I have always found the song “Gee, Officer Krupke!” to be one of the most fascinating and poignant songs in the entire musical. The fast pace of the song combined with the clownish antics of its singers make it appear light-hearted, almost like a carnival. In reality, however, the lyrics are describing some of the more horrifying aspects of growing up in an impoverished, urban setting. Although Riff and the gang adopt a very flippant attitude towards these domestic tribulations (to show how they can “snow” the officers and gain their pity – instead of jail time), this is probably more of an attempt at escapism: they are trying to laugh off their troubles instead of admitting that they actually cause real emotional/psychological pain. For example, the line “My parents treat me rough/ with all their marijuana/ they won’t give me a puff” must bother A-Rab more than he lets on in the song – after all, he gets upset when Officer Krupke later asks him “How’s your old man’s DTs?” (meaning delirium tremens, caused by drug withdrawal). And the line “They didn’t wanna have me/ but somehow I was had” could refer to Action’s parental problems, which Krupke later refers to when he says “How’s the action on your mother’s side of the street, Action?” (implying that Action’s mother is a “street walker”, or prostitute). Before the musical number even begins, the Jets conversationally comment on their own familial sufferings. Anybodys declares she will never get married because it’s “too noisy,” and even Baby John grows bold enough to insult her by ordering her to “go walk the streets like [her] sister.” Clearly, the lyrics in this song hit closer to home than the Jets would like to admit.
The song also grabbed my attention because of its cyclical nature. Riff gets shunted around from Krupke to a judge to a “head-shrinker” to a social worker – then ends up back where he started, as Krupke’s burden. He is correspondingly labeled “delinquent” then “psychologically disturbed” then a sufferer of a “social disease” – and finally “no damn good”, a delinquent once more. This cycle implies that the adult figures who are supposed to be responsible for Riff’s (or any member of the Jets’s) welfare are merely circling the solution. Instead of trying to understand these youths, they shove them along from person to person, each one avoiding the duty of finding and fixing the real reason for their “delinquency”. Even the lieutenant, the adult (other than their parents) most responsible for the well-being of the kids on his beat, refuses to understand them. He tells Doc, “Oh sure. Understand them. That’s what they keep telling me down at headquarters. You try keeping hoodlums in line, and see what it does to you.” After he leaves, Doc comments, “It wouldn’t give me a mouth like his.” And the lieutenant does have quite an offensive mouth – instead of even trying to understand what it must be like to grow up in such a totally fractured family environment, he brutally insults the Jets by calling them “stupid hooligans” and descendents of “tinhorn immigrant scum”. Essentially, he reinforces their feeling of inadequacy and isolation (which they already get from the fact that their parents are unwilling or unable to devote the time needed to raise them to be socially acceptable adults).
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
A Gang Fascism
During our last time in class we outlined the characteristic features of a gang from the musical Westside Story. It really stuck out to me that every single observation that we wrote on the board gravitated towards a single concept – fascism – a term I don’t easily throw around. Fascism is an ideology progressed and developed by the famous prime minister of Italy, Benito Mussolini, in the 1930s before he would be shot and hung from meat hooks in the middle of a town square in the last years of WWII. Fascism boasts a wholly male-dominated leadership and it is interesting to note that it is the opposite of socialism. Women are secondary class citizens in fascism; they may be respected but are painted as essentially weaker opposed to the masculine authority and power that rules all. The Jets do not allow for women to join their ranks or interfere with their decisions - like the character Anybody - which is what we called a “homosocial” type of organization. Fascism emphasizes race and nation above everything else, something clear in the fact that the Jets and Sharks are ethnically opposed gangs. What is most interesting is that fascism denies long spans of peace and that constant destruction and warfare is what gives society a sense of renewal and regenerates progress. There must be constant conflict. Loyalty to the clan and leader is essential, since there is always a leader, a hero of the state, who is supposed to embody the spirit and head the ideal community. The similarities can go on and on but the fact remains that they are two gangs who were fighting for one street when a whole city sprawled behind them.
Lyons, Matthew N. “What is Fascism? Some General Ideological Features.” 1995. http://www.publiceye.org/eyes/whatfasc.html.
Halsall, Paul. “Modern History Sourcebook:
Benito Mussolini: What is Fascism, 1932.” 1997. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.html.
Lyons, Matthew N. “What is Fascism? Some General Ideological Features.” 1995. http://www.publiceye.org/eyes/whatfasc.html.
Halsall, Paul. “Modern History Sourcebook:
Benito Mussolini: What is Fascism, 1932.” 1997. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.html.
Special treatment and the fraternity that is America
The scene in West Side story when the cop kicks the Puerto Rican gang out of the candy shop and then tells the white gang he’s for them reminded me of how different groups of people who do the same things are sometimes seen in a different light.
The scene I’m referring to is after the dance when the jets have a war council in the candy shop to discuss their rumble. The cop comes in and makes the sharks (who are all supposed to be first generation Puerto Rican immigrants) leave. One of the sharks makes a comment to the cop about America being a free country. The cop basically dismisses the claim and makes them leave anyway even though neither gang was breaking any laws. On the way out the sharks whistle “My Country ‘tis of thee,” or a similar patriotic tune. Then the cop talks to the jets (all supposed to be second generation European immigrants) and tells them he’s for them.
This reminded me of a presentation someone did in another class I have. He was talking about Hurricane Katrina and how one news story reported white people “gathering supplies” and another story reported black people “looting.” Just like in West Side story, two different groups of people were doing the same thing but it’s looked at differently because of who they are.
I also thought this was a commentary on American feelings toward immigrant groups. It’s almost as if becoming an American is like joining a frat. In America, each time there is a new group of immigrants they get hazed until another new group comes in to take their spot. Irish Catholics were discriminated against and stereotyped when they were immigrating in large numbers before 1900. They were only offered low paying jobs that nobody wanted to do. In a frat, each new pledge class must do the jobs no one else wants to do, such as pick up drunk brothers from the bars. The Irish pledge class was followed by the Italian pledge class and eventually the Puerto Rican. There were other groups too, but I just picked these three as an example.
The jets and the sharks are a perfect example of this system of seniority. The jets were born in America so they are no longer pledges. They pick on the new pledges (in this case the Puerto Ricans) and enjoy the benefits of being accepted in the club, such as cops siding with them. This tradition of picking on the new guy is continually passed down to each new American pledge class.
The scene I’m referring to is after the dance when the jets have a war council in the candy shop to discuss their rumble. The cop comes in and makes the sharks (who are all supposed to be first generation Puerto Rican immigrants) leave. One of the sharks makes a comment to the cop about America being a free country. The cop basically dismisses the claim and makes them leave anyway even though neither gang was breaking any laws. On the way out the sharks whistle “My Country ‘tis of thee,” or a similar patriotic tune. Then the cop talks to the jets (all supposed to be second generation European immigrants) and tells them he’s for them.
This reminded me of a presentation someone did in another class I have. He was talking about Hurricane Katrina and how one news story reported white people “gathering supplies” and another story reported black people “looting.” Just like in West Side story, two different groups of people were doing the same thing but it’s looked at differently because of who they are.
I also thought this was a commentary on American feelings toward immigrant groups. It’s almost as if becoming an American is like joining a frat. In America, each time there is a new group of immigrants they get hazed until another new group comes in to take their spot. Irish Catholics were discriminated against and stereotyped when they were immigrating in large numbers before 1900. They were only offered low paying jobs that nobody wanted to do. In a frat, each new pledge class must do the jobs no one else wants to do, such as pick up drunk brothers from the bars. The Irish pledge class was followed by the Italian pledge class and eventually the Puerto Rican. There were other groups too, but I just picked these three as an example.
The jets and the sharks are a perfect example of this system of seniority. The jets were born in America so they are no longer pledges. They pick on the new pledges (in this case the Puerto Ricans) and enjoy the benefits of being accepted in the club, such as cops siding with them. This tradition of picking on the new guy is continually passed down to each new American pledge class.
The Modern Machine vs. The Ancient Predator
West Side Story views the racial divide between Americans and Puerto Ricans during the late 1950's/ early 1960's through an ethnocentric lens. "Ethnocentrism" is the belief that other cultures or people value themselves in regards to how they compare to other cultures or people. Consequently, to be "ethnocentric" is to critique other cultures or people in regards to your own culture. The title of the film, itself, is an example of this. The "West," as we refer to it in relation to the rest of the world, is the United States. Therefor, a West Side Story is an "American" story. Suggesting that it is a tale for Americans to connect to and relate with. Consequently, this sets up a basis for the film as favoring Americans over Puerto Ricans.
This favoritism of American culture is further played-out in the two gangs' titles, "Sharks" and "Jets." A "shark" is typically viewed as an invader, a dangerous predator that poses a threat to it's prey. "Sharks" are blood-thirsty animals that have been around for hundreds (even thousands) of years that, when mentioned, bring to mind images of thrashing through ocean waters, disturbing the peace. A "jet," on the other hand, is viewed as being fast and sleek. "Jets" are a means for speedy transportation, and often bring to mind ideas of the military, particularly the air force - fighting to protect the freedoms of American citizens. "Jets" are a relatively modern invention capable of cutting through the air like a knife. Therefore, in labeling the Puerto Ricans as the "sharks" and the Americans as the "jets," the former are cast as ancient predators, and the Americans are cast as the modern fighters against such predators. Both groups are powerful; However, the more modern, mechanical team always wins. Thus, America has the power and the knowledge to invent a machine (a "jet") that can destroy a water-bound animal in seconds, and humans view themselves and their capabilities as far more forceful and powerful than those of animals.
This idea of machine versus animal bleeds into the hierarchical idea of air-bound travel versus water-bound travel. Traveling by air is a modern invention. It takes skilled, intelligent people to fly planes. More particularly, it takes a person of some-what prestige to fly a "jet" say, for the United States air force. Conversely, traveling by sea is something that has been done since even before America was discovered. Boats are not regarded as a particularly "modern" invention, and someone who drives a boat isn't necessarily regarded as being particularly prestigious (I have been canoeing since I was in day camp at age six). Furthermore, "jets" fly in the air, "sharks" swim in the sea (obviously) but this works as a metaphor for where Puerto Ricans stand (in regards to West Side Story, of course) in relation to Americans - below them. Consequently, by casting the Puerto Ricans as the "sharks" and limiting them to water-bound travel, the notion that they are less-advanced, prestigious, and capable then Americans is enhanced. It connotes the idea that they had to utilize their "ancient" mode of transportation to come to America where more modern transportation exists.
As a final thought, it could be assumed that most people don't particularly "like" "sharks." They are an animal you hope not to encounter on your next snorkeling expedition. Conversely, "jets" are typically viewed as "cool." At least I know I would like to ride in one if I got the chance. Therefor, this further emphasizes the idea that the American way is something to strive towards, and the Puerto Rican way is something to be avoided.
Can love like theirs exist?
Tony says “somewhere,” but Maria says “someday.” In Westside Story’s musical number, “Somewhere,” Tony and Maria sing to each other about the possibility of their relationship surviving in the future. Knowing that the story is based on Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, I first took the words in this song to mean that the “time and place for [Tony and Maria]” exists only in the afterlife, and that the two characters must die in order to live together in “peace and quiet and open air.” I considered the characters’ idea of Heaven to be a place “where nothing can get to [them].” All of these images seem to point towards afterlife. However, knowing the movie’s cultural commentary, the idea behind the song “Somewhere” could have a much different meaning.
Because this movie was released in 1961, during the Civil Rights Movement, a strong emphasis on race exists within the context of Westside Story. Tony and Maria are not just two teenagers from feuding families. Rather, they are two teenagers from feuding races. The second-generation European descendents despise the first-generation Puerto Rican immigrants, and Tony and Maria fall in love despite the heated controversy. In this sense, the song “Somewhere” argues that Tony and Maria each represent their culture, and after the Civil Rights Movement, when racism begins to subside, “there’s a place for” interracial couples like Tony and Maria. Interestingly, Maria does not sing about the place (Heaven) for the couple, but she sings that “there’s a time for [them], someday a time for [them].” This change in direction possibly refers to the future of Civil Rights in the United States. Once racism and segregation diminish, interracial couples will be able to exist without the fear of violence.
In class, we discussed the difference between Romeo and Juliet and Westside Story. Someone brought our attention to the fact that Tony and Maria must overcome the differences of an issue much larger than two different last names. They must overcome the racial violence and segregation of the time period in order for their relationship to survive. In the end of the movie, Tony dies, causing an abrupt end to their relationship. However, the cultural idea of Civil Rights leads people in the United States to “find a new way of living” and come to accept love between men and women of different races.
