ROMEO [Coming forward.]:
But soft! What light through yonder window breaks?
It is the East, and Juliet is the sun!
Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon
Who is already sick and pale with grief
That thou her maid art far more fair than she.
Be not her maid, since she is envious.
Her vestal livery is but sick and green,
And none but fools do wear it. Cast it off.
It is my lady! O, it is my love! O, that she knew she were!
She speaks, yet she says nothing.
What of that? Her eye discourses;
I will answer it. I am too bold; '
tis not to me she speaks.
Two of the fairest stars in all the heaven
Having some business, do entreat her eyes
To twinkle in their spheres till they return.
What if her eyes were there, they in her head?
The brightness of her cheek would shame those stars
As daylight doth a lamp; her eyes in heaven
Would through the airy region stream so bright
That birds would sing and think it were not night.
See how she leans her cheek upon her hand!
O, that I were a glove upon that hand,
That I might touch that cheek!
JULIET :
Ay me!
ROMEO:
She speaks.
O, speak again, bright angel, for thou art
As glorious to this night, being o'er my head,
As is a winged messenger of heaven
Unto the white-upturned wond'ring eyes
Of mortals that fall back to gaze on him
When he bestrides the lazy puffing clouds
And sails upon the bosom of the air....
NOTE:The scene being too long, please use the photocopies given in class to read it or check out our Website: complete scene
16 de diciembre de 2008
ROMEO AND JULIET, (Act2, scene2) W.Shakespeare
Suscribirse a:
Enviar comentarios (Atom)
Wilkie Collins
88 comentarios:
Oh that I were able to speak so! Should I be able to express such a beautiful words, I guess nothing else would be necessary to conquer a woman, am I wrong?
My favourite lines in the quote are: “Two of the fairest starts in all the heaven having some business, do entreat her eyes to twinkle in their spheres till they return”.
Marvellous!!
Mine: "Her eyes in heaven
Would through the airy region stream so bright
That birds would sing and think it were not night."
Roberto, try, there may be a poet inside you and you don´t know it! ;)
Well, which of the two of you is in love????
There is nothing like this about love, the Sofa scene does not have such strength...
It´s wonderful to see new topics on the blog which we can talk about. However, I must read it before writing something.Then, let´s read
After reading it twice, I have found one sentence, that I suppose will be one of my favourites inside the literature.. It´s the next one: "The brightness of her cheek would shame ose stars". I think this text is one the beautifullest love statement.
Do we have to be in love to appreciate these words???
Maria, I belive that we don´t necessarily have to be in love to be able to value these verses, because they´re beautifull although you didn´t share what they show. However, I also think that we need to have ever been in love in order to understand their meaning.
After such a long time, here I am (I have to admit that I´m a little nervous after seeing your English level).
María I agree entirely with you.
Dear Carmen, I don´t think it is necessary to be in love just to give that strength to these words. Do you think is necessary to be depressive just to cry when you watch a film?. I don´t think so. Do you think it is necessary to be a feeble person just to get shocked after seeing a landscape in a painting?. I´m afraid I´ve got my doubts.
How many people inhabit the world?. Five, six thousand million people?. Ok, show these words to every inhabitant of the world and you´ll get five or six thousand million of ways of understanding them (Carmen, weren´t you who defended the sentence "beauty is in the eye of the beholder").
Please, don´t misunderstand me. I wish María or Roberto were in love, the most marvellous state of mind a person can be. I just try to defend the idea that if a piece of art had to be interpreted just in one sense Fine Arts wouldn´t be the most important way of expressing for human being.
Sorry for my mistakes. You know, after months without writing in English.......
I don´t want to be a pain in your necks but I would like to wish all of you a Merry Christmas.
You don´t know how much I miss you, even the arguments with Carmen!!!.
Kisses.
Perfect Bandit, you always so accurate in your opinions. Very true all that you say. We also miss you!
I entirely agree with Bandit, the greatness of Arts is that they can be understood in many different ways.However, I also think that as much experiencies you had had, as well you will be able to understand them, or at least to enjoy them. But, on the other hand, I don´t want to mean it´s neccesary to have lived everything in your life in order to know how you should feel about it, because we don´t forget how fantastic is our imagination, and as Paracelso said; "we should live by the magnificence of our imagination, not of our limited memory". Please, think about this sentence, I belive its meaning is not only true,but very possitive to increase our hapiness.
Bye you all.
Well, hello Bandit. It seems strange to me that you say that one need not actually be or have been in love, to understand this scene...you are in love...aren´t you? (or perhaps not so any more???)...so you understand it, of course. you are very right when you say that anyone can experience even if you have not felt it but I do think that when is in love these words become more meaningful than if you have somewhat forgotten what being in love is. Remember your case and now think Romeo sees Juliet is struck by her beauty something happens between them which is unexplicable, only felt and he visits her in her house which was banned to a Montaguieu...i remember what it is like, I´m afraid 13 years of married life is not the best situation to climb walls "with love light wings"!
