Attracting High School Students to Shakespeare Through Supplementary Media

“By Any Other Name Would Smell As Sweet” Attracting High School Students To Shakespeare Through Supplementary Media

Submitted by Indigo Baloch As part of a Tutorial in Creative Writing April 14, 2017

Chatham University Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Acknowledgements

Thank you to Dr. Lynne Bruckner for her patience and guidance as my tutorial advisor.

Thank you to my board members, Dr. Carrie Tippen and Dr. Katie Cruger, for joining me on this journey. Thank you to my fellow tutorial students, Monica Ballard and Jess Turner, for always

providing me with vital feedback. Thank you to Tara, Justina, Claire, Claire, Brendan, and Sarah

for putting so much faith in me. Thank you to Kaelin for the caffeine pills and flowers the night

before tutorial was due. Thank you to my bees family—Alexis, Laney, Natalie, and Sara—for giving me a safe haven to vent and de-stress when the going got too tough. Thank you to

Campus Kitty for always being there when I needed pet therapy. Thank you to all of my loved ones at Chatham and elsewhere who provided me with love and support through this wild ride.

iii

Table of Contents

Critical

Introduction: The Continued Relevance of Studying Shakespeare………………………………5

Chapter I: Why Do We Study Romeo and Juliet?……………………………………………….12

Chapter II: Adolescent Current Issues in Romeo and Juliet……………………………………..22

Part I. Lord Capulet as a Possessive Father……………………………………………...22

Part II. Toxic Masculinity in the Feud of the Capulets vs. Montagues………………….27

Part III. Romeo’s Romanticized, Sexually Coercive Behavior………………………….33

Part IV. Sex Positivity and the Women of Romeo and Juliet……………………………36

Epilogue: Further Studies………………………………………………………………………..39

Works Cited……………………………………………………………………………………...41

Creative

Process Statement and Plot Summary……………………………………………………………43

Character List…………………………………………………………………………………….44

Act and Scene Summaries……………………………………………………………………….45

Verona High: An Excerpt………………………………………………………………………..47

Critical Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………….71

Creative Inspiration Bibliography……………………………………………………………….74

Introduction: The Continued Relevance of Studying Shakespeare

William Shakespeare’s plays are taught in schools across the world. According to a 2010 survey headed by the Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC), 50% of the world’s students study

Shakespeare. The survey includes responses from 43 countries and stated that 64 million students

study Shakespeare every year (Irish 2). However, as time passes, the 16th-century English

vernacular has become unfamiliar and difficult to digest for many people. And these obstacles

become a commonly off-putting characteristic for younger generations.

In the United Kingdom, Shakespeare is the only writer whose work is a required part of

the curriculum (Rokison 1). Similarly in the United States, “the usual first encounter with

Shakespeare by youth is in secondary education, in which the classroom becomes a site of

resistance [and in response] an entire industry has sprung up for the purpose of marketing

Shakespeare to youth,” that includes nearly every type of media you can imagine (Hulbert 1-2).

For example, the Hip Hop Shakespeare Company attempts to bridge the gap between different

communities and Shakespeare through combining “contemporary language, hip hop slang, and

Shakespearean imagery” (Rokison 3). And this is not uncommon as many people link the poetry

of Shakespeare to hip-hop and rap music. A visual example of this can be seen in the movie 10

Things I Hate About You (a modern adaptation of Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew) when

the English teacher raps Shakespeare’s Sonnet 141 for his class in an attempt to interest them in

the topic. In the film, the students seem uninterested at first but as the teacher begins to rap, they

become surprised and more engaged. While this is a film, it is often true that using more

nontraditional teaching methods can help keep students alert and involved.

Particularly, the RSC has been known for their dedication to attracting younger

generations to Shakespeare. The RSC’s educational efforts date back to 1948, striving to make

Shakespeare accessible and palatable to students who are wary of the bard (Winston 1).

Recently, RSC launched a Twitter campaign known as Such Tweet Sorrow (2010)—a social

media production loosely based on Romeo and Juliet. Over the span of five weeks the RSC recreated the play through character Twitter accounts that live-tweeted their lines (Rokison 3-4).

Such Tweet Sorrow reached out to the social media generation in a way that transformed the play to be more physically user-friendly and also showed the audience the continued flexibility of the

play. Romeo and Juliet became people the audience could more easily visualize: a 19 and 15-

year-old (respectively) of the millennial generation (3-4). Like the many Romeo and Juliet

“modern retellings” that have come before, Such Tweet Sorrow delivered its targeted, young

audience, modernized and relatable star-crossed lovers. This Romeo and Juliet used social media

to communicate, met up at hipster bookstores and coffee shops, and went to school like the

average millennial teenager (3-4). The project was run through several accounts, each having an

average followings of 3,000 people. At one point, fans arranged an online wake for the project’s

Mercutio, and Such Tweet Sorrow ultimately won a Royal Television Society Award for Digital

Innovation (Mudlark 1).

Such efforts, it appears, are necessary. In the RSC’s 2007 Attitude to Shakespeare (ATS)

survey1, the majority of students had negative attitudes towards Shakespeare. Overall, only 18

percent agreed “Shakespeare is fun” and almost half (46 percent) said, “studying Shakespeare is

boring.” And it is important to note that 49 percent agreed that they found Shakespeare difficult

to understand. This means that 735 students out of 1,500 felt they were struggling to understand

Shakespeare. Additionally, because the students seemed to find Shakespeare’s plays difficult,

1 The RSC’s 2007 Attitude to Shakespeare (ATS) survey was a survey that was completed by over 1,500 students beginning their Year 10 (equivalent to ninth grade in the United States) in urban and rural areas in England, and inclusive of a broad representation in terms of gender and ethnicity (Winston 2015, 134).

only 35 percent felt that, “It is important to study Shakespeare’s plays” (Winston 134). Clearly,

the students’ difficulty processing Shakespeare’s plays is causing a widening barrier between

students and Shakespeare’s works—although it is still possible to bridge the divide through fuller education of the plays. In the end, the greatest “key to this accessibility…is skillful, knowledgeable, and aesthetically aware teaching” (158). Young students need to be given more credit. If they are provided with the right tools and education to dissect Shakespeare, they can

carry those skills with them for the rest of their lives to assess not only Shakespearean texts, but

also perhaps even more arcane texts as well. While love for Shakespeare’s work is a different

matter, there is surely a sense of appreciation that comes with understanding.