Because this movie was released in 1961, during the Civil Rights Movement, a strong emphasis on race exists within the context of Westside Story. Tony and Maria are not just two teenagers from feuding families. Rather, they are two teenagers from feuding races. The second-generation European descendents despise the first-generation Puerto Rican immigrants, and Tony and Maria fall in love despite the heated controversy. In this sense, the song “Somewhere” argues that Tony and Maria each represent their culture, and after the Civil Rights Movement, when racism begins to subside, “there’s a place for” interracial couples like Tony and Maria. Interestingly, Maria does not sing about the place (Heaven) for the couple, but she sings that “there’s a time for [them], someday a time for [them].” This change in direction possibly refers to the future of Civil Rights in the United States. Once racism and segregation diminish, interracial couples will be able to exist without the fear of violence.
In class, we discussed the difference between Romeo and Juliet and Westside Story. Someone brought our attention to the fact that Tony and Maria must overcome the differences of an issue much larger than two different last names. They must overcome the racial violence and segregation of the time period in order for their relationship to survive. In the end of the movie, Tony dies, causing an abrupt end to their relationship. However, the cultural idea of Civil Rights leads people in the United States to “find a new way of living” and come to accept love between men and women of different races.
What Sets and Costumes say about the West Side
West Side Story doesn’t do a very good job of describing race, or the aspects that were important to racial differences at that time. This statement might seem weird, because, naturally, the musical is about the tension between two gangs from two very different groups of people both defined by their race. While lyrics and dialogue within the musical describe the financial or societal situations of both gangs and their families, the costuming and set seems to contradict these claims. For example, the Puerto Ricans in their song “America” describe their financial situation as being quite poor because Americans have a problem hiring Puerto Ricans when filling the positions at good jobs. Whether this idea is true or not, the set of the two stores exhibited in the film contradict this idea that Puerto Ricans can’t find a good job. The two stores in West Side Story are the dress shop and the doctor’s pharmacy/soda shop. While the doctor’s pharmacy is more or less dark, empty, and never lighted properly, the dress shop is very bright and full of fabrics or premade dresses to sell. The costumes worn by each of the gang members seems to follow the same pattern as the stores. The wardrobe of the Jets is very pale, worn, and sometimes dirty, while the sharks wear clothes that are very rich in color. This gives the idea that the Puerto Ricans can afford better clothes. Even the vestments hanging on clotheslines in the different neighborhoods are either pastel or vibrant depending on whose territory is being shown.
I have another comment about the stores shown in West Side Story, well actually, not the set, but the people in these stores. We only ever see one, possibly two men working the entire film. These characters are the doctor and of course Tony. Interestingly the people working in the dress shop are all female. No surprise there, women usually did all the tailoring at that time. But even more interesting is the number of women working in the dress shop. Maria sings her ditty about being pretty to three other girls who have just finished their projects. Anita is also present at the shop. This makes five Puerto Rican women who work during the course of this story. None of the Puerto Rican men are seen working. At the same time, none of the women from the Jet side are seen working. I might even argue that Tony and the Doctor cannot be considered part of the Jet family. Tony may have been the leader of the Jets at one time; he has stepped out from that position to be with Maria. The Doctor is definitely the most neutral character in the film who only wants peace. Whatever the costuming and set of West Side Story is trying to argue about life as a first generation immigrant from Puerto Rico or a second generation immigrant from Poland, it certainly doesn’t seem to match up with the characters’ own arguments about life as one of these races.
I have another comment about the stores shown in West Side Story, well actually, not the set, but the people in these stores. We only ever see one, possibly two men working the entire film. These characters are the doctor and of course Tony. Interestingly the people working in the dress shop are all female. No surprise there, women usually did all the tailoring at that time. But even more interesting is the number of women working in the dress shop. Maria sings her ditty about being pretty to three other girls who have just finished their projects. Anita is also present at the shop. This makes five Puerto Rican women who work during the course of this story. None of the Puerto Rican men are seen working. At the same time, none of the women from the Jet side are seen working. I might even argue that Tony and the Doctor cannot be considered part of the Jet family. Tony may have been the leader of the Jets at one time; he has stepped out from that position to be with Maria. The Doctor is definitely the most neutral character in the film who only wants peace. Whatever the costuming and set of West Side Story is trying to argue about life as a first generation immigrant from Puerto Rico or a second generation immigrant from Poland, it certainly doesn’t seem to match up with the characters’ own arguments about life as one of these races.
balcony vs fire escape
One of the biggest things that stood out to me in West Side Story was the rendition of the balcony scene. I thought the best part about it was that it was so obviously the modern equivalent of the balcony scene; it simply wouldn’t have worked if no one got the connection. So having it on the fire escape was a great choice; the location of Maria being suspended above Tony, her parents being close enough to call out to her, Tony having to run off afterwards. It seems obvious to have all of these characteristics to the scene but their absence would have been blaringly obvious. As such, it was the physical location, the actual scenery, that got my attention.
Of all the time spent on the fire escape scene, it was the classes’ reaction to Tony’s proposal of love that was most the interesting part. In reading Romeo and Juliet it was easy to forget that it had been a matter of hours between when the two met and when they were professing their love. While watching the movie it was easier to see how little time had passed between when Maria and Tony met. The general reaction from people, including myself, was to snicker when the ‘I love you’s’ were exchanged. It seemed so premature that it really stuck out. I think the reason it was so obvious in the movie was the ‘plain English.’ Without the flowery words it was easier to see how quickly the courtship progressed. Plus, in the original Shakespearian, it’s easier to put aside modern opinions on dating and simply go where the story takes us. But in the modern version, that cushion of the past is gone and everything that happens is judged by current standards.
Of all the time spent on the fire escape scene, it was the classes’ reaction to Tony’s proposal of love that was most the interesting part. In reading Romeo and Juliet it was easy to forget that it had been a matter of hours between when the two met and when they were professing their love. While watching the movie it was easier to see how little time had passed between when Maria and Tony met. The general reaction from people, including myself, was to snicker when the ‘I love you’s’ were exchanged. It seemed so premature that it really stuck out. I think the reason it was so obvious in the movie was the ‘plain English.’ Without the flowery words it was easier to see how quickly the courtship progressed. Plus, in the original Shakespearian, it’s easier to put aside modern opinions on dating and simply go where the story takes us. But in the modern version, that cushion of the past is gone and everything that happens is judged by current standards.
Women in West Side Story and an Unlikely Gang Fight
In West Side Story, it was interesting to see group violence, without showing any actual violence. Even though the story is a more modern portrayal of Romeo and Juliet, I believe they differ in many ways. My favorite way that West Side Story differs is the role that women play within the film. During the time this play and film were made, women were allowed to vote, but were still struggling (and still are) to gain equality. Women are viewed more as objects and possessions in this world of rival gang dancers, who intimidate others with what would be considered as flowery language by today’s standards. However, the one exception to this rule is Anita. Although she is Bernardo’s woman and he has a sense of power over her, she still seems independent and free-spirited. This character is not afraid to explore and display her sexual drive, but she does this in a way that does not seem forward or trashy. On the other hand is Maria. Maria does whatever Bernardo tells her to, until she falls in love with Tony. When she falls in love, her loyalty from her brother shifts and she is officially Tony’s possession. Even after Tony kills her brother, she still loves him, which is passive and shows an unrealistic level of love. I don’t care how much a guy claims to love me, if he killed a family member, especially the most protective member, there would sure as hell not be a romantic relationship that would sprout out of the death. Women in this feature seem to be held back, and not shown to their full potential, even though they probably wouldn’t think they had potential because they have been told what to do for their whole lives.
Another aspect about West Side Story that I noticed was that even during this time, I doubt the gangs in New York were singing, dancing and hanging out at the soda stand. I know that it is a musical and these are key aspects of that, but it just seems unbelievable to me. I would really just love to see what happens when the Jets meet the Bloods or Crips. What would they think of an all-Caucasian gang that dances, sings and hangs out at a playground?
West Side Story
Although I had already seen West Side Story multiple times, this viewing was different. Instead of watching it like any other movie, (I don't usually pay close attention to the cultural commentaries, character roles, etc.) I focused closely on the actors and actresses, cultural commentary and masculinity/femininity.
The first thing I noticed was the cast. I was unsure at first, but after discussing the film in class I found out every actor/actress in the movie was white, except for one (Anita's character). This would usually seem weird to me in other movies, but it makes sense because West Side Story was produced in the 1960s, when most actors and actresses were white, and few Puerto Ricans were even allowed to have small roles in films. The treatment of the Puerto Ricans in the film also made a lot of sense, considering it was set during a time when equality was not the number one priority to individuals.
The next thing that struck me as weird and even a bit ridiculous was the fact that both "gangs" are trying to represent masculinity. The Jets think they are the best, most manly gang on the streets and so do the Sharks, but when it actually comes to fighting, very few to none of the members are willing to fight. The two gangs are supposedly violent and disastrous, but there is very little physical contact throughout the entire movie. The most prominent action we see is dancing, which is the opposite of manly (in their society and still in our society today, although now dancing is more accepted for men). It is extremely ironic that both groups try to be as masculine as possible while most scenes involve ballet and no physical contact.
When the gangs finally do get together and fight, only one from each gang is chosen to actually fight. It ends with a death from the Jets and a death from the Sharks. Tony is one of the only people to actually kill someone, which is also ironic because he's supposed to be a more feminine character. Tony could possibly be trying to be more masculine by killing, but more likely it was just an accident, because he didn't really mean to kill Maria's brother.
Complete with fantastic choreography
What I found to be most interesting about the West Side Story was the way it reflected what was going on in the United States at that point in history, the movements of the 60s that tend to be overshadowed by the Civil Rights movement and Rock and Roll. One of these movements that I found most interesting is its presentation of the female sexual revolution that took place in the 1960s.
The female sexual revolution is reflected in the differences in the two main female characters: Maria and Anita. Throughout the film Maria is innocent and pure, all of which is symbolized by her frequently wearing white. Anita, on the other hand, tends to act more powerful and is of a rawer, more sexual nature. She also tends to dress in brighter colors, like purple and red. One scene in specific exemplifies these differences. Just before “the rumble”, in the quintet version of the song “Tonight”. Anita’s “verse” talks about how she and Bernardo are going to “have [their] private little mix/Tonight”. She does not care if Bernardo “walk[s] in hot and tired”, “Anita’s gonna get her kicks/Tonight”. Anita is empowered and in touch with her sexuality. This is in contrast with Maria, whom is singing about being reunited with Tony. She wants “the minutes seem[ing] like hours”. Her view is a bit more innocent.
These moments are brief and obviously are not the main focus of the film. But the fact that they are slipped in there shows that the film makers obviously understand their significance. Also, the fact that there are similar moments representing other movements of the time is what makes this film so great to me. The 60s were such a monumental decade in our history – so much changed! And this film totally shows and expresses and celebrates all of that while still telling an engaging story… complete with fantastic choreography.
The female sexual revolution is reflected in the differences in the two main female characters: Maria and Anita. Throughout the film Maria is innocent and pure, all of which is symbolized by her frequently wearing white. Anita, on the other hand, tends to act more powerful and is of a rawer, more sexual nature. She also tends to dress in brighter colors, like purple and red. One scene in specific exemplifies these differences. Just before “the rumble”, in the quintet version of the song “Tonight”. Anita’s “verse” talks about how she and Bernardo are going to “have [their] private little mix/Tonight”. She does not care if Bernardo “walk[s] in hot and tired”, “Anita’s gonna get her kicks/Tonight”. Anita is empowered and in touch with her sexuality. This is in contrast with Maria, whom is singing about being reunited with Tony. She wants “the minutes seem[ing] like hours”. Her view is a bit more innocent.
These moments are brief and obviously are not the main focus of the film. But the fact that they are slipped in there shows that the film makers obviously understand their significance. Also, the fact that there are similar moments representing other movements of the time is what makes this film so great to me. The 60s were such a monumental decade in our history – so much changed! And this film totally shows and expresses and celebrates all of that while still telling an engaging story… complete with fantastic choreography.
A Very Dark Film
I think this movie is absolutely incredible. Some may think the "cheesy" love story and the "dancing fights" give the film a very corny feeling, but let's examine this a little closer. At it's core, this story is incredibly dark. In fact it is so dark, that if you were to take out some of the cheesy love lines or the light hearted dance moves, it would be a really screwed up tale.
These two gangs are bent on hatred toward one another because of their race. Near the beginning, before the Sharks have even come to form and Bernardo is the only Puerto Rico in Manhattan, the Jets harass him. Not because he is trying to steal their turf with his new gang, but because he's Puerto Rican. He's no threat at all. In fact, Bernardo probably formed the Sharks out of fear of being jumped by a racist white gang. Maybe if they weren't so racist this all would have been avoided, but that's beside the point. Bottom line is, unlike the Montagues and the Capulets, the feud in West Side Story has not been going on for generations: it just started. These people don't have a reason to hate each other, they aren't families at war. They are simply of different race, which I guess is enough to rumble.
