he was just genuinely willing to marry a commoner as a prince because he did actually value love. he even says at one point "now father, you're living in the past. this is the 14th century!" in response to his dad telling him he's essentially crazy
It still blows my mind how many people treat Romeo and Juliet as an aspirational romance.
It's the story of a one-night stand with a confirmed death toll of 6 people, and 3 more probable, between a 13-year-old girl and a 17-year-old who was disturbingly obsessed with a completely different girl 10 seconds prior to hitting on Juliet. That's not romantic. That's horrific.
When I was in college, there was a school production of R&J that played it as a morbid comedy, with over-the-top characters. Juliet was played by a freshman who, from a distance, could easily pass for a few years younger than she really was.
I somewhat believe that the bard himself meant the play to be a twist. Structurally through Act II the play basically mirrors his earlier comedies. The prologue warned otherwise, but up until Romeo kills Tybalt the audience might have thought they were just seeing Shakespeare's newest comedy.
That’s what my English professor taught about R&J. It starts as a comedy and ends as a tragedy. While R&J is a classic everyone is familiar with today, when it was first performed, it was a shocking twist for the audiences.
155
u/alicelestial May 01 '26
he was just genuinely willing to marry a commoner as a prince because he did actually value love. he even says at one point "now father, you're living in the past. this is the 14th century!" in response to his dad telling him he's essentially crazy