Shakespeare’s plays are important because of their irreplaceable beauty, poetry, and

nuanced complexities—making them indispensible. In Shakespeare Set Free: Teaching a

Midsummer Night’s Dream, Romeo and Juliet, and Macbeth, performance editor Michael

Tolaydo insists,

We know Shakespeare’s plays are not about the plot; many in his audience knew the

stories before they saw the plays. They are really more about explorations into human

nature, about language, and about the ambiguity that much of that language presents. (27-

28)

As Tolaydo explains, the true gift in Shakespeare’s work is the humanity and emotional response

it elicits in its readers. Therefore, removing Shakespeare from curricula and replacing it with

modern texts would take away a fundamental experience from students. Shakespeare’s plays are important because of their elasticity—allowing for new ways of reading with every generation.

The Shakespeare we learn at a young age—from middle school through high school—can be

very different from the Shakespeare we come to know as we age, change, and encounter new and

different experiences. Especially in the case of tragedies, the plays can take on new meaning for readers once they have combatted grief in their own lives. And on a larger scale—one beyond the individual, Shakespeare also changes for the entire human race, as the world and its cultures and societies changes throughout history.

Rex Gibson, a teacher and lecturer in education at Cambridge University, and leader of

Shakespeare and Schools Project (Wienand 134) writes,

One reason why Shakespeare’s plays have proved so popular for so long is their infinite

capacity for adaptation. As society changes, so do the meanings and significances found

in the plays. For 400 years the plays have been interpreted and performed in an

astonishing variety of ways (Gibson xii).

Although Gibson focuses predominantly on theatre adaptations (rather than film), his belief in

Shakespeare’s timeless elasticity is important to note. It furthers the argument that adapting

Shakespeare’s work to modern settings and situations is not only possible, but also a valuable tool for younger audiences. In the RSC ATS survey, only 33 percent of the students disagreed with the statement “Shakespeare’s characters and situations are not relevant to life today”— meaning the majority failed to recognize most of the adaptations and references they encounter in their lives—let alone the fact that Shakespeare’s characters face countless human experiences that many students will likely face in time: love, death, betrayal, camaraderie, etc. (Winston

134). In actuality, as time goes on, we can repeatedly find new ways to rework Shakespeare’s plays into our lives, classrooms, and society. Romeo and Juliet becomes West Side Story (1961),

West Side Story becomes Grease (1978), and Grease becomes High School Musical (2006). The list will be ever growing and evolving. So while only 30 percent of the students in the ATS survey agreed, “I would be happy to watch a Shakespeare play/film in my own time,” the

chances that they have watched at least a loose adaptation and enjoyed it are very high (134).

The key lies in helping students make these connections between the playtexts and the films or shows they are familiar with and enjoy—especially where the allusions or references may be subtler and harder to identify.

It is also important to note that many of the words and phrases we use in daily life come from Shakespeare—i.e. “break the ice” (The Taming of the Shrew), “faint hearted” (Henry VI

Part I), “for goodness’ sake” (Henry VIII), “good riddance” (Troilus and Cressida), “heart of gold” (Henry V), “love is blind” (The Merchant of Venice), “all that glitters is not gold” (The

Merchant of Venice) (McAlpine 1). In the case of Romeo and Juliet, we can thank Shakespeare for “wild-goose chase” and “star-crossed lovers,” among others. Michael Tolaydo maintains,

“without question, some of the language is difficult; however, not all of it is” (28). Whether people realize it or not, Shakespeare has greatly influenced the way we all speak and the metaphors and expressions we use even daily. So to completely dismiss the texts as unfamiliar and distant vernacular is not necessarily accurate. In 2016, we still rely on words and phrases

Shakespeare created in the 1500s.

The power and importance of Shakespeare’s plays is layered. Moving forward, when adapting Shakespeare for the modern world, we must be cognizant of potential pitfalls. A proper adaptation should uphold the plot and respect the original playtext. Shakespeare’s plays are full of insightful and deliberate poetry. To lose that diction in the process of adapting holds students back from experiencing the full beauty of Shakespeare’s writing. If we can integrate words and phrases that he created into our daily speech, can we not preserve the original playtext dialogue without losing the interest of younger audiences? In my view, the Bard’s signal use of double entendres, poetics, and other literary devices in the original verbage carries a variety of layers of

meaning. As noted above, Shakespeare is about more than just plot. The goals of an adaptation

should include drawing the audiences back to the original text. If the adaptation is removed from the original text, the audience may struggle to make a connection and simply choose the digestible adaptation over the original playtext. Whether it be a film, theatre, or video game

adaptation, the student should leave with a general knowledge and appreciation of the play.

In the end, Shakespeare’s work is what you make of it. If you come in with a closed heart and mind, you will get out exactly what you are putting in: nothing. Many people form biased ideas of Shakespeare’s work without even reading his poems or plays. Nevertheless,

Shakespeare’s plays would not remain a staple in curricula across the world if it were not crucial.

In Transforming the Teaching of Shakespeare with the Royal Shakespeare Company, Joe

Winston asks,

If Shakespeare is globally recognized as one of the best dramatists, poets, and storytellers

to have ever live, why deprive [students], whatever their age or background, of the very

best when there are demonstrable ways of making him accessible, and if there is evidence

that it can directly benefit their learning and well-being? (158).

When dealing with Shakespeare, we are addressing texts that have endured centuries. If there was not something important to be gained from his work, we could have stopped circulating it

400 plus years ago. The gift of Shakespeare is one that was made to engage commoners and royalty alike. And beyond that, Rex Gibson sums up succinctly and rather playfully: “An easy answer to the question ‘Why teach Shakespeare?’ is ‘Why not?’” (1).

