A lesson

A few weeks ago we had a go at 'Romeo and Juliet' DVD's, managing all of the Zeffirelli version (1968) and half of the BBC version (1978), with the Thames Television version (also 1976) as yet untouched. With one virtue of this last being that it includes most of the text. We rather liked the Zeffirelli version and I rather liked the BBC version, despite the age difference between Romeo (old) and Juliet (young). Despite his old age, I liked this Romeo better than Zeffirelli's, I liked the nurse better than Zeffirelli's and I liked the more stagey setting. But BH didn't, so we didn't make it to the end. Not even to the half-way post, as I recall.

Afterwards, we thought about the age of Lady Capulet. The general impression is that she is quite old, mature at the very least, but there is one line, Act.I, Sc.III, Line.72, where it is made clear that she is something less than 30. After some not very good tempered debate with BH, I realised that changing one word – ‘I was your’ to ‘I was a’ – would put the matter right, at the expense of substantially reducing the dramatic impact of the line. Is the Bard just being careless with some of the details, in the way that the writers of detective stories often are? Or do we have a simple error in transcription? Or is it that the Bard had Lady Capulet talk the story up a bit in order to make her point, in order to give her that impact - as that is what people do? But perhaps that is too complicated? In any event, I did not find any discussion of the point in Arden, despite this last's love of close readings.

Since then I have been taking a closer look at the introductory material in this Arden version, edited by Brian Gibbons, clearly a big cheese in the world of Bard Studies, but with both Bing and Google failing to tell me anything much else about him, apart from the fact that he was still up and running at the end of the last century. They both turn up the non-functional hit snapped above, which says that he is or was about ten years older than I.

And yesterday I took a lesson in humility, in the form of taking a look at Section 4 of the Introduction, where he tells us about the play, that is to say after the sections on text, date (maybe 1595, an early play) and sources. The lesson was realising how much I did not know and would never know about this play. About its deep roots in the extensive love poetry of its day and about how the shifting poetic textures interacted with the developing action. About how Romeo grew up in the course of that action. From where I associate to a thought which I may have picked up from glancing at a book by another scholar, Stephen Greenblatt, about how the Renaissance was a time when there was renewed interest in the inner workings of the self. And I am reminded that I have never been much of one for poetry, rarely reading it anywhere else than in Shakespeare's plays. Even his sonnets being more or less virgin ground as far as I am concerned.

Deep roots of which I was unaware and which I imagine are apt to be buried, if not missing altogether, from any major refurb. for audiences of today, be that for stage or screen. And what would the audiences of the time of writing have made of it all? Were they the Guardian readers of their day or the Sun readers?

Thinking about it a little more, I don't think I have ever been to a proper production of Romeo and Juliet. A long time ago we saw an acrobatic Icelandic version at the Young Vic and more recently we saw a modern dress version at the Rose (reference 1). But that seems to be about it. As many references to the cigars (which I used to rather like) in the blog as to the play.

And there is a reference to 'Shakespeare in love' at reference 2 and another to a curious edition of the play at reference 3.

So, for a play which is so well known by name, not very much at all.

Reference 1: http://psmv2.blogspot.com/2015/03/romeo-alpha.html.

Reference 2: http://psmv2.blogspot.com/2015/05/deal-in-rain-1.html.

Reference 3: https://psmv3.blogspot.com/2017/11/air-ambulance.html.

Reference 4: http://vesturport.com/theater/romeo-juliet/. Almost certainly the acrobatic Icelandic version. The pictures supplied are clearly of the right sort of thing, but they don't ring any bells with me otherwise. Other than that BH was rather amused by there being a big hole in the tights of one of the lady acrobats.

Reference 5: http://psmv2.blogspot.com/2015/03/but-he-that-hath-steerage-of-my-course.html. An irrelevant musing, anchored on a quote from Romeo.