ACTUALLY....
Should be fun? Maybe?
Let's start at the beginning, with one of the most quoted lines of Shakespeare. We turn to Romeo & Juliet, Act 2, Scene 2.
 |
| Baz Luhrmann's 1996 Remake |
Juliet:
O Romeo, Romeo! wherefore art thou Romeo?
Deny thy father and refuse thy name;
Or, if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love,
And I'll no longer be a Capulet.
Deny thy father and refuse thy name;
Or, if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love,
And I'll no longer be a Capulet.
O Romeo, Romeo, for the rest of my life I will have to listen to people assume that wherefore means where? It does not. So here it comes, y'all...
Actually...
Wherefore means why in this context. Or 'for what reason.' Which is something that can be discerned through the context and grammar of Juliet's speech. If she were speaking directly to Romeo it would be "Wherefore art thou, Romeo" and there would be a comma, yes? But there is not. I know this is a minute detail, but context clues, guys! I love them!
Additionally, why would she go on to lament his lineage after asking where he was? "Where are you, Romeo? Deny your heritage and refuse your own name" makes much less sense than "Why are you Romeo? Deny your heritage and refuse your own name." She is implying that it is his name that tethers him to the Montagues - which makes a lot of sense in the worlds in which the play was written and set. Your name was everything if you had a good one and nothing if you did not. And yet she tells him to cast it off and vows that if he can't, then he needs only swear to love her and she would be willing to swear off her own name. Makes WAY more sense, right?
Additionally, why would she go on to lament his lineage after asking where he was? "Where are you, Romeo? Deny your heritage and refuse your own name" makes much less sense than "Why are you Romeo? Deny your heritage and refuse your own name." She is implying that it is his name that tethers him to the Montagues - which makes a lot of sense in the worlds in which the play was written and set. Your name was everything if you had a good one and nothing if you did not. And yet she tells him to cast it off and vows that if he can't, then he needs only swear to love her and she would be willing to swear off her own name. Makes WAY more sense, right?
Which brings me to a concession/correction I must make. I have... bemoaned the great adoration Romeo and Juliet have gotten culturally as lovers. But only in so much as I think there are other great lovers in Shakespeare that I find more moving, and that I believe comparing yourself to them implies a less-than-full understanding of their predicament or the messages of the play itself.
None of that detracts from the beauty of the famous balcony scene. Why, just look at this! Juliet asks into the darkness that Romeo deny his name, and he agrees to so willingly that when she asks who it is that visits her in the darkness, he says, "By a name/ I know not how to tell thee who I am/ My name, dear saint, is hateful to myself,/ Because it is an enemy to thee." He takes her metaphor and runs with it, beautifully.
And she says, "Art thou not Romeo and a Montague?" His reply: "Neither, fair saint, if either thee dislike." Which is not only lovely and ties in to the shirking of their names, but by referring to her as 'saint,' he has now twice referenced their first conversation, where they discussed what saints and palmers do to show affection. ("Have not saints lips, and holy palmers too?")
Anyway. my point has been lost somewhere, but suffice to say, Wherefore means WHY and people perpetrate this misconception all. the. time.
Did this feel like a lecture? My condolences.
Did this feel like a lecture? My condolences.
 |
| From Franco Zeffirelli's 1968 film version of R&J |
No comments:
Post a Comment