Shakespeare’s plays are so adaptable that they can be relatable to people in the 16th- century as well as people in the 21st-century. The playtext provides so much content and emotion

that is applicable to life inside and outside of the classroom. Learning how to read Shakespeare

is a lot of work—for students and teachers. Teachers need to encourage their students, giving

them a starting point, and students should work to make connections between the texts and their

own lives. Luckily, more and more supplementary materials are coming forward to help students

better understand and relate to Shakespeare’s plays.

Chapter I: Why Do We Study Romeo and Juliet?

Often, young students find themselves introduced to Shakespeare through Romeo and

Juliet—in fact, this was the case at my own high school. And even outside of the classroom,

adolescents will find references to Romeo and Juliet throughout dozens of movies and shows where characters read or perform the play in school. These references can be seen in Twilight:

New Moon, Hey Arnold!, Toy Story 3, Family Matters, Ned's Declassified School Survival

Guide, Hannah Montana, The Brady Bunch, and so many more. References to Romeo and Juliet

even come up in pop songs like We The Kings’ “Check Yes Juliet,” Taylor Swift’s “Love

Story,” and Madonna’s “Cherish.”

Yet, with so many Shakespearean plays to choose from, why is Romeo and Juliet the text

most commonly used as an introduction? An easy answer would be that the use of “young”

lovers might appeal most to young audiences. However, in Shakespeare Set Free, Jeanne

Addison Roberts explains that, “All of the comedies deal with young love, providing

perspectives very different from that of Romeo and Juliet, and adding important dimensions to a

topic barely touched on in any of the other great tragedies,” (3). If the goal is to appeal to young

audiences with young characters, Romeo and Juliet is not Shakespeare’s only play that employs

young characters. Roberts continues,

It is, of course, a topic of intense interest to most students, although paradoxically the

subject of young love is so close to most of them that they may have trouble dealing with

it. The immediate emotional impact of the story of the doomed lovers in Romeo and

Juliet may seem more accessible to them than the more detached rationality of the

account of the multiple lovers in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, but both attitudes need

exploring…” (3)

While teachers may not have the time to explore more of Shakespeare’s plays and compare themes between them, only providing one image of love and tragedy can be worrisome. In the case of Romeo and Juliet, it can sometimes be interpreted as a romanticization of their double suicide and all of the destruction caused by their brief love affair. As mentioned above, the references to Romeo and Juliet in pop culture are overwhelming and generally paint the play in a strictly romantic light. This romanticization can be problematic if young audiences do not receive a broad education about the play, its context, and its multitude of themes—often addressing aspects of human life.

While her experience is working with adults (rather than adolescents)—Laura Raidonis

Bates has a long history of visiting prisons and using Shakespeare to engage and educate inmates. Her purpose for using Shakespeare is a test of sorts—“a way of testing the limits of

Shakespeare’s alleged “universality”” (152). Bates is not focused on young students, but her work is important because it addresses mending poor, past education on Shakespeare. Her process involves using video excerpts and painstakingly close readings of the whole playtext.

She particularly uses Romeo and Juliet to discuss gang violence. Bates explains that some of the inmates she works with have been in a class where Shakespeare was taught, but they did not receive a full education of it and therefore were not able to make personal connections or see the relevance of what they were reading. Due to her thorough work, however, she has been able to help her pupils grasp the full weight of Romeo and Juliet and gain awareness of its

consequences. As an example of an adult whose life could be altered by a deeper education of

Shakespeare, Bates writes,

Awaiting sentences in Cook County Jail, Deon agreed. He had been involved with a

girl from a rival gang and was now facing attempted murder charges, “If only I’d read

this before,” he said, “I’d a looked at what happened to Romeo and I’d a left that girl

alone—and I wouldn’t a ended up in here!” (162).

Deon’s experience is a valuable example of where an effective teaching of Romeo and Juliet in someone’s youth could have changed their future. In the end, sometimes education on one text can change someone’s life entirely.

But even within one text there is a multitude of ways to read and teach Shakespeare’s plays. Rather than trying to address several of his plays, teachers also have the opportunity to address one text through multiple lenses. That is the gift that comes with the plays’ nuance. In her essay Triple-Threat Shakespeare in Shakespeare Set Free, Jeanne Addison Roberts claims,

There is no “message.” It is tempting to try to isolate clear morals in these plays, but we

need to resist the temptation to simplify them. I do not think that Shakespeare is trying to

tell us that Romeo and Juliet were too young or that they shouldn’t have defied their

parents…He is rather showing us, in ways what drama is uniquely structured to do

because it has no one narrative voice, the working out of genuine human conflicts for

which there are no clear solutions. Different audiences will see the plays differently…

(4).

Roberts reminds us that whether or not we agree with the different readings Shakespeare’s plays, we at least have to acknowledge them and be cognizant of them. Providing students with only one way of reading Romeo and Juliet throughout their lifetime is a disservice to the playtext and its many layers and intricacies. So while it is reasonable to provide young children with only the first layer—with Romeo and Juliet as a love story—by late adolescence, readers should be able to unpack the other levels of the play.

The are dozens of ways to read Romeo and Juliet, and each one offers a new experience and a new way to connect the text to our lives. It also helps us to see the imperfect, human nature of Shakespeare’s characters. They have flaws and that is what makes them all the more relatable.

And, as noted above, it is imperative to note the difference between modern day ideals and

Renaissance ideals. What may seem strange now, may have been the norm back then. In

Annotated Shakespeare: Romeo and Juliet, Burton Raffel states in the introduction that,

It is a mistake to believe either that Shakespeare’s Romeo is excessively passionate or

that he and Juliet are in some way recklessly immature and unthinking. Renaissance (and

to a large extent later medieval) approaches to love were founded on two bodily organs,

neither of them the brain. The eyes were thought to begin the process. Sight was indeed

indispensable, and sight, like the wind and the rain, happens to be a physically based

occurrence over which humans have no control. But the eyes alone could not create love.

