#juliet capulet

[abcwordsurge]

sexual attraction? you mean the thing that killed romeo and juliet?

[lenbryant]

Women in Shakespeare

[jakciekennedy]

sometimes i forget how good romeo + juliet 1996 is and then john leguizamo comes on screen and it’s like. oh yeah, this really is like the best adaptation ever. and then harold perrineau comes on screen and you’re like, yeah actually this performance should define the role forever. and then when doves cry starts playing at the wedding and you’re like, okay, yep, no one else will ever do it like this. incredible

[pixie1111]

romeo and juliet is so overrated that it’s become underrated

[velvet4510]

“Let’s be weirdos together” is true couple goals and the objective fact is that Romeo and Juliet are the ones who invented it, like in modern times we hear “it wasn’t a love story” this, “they would never have actually lasted” that, “it was just lust” here, “they only loved an idea” there, BUT if you actually read the text, Romeo starts spewing nonsense about pilgrims and saints at the moment they first meet (rather than, you know, introducing himself) and Juliet not only takes his little speech and immediately runs with it, buying into it and continuing it with total ease, but also completes it to form a perfect sonnet, and if that isn’t soulmates who match each other’s freak stuff, idk what is.

[giveme-mysinagain]

I think the problem with a lot of “feminist” classical retellings that makes them fail at being feminist is that they’re villainizing the wrong characters.

Stop holding the gods to human standards. They’re not human. That is quite literally the point of MULTIPLE Euripides plays. Go after the heroes.

But go after the RIGHT heroes. Why are we vilifying Hector, arguably one of the least problematic heroes, in stories where Achilles and Agamemnon exist? Why is Paris exempt from criticism, but Menelaus is the epitome of evil? (That part is also aimed at Euripides, I love The Trojan Women but holy shit you did him dirty my guy.) Why are we not being MORE hateful towards Jason? Why are we continuing to make Medea the villain?

Why are we making shit up about Romeo to give Juliet her “feminist freedom arc” that she ALREADY HAS IN THE PLAY? Paris is RIGHT THERE, go rip HIM to shreds. And on the opposite spectrum of that, why don’t we NAME everyone who wronged Ophelia instead of sanitizing her to the point where she’s a completely different character, and in the end, oppressing her just like everyone else in the play?

A lot of this also boils down to the refusal to accept women and feminine characters as flawed, as well as the refusal to acknowledge that, in order to uphold these false narratives, you have to completely destroy characters who aren’t traditionally masculine or feminine, but clearly we’re not ready for that conversation yet.

[capinejghafa]

Tell me not, Father, that thou hearest of this, unless thou tell me how I may prevent it. It strains me past the compass of my wits.

[not-soup-333]

Locked in too hard on Romeo and Juliet again with my current reread of the play. Romeo has no agency within the text unless it's related to love and Juliet has agency no matter what. They're subverting gender roles within the play your honor.

Romeo, who's depicted as a bleeding heart and a deep soul, only actively pursues ideas of love through the play. Violence isn't something he chooses, it's something that happens to him.

He tries to separate Tybalt and Mercutio, and only resorts to killing Tybalt in his grief and love for Mercutio. Despite not loving Leonardo DiCaprio, his acting in this scene during the 1996 version is a perfect example of this. It's the same with his murder of Paris, he doesn't actively want death and violence here (dare I say this is why it's such a footnote within the story itself).

Juliet, on the other hand, has more agency throughout the majority of the play. Her father gives her the option to choose whether or not to marry Paris, at least before this is revoked later, and this seems to be reflected in her nature. While she has less text overall (and is a little harder to understand because of it, imho), she's more levelheaded than Romeo, and takes far more action than he does.

Juliet is the one to send her nurse to find out more about their wedding. Juliet is the one who decides to defy her father and refuse to marry Paris. Juliet is the one who chooses to go to Friar Lawrence to solve her problems.

All of this even gets boiled down to base gender roles in their deaths. Romeo chooses poison, considered feminine within Shakespeare's work due to its indirect nature, but also continues this characterization of Romeo as almost love incarnate. Juliet, however, has death by blade, which is more masculine in Shakespeare in comparison, due to it being more directly involved in violence. There is such a fascinating juxtaposition in their final scene as a whole between the two of them (that really boils down to my prior statement, though).

Anyway enough analysis, I'm horrifically tired and love r&j and all this to say that Juliet is a boy and Romeo is a girl and they're kissing nasty and it's awesome and I love them.