Being in love is actually one of the best things that can happen to you, even if it is being in love with Jesus Christ, remember Saint Therese of Avila. Perhaps you could tell us whether you feel identified with Romeo or not...
to the rest Roberto you have not answered me!!! Are you in love or not? What about you María?
How are we going to work? We´ll do some lines together at a time. How many? 20? is that too much?
HAPPY CHRISTMAS to you all!!!
Dear Carmen, I am fond of you! ;-)
Have a nice Christmas Eve all of you!!
ahahaha, how much funny you are!! Carmen, you raise passions!! Undoubtedly, this year the blog is being much more interesting!!
I am nearly in love, but for the moment, I wouldn´t climb any wall. But I am the girl, who is traditional in love´s subjects!! ;)
Merry Christmas and love!!
Well, María and Roberto, you haven´t given me enough information, I want the lot!!!
Now to the text, you know that in classical mythology the moon is ruled by the virgin goddess Diana,Juliet is "her maid," but this maid is more beautiful than her mistress, so the writer suggests that she is not her maid and therefore she need not wear the "vestal livery" which has such inadequate colours, colours associated with "green-sickness" only cured by love-making.Of course Romeo connects not making love with foolery, thus "cast it off" and make love with me. (As you see men have always been trying to make women remove their clothes!!! It´s not new folks!!).
Then there is a very pretty metaphor about Juliet´s eyes being fairer and brighter than the stars (eyes in love are generally very bright indeed!!!, it is precisely this abscense of twinkle that does not exist in sad eyes, have you noticed?), they are so bright that they would make birds think it was daylight (wouldn´t fool humans, though this is why the birds come in handy!!). I do like the sensitive idea of the glove delicately touching her cheek, how important just a slight brushing of skin contact is for those in love (at the beginning, remember then it bocomes:careful with my make-up! don´t touch me!!)
Now to minor matters, Grammar: subjunctives L.9, L.16, L.17,
What is Be, L.6?
What is funny with the comparative in L.5?
Answers, comments...
L5 – Infinitive without to
L6 – Because of the rhythm? You can not get it using fairer? Far-fair sounds quite similarly?
L9 – Subjunctive, Modal past. We are expressing a wish (regret) that we would like something to happen but it won’t. (I wish I had money)
L16 – Subjunctive, Modal present/proper present
L17 - Subjunctive, Modal past in a conditional sentence. We don’t use the proper present because, otherwise, it would be more likely
I am reading the whole scene and, at present, Juliet is showing her sentiments before Romeo, entreating him to be honest and sincere, for she doesn’t want him to believe that she is easy to make fall in love. Otherwise, she will turn “perverse”
Well done Roberto, you are back to your own self again...perhaps Juliet has left???
Here at home in Santander, cold and rainy...boring...depressing...but tonight dinner party! Things are looking up! Have you seen Australia? Go in English
I have already finished reading the whole scene and it is full of beautiful quotes. For instance:
“'Tis almost morning; I would have thee gone:
And yet no further than a wanton's bird;
Who lets it hop a little from her hand,
Like a poor prisoner in his twisted gyves,
And with a silk thread plucks it back again,
So loving-jealous of his liberty.”
Here you have two links showing the scene played by English actors. It is useful and interesting, since not only does it give life to the text but also because it shows you extra information about the scene itself.
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=c3BfBIzz6vQ&feature=related
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=rJDYMTYsGAM&feature=related
All the morning I´ve been reading so beautiful and romantic a scene! I have not read what Roberto has written about Carmen´s grammar questions. So don´t think I am cheating. ;)
Well the extract is full of subjunctives, both proper and past.
L6: "Be" it is not a subjunctive, but an infinitive with inversion.
L5: Could it be a paronomasia? In poetry, when it is used similar-sounding words. In this case: "far" and "fair".
L9: past subjunctive.
L16-17: past subjunctive inside the conditional sentence.
Now I have already read Roberto´s comments and we have not given the same answers. But Carmen you say he is right. Therefore I am wrong... But, in L9 it is not a modal past. "She were" it is past subjunctive (proper). Were it modal past, it would be "she was", so to say, indicative in writing but subjunctive in meaning, but it is not the case in L9. Am I right?
And the same happens in the rest of the lines. They are not modal subjunctive, but proper. Aren´t they?
Roberto I think you have chosen a very good stanza. I also like this one: "What´s in a name? that which we call a rose / By other name would smell as sweet;"
And this one: "My life were better ended by their hate, than death prorogued, wanting of thy love".
Carmen, what did you mean when saying that?:
How are we going to work? We´ll do some lines together at a time. How many? 20? is that too much?
These provocative, strong and romantic words of love are perfect way to express your feelings to your beloved in the 16th century. I am afraid that nowadays Romeo and Juliet don´t have this power of word. But, if I found this “Romeo” I would think that he is a fake. There are too many ways to demonstrate love, don´t you think?.
Anyway, in these marvelous lines, I´ve chosen:
“See how she leans her cheek upon her hand!
O, that I were a glove upon that hand,
Than I might touch that cheek!
