo and Juliet were truly in love???

Oy.

First, you're right, AJ, I shouldn't have just labeled Juliet "easy." It actually is one of my own pet peeves when women are blamed for sexuality while men are praised for it. My only rebuttal is to say that the question in general was tongue in cheek, and so was the remark. But I officially take it back. :-)

To whoever asked me if "that helps me", it does not. They killed themselves for the selfish reason that they would have to continue life without the other. If Tybalt had been racing at Romeo with a sword, and she stepped in front of him at the last minute and took the murder intended for him, THAT is sacrifice, and is proof of love.

I want to be clear: I like the play. I don't know that I'd like it any better if they had a slow-building romance.

I just find it insane that for hundreds of years, people have held what they had up as true love. Enjoy the play, but for crying out loud, see their relationship for what it is.

Drummer boy: Well, happy birthday to you. Whatchu want, a cookie?

I'm not arguing whether it's a good play. I have not forgotten it's a play. I was an English major. I've taken a lot of English Lit classes.

Try thinking of it this way, if Juliet was your 13-year-old daughter, would you still see what she experienced as real love or as a childish obsession? If you heard the story on the Today show of a couple of teenagers who met, married, and committed suicide in the name of love, all within three days, would you call it love and think it's romantic?

My argument is not that it's not a great play, nor that Shakespeare is not a great writer. It is the response of people, and how it has warped ideas of what love is for generations. I'm amazed that the masses have upheld the whirlwind (in this case, we should actually say tornado) relationship that ended in suicide as an example of true love.

Answer 1

As it stands with most great pieces of literature, most people who comment on it frequently and say that it is a great love story have never actually read the play. If they have read it, they don't understand it. Romeo and Juliet is less about love and more about rash judgements, hormones controlling, anger controlling and family constraints and how all those things combined effect the lives of two teenagers. The play even says "Here's much to do with love but more with hate." Romeo and Juliet is an examination in acting before thinking. Romeo can be seen as the exact opposite of Shakespeare's Hamlet. Hamlet took too long thinking, and did not act quick enough. Romeo did the opposite. Juliet, on the other hand, did contemplate things from time to time but she was caught in the whirlwind known as Romeo.

Just my two cents, but I don't think it's a romantic play at all. I don't think it's a love story. I think it examines those things I have listed above.

Answer 2

You're forgetting a very important fact: Romeo & Juliet was originally written as a play. Thus, just as it is in movies, time is a consideration and elements must be speeded up more than they would normally occur in real life. By being too literal you are missing the greater point, and also the poetry of Shakespeare's language. Too, the conflict between the two families, and what Romeo and Juliet were both willing to sacrifice. This is a work of metaphor and allegory: not everyone can understand those things, as it entails more than merely reading words like a history book. People often do the same thing with the Bible: to read it as literal is to miss the more important, profound message at its core. You probaly should take a class in English Lit.

Answer 3

'Romeo and Juliet' wasn't written as a realistic love story. It followed in the tradition of medieval (and earlier) English, French, and Latin romance poetry. The basic story line comes directly from the story of Pyrimus and Thisbe in Ovid's 'Metamorphoses' (an epic poem, written in Latin around 8 CE). It also bares similarities to some of the Lais of Marie de France, who was a late 12th century Anglo-Norman noblewoman. It's not a love story in the sense that a modern romance novel or romantic comedy is. It's much closer to a medieval courtly love story.

Answer 4

It is interesting that you say Juliet was 'easy' but make no comment about Romeo being equally 'easy' - in fact more so as he appears to be initating events.

This judgement reeks of sexism and you would do well to be aware that female control labels such as this have been used by Patriarchy throughout the ages to keep women controlled, nervous insecure and unassertive and feeling inferior. Let's break out of that, shall we?

Good on Juliet I say, hope she enjoyed it, but really, was it worth Romeo getting so emotional over?

Answer 5

You may just be the only one!

It's a play, and drama, in someone's words (someone remind me), is just like life, but with the boring parts cut out. So of COURSE it's an abbreviated version of a real tragic romance. Would you want to read, or see, a play that took two or three days to perform, in real time?

Answer 6

People long for true love - and in this modern day, we don't see much story being told of someone would sacrifice his/her life for the sake of his/her love. Hence, Romeo and Juliet are true love.

Does that help you?

Answer 7

haha i know! i said the exact same thing in my English class and got told "Well if your so right, then explain to me why it is so many people would follow what isn't a good representation of true love" ( which is a ridiculous rebuttal, but then again this was coming from an idiot given a license to teach)
How could they possibly be in "love"! they know just about nothing about each other.
Personally i think Shakespeare got really lucky, because a lot of people decided to consider his writing amazing, but if i write something similar no one says squat.

Answer 8

You raise some good questions. I for one thought they were both dumber than a box of rocks for that 'fake suicide' stunt--her for doing it, him for getting so worked up over her 'death' that he killed himself, and then her again for 'reviving,' seeing that he's dead, and getting so worked up over -that- that she killed herself! Actually I think Ol' Willie's purpose for the play was told at the end, where the Prince rebuked both families for their squabbling, the moral being, "Let's just all get along." Yeeesh!!!

Answer 9

Probably.

Answer 10

Maybe.