The eyes transmitted the image they saw, automatically and without any notion of

preconception or planning, straight into the organs of emotion. Stirred by such a physical

impact, the recipient’s heart and soul were inevitably and irreversibly bound by that wry,

sly, and even malevolent god Love, who was identified with the bow-wielding blind imp,

Cupid (xvi).

While Raffel’s statement could be a bit of a stretch, it certainly holds merit. Renaissance people relied on different explanations and timelines for falling in love—sometimes getting married at a younger age than is even legal nowadays. Looking back over the centuries, approaches to love and marriage have evolved vastly into entirely new ideals. Romeo and Juliet’s whirlwind love and relationship was something that may have been more common in Anglo European culture at the time it was written and set.

In fact, The Norton Shakespeare, Volume One gives a great deal of historical context, focusing on the origins of the play. It even states that Romeo and Juliet was an existing play in the 16th century—shifting from Italy to France to England, before Shakespeare wrote his version, quickened the pace, and amplified most of the existing content. Stephen Greenblatt writes,

Shakespeare’s direct source is Arthur Brooke’s Tragicall Historye of Romeus and Juliet

(1562), a long, leaden English poem based on a French prose version…Shakespeare

follows the main outline of Brooke’s narrative, although he makes many changes in the

interests of theatrical compression and intensification. Hence the events that in Brooke

take nine months are telescoped into a few days…Juliet, eighteen years old in Bandello’s

[original] version and sixteen in Brooke’s, is depicted as only thirteen, a young girl

suddenly awakening to passionate desires that set her against the will of her family (897-

898).

As Greenblatt makes clear, Shakespeare made deliberate changes. He could have kept Juliet eighteen, but he specifically chose to make her character younger—opening a whole new conversation about this young romance. Rather than a relationship between two young adults,

Juliet is only thirteen and is still discovering herself and her desires. It is also crucial to keep in mind that the romance on the whole hearkens to the tale of Pyramus and Thisbe in Shakespeare’s own A Midsummer Night’s Dream. And in that play, the story of Pyramus and Thisbe is presented in a comedic light—yet Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy. Romeo and Juliet opens up many different themes to delve into and read more closely. The more you learn about the historical context and background of the play, the more you have to pick apart—making it a great play for classroom discussions.

Still, one of the clearest reasons why Romeo and Juliet has taken over curricula is actually due to film adaptations of Shakespearean plays. With digital and film advances, film adaptations can step in where schools may struggle to find the time and funds to perform

Shakespeare in the classroom or take students to professional productions. While he suggests performing Shakespeare in the classroom, Michael Tolaydo reminds us that,

As teachers, I think we often forget that these plays were created to be heard and seen,

and that the text we read—some of it corrupted through time by editors and printers—is

actually only an attempt to capture that three-dimensional event which was performed on

those old Elizabethan stages where the action often complemented the word. When we

read a play, we miss some of what I call the performance language of the play. A line of

text on a page does not exist as a piece of theater. A whole play does not come into being

when it’s in print. It breathes only when it is performed and for that moment only (27).

Here, Tolaydo reminds us of the importance of providing students with an image of what is

happening in the play as they read. The benefit of film is the ability to show those moments on

replay—a performance we can rewatch over and over again, and process anew each time. With

film adaptations, educators can provide their students with a quick visual performance to

accompany the text without putting strain on their time limit and financial limits. If they can get

their students performing vital scenes in the classroom as a bonus, that is wonderful, but for

some districts who have limitations, film can be a fundamental learning tool.

The rise of Romeo and Juliet, specifically in popular film, really began with Italian

director, Franco Zeffirelli’s Romeo and Juliet (1968). In Shakespeare and Film: A Norton Guide

Samuel Crowl explains,

Zeffirelli’s Romeo and Juliet was the first Shakespeare film to find a large, mostly

teenage, film audience, and it became the most commercially successful Shakespeare

film in history until it was surpassed by Baz Luhrman’s William Shakespeare’s Romeo +

Juliet in 1996 (12).

Zeffirelli’s film was a success because it targeted the youths of the 1960s and gave them a film that they felt identified with their ideals. And because of its overwhelming popularity with the generation, Crowl rationalizes,

Zeffirelli’s film continues to have a potent afterlife as the youth movement of the 1960s

swept Romeo and Juliet into the American high school English curriculum, displacing

Julias Caesar and Macbeth as the most commonly taught Shakespeare plays (13).

Zeffirelli’s film cast a spell over his young audience, and also changed the way young people

were introduced to Shakespeare. The way Zeffirelli’s film appealed to them lies deeply in his

romantic portrayal of the young lovers.

Zeffirelli’s film suited the historical, cultural, and societal desires of young people at the

time. “His Shakespeare films all reflect his particularly Italian neo-romantic style derived from

his work as an opera director. They are bold and vivid and conceived for a mass rather than

coterie audience” (12). And because of these filmic devices, the younger generation, eager for a

time of love and peace, saw two young lovers who were desperate to be together despite the

odds. The film is meant to focus on romanticizing the lovers because the world wanted to put an

emphasis on love and spreading love.

After Zeffirelli, Australian director Baz Luhrmann took the title and added his own,

colorful flair. The film “is loaded with the zooms, slams, and jump cuts that mark its opening

sequence and become its cinematic signature”—something integral to Luhrmann’s style, and can

be seen in his other films as well (86). Luhrmann’s William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet

(1996) changed the playing field entirely by inserting the flashing MTV, neon, pop culture of the

90s. This film is critical to Romeo and Juliet’s survival as an educational tool because it had a profound effect on young students reading Shakespeare and brought about a resurgence of film love for the play. At a time when students may have grown tired of Zeffirelli’s film (then 30- years-old), Luhmann’s film drew young students back again. The improvement was so great that it gained scholarly attention. In early 1998, the Times Educational Supplement (TES)2 reported

that the film was “being credited with the huge improvement in 14-year-olds' performance in

Shakespeare tests." Statistics show 62 percent of 14-year-olds studied Romeo and Juliet. In fact,

Luhrmann even went into schools himself to promote studying Shakespeare and 12,000 study

guides were sent out to UK schools to support his film—this being an great example of making

sure students are not just consuming media, but also analyzing it. (Irish 15)

So while the questionable elements remain, teachers find themselves forced to make the

tough decision between using the film in class or not—a dilemma where time constraint and lack

of funding/tools comes into play again). While the film can draw the interest of more skeptical

and uninterested students (due to the bright colors, loud sounds, and overall flamboyant nature of

the film) time must be dedicated to breaking down the film, and pointing out its differences from

the playtext. Gemma Warren, a Postgraduate Certificate in Education3 student wrote in her TES

column in March 1998 of using the Luhrmann film: "I've never had 100% attendance and total punctuality for three consecutive days [before]. It makes me remember why I love teaching"

(15).