(In my opinion, this is the definitive proof, touch and feel!)
By the way, it is not shameful to fall in love! and I agree with Carmen, you haven´t given her enough information. Please, Roberto, María, Bandit, give this information to Carmen, I feel curious!!
Rebeca, thanks for the quote, I love it.
María, you are right though I focused on "She knew", it being either modal or proper past. :-)
Oh Susan, your Andrew is not a Romeo?? What a pity!! ahahhahaah ;)
It is very interesting what you say about current Romeos. Don´t they exist any more??
Ok, Roberto, I thought it was a bit strange that you were wrong! ;)
María and I am not Juliet either! but I really appreciate the quote.
Anyway, if you find a Romeo, please let me know
I have read the text, and I liked it. I am afraid I be the Devil's advocate, but in my opinion the metaphors are a little bit affected and pretentious. So all of you who are longing for a Romeo, imagine that someone approachs you in a pub and whispers in your ear:
"Your smell is so fresh that even the most delightful flower of the Queen's garden would feel ashamed of your competence. Moribunds feel dead and in heaven when they smell you, and not even can the most decomposed dog mess eclipse your fragrance".
No success would I augur, even despite of the fact that it is not written by Shakespeare.
I wish you a happy new year!
Well, I´ve been some time away from the blog and see that you have not visited it very much either. I´m afraid that I just have been a little lazy since I´ve seen that most people are not very interested and I told you that this takes me and you. I hope this absecense stops or the forum will die out.
Now back to Romeo, Susan, the words are too grand for a modern Romeo, of course, first of all because it is poetry and then there are many metaphors, and secondly because current Romeos do not read,so how can they express themselves? In these Mega-parties with lots of loud music, drugs and length of time people do not even talk, they express themselves with gestures!! but women do not like this, do we? We like to listen to men telling us how much they love us and what they would do for us. any such Romeo would be very successful now.
As to you, Jesús, I think you are the one who objected to Pride and Prejudice. My sister tells me you have improved and like it more, keep reading and you may understand Romeo and his language a bit better...this is poetry and we need metaphors, we need imagery, we need to understand the feeling, and so that we understand the depth of the feeling we need comparisons with words!!!!
Let´s now talk a little bit about what juliet says:"O Romeo, Romeo wherefore art thou Romeo?.." Has anybody realized that it is Juliet who speaks first? Romeo is not meant to have heard but he does and this is why he is willing to stop her and throw in a word.(It is very lucky for him because he has the confirmation that she loves him and now when he speaks he is more certain of his approach) the nest lines about what a person is regardless of everything else are very clarifying: when you love a person you love the person, not the name, the family or his profession, thus Juliet points to the essence of love uncorrupted by mateliasim(would you say that this is not so nowadays?)."That which we call o rose/By any other name would smell as sweet" is the perfect explanation!!Juliet reasons thus with herself and proposes something: shed thy name and take me, (notice by the way that women are forever asking for something in return!!!)
Comments now...
romeo´s reaction:He is a little at a loss with the problem his name gives him, he reminds me of those men tha when they are in love are so easily "linguistically" manipulated by a woman and we make them say sorry because they cracked an inconvenient joke about us and we threaten the with dropping them or something like that, know what I mean? What I love of what Romeo says is when he describes the power of love "With love´s light wings did I oérperch these walls;/..And what love can do, that dares love attempt;" Don´t you think that this describes the gigantic strength love has? When you love, any type of love can do, you climb up any wall (this is the metaphor, Jesús !), you do anything even give your live, even death, or any suffering. There are many examples of this in real life and in History as well.
Now I have to go to lunch and cards, I´ll be back tonight to see if anyone is on line
It is my turn.
I must acknowledge having had to see the extract on the stage (by means of Youtube) so as to have some idea of the physical placement of the characters and you are right, Carmen, when saying Romeo is lucky by listening to Juliet say he is her chosen one. With such a confirmation I would probably dare to do the same. Your quotes are also marvellous, explaining perfectly what love is.
What about women nowadays, Carmen? I think there are not too many interested in something else than fashion, physical appearance, gossip, marriage and having children.
Anyway, there are three lines, the meaning of which I am unable to understand even though I have read them several times. Would you mind explaining them to me?
“A thousand times the worse, to want thy light.
Love goes toward love as schoolboys from their books,
But love from love, toward school with heavy looks.”
It is also quite beautiful when Romeo says:
"Alack, there lies more peril in thin eye than twenty of their swords. Look thou but sweet, and I am proof against their enmity."
Roberto, women are forever interested in men!! They´ve always been interested in fashion, to look pretty and attract men, gossip, to while away time as they are waiting for men, or when there are no men around, marriage, with men and children, which are produced also by men!!! so MEN.
the first line maeans That it is awful to be without Juliet and if she disappears he lacks light, her presence, etc.
the next two lines are very well known:he uses a comparison which is very effective: a lover when he is going to meet, see, his love he goes happily to the meeting as happily as schoolboys are when they leave their school, their books, when they stop their studies for the day; on the contrary when two lovers separate it is like when they are called back to their school, books etc, and they trudge back to school with downcast eyes and furrowed foreheads!!