Even darker at it's core is this notion: Maria sleeps with her brother's murderer an hour after he is slain. Bernardo is a much more effective character than Tybalt in the sense that he is more developed and he is Maria's brother as opposed to being a cousin. Bernardo acted as Maria's protector, her guardian. You could tell he cared for her dearly. I found it very disturbing that Maria would sleep with his killer, a man whom she had just met one day prior, only an hour after the murder. And she knows that Tony killed him. It's bizarre. If you think about just that idea, then this film deals with some extremely dark issues.
These two gangs are bent on hatred toward one another because of their race. Near the beginning, before the Sharks have even come to form and Bernardo is the only Puerto Rico in Manhattan, the Jets harass him. Not because he is trying to steal their turf with his new gang, but because he's Puerto Rican. He's no threat at all. In fact, Bernardo probably formed the Sharks out of fear of being jumped by a racist white gang. Maybe if they weren't so racist this all would have been avoided, but that's beside the point. Bottom line is, unlike the Montagues and the Capulets, the feud in West Side Story has not been going on for generations: it just started. These people don't have a reason to hate each other, they aren't families at war. They are simply of different race, which I guess is enough to rumble.
Even darker at it's core is this notion: Maria sleeps with her brother's murderer an hour after he is slain. Bernardo is a much more effective character than Tybalt in the sense that he is more developed and he is Maria's brother as opposed to being a cousin. Bernardo acted as Maria's protector, her guardian. You could tell he cared for her dearly. I found it very disturbing that Maria would sleep with his killer, a man whom she had just met one day prior, only an hour after the murder. And she knows that Tony killed him. It's bizarre. If you think about just that idea, then this film deals with some extremely dark issues.
Commentary on Racial Injustice in "West Side Story"
“West Side Story” is a 1961 modern rendition of Romeo and Juliet. The modern spin allows for the movie to explore many social problems that were not present when Shakespeare wrote his famous play. “West Side Story” is set up as a battle between races instead of a battle against related members of a family. The Sharks are representative of 1st generation Puerto Rican Americans and the Jets are representative of the 2nd generation American who are native born. The Jets see the Sharks as invaders of their territory. They are unwilling to allow shared space between the two groups.
In the song “When You’re a Jet” the Jets say, “every Puerto Rican is a lousy chicken.” This shows and emphasizes that the opinion of the “white” jets when it comes to people of color. The song is making social commentary on the racial injustice of the time. The Jets represent white America and its oppressive nature towards those of color. The Puerto Rican’s (Sharks) are representative of the struggle of all colored Americans to assimilate into the country’s culture. The jets don’t want the sharks to have any part of their territory and the certainly to not want to share any of their wealth with them. This is making a statement about how 2nd generation Americans treated people of color in the 1960’s.
Although slavery has been abolished for some time before the filming of this movie, white America is still unwilling to allow Puerto Rican’s and many other races to assimilate in the country and obtain their own wealth. This is highlighted in the song “America” where the Puerto Rican men describe their struggle to become equal citizens. They say, “Twelve in a room in America” and “One look at us and they charge us twice”. This is the Puerto Rican men describing to the women that although they think it is better in America they are really being treated like second class citizens in comparison to the whites in America.
In these ways “West Side Story” is able to commentate in a different way than Shakespeare does in Romeo and Juliet. Shakespeare is commentating on the injustice of love and “West Side Story” commentates on love as well as racial injustice in American culture.
The Group Mentality in West Side Story
One theme that West Side Story touches on that Romeo and Juliet didn't, is the group mentality. In Romeo and Juliet the two lovers are pressured by families to be apart. In the musical its the peers who corrupt and influence Tony and Maria.
This is most likely part of the modern twist that was given to the story of Romeo and Juliet. I would find it hard to believe if I was watching a modern piece in which two actual families had a feud that strong. While we may not like our neighbors, there aren't people running around New York killing each other because they are the gardeners for different families.
Even though I believe the group mentality was the result of a modern twist, it still is a theme and there is still a statement. The argument on the group mentality can be seen as "don't join a gang" or "don't give in to peer pressure". Both of these could be plausible arguments for a Broadway musical turned motion picture.
This is most likely part of the modern twist that was given to the story of Romeo and Juliet. I would find it hard to believe if I was watching a modern piece in which two actual families had a feud that strong. While we may not like our neighbors, there aren't people running around New York killing each other because they are the gardeners for different families.
Even though I believe the group mentality was the result of a modern twist, it still is a theme and there is still a statement. The argument on the group mentality can be seen as "don't join a gang" or "don't give in to peer pressure". Both of these could be plausible arguments for a Broadway musical turned motion picture.
A Violent Dance
So after watching "West Side Story," I can see now how violent dancing really can be. I mean, wow, that was some hardcore dancing that took place. But in all seriousness, I like how this movie uses dancing and singing to convey violence without it actually being all that violent; all the fight scenes are just big choreographed dance numbers. I think believe that this is some sort of social commentary on our society. On the one hand you have violent acts like fighting or "rumbling" and then on the other you have dancing which I doubt people associate with violence all that much. Yet, the non-violent act of dancing is used to represent the violent acts that are in this film. I think is it just very ironic that these two opposite sides of the social spectrum come together and are used to represent each other. That's the one thing that really stood out to me. Well, also that fact that most of the people that played Peutro Ricans were really white people. I thought that was an interesting fact that kind of make the film seem alot more cheesier to me, which is amazing since I didn't think this film could get any cheesier.
Dissonance in Music and Plot
I don't know what other people thought of the music in West Side Story, but I have always thought Leonard Bernstein was a musical genius (he's the guy that wrote the music, but not the lyrics). For one thing, he once played a piano concert on no practice, no sleep, and a night of drinking (he was a replacement, so he wasn't planning on playing a concert the next day), and he played flawlessly. But more importantly, he wrote the music of West Side Story so that it fit the story in an interesting way: he used what's called a tritone. They're sprinkled throughout the score, but the most obvious one is when in the song "Maria." I don't know how much people know about music, but it uses the first note (do), the fourth note (fa), and the fifth note (sol) of a key (so CFG in the key of C). I don't know how much sense that made to anyone, but the point of this is that it causes a dissonant sound. Sort of like the dissonance between the two gangs.
Romeo and Juliet to Westside Story
Romeo and Juliet to Westside Story
I have seen Westside story before, but had forgotten how corny the movie truly is. However, I now believe the movie parallels the book more closely than I would have ever thought. The music and dancing seem over the top, but so was the entire feud between the Capulets and Montagues. Something that really stuck out to me was the concept of “snapping.” At the beginning of the movie the Jets were walking all around their area “snapping” to prove their strength and confidence. When we are first introduces to the sharks the “snapping” occurs once again. “Snapping” plays as a representation of hatred between the two families in Romeo and Juliet. The ending of the movie ends in silence- neither group walk away snapping because they have realized that their hatred was worthless and only lead to the deaths of their loved ones.
The interaction between Romeo and Juliet and Maria and Tony were equally as obsessive. When reading Romeo and Juliet I imagine this intense love story and without thinking logically it seems it is happening over a long period of time due to its’ romantic and eloquent writing. The play, in truth, takes place in 2 days just as the movies shows too. The movie makes us see how ridiculous their love is. Westside story’s Tybalt is Maria’s brother. Although Tony kills her brother she does not take the time to mourn because she is so concerned with being with Tony for the rest of her life.
Something else I found very cool in the movie that represents the “Capulet” and “Montague” families was the differentiation in color. When Maria and Tony are kissing in Maria’s bedroom they are centered in front of a door that is checkered both blue and red. It is at this time that we see the two families are separate but it is alludes to someday the families coming together.
Although Maria does not die as Juliet does the same feeling at the end is evoked. Her facial expression of defeat and grief help both families realize this feud needs to end just as the Capulets and Montagues do over their dead children’s bodies.
I have seen Westside story before, but had forgotten how corny the movie truly is. However, I now believe the movie parallels the book more closely than I would have ever thought. The music and dancing seem over the top, but so was the entire feud between the Capulets and Montagues. Something that really stuck out to me was the concept of “snapping.” At the beginning of the movie the Jets were walking all around their area “snapping” to prove their strength and confidence. When we are first introduces to the sharks the “snapping” occurs once again. “Snapping” plays as a representation of hatred between the two families in Romeo and Juliet. The ending of the movie ends in silence- neither group walk away snapping because they have realized that their hatred was worthless and only lead to the deaths of their loved ones.
The interaction between Romeo and Juliet and Maria and Tony were equally as obsessive. When reading Romeo and Juliet I imagine this intense love story and without thinking logically it seems it is happening over a long period of time due to its’ romantic and eloquent writing. The play, in truth, takes place in 2 days just as the movies shows too. The movie makes us see how ridiculous their love is. Westside story’s Tybalt is Maria’s brother. Although Tony kills her brother she does not take the time to mourn because she is so concerned with being with Tony for the rest of her life.
Something else I found very cool in the movie that represents the “Capulet” and “Montague” families was the differentiation in color. When Maria and Tony are kissing in Maria’s bedroom they are centered in front of a door that is checkered both blue and red. It is at this time that we see the two families are separate but it is alludes to someday the families coming together.
Although Maria does not die as Juliet does the same feeling at the end is evoked. Her facial expression of defeat and grief help both families realize this feud needs to end just as the Capulets and Montagues do over their dead children’s bodies.
The Strength of Love
In West Side Story, a modern interpretation of Romeo and Juliet, most of the story line stays the same between the two but some aspects are changed. The most noticeable of which, for me at least, was the fact that Maria does not die at the end of the film, contrary to both Romeo and Juliet dying in the end of the story. This culminated scene begins very powerfully with Tony running through the streets looking and yelling for Chino, Maria's supposed killer, telling him to find him and kill him as well. Right as Maria finds Tony, Chino comes out of the dark and shoots Tony to the ground. When both Romeo and Juliet died at the end of their story, I felt it conveyed a stronger set of emotions behind their love as well showed the two feuding families their own faults. With only Tony dying whilst Maria stays alive, I feel as though this movie did not end in the same dramatic and moving fashion. While, to the directors credit, Maria does have an emotional speech about the absurdity of the two rival gangs fighting, she only toys with the idea of suicide by asking if there is another bullet left in the gun for her. The whole reason both Romeo and Juliet die in the story, besides the misinformation that was given, is for their love for one another. Upon seeing Romeo dead, Juliet kills herself because she knows that she cannot live without her true love and, therefore, has no reason left to be alive. This scene in the play conveys the strength of their love for each other. Yet, in the movie, because Maria does not kill herself, the audience does not receive the same idea of their love for each other. While the movie is a moving love story, it is simply not on the same level impassioned love as the original because of the lack of devotion between Maria and Tony.
Although the final scene in the movie ultimately showed a lesser amount of love between Maria and Tony as compared to Romeo and Juliet, there were some interesting aspects earlier in the film which conveyed their connection aptly. During the dance scene, when Maria and Tony first see each other, the rest of the screen is blurred while the camera only focuses on the two characters. This cinematic technique shows their individuality or separation from the two fighting gangs. This technique is later used again when the two lovers are talking outside of Maria's apartment, further displaying their separation from the gangs and, possibly, the world. In those two moments, the technique showing their separation implies that their love knows no boundaries, whether they be racial or even worldly. This separation is shown when both Maria and Tony disregard their ties with the two rival street gangs and focus only on their love. In the final scene, although Maria does not take her own life after Tony is killed, she gives him one last kiss and it is safe to say that her love for him remains. The separation shown earlier is further emphasized during this scene because the audience can surmise that Maria's love for Tony will remain even after his death, implying that their separation transcends worldly constraints, even death. Therefore, while the story itself is not quite as powerful due to the lack of Maria's death at the end, the strength of their love is still shown by a clever filming technique, demonstrating that their love surpasses both racial and worldly boundaries.
A Modern Revision
West Side Story is a hit musical of the 1960’s that puts an interesting twist on Shakespeare’s ever-famous Romeo and Juliet. The musical still focuses on some of the same themes, but shines a modern light on others. It makes a large statement on racial issues in the U.S., but also remains loyal to Shakespeare’s original idea of questioning gender roles.
The fact that West Side Story is centered around two battling racial groups (European, white immigrants and Puerto Ricans) changes the plot of Romeo and Juliet significantly. The film is no longer focusing on the name that an individual possesses, but rather the color of his skin. At a time in America when this was a prominent issue, the film/musical would certainly have an impact on those who encountered it. Officer Krupke, who represents the Prince of Romeo and Juliet, is clearly partial to the Jets, because they are white. Even in the last scene of the film, the only individual arrested is Puerto Rican. West Side Story is perhaps pointing to the fact that America’s law was racially partial to whites. Law makers and law enforcers alike were unjust towards people of different ethnicities, and West Side Story clearly pays attention to this flaw in American society during the 1960’s.