2 The Times Educational Supplement (TES) is a UK publication for schoolteachers. 3 The Postgraduate Certifcate in English is a graduate training route for teaching in the UK.

It is also important to remember that Luhrmann strongly encouraged further education in

Shakespeare’s plays and made his film with purpose, hoping it could be a study aid for younger audiences. In Shakespeare for Young People, Abigail Rokison states,

The primary motivation behind the modern setting was, according to Luhrmann, to

make the often complex and antiquated language of the play accessible to modern

audiences no regularly acquainted with Shakespeare’s work, by finding ‘modern day

images and equivalents that could decode the language of Shakespeare’ (40).

Throughout the film, Luhrmann relied on coded, modern visuals as metaphors to attract his

audience while providing them a media-saturated and quickly digestible serving of Shakespeare.

Essentially, the film served the play to a young, 90s audience in a form that was familiar to them,

heavy with amusing, subtle nods for Shakespeare-lovers who could find them (i.e. the guns that

were referred to as “swords” and even had the word “sword” engraved into them). Crowl also notes,

The pool hall where the Montagues hang out is called the Globe; the nearby ruined beach

resort is the Sycamore Grove; the Montagues and Capulets exchange snatches of lines

lifted from various Shakespeare plays in the film’s opening shoot-out at the Phoenix gas

station (“Double, double, toil and trouble,” “pretty piece of flesh,” “more fuel to the

fire”); advertising billboards proclaim: The Merchant of Verona Beach, Such Stuff as

Dreams Are Made On, and Shoot Forth Thunder (86).

The allusions are numerous, witty, and add layers to the film in ways that Shakespeare’s plays

did in their own time period. Similarly, Shakespeare made references and allusions that his

audience would understand, and find amusing and relevant. By engaging with his audience

through similar tactics, Luhrmann tries to further Shakespeare’s work in a modern era.

Tools such as film adaptations are valuable in the classroom to help students make connections between the playtext and their daily lives. Clever substitutions like guns for swords can help students associate modern items with those in the original text. For example, in a modernized adaptation, a messenger (character) could be portrayed as a messenger (on a phone or laptop). These replacements provide students with a clearer visualization of the scene unfolding in the playtext. Teachers can also help students connect plots and themes to modern situations. A ball or feast can become a house party, and a quarrel between two houses can become a gang war. And all of these efforts are not to bastardize Shakespeare, but to make his work more accessible and relevant for modern audiences.

Chapter II: Adolescent Current Issues in Romeo and Juliet

One way to begin viewing Shakespeare through a more modern lens is to analyze the

playtext through theories—especially newer literary theories. Some theories that have become

more prevalent with scholars are queer and feminist theory. Especially for Romeo and Juliet, there are countless intricacies that can be analyzed through a feminist lens—sexuality, agency for women, toxic masculinity. And while some may be inappropriate for high school classrooms, students can make the connections outside of class, in their own lives. In this chapter, I analyze

Romeo and Juliet through a feminist lens to focus primarily on possessive fatherhood, sex positivity, toxic masculinity, and sexual coercion within the playtext. This is in an effort to show the connection between Romeo and Juliet as adolescents to the adolescent students reading the play. The text is applicable to young audiences, and especially to young adults.

I. Lord Capulet as a Possessive Father

When approaching Romeo and Juliet through a feminist lens, it is crucial to address the gap between its time and setting, and our own. In the Renaissance era “there were similarities between the position of servants in the household and that of children in the family…Both owed obedience and service to the head of the household” (Stone 87). Children were expected to follow their parents’ orders and wishes—and often they were used as pawns in marriage. Even beyond marriage, Elizabethan women simply had far less power and agency than women are afforded today. Jeanne Addison Roberts writes,

Another extremely important topic for modern audiences to consider in reading these

plays is their representation of women. Shakespeare was, of course, a member of a

society even more patriarchal than our own, where women had no legal rights and were

the property of their fathers or their husbands. Juliet’s father can condemn his not-yet-

thirteen-year-old daughter to “hang, beg, starve, die in the streets” (3.5.204) if she refuses

the marriage he has arranged for her (5).

Juliet’s betrothal to Paris is not uncommon and her father’s anger at her refusal would have been expected. Though Shakespeare has written many other strong-willed and brilliant female characters (Beatrice, Portia, et. al.), Juliet seems trapped by her youth and feels she has to choose between obeying and eloping. She has neither money of her own, nor does she have the right to choose her suitor. As Juliet was to be married one way or another, she decided to choose her spouse herself. This is something that would have been unacceptable at the time and left her disowned and destitute. Nevertheless, Juliet chose love over more fundamental needs.

Passionate, overwhelming emotion is threaded throughout the play in many forms. Most

of the characters in Romeo and Juliet are quite animated—they bounce between a variety of

extreme emotions, which leads to high drama and tragedy. In the Norton Shakespeare preface to

Romeo and Juliet, Grennblatt writes,

The passionate love that divides Romeo from his friends sets both lovers still more

decisively against the values of their powerful families. Those values involve a complex

intertwining of honor, dignity, love, will, and property, a blend that can manifest itself as

gracious hospitality or as murderous feuding, as gentle nostalgia or as cold calculation, as

a father’s indulgent affection for his daughter or as blind rage when she attempts to

thwart his will. (901-902).