Good night..a thousand times good night!
What about this one:
"By whose direction found'st thou out this place?"
"By Love, that first didi prompt me to enquire: He lent me counsel, and I lent him eyes. I am not pilot,... I should adventure for such merchandise".
And also this one Carmen told us some time ago:
"Parting is such sweet sorrow, that I shall say good night till be morrow."
It takes you time to understand Shakespeare but once you got it, the world is yours!
Ok, I've alraady picked it up. I was a little bit puzzle because of "from", for there is no verb.
Thank you.
Romeo was very lucky by knowing Juliet´s feelings before expressing his, which is not usual as it is they that take a risk, expose to the failure and rejection. Here, this problem disappears.
As Juliet´s sentiments, despite the lines about not loving a name but a person, I think that she could find it irresistible to love and be loved by a man strictly forbidden. Women love the forbidden fruit. Is this Juliet´s case or is her love pure and truthful?
Hi everyone!
Sorry that I hadn't read this thread before, but I admit that I am not so thrilled about Romeo&Juliet as I was by other threads from Shakespeare. Though I can see that the part of the scene I have just read is very well written, with many shining metaphors... it's too sugary for me.
When speaking about love songs, films, plays, I'm always much more interested in the parts where more twisted feelings appear - Anyway, I will try to read it carefully, have a look at the videos, and write some deeper comments.
I wish you all a good "Noche de Reyes"!
Christmas is over at last! Elena, your scepticism is enviable! Love as Romeo&Juliet´s is not usual in real life, even I daresay it doesn´t exist for a long time since some looks for another person, boring and tired of the same life day after day, or since some feels so intense a love that finishes dying (not neccesarily in a literally way)! Both alternatives are a tragedy, so, better for you if you don´t believe in love. As for me, I am doomed to the tragedy!! ;)
Hello everybody! At last I’m able again to enter the blog! I’m nearly desperate, my house has been full of people till this morning and I haven’t had a spare minute for me. I’ve started reading your comments but as they are several and I going to need time to read all of them, I want first to give you signs of life. It’s nice to meet Bandit here again I missed him a lot. I’ll tell you something about your comments later, I promise. Happy New Year for everybody.
Carmen you asked us to say something about some lines in the test. in spite of the fact that Roberto and María already did the work and you corrected the one from Roberto, I also want to do it.
L5: In classical mythology the moon is ruled by the virgin goddess Diana; hence the innocent Juliet is “her maid”, but this maid is more beautiful than her mistress.
Roberto says there is an infinitive without to. I’m sorry but I cannot find the infinitive. What I find is a third person singular without the compulsory “S” which I so often forget.
L6: Be, I think is an imperative in the negative form with inversion and without the auxiliary. Instead of “do not be her maid”, Shakespeare uses “be not her maid” which is more poetic and has a lot more strength.
L9: “O, that she knew she were”, I think this is the “if” clause in a second conditional sentence in which the main clause is omitted. In addition we could say the word "were" is equivalent to a present “O, if she knew she is” Romeo uses the unreal past because he thinks it’s unlikely or impossible that the condition will be fulfilled.
L 16: “till they return” this is a proper subjunctive or a modal present because in this case there is no difference.
L 17: “What if her eyes were there”, second conditional with a past subjunctive in this case, as in the previous, we cannot say if it’s modal or proper, both having the same shape.
Alberto, what you say seems to have much sense. If you “are” in love, I think you could enjoy more the scene and, even, identify with one of the characters (at least to a certain extent)but, what happen if you are divorced or have never been in love or having been in love in the past you are not at present?
“Being in love is actually one of the best things that can happen to you” Carmen I absolutely agree with you.
Carmen you also speak about “modern Romeos” and I must confess something in that point. Last month I saw three plays from Shakespeare: Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet and Midnight Summer's Dream. When comparing them with the Golden Age of Spanish literature I find Shakespeare less true to life. It’s as if Shakespeare were doing a poetic exercise about a situation and the situation itself were only an excuse. On the other hand I asking myself if we are nowadays less intelligent or cultured than people were at that time; I find it difficult to undrestand some classical references, metaphors etc and so does my husband, and we are people who could be called “cultured”. Where the general public able to understand and appreciate Shakespeare plays at that time, in a country such as England, still one of the most little and backward in Europe? (Remember it was Queen Elisabeth who began to change the country and in her time Spain, France, the Holy Roman Empire, the Papal States or the Italian Republics were countries more riches, developed and cultured than England)
Dear Paloma,
I think my answers are right though I acknowledge having made a mistake when writing the titles. “L5” and “L6” are changed. Actually, it should be “L6” first and then “L5”, however, the context is correct.
Anyway, Line 5 is “That you her maid, are far more fair than she”
I also think Line 6 is not an inversion.
Those days, they were used to that usage of language and theatre was probably the most important spectacle for population to enjoy. Besides, places, situations and characters were involved in environments well known for people of that epoch. So, I guess it was easier for them to pick it up.