The question of gender roles is also brought to the forefront of West Side Story. The opening scenes of the film reveal very “tough” boys with very graceful movements. The choreography seems almost balletic. The hateful deeds of which they are participating in are contrasted with soft dance steps. Though they are supposed to be rough and hateful men, their movement suggests the grace of a woman. The characters of Anybody and Baby John also play a significant role in stepping outside gender boundaries. Anybody is constantly striving to gain acceptance in the Jets, while Baby John is accepted, but seems to be less of a man than Anybody. Throughout the movie, Anybody reveals bravery, sensibility, and fearlessness, but Baby John is always doubting, fearful, and extremely sensitive. However, because he is a boy, he is expected to be a member of the Jets and because Anybody is a girl, she is not allowed to be member. When Anybody does finally gain acceptance, she is referred to as “buddy boy”. The film ultimately brings light to the fact that men are not always tough and emotionless, and women are not always senseless and sensitive, much in the same way the Romeo and Juliet brings light to these same issues. Overall, West Side Story is an ingenious revision of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet that highlights new issues and problems that were prominently evident in the 1960’s, including those of race and gender roles.
The fact that West Side Story is centered around two battling racial groups (European, white immigrants and Puerto Ricans) changes the plot of Romeo and Juliet significantly. The film is no longer focusing on the name that an individual possesses, but rather the color of his skin. At a time in America when this was a prominent issue, the film/musical would certainly have an impact on those who encountered it. Officer Krupke, who represents the Prince of Romeo and Juliet, is clearly partial to the Jets, because they are white. Even in the last scene of the film, the only individual arrested is Puerto Rican. West Side Story is perhaps pointing to the fact that America’s law was racially partial to whites. Law makers and law enforcers alike were unjust towards people of different ethnicities, and West Side Story clearly pays attention to this flaw in American society during the 1960’s.
The question of gender roles is also brought to the forefront of West Side Story. The opening scenes of the film reveal very “tough” boys with very graceful movements. The choreography seems almost balletic. The hateful deeds of which they are participating in are contrasted with soft dance steps. Though they are supposed to be rough and hateful men, their movement suggests the grace of a woman. The characters of Anybody and Baby John also play a significant role in stepping outside gender boundaries. Anybody is constantly striving to gain acceptance in the Jets, while Baby John is accepted, but seems to be less of a man than Anybody. Throughout the movie, Anybody reveals bravery, sensibility, and fearlessness, but Baby John is always doubting, fearful, and extremely sensitive. However, because he is a boy, he is expected to be a member of the Jets and because Anybody is a girl, she is not allowed to be member. When Anybody does finally gain acceptance, she is referred to as “buddy boy”. The film ultimately brings light to the fact that men are not always tough and emotionless, and women are not always senseless and sensitive, much in the same way the Romeo and Juliet brings light to these same issues. Overall, West Side Story is an ingenious revision of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet that highlights new issues and problems that were prominently evident in the 1960’s, including those of race and gender roles.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Sharks and Jets Gender Roles
In West Side Story, it is important to notice the different roles that men and women play. For the most part, traditional gender roles of the mid-20th century are embraced; the women are expected to wear dresses and play housekeeper and the men are expected to be tough and protect their women. They are supposed to be the decision makers. I think it is interesting to contrast the women of the Sharks with the women of the Jets. There are no prevalent female characters in the Jets, except for Anybodys, and her function is to demonstrate that she is not a "typical" women, and therefore not accepted for it. The men are constantly trying to get rid of her and telling her to go "put on a skirt." The other women seen with the Jets are portrayed as followers of the men. When they appear, they are dressed up, and don't add to the plot, besides to be present.
The Sharks have Maria and Anita, both who represent different stereotypical women. Maria is seen as a pure, polite, young woman, while Anita is more assertive; despite this, she still stands by her man, regardless.
The song "America" is interesting because it portrays the Puerto Rican women as excited by all the opportunities in America, whereas the men are not as excited. I think this could be because of the sense of equality the women have by being in America. They feel they have more rights and can be treated like they are "American." The men see this as a loss of control in their personal lives, and also in their jobs--in America, they are never the boss, they are often working for someone in low-paying jobs.
Only Tony seems to break the typical male code portrayed in this movie. He does not appear macho, or tough. He is content being apart from the gang, and seems to have moved on from that.
Overall, traditional gender roles of the 1950s-1960s seem to be at work in this film. It is interesting to note how the Sharks and the Jets contrast in this way and how they are alike--I suspect this could be a comment on the similarities between the two gangs, even if they won't admit that.
The Sharks have Maria and Anita, both who represent different stereotypical women. Maria is seen as a pure, polite, young woman, while Anita is more assertive; despite this, she still stands by her man, regardless.
The song "America" is interesting because it portrays the Puerto Rican women as excited by all the opportunities in America, whereas the men are not as excited. I think this could be because of the sense of equality the women have by being in America. They feel they have more rights and can be treated like they are "American." The men see this as a loss of control in their personal lives, and also in their jobs--in America, they are never the boss, they are often working for someone in low-paying jobs.
Only Tony seems to break the typical male code portrayed in this movie. He does not appear macho, or tough. He is content being apart from the gang, and seems to have moved on from that.
Overall, traditional gender roles of the 1950s-1960s seem to be at work in this film. It is interesting to note how the Sharks and the Jets contrast in this way and how they are alike--I suspect this could be a comment on the similarities between the two gangs, even if they won't admit that.
Reversals in West Side Story
“West Side Story” is a musical drama loosely based on “Romeo and Juliet.” The musical instead highlights feuding between two gangs (if you could call dance-fighting gang like) and a love that blossoms amidst the fighting. Like “Romeo and Juliet,” “West Side Story” also shows the reversal of gender roles through their lead characters. Tony is to Romeo as Maria is to Juliet. Other parallals of characters can be seen through Doc, the Friar, and Bernardo is the equivalent of Tybalt.
The gender role reversal in Tony can be seen after he meets Maria. Although he does not act as feminine as Romeo does in his love for Juliet, Tony does show signs of femininity. He sings an entire song about Maria’s name, fantasizing about her as a school girl would of her crush. Out of all the other male characters, Tony tends to show his emotions more than the other men would. He openly expresses his feelings toward Maria, and after he hears of her supposed death, cries in front of Doc. He then cries throughout the streets trying to get Chino to shoot him. Whenever Tony is with Maria, he turns into a “softie” to comfort and take care of her. Maria is the one having to push Tony out of the window when Anita knocks on the door, because Tony does not wish to leave.
Maria’s gender reversal is shown in how she seems to be the manlier person in her relationship with Tony. She is the one who constantly tells him to be quiet for fear of waking her parents, and pushes him out the window before Anita catches them. At the end of the musical when Tony dies in Maria’s arms, she stays rather strong but still reaches her breaking point when picking up the handgun that Chino dropped. She brandishes is around yelling about how many men she could kill, and then kill herself. She yells like a man and threatens to kill as a man would. However, she returns to her female role as she dropped to the ground and cried over Tony, not doing anything to confront his death or kill herself as Juliet had.
The gender role reversal in Tony can be seen after he meets Maria. Although he does not act as feminine as Romeo does in his love for Juliet, Tony does show signs of femininity. He sings an entire song about Maria’s name, fantasizing about her as a school girl would of her crush. Out of all the other male characters, Tony tends to show his emotions more than the other men would. He openly expresses his feelings toward Maria, and after he hears of her supposed death, cries in front of Doc. He then cries throughout the streets trying to get Chino to shoot him. Whenever Tony is with Maria, he turns into a “softie” to comfort and take care of her. Maria is the one having to push Tony out of the window when Anita knocks on the door, because Tony does not wish to leave.
Maria’s gender reversal is shown in how she seems to be the manlier person in her relationship with Tony. She is the one who constantly tells him to be quiet for fear of waking her parents, and pushes him out the window before Anita catches them. At the end of the musical when Tony dies in Maria’s arms, she stays rather strong but still reaches her breaking point when picking up the handgun that Chino dropped. She brandishes is around yelling about how many men she could kill, and then kill herself. She yells like a man and threatens to kill as a man would. However, she returns to her female role as she dropped to the ground and cried over Tony, not doing anything to confront his death or kill herself as Juliet had.
Jets vs. Sharks
The film Westside Story, adapted from the 1957 Broadway play of the same name, tells the same Romeo-and-Juliet tale of two lovers from separate “families,” where instead of households, there are the street gangs of the Jets and the Sharks. The Jets are the second generation products of European immigration during the aftermath of World War II. The Sharks are Puerto Rican immigrants, who despite their US citizenship are treated like second-class human beings. Tony is the Romeo of the Jets and Maria is the Juliet of the Sharks.
Throughout the entirety of the film, there are stark visual differences between the Jets and the Sharks. One of the most striking distinctions between the two groups is the color of the costuming for each side, particularly in the scene where both gangs meet at the school dance. The boys of the Jets, the “American” gang, are outfitted in more washed out pastel tones. Their tuxes and jackets are in yellows, oranges, and faded blues. Even though the Jets are the so-called Americans of the film and are treated better, particularly by authority figures like Officer Krupke, their clothing is a lot dirtier and grungier than that of the Sharks. In contrast to the Jets, the Sharks are dressed in bolder colors of purples, reds, and blacks. The materials of their outfits are much cleaner and sharper looking. Perhaps the grunginess of the Jets is representative of not only the actual wear of the clothing, but also symbolic of how the Jets have been in America longer than the Sharks, who are recent immigrants. Or maybe the disparity between the shabbiness of the Jets and the cleanliness of the Sharks is representative of imbedded racism in American. No matter how nice looking or clean-cut the Sharks are, the Jets will still be respected more because of the color of their skin.
In addition to color difference, the Jets and Sharks even differed in their dancing patterns. The women of the Sharks seemed to come of as more strong than did the ladies of the Jets. Anita and her friends had their own separate dance number and when dancing with Bernardo and the rest of the Sharks, the women seemed stronger and livelier. The women did not fade to the background as did the women of the Jets. Even outside of the dance scene, the Puerto Rican women seemed to have more independence from the men than did the girls with the Jets. Even Anybodys’ character obeyed Riff, whereas Anita held some sway with Sharks leader Bernardo. So, the film makes the commentary that even though the Puerto Ricans are more enlightened in the gender sense (and better dressed), the Jets will still be superior merely for the color of their hands and face, not for their merits or lack thereof.
Throughout the entirety of the film, there are stark visual differences between the Jets and the Sharks. One of the most striking distinctions between the two groups is the color of the costuming for each side, particularly in the scene where both gangs meet at the school dance. The boys of the Jets, the “American” gang, are outfitted in more washed out pastel tones. Their tuxes and jackets are in yellows, oranges, and faded blues. Even though the Jets are the so-called Americans of the film and are treated better, particularly by authority figures like Officer Krupke, their clothing is a lot dirtier and grungier than that of the Sharks. In contrast to the Jets, the Sharks are dressed in bolder colors of purples, reds, and blacks. The materials of their outfits are much cleaner and sharper looking. Perhaps the grunginess of the Jets is representative of not only the actual wear of the clothing, but also symbolic of how the Jets have been in America longer than the Sharks, who are recent immigrants. Or maybe the disparity between the shabbiness of the Jets and the cleanliness of the Sharks is representative of imbedded racism in American. No matter how nice looking or clean-cut the Sharks are, the Jets will still be respected more because of the color of their skin.
In addition to color difference, the Jets and Sharks even differed in their dancing patterns. The women of the Sharks seemed to come of as more strong than did the ladies of the Jets. Anita and her friends had their own separate dance number and when dancing with Bernardo and the rest of the Sharks, the women seemed stronger and livelier. The women did not fade to the background as did the women of the Jets. Even outside of the dance scene, the Puerto Rican women seemed to have more independence from the men than did the girls with the Jets. Even Anybodys’ character obeyed Riff, whereas Anita held some sway with Sharks leader Bernardo. So, the film makes the commentary that even though the Puerto Ricans are more enlightened in the gender sense (and better dressed), the Jets will still be superior merely for the color of their hands and face, not for their merits or lack thereof.
Themes of the Westside
The movie, Westside Story, is a classic musical loosely based on the story of Romeo and Juliet, so it makes sense that the movie would have many similarities with the play. In the movie, there are two themes that appear; the roles of gender and cultural differences.
Gender roles in the movie are based on tough, manly men and weak, defenseless women. This is how the movie wants to depict men and women. I, however, disagree. I believe that this movie wants to show the way men and women are supposed to be based on stereotypes, but throughout the entire movie, the roles a reversed. For example, the Jets and the Sharks are supposed to be two tough gangs in a neighborhood of Manhattan. Anyone who is not part of the two gangs is afraid of them or wants to be them. The guys are so tough, even the police cannot stop them. What I do not understand is that the two gangs are supposed to be intimidating, but they dance everywhere and randomly burst out into song. Given, this movie is a musical, but if these guys are supposed to be shown has tough men, it makes me curious as to why they show so much femininity. Another example of gender role reversal is at the end of the movie. After Tony is shot and killed, Maria, stripping herself of the feminine stereotype, takes the gun that killed Tony and starts threatening the two gangs and then threatens to kill herself. She intimidates the men and uses the threat of violence to get her point across. I found both role reversals interesting because it broke the stereotype of men and women.