Not only are the young characters expressing these wild emotions, but so too are the elders.

Juliet’s father is interesting—as he swaps “indulgent affection” for “blind rage.” Early in the play, he surprisingly supports Juliet’s right to choose her husband. It is her mother whom

attempts to pressure Juliet into marrying Paris. Giving Juliet false hope, Capulet at first

acknowledges Juliet’s youth and potential inability to make significant life decisions:

Capulet: But saying o’er what I have said before.

My child is yet a stranger in the world;

She hath not seen the change of fourteen years.

Let two more summers wither in their pride

Ere we may think her ripe to be a bride.

Paris: Younger than she are happy mothers made.

Capulet: And too soon marred are those so early made.

But woo her, gentle Paris, get her heart;

My will to her consent is but a part,

And, she agreed, within her scope of choice

Lies my consent and fair-according voice.

(1.2, 7-17)

In this passage, we hear a doting father who wants to see his daughter find marriage through

love. He gives her autonomy and the freedom to choose her husband. He also expresses that she is too young to marry and should be given time to decide. Where most fathers at the time might rush their daughters into marriage to forge an exchange or alliance, he is more patient with Juliet.

While it is surprising for the 16th century, the dialogue above is refreshing and reassuring.

In fact, Capulet appears as a fairly calm character—even dismissing Tybalt’s anger when Romeo attends the feast. So it is even more shocking for the audience (and Juliet) when Capulet unexpectedly spirals into the “blind rage.”

Capulet: Soft, take me with you, take me with you, wife.

How, will she none? Doth she not give us thanks?

Is she not proud? Doth she not count her blest,

Unworthy as she is, that we have wrought

So worthy a gentleman to be her bride?

Juliet: Not proud you have, but thankful that you have.

Proud can I never be of what I hate,

But thankful even for hate that is meant love.

Capulet: How, how, how, how—chopped logic? What is this?

‘Proud’, and ‘I thank you’, and ‘I thank you not’,

And yet ‘not proud’? Mistress minion, you.

Thank me no thankings, nor proud me no prouds,

But fettle your fine joints ‘gainst Thursday next

To go with Paris to Saint Peter’s Church,

Or I will drag thee on a hurdle thither.

Out, you green-sickness carrion! Out, you baggage,

You tallow-face!

Capulet’s Wife: Fie, fie, what, are you mad?

Juliet: (kneels down) Good father, I beseech you on my knees,

Hear me with patience but to speak a word.

Capulet: Hang thee, young baggage, disobedient wretch!

I tell thee what: get thee to church o’Thursday,

Or never after look me in the face.

Speak not, reply not, do not answer me.

(3.5, 141-163)

Where Capulet had previously said Juliet should be wooed and given time to fall in love—“But

woo her, gentle Paris, get her heart” (1.2, 7-14)—he now states that she must be married by

Thursday; otherwise, will not be welcome in his home or as his child. When he spoke with Paris

before the feast, Capulet said the marriage would be based on Juliet’s consent, but now—only two scenes later—she flatly refuses the proposal. In turn, Capulet calls her “Mistress minion,”

“baggage,” and a “disobedient wretch.” These are not the words of an “indulgent” father, far from it. In short, he addresses her more as property than a child.

The first side of Capulet we see—in regards to Juliet—is warm and nurturing. Originally,

Capulet told Paris that “too soon marred are those [brides] so early made,” but now he is bringing up “green-sickness”—also known as the “disease of virgins…a historical condition involving lack of menstruation, dietary disturbances, altered skin colour and general weakness once thought to affect, almost exclusively young girls at puberty” (King 1). Before Capulet had been adamant that girls should not be married off so young, but now he is spouting the 16th- century logic of an illness directly tied to staying a virgin. Where he may have seemed progressive earlier, he now shows his true nature.

As shown at the top of the passage, Capulet is raving. While there are no stage cues, the text clearly suggests he is furiously yelling and his anger is building. There seems to be nothing

Juliet or his wife can say to calm him. Capulet’s wife asks him if he is “mad,” while Juliet is on her knees begging for forgiveness. He tells Juliet that she is not to even speak to him, refusing to hear her explanations or pleading. Rather than a gentle, nurturing father, Capulet has shown himself to be more concerned with Elizabethan ideals than his daughter’s wishes. Juliet likely felt that he gave her agency while growing up, but suddenly it is ripped away from her—causing

her to make a desperate grasp for identity and freedom. And in the play, that grasp revolves around eloping with Romeo. In the end, she still feels the need to rely on a man to build up her agency—something feminist movements work hard to combat.

II. Toxic Masculinity in the Feud of the Capulets vs. Montagues

One topic, in particular, that can be discussed in high school classrooms in masculinity.

Societal ideals of masculinity are extremely harmful to young, developing men and having more

conversations about the topic can help. In the play, the toxic masculinity between the men of the

Capulets and the Montagues is jarring and rampant. And the violence between the families

creates high drama to the point where it can appear eccentric—providing much to discuss. This

dramatic tension between characters is a source of much of the death and violence found in the play. Romeo and Juliet even begins with a quarrel between Capulet and Montague men, immediately throwing the audience into the fighting. Gregory and Samson (of the Montagues) are outside, looking for a fight—especially with the Capulets. And this display of a need to prove strength and traditional masculine values falls in line with the overarching theme of toxic masculinity:

Gregory: I will frown as I pass by, and let them take it as they list.

Samson: Nay, as they dare. I will bite my thumb at them, which is disgrace

to them if they bear it.

[He bites his thumb]

Abraham: Do you bite your thumb at us sir?

Samson: I do bite my thumb, sir.

Abraham: Do you bite your thumb at us, sir?

Samson: [to Gregory] Is the law of our side if I say ‘Ay’?

Gregory: No.

Samson: [to Abraham] No, sir, I do not bite my thumb at you, sir, but I bite

my thumb, sir.