Ok Roberto, sorry for my mistake. I still think L6 is an imperative and not an infinitive: he tells her to do something. It’s clear we need Carmen to judge who is right. Maria agrees with you but , as you know, the imperative in English is also formed with the base form of the verb. The imperative negative is as follows:
In English, the imperative mood uses the same word order as the indicative mood, while the prohibitive mood uses a different word order if you is added.
Indicative Imperative / Prohibitive
−you +you
Affirmative You go. Go! You go!
Negative not You do not go. Do not go! -
-n't You don't go. Don't go! Don't you go!
So, there is an inversion: do not be / be not
I had made a panel with the similarities between the indicative and the imperative but it has broken down when I have published it.
Indicative affirmative: you go / imperative affirmative: Go! Or you go!
Indicative negative: you do not go or you don’t go / imperative negative: donot go!, don’t go, Don’t you go!
As you can see the last one is the only different one.
Paloma you are probably right though I was taught that inversion embraces the following cases:
1- Questions
2- So, nor and neither
3- To emphasis, using adverbs
4- Conditional clauses (types II and III)
(5) (Dramatic inversion)
What a dilemma! ;) Either it being an infinitive or an imperative, what we know is that Juliet is handsomer than the moon, though she should have been her maid for ever! It is a joke, it´s fantastic you look for the correct answer. But let Carmen say us this!
"Inversion" or "not inversion". That is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer...
:-)
Scream!! (familiar)
What an interesting discussion! I vote for imperative too.
Sorry it was me: I was hurrying so much to go to bed that I pressed enter before writing my whole name. I'll try to get it right this time :)
PLEASE, GO TO THE FILM CLUB!
Thank you.
What about:
JULIET
I will not fail: 'tis twenty years till then.
I have forgot why I did call thee back.
ROMEO
Let me stand here till thou remember it.
JULIET
I shall forget, to have thee still stand there,
Remembering how I love thy company.
ROMEO
And I'll still stay, to have thee still forget,
Forgetting any other home but this.
Marvellous!
Now that we have analysed the poem with Carmen´s help I re-ask you this:
As for Juliet´s sentiments, despite the lines about not loving a name but a person, I think that she could find it irresistible to love and be loved by a man strictly forbidden. Women love the forbidden fruit. Is this Juliet´s case?
It is an imperative but not an inversion, ok?
I think Juliet,as most women, or men, for that matter, would find the prohibited attractive, but juliet does not know who this young man is when she falls in love with him. Neither does Romeeo, it´s love at first sight, that why it is so basic and so true.
Elena, what do you mean, it doesn´t exist nowadays??? it is everlasting and immortal. All of us have experienced it or will experience it!! You too. Make the most of it because it´s very intense,brief and...unforgetable!! Come let´s have stories..
Bye, rushing to a dinner party!!Back here tomorrow
Working in this extract, I’ve been thinking long and hard about love. Romeo and Juliet is said to be the best love story ever written. But, it is true love what we see here? Or, it is something else? What true love is?
They hardly know each other, having been together only during a ball. Even more, before meeting Juliet, Romeo was deeply in love with Rosaline. Yet, Juliet is only thirteen, even at that time, too young a person, with a character still changeable. I think they fall in love first of the beauty and second of what is forbidden (nothing more attractive).
I know what I’m speaking about, I have been married for 26 years and my husband and I are still in love to each other. For me, this is the true love, the one which is still alive after knowing each other in our best and in our worst, happy and sad, proud and ashamed, well dressed and looking a mess, alone and in company; the one which last when you have seen (and smelling) your love awaking in the mornings or taking off his shoes in a summer evening.
The true love is made of good and bad moods, tantrums, immense quarrellings, disagreements and disappointments; but also of agreements, fits of passion or great pleasures and joys.
The true love doesn’t ask you to change your name or you family: it stands them!!!!
The rest... is only literature.
How beautiful your words Paloma! I must congratulate both you and your husband for your great relationship! I think there is a few of couples that prolongs their love as you do! But that´s something that married people should say, better than me, whose longer relationship with a man has not lasted more than a year!
I think you are right. Romeo&Juliet´s is a pure love, love at first sight, but they are very young, and hadn´t they dead, probably would have got divorced.
That´s something we can´t know...
As for Juliet´s asking Romeo to change his name, I think that she is wishing not to have any problem by loving Romeo, a Montague. Because, as she said about roses´ smell, she doesn´t love the name, but the person.
Yesterday afternoon, being in class I thought I had made a mistake in the previous post and yes, indeed, that’s how it was: one is in love “with” nor in love “to”. Sorry for your eyes.
Maria I understand what Juliet means with the name matter. The last sentence in my comment was a joke, because, when married, one of the most important source of conflicts between the couple are “the in laws”.
Thank you for your words but let me tell you something about love: Love is, literally, a field of rouses. As these flowers, it needs a lot of care to survive. Rouses need water, rosebush to be prune, sun, warm temperature &c. They are delicate flowers. Yet, they have thorns, and, in spite of all the precaution you have it’s very easy to prick oneself.