The cultural differences in this movie are extremely significant to the time period in which it was filmed. The movie was filmed in the 1960s when the Civil Rights movement was taking place. The film shows a lot of hate and racism and the consequences of the actions that are taken out of hate. The song, ‘America,’ Anita sings, “Buying on credit is so nice” then Bernardo sings, “One look at us and they charge twice” expresses the mindset of how immigrants were viewed and still are viewed today. It’s a horrible way to view a person and I believe this movie helps show the truth of ignorance and its consequences.
Gender roles in the movie are based on tough, manly men and weak, defenseless women. This is how the movie wants to depict men and women. I, however, disagree. I believe that this movie wants to show the way men and women are supposed to be based on stereotypes, but throughout the entire movie, the roles a reversed. For example, the Jets and the Sharks are supposed to be two tough gangs in a neighborhood of Manhattan. Anyone who is not part of the two gangs is afraid of them or wants to be them. The guys are so tough, even the police cannot stop them. What I do not understand is that the two gangs are supposed to be intimidating, but they dance everywhere and randomly burst out into song. Given, this movie is a musical, but if these guys are supposed to be shown has tough men, it makes me curious as to why they show so much femininity. Another example of gender role reversal is at the end of the movie. After Tony is shot and killed, Maria, stripping herself of the feminine stereotype, takes the gun that killed Tony and starts threatening the two gangs and then threatens to kill herself. She intimidates the men and uses the threat of violence to get her point across. I found both role reversals interesting because it broke the stereotype of men and women.
The cultural differences in this movie are extremely significant to the time period in which it was filmed. The movie was filmed in the 1960s when the Civil Rights movement was taking place. The film shows a lot of hate and racism and the consequences of the actions that are taken out of hate. The song, ‘America,’ Anita sings, “Buying on credit is so nice” then Bernardo sings, “One look at us and they charge twice” expresses the mindset of how immigrants were viewed and still are viewed today. It’s a horrible way to view a person and I believe this movie helps show the truth of ignorance and its consequences.
"America": Battle of the Sexes
I thought it was really interesting that, in the "America" number, the Sharks men are the ones who seem to not be enjoying themselves in America, while the Sharks women are trying their best to make them see how much better it is than Puerto Rico.
I think this is largely because women in Puerto Rico did not have the same rights as women in America did in the 50s. In fact, America was on the brink of the Civil Rights Movement. Women were grasping at more power during this time. It is obvious that Anita is happy for this newfound power when she says, "I am an American girl now; I don't wait." So of course the women like the United States better at first! They can notice a positive difference.
The men don't like this difference. Even Bernardo admits it: "Back home, women know their place." However, not only do they have less control over their wives and girlfriends, but they are discriminated against by the white Americans. They have more trouble seeing the silver lining of being in America because they feel like only negative things have come from immigrating.
Something else I found was that the Puerto Rican women are more willing to call themselves Americans, whereas the the men find ways to distance themselves from the word. Anita calls herself an American girl; Bernardo says Maria was dancing "with an American," as if they are not all Americans. Anita wants to join in the American way, but Bernardo says she is "brainwashed" and has "gone queer for Uncle Sam." He wants to put as much distance as possible between where he came from and where he lives now.
These are strong indicators of the differences between the sexes on this matter. The ladies think it is fine to assimilate into the culture because they can see the positive affect it is having on their lives. Sure, discrimination exists, but they see themselves as being able to overcome it with their newfound power. The men, on the other hand, only see a setback. They have had more rights taken away than given to them, and so they are more skeptical of the country.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Senseless Violence: "A Curse on Both Your Houses"
In the third act of Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet,” violence is the topic of discussion as soon as the dialogue between Benvolio and Mercutio begins. The young men make interesting claims about the times violence is necessary and when it is foolish. Benvolio seems like the sensible one at first when he suggests they return home in order to avoid a quarrel with the “Capels” (III. i. 2). Mercutio points out that Benvolio is “like one of [those] fellows that, when he enters the confines of a tavern, claps me his sword / upon the table” (III. i. 5-6) and then ends up fighting anyway. The idea that a man would claim to avoid violence at all costs but then act in violence against his word shows that fighting is shameful. It would be far more dignified to resist the temptation to fight. However, male characters in this play seem to be easily persuaded to act in violence.
Mercutio continues to ridicule Benvolio for his hypocrisy when he points out past quarrels in which Benvolio fought for frivolous reasons. He calls attention to times in which Benvolio quarreled with a man for “wearing his new doublet before Easter” (III. i. 27) and another “for tying his new shoes with old ribbon” (III. i. 28). By pointing out this weakness about Benvolio, Shakespeare sets up anticipation for a quarrel to begin when Tybalt and other Capulets enter the scene.
Once again, Romeo is not portrayed as a typical male character in the play. While Mercutio draws his sword against Tybalt, Romeo tries to intervene. He is a member of the family in which the Capulets despise, and he tries to avoid the violence. His urge to stop the violence is somewhat feminine and goes against everything the male characters had just been discussing. Unfortunately, his attempt to break up the fight is the very reason Mercutio is killed. The stage directions indicate that just as Romeo forces himself in between the two characters, Tybalt stabs Mercutio under Romeo’s arm (III. i. 90-91). The violence used by Shakespeare in this scene shows the senselessness of fighting without reason. This idea parallels the entire conflict between the Capulets and Montegues, a conflict with little known cause.
Mercutio continues to ridicule Benvolio for his hypocrisy when he points out past quarrels in which Benvolio fought for frivolous reasons. He calls attention to times in which Benvolio quarreled with a man for “wearing his new doublet before Easter” (III. i. 27) and another “for tying his new shoes with old ribbon” (III. i. 28). By pointing out this weakness about Benvolio, Shakespeare sets up anticipation for a quarrel to begin when Tybalt and other Capulets enter the scene.
Once again, Romeo is not portrayed as a typical male character in the play. While Mercutio draws his sword against Tybalt, Romeo tries to intervene. He is a member of the family in which the Capulets despise, and he tries to avoid the violence. His urge to stop the violence is somewhat feminine and goes against everything the male characters had just been discussing. Unfortunately, his attempt to break up the fight is the very reason Mercutio is killed. The stage directions indicate that just as Romeo forces himself in between the two characters, Tybalt stabs Mercutio under Romeo’s arm (III. i. 90-91). The violence used by Shakespeare in this scene shows the senselessness of fighting without reason. This idea parallels the entire conflict between the Capulets and Montegues, a conflict with little known cause.
Popular Culture's Obsession with "Romeo and Juliet"---(not exactly the assignment but I found this interesting)
Though tragedy is evident in the last acts of Romeo and Juliet, from Mercutio’s death to the death of both Romeo and Juliet, there have been many “fairy tale” adaptations of this tale. Most modern adaptations are less violent and the characters rarely, if ever, see tragedy. The basis of two star-crossed lovers can easily be adapted to any situation or plot, further making Shakespeare’s play still evident in modern American society, with correlations to The Notebook, independent films like Charlie Bartlett and even songs, most recently Taylor Swift’s “Love Story.” The play has been used even in film classics like Rebel Without a Cause and the most relatable to the actual tragedy, without being the same story, West Side Story. Though the ladder of these examples did not have a happy ending, and further relaying the tragedy aspect of the original play, the other examples develop a concept that forbidden love can be justified through teenage rebellion.
In the master of teenage rebellion’s film, Rebel Without a Cause, Dean’s character deals with being the new kid in town. In the movie, a rival gang confronts Jim Stark, Dean, and he fights for the love of Judy, or Natalie Wood. The story line takes the same amount of time as that of Romeo and Juliet which displays teenage rebellion and it’s fast paced movement and lifestyle. Though the two lovers did not die tragically in the end, Sal Mineo’s character, Plato, which is to Stark as Mercutio is to Romeo, dies tragically by wearing Stark’s jacket, and getting shot by the police. In Wood’s other tragic film, West Side Story, the correlation of Romeo and Juliet can be most evidently drawn. The tale is basically the same, except in a different time, and they both end in a blood bath; however, in West Side Story it is a gang scuffle instead of suicide, and Maria, (Wood), does not die.
Compared to the older films that deal with the same subject matter, popular culture today has added a “happily ever after” to sugar coat the tragedy, and make the conflict barely seem like a struggle. In Charlie Bartlett, a troublemaker moves into a new school where he is instantly attracted to the principal’s daughter, another tale of unrequited love. Rebellion is a main issue throughout the story line, and a few more characters are associated to Shakespeare’s classics: Murphey is the Mercutio, providing comic relief and sexual innuendo, while the principal, played by Robert Downey Jr. is a protective father, much like Capulet. However, in this story, nobody dies, and no big tragedy is overcome, but the romantic aspect provides the general conflict. Much like this is the film adaptation and the Nicholas Sparks’ novel The Notebook, which ends in a romantically sappy way, also conveys forbidden love, and characters for comic relief.
In Swift’s song, as well as the music video, “Love Story,” she acts as Juliet, and her and her “Romeo” face the same challenges that Romeo and Juliet faced. The video is a period piece, but she changed the ending, making it optimistic, with changes our views on the specific tale over time.
The Distraction of Love
In Shakespeare’s Act III, scene ii of Romeo and Juliet, the characterization and actions given to Juliet undergoes a total shift of language and sentiment after the two become married. While in Act I Juliet is more practical and looking towards the future with her concerns towards her relationship with Romeo, she now has prose similar to Romeo’s in the first act, full of oxymoron and emotion, while Romeo’s actions shift from the “artificial night” and nonconformity to the norms of masculinity to actions defined as male, the killing of Tybalt.
In Act III, scene ii, Juliet’s prose is full of oxymoron such as “fiend angelical!” (III.ii. 75), and, “A dammed saint, an honorable villain!”(III. ii. 79.) describing Romeo, and to the reader, this dialogue sounds very childish and emotional, much like Romeo’s characterization in Act I. The concept developed within her loaded dialogue is Shakespeare’s device to portray Juliet’s childish emotions, and how the concept of their love is based on infatuation, and impulse rather than a deeper connection and knowledge of each other. Shakespeare uses the passages of Act III scene I and Act III scene ii to shape Romeo and Juliet both as characters who are driven by impulse and emotion rather than logic and sound judgment. The lines “To prison, eyes; ne’er look on liberty! Vile earth, to earth resign; end motion here,” (III.ii.57-60), portrays Juliet in a rather melodramatic sense, wanting to end her life because she believes her husband Romeo is killed. This sentiment expressed is not after Juliet is told the entire story by her nurse, but after the assumptions Juliet concludes from the short sentences that do not delve into detail. Shakespeare uses this example and the lines of “O I am fortune’s fool!” (III. i. 135), Romeo’s line after he has killed Tybalt, to portray the erratic behavior of both of these characters, whose mind is not on the tasks of everyday logic, but fully focused on the love of another.
In Act III, scene ii, Juliet’s prose is full of oxymoron such as “fiend angelical!” (III.ii. 75), and, “A dammed saint, an honorable villain!”(III. ii. 79.) describing Romeo, and to the reader, this dialogue sounds very childish and emotional, much like Romeo’s characterization in Act I. The concept developed within her loaded dialogue is Shakespeare’s device to portray Juliet’s childish emotions, and how the concept of their love is based on infatuation, and impulse rather than a deeper connection and knowledge of each other. Shakespeare uses the passages of Act III scene I and Act III scene ii to shape Romeo and Juliet both as characters who are driven by impulse and emotion rather than logic and sound judgment. The lines “To prison, eyes; ne’er look on liberty! Vile earth, to earth resign; end motion here,” (III.ii.57-60), portrays Juliet in a rather melodramatic sense, wanting to end her life because she believes her husband Romeo is killed. This sentiment expressed is not after Juliet is told the entire story by her nurse, but after the assumptions Juliet concludes from the short sentences that do not delve into detail. Shakespeare uses this example and the lines of “O I am fortune’s fool!” (III. i. 135), Romeo’s line after he has killed Tybalt, to portray the erratic behavior of both of these characters, whose mind is not on the tasks of everyday logic, but fully focused on the love of another.