(1.1.35-45)

Immediately following this passage, Benvolio arrives, and the servants of Montague take this as a sign that they can outnumber the Capulets. Benvolio urges them to stop, but unfortunately,

Tybalt enters and reignites the feud. Here, Benvolio presents a stark contrast to Tybalt’s hypermasculinity, as he aims to pacify the houses rather than feed the flame. And it can be seen later throughout the play that Benvolio is often mocked for his more passive nature. He does not seek to prove his manliness through fighting and that causes him to stand out.

This whole scene is steeped in toxic masculinity—as the men are so desperate to appear masculine and powerful. Gregory and Samson are trying so hard to find a way to pick a fight with the Capulets that it even comes off as silly. The Montagues are talking about “frowning” and “biting their thumbs” at the Capulets in an attempt to get them riled up. Even these methods of instigation are childish and exaggerated. They know full and well that they will get in trouble if they pick another fight with the Capulets, and yet, they want to feel strong and receive the validation of knowing they proved their strength. This can be tied back to the common rowdiness of male high school students as they go through puberty and begin experiencing hormonal desires and physical changes. There is an insecurity in the unknown that is often masked by hypermasculine behaviors.

This narrow notion of masculinity underwrites misogyny as well. Earlier in the scene, when they are alone, Gregory and Samson make sexist comments laced with sexual violence towards women as a means of proving their manliness. As Samson observes:

‘Tis true, and therefore women, being the weaker vessels, are ever thrust to the wall;

therefore I will push Montague’s men from the wall, and thrust his maids to the wall.

(1.1.14-16)

From here, he threatens to be “civil” with the maids by cutting off their heads. And all of these hypersexualized aggressions are revolving around their master’s quarrel—not one specifically between individual servants—or it least it might not have begun that way. All of these serving men are taking this war between the houses as an excuse for proving their manliness through violence and aggression. To them, it is a clear challenge to their honor—if they were to back

down and stay out of the fighting, they might look weak and find their masculinity challenged.

This dangerous, toxic masculinity steadily builds throughout the play. And when this

quarrel between Capulet’s men and Montague’s men finally reaches its climax, it ends in death.

The scene—3.1—begins with foreshadowing from the more peaceful, composed Benvolio:

The day is hot, the Capels are abroad,

And if we meet we shall not scape a brawl,

For now, these hot days, is the mad blood stirring. (3.1.2-4)

Here, Benvolio sets a foreboding scene of tension. Even the environment appears to be preparing

for a climactic fight. However, Mercutio’s response questions Benvolio’s submissive character,

describing him as the confrontational one, as a means of projecting Mercutio’s own flaws onto

someone else:

Come, come, thou art as hot a jack in thy mood as any in Italy, and as soon moved to be

moody, and as soon moody to be moved. (3.1, 11-13)

Mercutio speaks in his usual circling and ambiguous voice, not unlike one of Shakespeare’s

soothsaying fools. Here, the diction proves to be poetic and vivid, even though it is prose. The

style and cadence makes it musical and beautiful to read—an clear example of the importance of maintaining original texts. The repetition of the word “moody” in particular gives the line a particularly teasing and rambling tone. From everything we have seen so far, Mercutio seems to be a fairly moody character (as well as Romeo and Tybalt), but if anything, Benvolio has been the most stable character of all. Mercutio continues challenging Benvolio in this way until Tybalt enters, and the amount of lines and congested nature of the text builds tension until that moment.

Prose can be much more direct and the form of these lines accelerates the pace. And not only that, it leaves Mercutio in a blithe mood where he is unafraid to challenge the Capulets. Though

Tybalt is the one who approaches first, Mercutio chooses to respond in a playful, provoking manner in a moment that requires a serious tone. As noted above, this could be tied to the changing hormonal balance and societal norms that lead young boys to act out and often become

disruptive.

As a combatant to the toxic tension, steady, pacifying Benvolio is in injected into the

scene. He tries to diffuse the situation, but when Romeo arrives, the scene continues to build as

Tybalt challenges Romeo to fight:

Tybalt: Romeo, the love I bear thee can afford

No better term than this: thou art a villain.

Romeo: Tybalt, the reason that I have to love thee

Doth so much excuse the appertaining rage

To such a greeting. Villain I am none.

Therefore, farewell. I see thou knowest me not.

Tybalt: Boy, this shall not excuse the injuries

Thou hast done me. Therefore turn and draw.

Romeo: I do protest I never injured thee,

But love thee better than thou canst devise

Till thou shalt know the reason of my love.

And so, good Capulet—which name I tender

As dearly as mine own—be satisfied.

Mercutio: [drawing] O calm, dishonourable, vile submission!

Alla stoccado carries it away.

Tybalt, you ratcatcher, come, will you walk?

(3.1, 55-70)

Romeo takes a mature stance here—contrasting with some of his more impetuous decisions earlier in the play. And so he not only surprises and angers Tybalt, but also Mercutio. Both continue to challenge Romeo and refuse to leave without a fight. Mercutio even calls Romeo

“dishonourable” for his “vile submission” in refusing to fight. The diction is vital here as Romeo chooses again and again to repeat the word “love,” when referring to Tybalt. This hearkens back to the note above about “moody.” The repetition gives the moment rhythm and makes it stand out. Romeo uses gentle words like “tender” and “dearly” when addressing Tybalt and the more compassion and placidity he shows, the angrier Tybalt becomes—as if the sensitive display of affection is more of an assault on him than if Romeo were to actually insult him. With Tybalt’s fragile hypermasculinity, every attempt Romeo makes to be softer or gentler seems offensive and infuriating, Tybalt wants to draw the violence out of Romeo, but Romeo’s refusal has a weakening effect on Tybalt. It is possible that in this moment, Tybalt feels even a bit emasculated, standing before an unwilling enemy. Because he does not know how to respond to

Romeo’s tenderness, he feels confused and insecure. He had a big plan to fight Romeo, but now he is not getting his way—and this sudden uncertainty quickly enrages him.

With the tension and testosterone running high, Mercutio turns his lust for conflict into the senseless fight with Tybalt. The scene ends with two deaths—that of Mercutio and Tybalt.