To maintain a love alive for a very long time can be, sometimes, an exhausting job. It’s a matter of patience, hard work, endurance and, above all, capacity to forget and forgive. But the most important thing is to know that every time it rains, no matter how big the deluge is, or how long it lasts, in the end, always, always, it clears up, the sun sights and things are seen to be different, very different indeed.
No one is perfect, nobody is as you want he/she to be, no one behaves as you wants or expect he to do, nobody fulfills always your expectations and, most important: hardly ever can you change a person. After a long time, you realise he /she has changed “a little” but, you too.
Ah! one more thing: don’t worry about fights, when there is love, they are very healthy, and I dare say, necessary as well. DISTRUST CEMETERY’S PEACE. A couple is as to square stones that crash to each other, until they become spherical always give off sparks.
Love at first sight does exist, it is marvellous for you are on the first step and therefore, you portrait the person in your mind as you wish her to be, idealizing every single feature both of her body and her spirit. It is like dreaming awake, isn’t it? Then, is when disappointment welcomes you.
You are lucky Paloma. I wish I would see the same relation when contemplating my parents.
Paloma, your comment cannot be more complete and I dare not be less. Very good description. Obviously, Romeo and Juliet represent our more immature impulse, I dare say our thoughtlessness, but when you are a teenager, in every respect, you are less reflective and love could be as intense as ephemeral. Nevertheless, who did not have this minute of Glory?. I share with you that this is not true love but it depends on your experience, some people are still living in the moon!!, as Carmen said most of the men, that´s why some men in their sixties still wish this minute of Glory, if possible with a Juliet of 30 years old!!.
Therefore, there are many different ways to reach your satisfaction, if you demand commitment and a mature relationship probably this is minute of Glory makes you laugh. On the contrary, other people do not want to fight wrestle in a relationship and all they need are “good moments”. Obviously, Paloma, true love is an intense experience which in the difficulties grows up.
Susana, I agree with you in what you say. Romeo and Juliet’s love has something since they give their lives for the other. The problem is too many people think, and expect love, to be like this, and it is not. This love is, we see it in the play, like a firework, it lights too much and too brilliantly but for a very short time, and the light it gives to the night sky (that is: the happiness it gives to you) disappears in a minute. Then, if you want your sky illuminated again, you need to light another firework.
Unfortunately, very often people forget to light the next fire and keep expecting either the light should last for a longer time or the other lights a new firework, but this is something both have to do in turn, otherwise it does not work.
Paloma, I see what you mean and you can say therefore that your love is the greatest!; which, let me tell you, is very difficult to get. You only have to see around, how many couples get divorced nowadays or, on the other hand, live unhappy for ever living with people they don´t love any more?
However, in my opinion, Romeo&Juliet´s love, in spite of being immature, as Susan says, is innocent, sincere, pure and bright. In the sense that it is themselves and their feelings that only exist (no "laws", no house, no children, no problems). They don´t think of troubles very much, they being very young and not knowing what "a love for life" really means. They had no time to realize...
WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE
SONNET 116
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
O no! it is an ever-fixed mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.
Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come:
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
Susana, I did like very much your comment on what people may search in a relationship...
Hi mates,
I wanted to give my opinion about Romeo and Juliet´s love. I had so many things to say that I have decided to send you an e-mail. There, I explain myself better than here and overall I explain myself in Spanish.
Don´t be cruel to me.
Bye
I am sorry to be late with comments on the balcony scene, and I think I can add very little. Since Shakespeare locates Romeo an Juliet in Italy, it seems to me that he connects and manages superbly the conception of woman and love well defined in Italian literature and philosophy for centuries. There are three clearly differentiated conceptions of woman, each associated with important writers. For Dante Alighieri woman is soul, for Francesco Petrarca woman is soul and body, and for Giovanni Boccaccio woman is just body. Dante seeks Beatrice’s soul and do not care of her body, Petrarca seeks Laura’s soul but would be pleased to have access to he her body, and Boccaccio would like to have access to the body of simply any woman that cross his way no matter if she has a soul or not. Romeo seems to me behaving like a Dante as a mean to achieve Boccaccio’s style satisfactions. Juliet goes in her way to be a Laura, proud of her soul but not willing to give away her body unproperly. I am not sure to be right, but I think that if this three concetion of woman would be thaught at school, we would have less examples of genre violence. As Lennon sings, you can say that I am a dreamer, but I am not the only one…
Thank you Elena! I am flattered that you like it, especially because you are one of the most interesting writers in the blog.
In relation to the subject (love), you say that my description is a little too physical. And I wonder, what´s love at the beginning of a relationship but pure physical attraction?. When you focus your attention on a special person his/her physical appearance is the main reason why you put your eyes on him/her. Nobody can avoid it. Our brain spills different substances on our blood (endorfinas) that´s the reason why we feel "butterflies in our stomachs". But that situation lastes just a period of time (it´s depends on the person, it can last 6 months, one year, one year and a half, but no more). Scientifics have proved my statement. That´s the reason why I say that after a long period of time you can´t feel the same passion, the same nervous, the same feelings than at the beginning of your relatioship. So, after 10, 15, 20 yeas of relationship it´s impossible to feel these butterflies because our brain doesn´t produce those substances. After that period of time you feel different things but not love. Please, don´t misunderstand me, those other sensations are marvellous too, but they aren´t love. The subject is that you have to know how to enjoy with those other things, with those other sensations.