The Not-So-Merry Wives of Verona
I know the primary focus of the play is on the young folk (especially the two eponymous lovers), but I never quite noticed before the relationships of the parents, especially the role of the wives. Instead of confining themselves to the weak, submissive role the men seem to feel they should play, Lady Capulet and Lady Montague seem to be rather powerful female figures – even feisty at times. They are comparatively more assertive, especially towards men, than the other two main female characters: more openly defiant than Juliet and much more purposefully so than the nurse. Right from their first appearance, the two wives have no scruples at all in chiding their husbands for their eagerness to plunge into the fray. Lady Montague, though she is much more silent than her Capulet counterpart, even physically restrains her husband while scolding, “Thou shalt not stir one foot to seek a foe” (I.i.79). Lady Capulet enjoys a wittier attitude when dealing with her hot-tempered husband, as she sarcastically rebukes him for brawling in his old age: “A crutch, a crutch! Why call you for a sword?” (I.i.75). Interestingly, it is the women who urge their men not to fight, not to continue the bloody feud, in this scene. Lady Montague is silent for the next three acts, but Lady Capulet remains a strong, fairly talkative character who is intensely interested in the welfare of her only child, as exhibited by her constant conversations with Juliet, especially regarding marriage. She even advises her child to “what obscured in this fair volume lies/ Find written in the margent of his eyes” (I.iii.85-86) – in other words, endeavor to look into Paris’s eyes (often poetically described as the window to the soul) and discover his true, inner qualities. This line, coupled with her reference to Lord Capulet as a former “mouse-hunt” (IV.iv.11), indicates that her own marriage was not as well-planned as the older, wiser her knows in retrospect, and she wants to shield Juliet – her “only life” (note that this leaves no room for Lord Capulet) (IV.v.19) – from making the same mistake. On the whole, the wives seem more aware of the potential for emotional loss that the feud poses, and seem more eager to prevent bloodshed than their husbands ever do. It is only after the loss of her beloved cousin, Tybalt, that Lady Capulet desires physical revenge upon a Montague and cries “Romeo must not live” (III.i.180). Thus, when their wisdom is not heeded, it is the women who suffer most by the loss of the men they love.
One is different
Romeo seems to be painted as kind of a sissy. There’s a lot of violence throughout the play. It’s seems like violent acts are part of being a man for many of the characters. For example, in the beginning of the play, the servers are arguing about who is a better fighter. Then there is a fight scene. All the male characters around Romeo’s age are in this fight, but Romeo isn’t there because he’s crying by a tree or something. Then, in the third act, Romeo tries to break up a fight. So not only does he miss a fight because he’s dealing with his emotions, but he tries to prevent another fight. Later, the Friar even says, “Art thou a man? Thy form cries out thou art; / Thy tears are womanish” (III.iii.109-110). He’s really set apart from the other male characters.
Romeo seems to be in a better mood at the beginning of the third act than he was at the beginning of the play. Tybalt calls him a villain at the beginning of act three, but Romeo just brushes it off. He says, “Villain I am none. / Therefore farewell. I see thou knowest me not,” (III.i.63-64). I got the impression that Romeo was kind of on cloud nine at this point. He was so happy Juliet liked him that nothing could ruin his day. Someone called him a villain, he told them he’s not and said goodbye. He seemed much happier than when he was weeping and making an artificial night.
I didn’t really get into this play until about the end of the third act. For most of the story I had a difficult time staying focused on what I was reading because of the language. I had to slow down and re-read several lines to understand what was going on. The footnotes helped clarify some things, but they really broke my rhythm and slowed me down even more. It was hard to get into the play when I’m stopping to read footnotes on the bottom of each page.
That being said, the end of the third act and the fourth act was my favorite part so far. I remembered that Romeo killed himself because he thought Juliet was dead, but I couldn’t recall why he thought she was dead. I had a real “aha” moment when the Friar talked to Juliet about the vial of potion that would make her appear to be dead. I’m looking forward to re-discovering the end of the play.
Romeo seems to be in a better mood at the beginning of the third act than he was at the beginning of the play. Tybalt calls him a villain at the beginning of act three, but Romeo just brushes it off. He says, “Villain I am none. / Therefore farewell. I see thou knowest me not,” (III.i.63-64). I got the impression that Romeo was kind of on cloud nine at this point. He was so happy Juliet liked him that nothing could ruin his day. Someone called him a villain, he told them he’s not and said goodbye. He seemed much happier than when he was weeping and making an artificial night.
I didn’t really get into this play until about the end of the third act. For most of the story I had a difficult time staying focused on what I was reading because of the language. I had to slow down and re-read several lines to understand what was going on. The footnotes helped clarify some things, but they really broke my rhythm and slowed me down even more. It was hard to get into the play when I’m stopping to read footnotes on the bottom of each page.
That being said, the end of the third act and the fourth act was my favorite part so far. I remembered that Romeo killed himself because he thought Juliet was dead, but I couldn’t recall why he thought she was dead. I had a real “aha” moment when the Friar talked to Juliet about the vial of potion that would make her appear to be dead. I’m looking forward to re-discovering the end of the play.
Gender Irregularities
The one thing I really noticed about the first part of act 3, scene 2 is Juliet’s use of “sky” references; cloudy night, sun, moon, stars, heaven, etc. This wouldn’t have come to my attention if we hadn’t gone over Romeo’s use of “sky” references in act 1. It seems now with Juliet using the references that she has begun to act more like she is supposed to. I know that women in this time period are supposed to be weak and sensitive and that is of course the basis for the gender irregularities in the play. Romeo is sensitive and moody and Juliet, even though it was unintentional, made the first profession of love. But I feel like that changes a bit in act 3. Juliet, in act 3, scene 2 appears more like a girl in love - speaking to herself, talking to the night, wishing Romeo was there with her, anxious for news of him from her nurse. The entire time we see her she adheres more to what society has come to expect from teen girls with a crush (even though she is technically married to Romeo at this point, the feeling remains the same). She is, for lack of a better word, giddy with the thought of seeing him. This is in contrast to act 2. scene 2 when Juliet is talking and doesn't realize Romeo is there listening and she is very sensible about her reaction to him. The famous “What’s in a name” line is a good example of this, as is when she doesn't allow Romeo to swear by the moon because of its waxing / waning cycles. Of course Romeo at that moment is the one speaking of heavenly bodies, so they are set as opposites.
In act 3 Romeo is given what I perceive as his first truly masculine act of killing Tybalt but the manliness of this is stripped from him quickly. Not only does he try to interfere with the fight between Tybalt and Mercutio but he flees the scene after he kills Tybalt. Even when he fights with Tybalt it’s because he killed Mercutio, not because of the insults he threw at Romeo. Romeo wanted peace between himself and Tybalt, which in today’s world is great but back then for him to take the insult without attempting to settle the score would have been seen as weak, and I think that’s what Shakespeare is trying to do. I would love to say that Shakespeare is using Romeo’s weakness as a reason for killing both him and Juliet. I understand there are other factors involved in the deaths and I am currently unable to fully support the statement. I’m simply putting the idea out there that maybe if Romeo was more manly things would have turned out differently.
In act 3 Romeo is given what I perceive as his first truly masculine act of killing Tybalt but the manliness of this is stripped from him quickly. Not only does he try to interfere with the fight between Tybalt and Mercutio but he flees the scene after he kills Tybalt. Even when he fights with Tybalt it’s because he killed Mercutio, not because of the insults he threw at Romeo. Romeo wanted peace between himself and Tybalt, which in today’s world is great but back then for him to take the insult without attempting to settle the score would have been seen as weak, and I think that’s what Shakespeare is trying to do. I would love to say that Shakespeare is using Romeo’s weakness as a reason for killing both him and Juliet. I understand there are other factors involved in the deaths and I am currently unable to fully support the statement. I’m simply putting the idea out there that maybe if Romeo was more manly things would have turned out differently.
Was Beyoncé Channeling Nurse Capulet?
At first read, successfully comprehending the language of "Romeo and Juliet" proved quite challenging for me. However, following Tuesday's class discussion, I dove into acts III and IV feeling better equipped to analyze the cultural implications of Shakespeare's play. What I find most intriguing are the gender codes set up among the characters. Every page I turned, someone was setting up an expectation for what it means to be/what is expected of a man or a woman (Romeo or Juliet).
Shakespeare characterizes love as a weak, feminine emotion. In act III, Romeo jumps between Tybalt and Mercutio to stop their fighting. Now that he is in love, Romeo finds no reason for violence (unlike the other men in the story). He resists it, discrediting its effectiveness, its manliness. He proclaims, "Gentlemen, for shame! forbear this outrage!" (III. 1. 86). However, once Mercutio is slain by Tybalt when Romeo jumps in to stop their feuding, he snaps back from his gentle, peaceful state of mind when he says, "O sweet Juliet,/ Thy hath made me effeminate/ And in my temper softened by valor's steel!" (III. 1. 112-114). To become effeminate is to become unmanly, womanly. Thus, Romeo blames his love for Juliet for having "softened his temper" to that of a woman's. In doing so, the possibility for men to be madly in love without acquiring a weak, womanly temper is shut down. This paints women as the inadequate of the two sexes, limiting men to a rigid expectation of having a fearless, unsympathetic disposition.
Furthermore, these male gender codes foreshadow today's stereotypes of young men. In discussing how Romeo created such irony in killing Tybalt after being so sweet with Juliet, the nurse professes, "There's no trust,/ No faith, no honesty in men; all perjured,/All forsworn, all naught, all dissemblers" (III. 2. 85-87). To be "perjured" or "forsworn" is to knowingly and willingly tell of things that aren't true. In the instance of "Romeo and Juliet" these truths would be of the love Romeo swore he had for Juliet. To be "naught" is to be worthless, zero, and to be a "dissembler" is to be a liar. Therefore, the nurse limits all men to being untrustworthy, faithless, dishonest, liars - a conventional image of young men today. A perfect example of this would be Beyoncé's "If I Were A Boy," in which she, as I posted in a previous blog, "critiques today's stereotypical young adult male: unthoughtful, insincere, and egocentric when it comes to women and relationships" (4 Feb. 2009).
Overall, the similarities between the gender codes/expectations of men and women during the time of Shakespeare and those prevalent in today's society surprised me. Although some of those expectations have changed, such as women gaining equality, many have remained the same for centuries. -- Interesting!
a real love story?
I used to read this book and find it so passionate and powerful. I now feel as it is corny and ridiculous as the emotions of both families shift with a snap of a finger. Mercutio and Tybalt are both well known and well-liked men in their families, however, their deaths seem not to carry out much sorrow. Capulet says, "Well, Wednesday is too soon. A thursday let it be, a Thursday , tell her, she shall be married to this noble earl" (Act IV. 4. 19-22). I find this ironic as his nephew has just been killed yet he will have his daughter be married in the same week. I suppose times were different, however, it seems somewhat like a mockery to me. And if you think about the Nurse--well Tybalt was her "best friend" yet she forgets her mourning in order to help Juliet. It is as though their emotions do not matter because the most important part is to tell this story in a short time frame- 3 days to be exact.
It is weirder still that they expect Juliet to so graciously accept the offer of marrying Paris so quickly after the death of her close cousin. Also, she being so young and never showing any interest in Paris shows character of an earlier time period. Her father shuns her as she denies his request in marry paris saying, "Hang thee young baggage, disobedient wretch" (Act IV. 5. 160). I understand her father wanted her to marry Paris, but as their only daughter he expresses a lot of hatred because of one thing she does not obey.
To make me feel this way even more is after Juliet's "fake death." Yes, they seem upset however they immediately discuss changing the food and decorations from a wedding to a funeral. The change in emotions happen so quickly and so superficially that it makes this entire love story appear as a joke. It may be written in a poetic and beauteous form, but it lacks the true feelings and emotions that real people hold.
The Progression of Romeo and Juliet
During the third and fourth acts of Romeo and Juliet there are a few factors that change the two lead characters as people that pushes the play forward. After Romeo and Juliet are married, in Act II, sudden violence disrupts their adolescent happiness, which ignites an immediate role change between the couple.
The innocence of Romeo and Juliet's young love quickly dissolves when in the first scene of Act III, Tybalt slays Mercutio, Romeo's friend, and in revenge, Romeo slays Tybalt. Tybalt went searching for Romeo to fight, but Romeo said, "I do protest I never injured thee,/ But love thee better than thou canst devise/ Till thou shalt know the reason of my love;/ And so, good Capulet, which name I tender/ As dearly as mine own, be satisfied."(III. i. 67-71). The role of Romeo being the more feminine person in respect to Juliet changes in this scene when he kills Tybalt. His rage and fighting are male instincts when threatened and he embraces those feelings. From this act to the ending of the play, Romeo is no longer the poet or sensitive man he was in the first two acts.
Similarly, as the violence ignites and Tybalt slain, Juliet changes from the strong, intelligent woman she was in the first two acts to an emotional, scatter-brained young girl that she truly is. Juliet finally acts her age after Romeo is banished. An example of her transformation is shown when she speaks to her mother, "Farewell! God knows when we shall meet again."(IV.iii.14-15). In the first two acts, Juliet is well composed and very level-headed. As seen in this line, Juliet changes her persona to an emotional, impulsive, and naive girl.
