Drama Queen

Upon finding the bodies of Romeo, Juliet and Paris, Prince Escalus declares that “All are punish’d” for the feud between Capulet and Montague. Montague has lost a son, and his wife has died of sadness. Capulet has lost his only daughter, and probably feels terribly guilty for pushing her towards the marriage which inspired her suicide. The Prince, in not stopping the feud earlier, has lost two family members, Mercutio and Paris. Mercutio and Tybalt, in being proud and rash fighters, have both lost their lives. The Friar and the Nurse, who kept Romeo and Juliet’s secrets safe, bear the awful guilt of not acting differently to save the young lovers.

But probably the most extreme ‘punishment’ falls to Romeo and Juliet, who are mostly guilty of being young. Their extreme feelings (of intense love, of despair at any problem) mainly come from the newness of these feelings, and the pair’s youthful inability to formulate strategies to deal with life’s difficulties. But surely this should not be punishable by death!

The Prince declares that their deaths are punishment for the senseless quarrel between Capulet and Montague. The Friar may just as much feel that deaths are punishment for his own naivety, in not acting the adult and forcing the pair to slow down and take their time. Lady Capulet may feel responsibility for never really loving her daughter as a mother should.

But the story is not sad because of the deaths. The story is sad because the deaths are senseless. They solve nothing and, more importantly, didn’t need to happen. It didn’t have to be like this. There are so many ways in which the characters could have lived happily and peacefully. If only Romeo had not attended the party… If only Mercutio had not died… If only Romeo had not been banished… If only Capulet had not forced the marriage upon Juliet… If only Romeo or Juliet had heeded there premonitions of impending danger… If only.

In the end, what do you think Shakespeare is trying to tell us? Is he telling us about the value of love? About thinking before we act? Or about not letting anger destroy lives?

Romeo, for killing Tybalt, is given the light punishment of banished, yet Romeo wails as though he has been sentenced to death. “Be merciful, say ‘death’,” he moans to the Friar, ”There is no world without Verona walls.”

Similarly, when told of her impending marriage to Paris, Juliet leaps to melodrama, declaring to the Friar, “I long to die/ if what thou speak’st speak not of remedy”.

The way Romeo and Juliet react to difficulties serves to show their immaturity and relatively sheltered lives. Until the death of Tybalt, it would seem neither had really experienced loss or hardship. Both come from rich families, are only children, and have had everything that money could provide. And they are still so young, with little experience of adult life. Is it any wonder that they don’t know how to deal with an adult relationship, or how to handle loss?

Imagine that the two had escaped to Mantua together, rather than killing themselves. How long would these children have lasted in an adult world? How long til Romeo found a new beautiful woman to fall in love with? How long til lack, of money, or illness, or loneliness for their families led the pair to despair and long for death, rather than difficulty?

Knowing their innocence, perhaps the Friar should have known better than to marry Romeo and Juliet. Surely, having seen both Romeo and Juliet fall apart under pressure, the Friar might have guessed how they might react to the other’s death. In leaving Juliet alone in the tomb with Romeo’s body, was the Friar responsible for her death? Think about all the moments in the story at which the Friar could have changed the outcome: their marriage; the whole plan to fake Juliet’s death; leaving the young lovers alone in the tomb. Did Friar Lawrence essentially plunge the knife into Juliet’s chest?

‘Romeo slew him [Tybalt]; he slew Mercutio/ Who now the price of his dear blood doth owe?’

Who should pay for the death of Mercutio? The Prince feels that Tybalt’s death is fair repayment for Mercutio’s, but through banishment for killing Tybalt, Romeo is essentially paying the price. Considering that Romeo at first refused to fight Tybalt, and only did so out of a combination of wounded pride and grief for Mercutio, it seems a huge leap that he should have to leave everything he loves.

And really, whose fault is it that Mercutio was slain? Mercutio wholeheartedly threw himself into the fight with Tybalt. Benvolio’s already told us how hotheaded that Mercutio can be, and we’ve heard Mercutio say that Romeo just HAS to answer Tybalt’s challenge like a man. When Romeo refuses to fight, Mercutio pushes Tybalt to fight with him. He makes a CHOICE to fight Tybalt, doesn’t he? Or, through Romeo’s shameful reufsal of the challenge, was Mercutio left with no choice but to try and fight for his friend’s lost honour?

Who do you think is to blame for Mercutio’s death?

Romeo has shown us that his love, while deep and heartfelt, is changeable. Having met Juliet, his previous love for life, Rosaline, is forgotten. Rosa-who? Sure, maybe he “ne’er saw true beauty til this night”; perhaps Juliet showed him the meaning of true love. But then again, maybe, given more time and less tragic circumstances, Romeo would have moved from Juliet to another beauty?

What do you think? Is Romeo’s “faithful vow” worth anything? Is it to be trusted?