In my opinion, our point of view about love is determined by social pressure, by social taboo. Society imposes the idea that we have to go to church feeling an ideal love. It imposes the idea that love is for ever. And that´s a wrong idea.
You only have to see how many marriages split up currently. Wifes and husbands love each other less than years before?. I don´t think so. The reason is that 30, 40 or 50 years before marriages with serious problems used to keep join in order to protect children or just to show a correct image in front of their neighbours (por el qué dirán, vamos) or because women´s economic dependence.
Sorry for my mistakes. My English is a little rusty.
I miss all of you!!!.
Bandit, what you say may be very advisable, but I believe in love; does this opinion make me be an idealist? or a dreamer, as Alessandro says? Love can be sometimes a "tragedy", but a lovely tragedy we choose. If this tragedy stops being lovely to be wretched or, even worse, empty, it isn´t love any more. So, why should the relationship go on? If everything that made me be in love is forgotten or lost, how to carry on? It´s difficult to explain in English!! and I don´t want you to misunderstand me.
Alessandro I agree that to educate from literature is wonderful and neccessary, in every single way. And I don´t think you are a failure. Defend yourself!! ;)
We in Spanish have more words to speak about love than English have. I think Bandit calls love what we in Spanish call “enamoramiento” or “pasion inicial” but love is a more wide concept. In my opinion love is something too complex to be defined in only one way. Everybody is saying true things about love. Love is what Bandit says, of course, but also what Maria and I or anyone else says. There is a film called “Love has two faces” I think it has more than two, it has nearly as many as people feel it. When I used to feel butterflies in my stomach I wouldn’t be able to do some things that today I would do without the slightest hesitation for the person I love. At that time, my own feelings or how he made me feel was the most important issue, now his feelings or what I make he feel is more important for me. Was that selfish love better or purer that the one I feel today? I don’t think so.
As for the endorphins, I assure you, they still are produced after one life together.
Do you want your love to last forever? Then work, for it. Feed it. Pamper it. Allow it to grow and to develop. Be patient. Avoid the routine. Use your imagination….
WE HAVE A CONTEST ON THE FILM CLUB!!!
Maria, thank you very much for your support. I usually do not feel like a failure, at least sentimentally. I will post on this topic, but my week end was also very long, III National cup of fox hunting in Rodeiro, Galicia. Almost nine hundred hunters... Since in England they do not hunt foxes anymore, we must keep the tradition.
Alessandro thanks for your comment it´s very illustrating.and very true but what is funny is that Shakespeare seems to have had a moderate education, incredible,don´t you think?
Bandit, you are right in that love does not last for long, but then I agree with Paloma that that love you speak of is more "passion", perhaps that is love for you...one-track mind, after all you may be more like your friend with the muscles than I thought...
Paloma, I´ve liked your post very much and it is very clear, so you see, as I said you write better in English than in Spanish, spelling mistakes excepting, but though you prove your point what you say about watering the roses does not always work, some women do many things to keep up passion and retain their husbands and in walks a new face with cheaply dyed hair and you´ve lost him!!
Susan, well done you are improving and making less and less mistakes. I see it more like you than our dear Paloma.
Roberto, as always, the fantastic quote, you know I had not read this sonnet, or if I had I had forgotten it! It´s perfect for the discussion and it´s marvelous...so we are back at the beginning love can be and forever, otherwise if it be not the poet doesn´t write man doesn´t love. GREAT
I´ve being trying to understand sonet 116 and I think I´ve picked something. For Shakespeare long love does exist, and if someone proves it doesn´t exist means that that someone ever loved. Very good! Thanks Roberto!
María I´ve BEEN trying!!!!!!!
Yes you´ve picked it up, now you CAN read Shakespeare... that´s something, now please, send the bandit the sonnet, will you from me, let´s see what he comes up with.
Oh I´m so sorry for the great mistake!! I´ll send it to Bandit and if he sees it before the play, this afternoon he´ll tell you his opinion. But I think he´ll disagree with Shakespeare...
Carmen, as usually it is usually assumed that Shakespeare education was rather moderate. I am totally out of date with this argument, but long time ago there were different opinions about this. As with the discussion of the existence or not of W.S. There was a joke: Shakespeare never existed, all his work have been written by another guy whose name curiously was also William Shakespeare. For me is very strange that W.S. was as ignorant as some say. For instance, many of his plays are brilliant “remakes” of Greek and Latin classics: how could he do this if he had just a very limited education? Many years ago I read part of book whose author defended the thesis that a brother of the king liked to write plays, but his condition did not permitted him to do it openly, so he did write and then gave them to the Shakespeare we know to be shown on stage. I cannot remember the name of this writer, but he sounded very prepared and convincing. But of course I am not an expert. By the way: can you please ask your cousin the address of the Piggy’s? Of course it is not for me, but for a friend of mine who likes that kind of places…
I think Shakespeare must have had some education although not as much as some of his contemporaries, for example he was no scholar apparently not good at Latin and Greek, that´s why they despised him a bit, but he was wonderful with human nature, that is what is difficult the rest he could have got help with.
the Piggy is in the little street that goes from Castellana to María de Molina.