One interesting detail that I found was that the Friar stays the same throughout the play. Of course he has different emotions, he's not a robot, but he is well-composed and tries his best to do the right thing. When Romeo askes the Friar to marry Juliet to him, he is hesistant but eventually agrees, thinking that the marriage will resolve the family feud. In the end, he tries to save the couple but is too late. The violence that takes place, of course, shocks the Friar, but he still remains the same man from start to finish.
The igniting of violence in the third and fourth acts causes Romeo and Juliet to change roles because the violence directly affects them and shakes their world.
The innocence of Romeo and Juliet's young love quickly dissolves when in the first scene of Act III, Tybalt slays Mercutio, Romeo's friend, and in revenge, Romeo slays Tybalt. Tybalt went searching for Romeo to fight, but Romeo said, "I do protest I never injured thee,/ But love thee better than thou canst devise/ Till thou shalt know the reason of my love;/ And so, good Capulet, which name I tender/ As dearly as mine own, be satisfied."(III. i. 67-71). The role of Romeo being the more feminine person in respect to Juliet changes in this scene when he kills Tybalt. His rage and fighting are male instincts when threatened and he embraces those feelings. From this act to the ending of the play, Romeo is no longer the poet or sensitive man he was in the first two acts.
Similarly, as the violence ignites and Tybalt slain, Juliet changes from the strong, intelligent woman she was in the first two acts to an emotional, scatter-brained young girl that she truly is. Juliet finally acts her age after Romeo is banished. An example of her transformation is shown when she speaks to her mother, "Farewell! God knows when we shall meet again."(IV.iii.14-15). In the first two acts, Juliet is well composed and very level-headed. As seen in this line, Juliet changes her persona to an emotional, impulsive, and naive girl.
One interesting detail that I found was that the Friar stays the same throughout the play. Of course he has different emotions, he's not a robot, but he is well-composed and tries his best to do the right thing. When Romeo askes the Friar to marry Juliet to him, he is hesistant but eventually agrees, thinking that the marriage will resolve the family feud. In the end, he tries to save the couple but is too late. The violence that takes place, of course, shocks the Friar, but he still remains the same man from start to finish.
The igniting of violence in the third and fourth acts causes Romeo and Juliet to change roles because the violence directly affects them and shakes their world.
Teenage Rebelion Fuels Their Love
In “Romeo and Juliet” both Romeo and Juliet appear to be acting out against their parental control. There love appears to be absurdly founded on absolutely nothing. Many people say that Romeo and Juliet both act differently from how they would have acted if this play were real. I do however believe that there love is founded on something beyond the superficial. To me both Romeo and Juliet appear to be trying to take control of their own lives in a way that has previously been denied to them. Neither the Montagues nor the Capulets would allow this marriage to occur under any circumstance. They both long to shed the shackles of their families and live their own lives the way they want to live them. This love is less about actually love and more about trying to escape their individual parental controls. These two are merely children at 13 years of age. They would do anything to defy their parental figures.
Capulet approaches Juliet in act III and demands that she marry Paris. She refuses because she is already married to Romeo. She is sick of her parents directing the course of her life and feels that it is time for her to live her own life. She drastically takes her own life into her hands in act IV where she ingests a sleeping potion. Before she drinks the potion she thinks about all the terrible things that could go wrong with the potion. She decides that she will drink the potion anyway. This is Juliet taking control of her own life for the first time in the play.
Romeo does the same in this portion of the book by agreeing to stay with Juliet on their wedding night even after dawn begins to break. It is not the best decision and Juliet allows him to leave once he agrees to stay. Still, Romeo takes his own life into his hands.
Dear Mercutio
At first you would think Mercutio is the voice of reason in this play. He is constantly explaining to others that fighting is not the answer to all problems. However, I think Mercutio is a flip-flopper. In scene one of act three alone, he changes his views of fighting with other in almost a lightening quick pace. Immediately in the first scene of act three, Benvolio talks about fighting with others when there is no fight in sight. Mercutio describes Benvolio someone “that, when he enters the confines of a tavern, claps me his sword upon the table…and by the operation of the second cup draws him on the drawer…” (III.i.4-8). Here, Mercutio is stating that after two drinks, Benvolio will be jumping at a sign of a fight with the waiter or with anyone in the matter. Instead, Mercutio is the one that does not need to fight to consider himself a man. When the Capulets arrive, Benvolio becomes excited at the prospect of a fight, and instead Mercuto “care[s] not” (III.i.35).
After the Capulets arrive and dialogue progresses though, Mercutio’s view on fighting seems to change. When Benvolio says that they are in the public eye and should not fight in front of others, he asks that they leave the area. Mercutio then says “I will not budge for no man’s pleasure, I” (III.i.54). Romeo then enters, and of course mr. whiny-pants creates even more problems alone. Mercutio though protects Romeo and draws his sword to fight Tybalt so that Romeo would not die or suffer, leaving Juliet to deal with the pain. Tybalt and Mercutio begin fighting, however, Romeo now takes the role of the voice of reason, trying to have the two put the swords down to avoid all fighting. While Romeo tries to intervene, Mercutio is then stabbed by Tybalt. I think in this page alone, Mercutio flip-flops two or three times about the situation. At first, he curses both the Capulets and Montagues for their fighting, complaining of being hurt. Then he tells everyone that it’s just a scratch and he will be around tomorrow. Finally of course, Mercutio says yet another famous line from the play, “A plague a both your houses!” (III.i.105) Mercutio then dies, and I don’t think I ever understood what he wanted from everybody. Stop flip-flopping, and decide to be a man or a coward.
After the Capulets arrive and dialogue progresses though, Mercutio’s view on fighting seems to change. When Benvolio says that they are in the public eye and should not fight in front of others, he asks that they leave the area. Mercutio then says “I will not budge for no man’s pleasure, I” (III.i.54). Romeo then enters, and of course mr. whiny-pants creates even more problems alone. Mercutio though protects Romeo and draws his sword to fight Tybalt so that Romeo would not die or suffer, leaving Juliet to deal with the pain. Tybalt and Mercutio begin fighting, however, Romeo now takes the role of the voice of reason, trying to have the two put the swords down to avoid all fighting. While Romeo tries to intervene, Mercutio is then stabbed by Tybalt. I think in this page alone, Mercutio flip-flops two or three times about the situation. At first, he curses both the Capulets and Montagues for their fighting, complaining of being hurt. Then he tells everyone that it’s just a scratch and he will be around tomorrow. Finally of course, Mercutio says yet another famous line from the play, “A plague a both your houses!” (III.i.105) Mercutio then dies, and I don’t think I ever understood what he wanted from everybody. Stop flip-flopping, and decide to be a man or a coward.
What's the deal with Friar Lawrence?
Friar Lawrence is a character the audience can identify with because he seems to be sitting on the fence and trying to tear it down at the same time. Not belonging to either the Montagues or Capulets, the religious man wants the fighting in Verona to stop. So, when Romeo and Juliet ask for his help, he marries them willingly, because he believes that this union will lead the two fighting families to make amends. Lawrence just seems like a guy who doesn’t agree with all the fighting. That all happens in Act II.
In Act II, however, Lawrence doesn’t seem to care that Romeo has fought and killed Tybalt. In fact, Lawrence consoles the poor killer. He comforts Romeo by saying, “Tybalt would kill thee,/ But thou slewest Tybalt. Thou art happy too”(III.iii.137-8). Lawrence, although a religious man, forgets the First Commandment entirely: “Thou shalt not kill.” Instead, the Friar tells Romeo that it’s okay that Romeo killed Tybalt because Tybalt was going to kill Romeo anyway. Whatever happened to “turn the other cheek” or even Lawrence’s own idea of peace in Verona. I would have expected the Friar to, at the very least, scold Romeo for his carelessness. But the Friar tries to make Romeo get off the floor and stop crying.
I also have another problem with the Friar’s attitude toward this whole Romeo-screwed-everything-up situation. Although, I have said Friar Lawrence is not associated with the any particular feuding clan, he still follows the current society’s attitudes towards women as the weaker sex. When Romeo is being a baby in the Friar’s cell, the Friar scolds him by saying, “Thy tears are womanish,” (III.iii. 110). While Friar Lawrence seems to separate himself from the hatred of the fighting families, he continues to consider women as inferior men, and even questions Romeo’s masculinity just as Romeo’s parents did. To sum up, I don’t think Friar Lawrence is as cool of a guy as he might seem. There’s something fishy about the fact that he doesn’t care that Romeo killed Tybalt, yet he continues to believe these stereotypes about women just like so many other characters, both Montegue and Capulet alike.
In Act II, however, Lawrence doesn’t seem to care that Romeo has fought and killed Tybalt. In fact, Lawrence consoles the poor killer. He comforts Romeo by saying, “Tybalt would kill thee,/ But thou slewest Tybalt. Thou art happy too”(III.iii.137-8). Lawrence, although a religious man, forgets the First Commandment entirely: “Thou shalt not kill.” Instead, the Friar tells Romeo that it’s okay that Romeo killed Tybalt because Tybalt was going to kill Romeo anyway. Whatever happened to “turn the other cheek” or even Lawrence’s own idea of peace in Verona. I would have expected the Friar to, at the very least, scold Romeo for his carelessness. But the Friar tries to make Romeo get off the floor and stop crying.
I also have another problem with the Friar’s attitude toward this whole Romeo-screwed-everything-up situation. Although, I have said Friar Lawrence is not associated with the any particular feuding clan, he still follows the current society’s attitudes towards women as the weaker sex. When Romeo is being a baby in the Friar’s cell, the Friar scolds him by saying, “Thy tears are womanish,” (III.iii. 110). While Friar Lawrence seems to separate himself from the hatred of the fighting families, he continues to consider women as inferior men, and even questions Romeo’s masculinity just as Romeo’s parents did. To sum up, I don’t think Friar Lawrence is as cool of a guy as he might seem. There’s something fishy about the fact that he doesn’t care that Romeo killed Tybalt, yet he continues to believe these stereotypes about women just like so many other characters, both Montegue and Capulet alike.
Where's the Love For the Family?
Romeo kills Tybalt. Good deal, justice is served. Tybalt insults Romeo and kills his best friend, he deserves to die. He is however Juliet's cousin. And when he dies and Juliet learns of the news, she does take it rather hard. She refers to Romeo as a "serpent heart, hid with a flow'ring face!" (III.ii.23). According to the footnote at the bottom of the page, she is basically referring to him as Satan. The visage of the devil was concealed by the face of a young girl wreathed in flowers when the serpent appeared to Eve. Although they have only known one another for a couple days, Juliet claims she is in love with Romeo. Based on the evidence above that she immediately refers to her love as the devil as soon as she hears of her cousin's death, should be a good indicator as to how close the two were (Tybalt and Juliet). They probably saw each other everyday, they live in the same town, part of the most powerful family and let's face it, Juliet is a pretty lovey dovey person. I doubt she could hate someone even as aggressive and ill-tempered as Tybalt. She did dwell on his death, for about ten seconds.
The nurse follows Juliet's brief monologue of how Romeo was the devil is disguise, with a little quip of her own about men stating that, "no faith, no honesty in men . . . Shame come to Romeo!" (III.ii.86-90). This is where we see a change of direction in Juliet's tone as she recoils with "Blistered by thy tongue for such a wish!" (III.ii.91-92). Wait a minute . . . Tybalt, you blood relative who you have known youre entire life dies. This was a guy Juliet probably played with in the yard, grew up with, and had a real relationship with. Romeo comes into the picture and two days later and his "banishment" is worse news than if he "hath slain ten thousand Tybalts," (III.ii.114). Where is the love for the family? Sure, Juliet mourns Tybalt's death for about ten seconds, but then she moves to the more imperative concern; that her love is exiled. I think this is a great example of Juliet showing the reader that she is a little girl. She is completely ridden with emotion as is Romeo.
I believe that is why these two are "in love." They are completely overrun with emotions and the other one is there to catch them. If I were in the Capulet family I would have Juliet beheaded for being so foolish. She is so messed up in the head that she believes that her feelings for this man she met only a couple days ago exceed even her closest relatives. Sounds like something a teenager would think . . . oh wait.
The nurse follows Juliet's brief monologue of how Romeo was the devil is disguise, with a little quip of her own about men stating that, "no faith, no honesty in men . . . Shame come to Romeo!" (III.ii.86-90). This is where we see a change of direction in Juliet's tone as she recoils with "Blistered by thy tongue for such a wish!" (III.ii.91-92). Wait a minute . . . Tybalt, you blood relative who you have known youre entire life dies. This was a guy Juliet probably played with in the yard, grew up with, and had a real relationship with. Romeo comes into the picture and two days later and his "banishment" is worse news than if he "hath slain ten thousand Tybalts," (III.ii.114). Where is the love for the family? Sure, Juliet mourns Tybalt's death for about ten seconds, but then she moves to the more imperative concern; that her love is exiled. I think this is a great example of Juliet showing the reader that she is a little girl. She is completely ridden with emotion as is Romeo.