Shakespeare was forced to give up the school when he was 9, I think. His father needed his help as glover maker. Nevertheless, when attending school he had access to poetry and was lucky for his teachers were for the old faith instead of the Protestantism. Besides, before going to London he was concealed (his family were persecuted for many reason) and could read plenty of books.
thanks, Roberto for your information, you know everything! He must have read, undoubtedly, but he was no scholar
I’ve bought a book in Edinburgh, its title is “Shakespeare” ant the author is Bill Bryson. I’m going to start reading it right now, then I’ll tell you whether it worth reading. I hope after finishing it I’ll know about Shakespeare at least the same as Roberto.
Here are two comments about the book:
“A delight …A gem of a book” (Mail on Sunday) “Brilliantly funny and gently insightful” (Sunday Times)
Roberto the biography I’m reading disagrees with you have said about Shakespeare’s life in many points. It seems that very little is really known about Shakespeare life and the most is invented. What you said about his 9 years old seems to be an invention and the same about the concealment. My book says “ it is commonly supposed that S. enjoyed a good education at the local grammar school….and he probably did, though in fact we don’t know, as the school records for the period were long ago lost” “Boys normally attended the school for seven or eight years, beginning at the age of 7” “Any grammar school pupil of the day would have received a more thorough grounding in Latin rhetoric and literature “than most present-day holders of a university degree in classics” “Formal education stopped for S. probably when he was about fifteen”.
Dear Paloma,
Despite having written “I think” in my comment, I got the information by means of the documentary “In search of Shakespeare”, shot by the BBC in 2002. Nevertheless, I will watch it again so that I can check whether my post gives the same intelligence as in the documentary itself.
The book I'm reading about Shakespeare is really worth reading, well written, easy to read, enjoyable and full of interesting information about him and his time. I strongly recommend it to you:
Bill Bryson “Shakespeare” (The World as a Stage) Harper Perennial
It’s written on it:
“Shakespeare genius was not really to do with facts, but with ambition, intrigue, love, suffering – things that aren’t taught in school. He had a kind of assimilative intelligence, which allowed him to pull together lost of disparate fragments of knowledge, but there is almost nothing in his plays that speaks of hard intellectual application….Nothing we find in Shakespeare betrays any acquaintance with Tacitus, Pliny, Suetonius or others who influenced Johnson and were second nature to Francis Bacon. That is a good thing – a very good thing indeed – for he would almost certainly have been less Shakespeare and more a showoff had he been better read. As John Dryden put it in 1668: “Those who accuse him to have wanted learning, give him the greater commendation: he was naturally learn’d”
"it id often said that what sets Shakespeare apart is his ability to illuminate the workings of the soul and so on, and he does that superbly, goodnessknows, but what really characerizes his work - every bit of it, in poems and plays and even dedications, throughout every portion of his career - is a positive and palpable appreciation of the transfixing power of language.
Thanks Paloma, indeed for those extracts, I´ve really enjoyed reading them!!
Paloma, all things are very interesting! Shakespeare was a genius. What he had was experience or at least a great capacity of observing and, the most important virtue, talent to tell them.
You have mentioned Francis Bacon. I saw the exhibition last Tuesday and it is very clear that he was influenced by many things. You can like his work or not, but the fact is that it moves you in some way, transmits something.
Dear Paloma,
Thank you for such interesting posts, I acknowledge your sources of information are better than mine. Good job!
Not only did Shakespeare has a natural talent to show on the stage human feelings but he also was amazingly able to portrait faithfully the two sides of the coin.
Thanks a lot to you all. You are very kind with me.
A couple of weeks ago, I have been to Verona, which is the suppossed location of the story between Romeo and Juliet.
I felt astonished about the massive profit they are taking of the celebrity of Shakespeare's play.
You can visit Juliet's tomb, Romeo's house, Juliet's balcony,... and everwhere is painted whith love declarations by the huge amount of turists. The most shocking thing, is a bronce statue underneath Juliet's balcony. There are a lot of turists taking pictures of people whith the hand on the breast of the statue(they may think that they will be lucky due to that) so the show is in the sexual assault to Juliet's figure, more than in the balcony itself.
Apart from that, there are pannels everywhere with some extracts of the original text, so it was great to read it in front of the places wich were suppossed to inspire the play.
fatty liver symptoms mayo clinic fatty liver symptoms mayo clinic fatty liver symptoms mayo clinic
My web site; natural treatment for a fatty liver
Publicar un comentario