I believe that is why these two are "in love." They are completely overrun with emotions and the other one is there to catch them. If I were in the Capulet family I would have Juliet beheaded for being so foolish. She is so messed up in the head that she believes that her feelings for this man she met only a couple days ago exceed even her closest relatives. Sounds like something a teenager would think . . . oh wait.
Romeo and Mercutio
I think that Mercutio is my favorite character from "Romeo and Juliet." He just seems like the kind of guy that you could get along with and have a good time. And then he dies in act III.1...and that upset me. Well, I knew it was coming mind you, but still. Now even though my favorite character dies in this scene, I still think it is an interesting scene. It's one of the few scenes where Romeo mans up and stops whining in long winded monologues. And it also is great, because Mercutio calls Romeo out on his being an emotional creeper, "Why the devil came you between us? I was hurt under your arm" (III.i.101-102), and the Montagues and the Capulets on their stupid feud, "A plague a both your houses!" (III.i.90). I think it is good that someone at least had the sense to see how silly everyone was acting, but as much as I like this scene it confuses me too. Why does Tybalt run off only to return a little while later? It doesn't make sense. Either way, this scene, in my opinion, is like the climax of the play. So much happens here that changes how the story is going to end. Oh Mercutio, if only you hadn't of picked that fight with Tybalt and if only Romeo would have picked a better time to man up; really now, one of the few times he does this it gets him into a load of trouble.
One last thing I would like to comment on is just how whinny Romeo is, I just can't stand it. Every time something happens to him he has to have some monologue detailing exactly how he feels so everyone just has to know, "'Tis torture, and not mercy. Heaven is here, where Juliet lives..." (III.iii.29), and this continues for many lines more. It's just crazy...oh Romeo, please just stop talking...
One last thing I would like to comment on is just how whinny Romeo is, I just can't stand it. Every time something happens to him he has to have some monologue detailing exactly how he feels so everyone just has to know, "'Tis torture, and not mercy. Heaven is here, where Juliet lives..." (III.iii.29), and this continues for many lines more. It's just crazy...oh Romeo, please just stop talking...
The Death of Mercutio
The scene which I found to be the most interesting because of it's endless supply of male bravado was Act 3 Scene I wherein Tybalt and Mercutio duel. Tybalt comes looking for Romeo but, of course, Mercutio has some choice words to say to him in order to spark the powder keg between the two families. After Tybalt asks Mercutio about Romeo's whereabouts, Mercutio answers by saying, "Here's my fiddlestick; here's that shall make you dance. Zounds, consort!" (III,i,47-8). I have found that Mercutio's rapier wit only makes the play more entertaining, but, in this case, it gets him into trouble. When using the word "fiddlestick", Mercutio is no doubt referring to his penis, a reference frequently present in this play when male characters mock one another. I find it amusing yet somewhat childish that a man, who knows what he's getting in to by taunting Tybalt, a notoriously short-fused member of the rival family, would mock him in reference to the male genitalia. Although Mercutio is sticking up for his good friend Romeo, it is interesting to note that he is member of neither of the feuding families, but rather a kinsman of the Prince of Verona. I find this interesting because Mercutio, a relative of the Prince who decreed the penalty of death for anyone causing trouble between the two families, knowingly instigates Tybalt in a sword fight. This scene shows the pinnacle of male pride in the play, with Mercutio using his witty comments to lure the fiery Tybalt in to an altercation even though Tybalt doesn't initially wish to fight him.
Another interesting point in this scene comes after Tybalt wounds Mercutio and runs away, leaving the wounded Mercutio with Romeo and Benvolio. Mercutio, after fighting Tybalt and accosting Romeo for his lack of masculinity when he chose not to engage in the duel, curses Romeo as well as both of the feuding families by saying, "A plague a both your houses!... Why the devil came you between us? I was hurt under your arm" (III,i,98-102). After questioning Romeo's manliness and fighting for him, I find it deplorable how Mercutio is able to blame his wound on Romeo trying to stop the duel. It is also interesting that Mercutio curses both the Capulets and the Montagues, yet he knew that the duel would end in one of two ways once he provoked Tybalt. Mercutio, to me, is the most interesting character because of his intricacies and witty tongue, as well as the fact that he sides with the Montagues even though he has no blood connection with either family. Although he instigates the fight knowing what the result would be, insults Romeo's masculinity, and blames him for getting wounded himself, the fact remains that Mercutio stuck up for Romeo in a duel which was set to ensue no matter who was involved, and he ended up giving his life for his best friend.
Insults and Violence: Markers of Masculinity
Bragging and insults seem to be a brand of "masculinity" even in Shakespearean times. Mercutio, at the beginning of the Act III, is a perfect example of this. Even when he is talking to Benvolio, a friend, Mercutio feels the need to break him down. He says, "why, thou wilt quarrel with a man that hath a hair more or a hair less in his bread than thou hast" (III.i.16-18). He goes on for at least ten more lines, insulting Benvolio, saying that he is too quick to fight over silly things. (Ironically, it was actually Benvolio who attempted to break up the fight from the first scene.) However, Mercutio's insults become much more personal when Capulets enter the scene. Where Benvolio acknowledges the fact that Tybalt has arrived, Mercutio announces that he "care[s] not" (III.i.35). He has greatly insulted the Capulets by saying they mean so little to him that they are completely unworthy of acknowledgement. He is also, in this way, bragging a bit. It is his way of proving he is unafraid of the Capulets because he doesn't find them to be a threat. He believes he could hold his own in a fight.
Fighting is also of importance to masculinity in Romeo and Juliet. Because it cannot be said which family is better, the Montagues or the Capulets, violence is an easy way for them to settle the dispute. If one man can kill another, does that not make the one who survives the better man? After all, he is still alive. It makes him seem stronger and braver. This is likely why Mercutio jumps into a fight with Tybalt, who was originally trying to duel with Romeo. When Romeo denies to fight, Mercutio says, "O calm, dishonorable, vile submission!" (III.i.72). Mercutio cannot stand the idea of a Montague man not rising to the challenge of a lesser being such as a Capulet. It makes the Montagues seem weak and he cannot let that happen.
A Fairytale Gone Wrong
Mercutio’s character in Romeo and Juliet could quite possibly be labeled as that of a witty jester. Even as a good friend of Romeo, Mercutio is constantly mocking him and his ideals of love. Perhaps his lengthiest rant can be found in Act I of Scene III, where Mercutio tells the story of Queen Mab. What begins as a delightful fairytale soon spins wildly into disturbing violence and vivid sexual innuendos.
Mercutio’s tale begins with visions of a tiny fairy that visits men while sleeping, and grants them of their dreams. He goes into great detail when describing the fairy and her tiny carriage with “wagon spokes made of long spinners’ legs,/ The cover, of the wings of grasshoppers” (59-60). His miniscule imagery continues entrancingly as he creates a seemingly wonderful fairytale. The fairy’s journey begins by galloping “through lovers’ brains, and then they dream of love” (71), but then escalates to her driving “o’er a soldier’s neck,/ And then dreams he of cutting foreign throats” (82-83). This is certainly not an image that one might imagine to find in a harmless fairytale. What had begun as an enchanted fable now turns into that of an evil fairy granting the dreams of violent men. Queen Mab soon becomes the fairy that “bakes the elflocks in foul sluttish hairs” (90), and makes “women of good carriage” (94). Mercutio’s speech ends describing the fairy as one who teaches maids to have sex. This is clearly a stark contrast to the beginning of his tale.
However, before Mercutio becomes completely out of hand, Romeo stops him, saying “Thou talk’st of nothing” (96), and Mercutio readily agrees by referring to his own speech as “children of an idle brain” (97). Mercutio’s entire speech has been a mockery of Romeo’s dreams of love. In agreeing with Romeo, Mercutio simply confirms his own beliefs in the senselessness of Romeo’s imaginings. Mercutio can see past Romeo’s fairytale dreams. Mercutio is also commenting on the not so noble intentions of society. He can see through the imaginary fairytales, and in his opinion, view the dark and depraved world of reality that is actually full of violence and impurity. Mercutio’s mocking pessimism and witty puns add an element of biting comedy to “Romeo and Juliet” that can sometimes be overlooked, but is certainly well worth paying close attention.
Mercutio’s tale begins with visions of a tiny fairy that visits men while sleeping, and grants them of their dreams. He goes into great detail when describing the fairy and her tiny carriage with “wagon spokes made of long spinners’ legs,/ The cover, of the wings of grasshoppers” (59-60). His miniscule imagery continues entrancingly as he creates a seemingly wonderful fairytale. The fairy’s journey begins by galloping “through lovers’ brains, and then they dream of love” (71), but then escalates to her driving “o’er a soldier’s neck,/ And then dreams he of cutting foreign throats” (82-83). This is certainly not an image that one might imagine to find in a harmless fairytale. What had begun as an enchanted fable now turns into that of an evil fairy granting the dreams of violent men. Queen Mab soon becomes the fairy that “bakes the elflocks in foul sluttish hairs” (90), and makes “women of good carriage” (94). Mercutio’s speech ends describing the fairy as one who teaches maids to have sex. This is clearly a stark contrast to the beginning of his tale.
However, before Mercutio becomes completely out of hand, Romeo stops him, saying “Thou talk’st of nothing” (96), and Mercutio readily agrees by referring to his own speech as “children of an idle brain” (97). Mercutio’s entire speech has been a mockery of Romeo’s dreams of love. In agreeing with Romeo, Mercutio simply confirms his own beliefs in the senselessness of Romeo’s imaginings. Mercutio can see past Romeo’s fairytale dreams. Mercutio is also commenting on the not so noble intentions of society. He can see through the imaginary fairytales, and in his opinion, view the dark and depraved world of reality that is actually full of violence and impurity. Mercutio’s mocking pessimism and witty puns add an element of biting comedy to “Romeo and Juliet” that can sometimes be overlooked, but is certainly well worth paying close attention.
What's in a man?
William Shakespeare, one of the most well-known poets and dramatists, is particularly famous for his play Romeo and Juliet. Over time, as the plot became popularized, Romeo has come to resemble the epitome of the male lover. However, a closer examination of the play, portrays a much more effeminate and “womanish” Romeo. Within the context of Elizabethan times, Romeo was most definitely not “manly,” and hardly the benchmark for masculine love.
In Act III, scene three, Romeo, after murdering Tybalt, seeks refuge within the Friar Laurence’s cell. Soon thereafter, he gets news that he is banished from the city of Verona. Immediately, Romeo is sent into the throes of despair and prostrates himself upon the floor, for he realizes that he must be parted from his dear love, Juliet. Romeo moves to stab himself with a dagger, provoking the friar into scolding some sense into the young man:
FRIAR: Hold thy desperate hand.
Art thou a man? Thy form cries out thou art;
Thy tears are womanish, thy wild acts denote
The unreasonable fury of a beast.
Unseemly woman in a seeming man!
And ill-beseeming beast in seeming both!
Thou hast amazed me. By my holy order,
I thought thy disposition better tempered…
Thy noble shape is but a form of wax,
Digressing from the valor of a man;
Thy dear love sworn but hollow perjury. (III. iii. 109-128).
The friar accuses Romeo of being a woman for his outburst of emotion. According to Friar Laurence, Romeo is a man because his “form cries out” that he looks male, so thus he must be male. Then, if Romeo is a man, then he should not be crying and showing so much feeling. To be a man means to not be “womanly” in emotions, to not shed tears and fall onto the ground. Yet, Romeo is a man because of how he looks, but is on the floor in tears. So, then, Romeo is not a man, or is not at the moment acting like one. Romeo’s reaction to the news that he will be thenceforth “banished” is not something a real man would do; therefore Romeo’s behavior is “unseemly” and inappropriate. Romeo is disobeying the medieval constructs of male identity, which consists of a strong and unemotional character. To be unemotional is to be a man in that the lack of emotion denotes one’s lack of “womanish” character, and since women are the “weaker vessels,” men must be strong (I.i. 14-15). Romeo’s behavior is so out of character of what a man is that the friar is aghast and swears on his holy authority as a clergyman (ordained by god), that Romeo is a man and should not act this way. For, if Romeo continues to act womanly, he is digressing from what it is to be a man: strong, brave, fearless, and heroic (III.iii. 127). Romeo’s effeminate behavior deviates from what is deemed “right,” that Romeo should be a man and follow the rules of what it is to be a man. Yet, if Romeo so deeply loves Juliet as he claims, then why is his outburst and emotional prostration inappropriate? Should not love move people to their knees? Apparently only women are permitted that liberty, the freedom to be hysterical in the name of l’amour. And Romeo cannot be a woman, for then his love for Juliet is dishonest, wrong, and untrue. ‘Tis a great sin for a woman to be with a woman. The Friar Laurence would have some serious bones to pick in modern American society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