And nothing is gained from the conflict—only loss. Mercutio and Tybalt lose their lives and

Romeo is exiled from Verona. From this point on, the play only escalates with Romeo’s exile and finally the desperate suicides of the young lovers--providing more and more misfortune.

Had Tybalt or Mercutio listened to Benvolio and/or Romeo, the situation could have been averted or at least delayed. While Mercutio tried to map his own hot-blooded nature onto

Benvolio, Benvolio remains one of the most level headed characters throughout the play. Romeo made an attempt at being more sympathetic, but was only met with aggression and violence so when Tybalt returned to the scene, Romeo was ready for vengeance.

There is a visible cycle of forced aggression here, where men mock and harass other men who do not want to fight. Mercutio ridicules Benvolio, and both Mercutio and Tybalt become insistent with Romeo until they succeed in a fight. Even if a character tries to avoid the fray, they are pulled back in by force, or risk alienation. And this is still a common theme today that men struggle with, silently. They are given an image of masculinity (usually with threads of hostility and violence) that is not only enforced, but also obligatory. And if they receive this conditioning at a young age, it only perpetuates the cycle, to carry on to future generations.

While discussing abstinence and sex positivity in the classroom might be a bit too sensitive a topic, toxic masculinity is something that can absolutely find a place in the dialogue.

More and more frequently, young male athletes are receiving training on these topics and how they can live healthier, more positive lives. Especially when compared to the ultra-violence in

Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet, a discussion on violence and masculinity in the classroom can

be essential to engage students in the play.

III. Sex Positivity and the Women of Romeo and Juliet

Another way the play resonates with feminist theory is how it connects to sex

positivity—both for those who want to have sex, and those who do not. When it comes to

anything (sex included), throughout the play, Juliet and her desires are often overlooked and

ignored. In general, she can be more subdued than Romeo, whereas Romeo is painted as more

passionate and excitable. He is the pursuer and he woos Juliet. It signifies that in our era, Romeo has become a term to describe a romantic or charming man, but contemporary people rarely refer to Juliet; she is cited in popular parlance only when accompanied by a “Romeo.” This is a legacy of the play. While Juliet has plenty of lines in the play, she is usually overshadowed by other characters in the scene. Either she is spoken over or her opinions are swayed by other characters.

At times, it can be hard to tell what Juliet actually wants for herself versus what has been planted in her mind by another character. And Juliet is not the only woman we see disregarded. Romeo’s original love—Rosaline—passes only briefly through conversation before never being mentioned again. Romeo spends the beginning scenes swooning over and pining after Rosaline, but when he meets Juliet, he completely forgets about her. And so there is a pattern throughout the play where women are forgotten or overlooked.

When Romeo first physically enters the play, he is melodramatically pining after

Rosaline as if he really loves her. This is the reader or audience’s first introduction to him and he is not yet interested in or even truly aware of Juliet.

Benvolio: It was. What sadness lengthens Romeo’s hours?

Romeo: Not having that which, having, makes them short.

Benvolio: In love.

Romeo: Out.

Benvolio: Of love?

Romeo: Out of her favour where I am in love.

(1.1, 156-161)

Here, Romeo is pining after Rosaline, as if he could only ever love her. He expresses that her

refusal of his affections has taken away his joy and he no longer has the ability to enjoy his life.

Other characters even talk about it amongst themselves. In conversing with Benvolio about

Romeo’s recent melancholy manner, Romeo’s father, Montague, says that:

Many a morning hath he there been seen,

With tears augmenting the fresh morning’s dew,

Adding to clouds more clouds with his deep sighs.

But all so soon as the all-cheering sun

Should in the farthest east begin to draw

The shady curtains from Aurora’s bed

Away from light steals home my heavy son

And private in his chamber pens himself,

Shuts up his windows, locks fair daylight out,

And makes himself an artificial night.

Black and portentous must this humour prove,

Unless good counsel may the cause remove. (1.1, 124-135)

At this point, Romeo is holing up in his room—“And private in his chamber pens himself,

Shuts up his windows, locks fair daylight out”—and crying—“Many a morning hath he there

been seen, With tears augmenting the fresh morning’s dew”—because Rosaline rebuffed him.

From everything he conveys, we are led to believe that Rosaline is his one true love and he is

suffering from a badly broken heart. And yet, just a little further on, we find out that he is

specifically lamenting that Rosaline has decided to remain “chaste.”

Benvolio: Then she hath sworn that she will still live chaste?

Romeo: She hath, and in that sparing makes huge waste;

(1.1, 210-211)

To remain “chaste” is something that is entirely Rosaline’s choice and yet, Romeo describes it as

a “waste” because of her beauty. This objectifies Rosaline and invalidates her personal choices

by referring to them as a “waste.”

If we consider a 21st-century feminist lens, we can relate Rosaline to sex positivity—

which says sexuality should be inclusive in not only in advocating for people who are sexually

active, but also those who prefer not to be. It is also important because while Juliet is seeking

freedom and agency through marrying Romeo (notably someone of her choosing), Rosaline has

made a personal choice not to be with Romeo as her own grasp for freedom. Both of these

women have made very impactful choices about their future, and deserve the liberty to do so. As

many young girls in high school will be growing and changing vastly in a matter of four years,

the rapid choices of Rosaline and Juliet can seem familiar. The girls will soon be making choices

regarding their own sex lives and the play can provide a fictional text resonate with or consult.

While it may be a bit sensitive for a high school classroom, even independently, students

being introduced to this play can analyze the text in relation to the right to choose between

abstinence and sex. As young adults—not unlike Romeo, Juliet, and Rosaline—21st-century

students are also facing these crucial decisions in their own lives. They are coming into their

sexuality and making impactful choices. Here, they could easily connect to the characters in the

play, while also analyzing the right to choose when/if they have sex. As mentioned above,

Romeo and Juliet has taken a hold on high school curricula, partly because young students seem

to resonate with the young lovers in the play. In cases such as dialogue surrounding sexuality,

students can compare their own personal decisions and morals to Romeo and Juliet in an effort to

connect to the playtext.

There is a lot for students to dissect when it comes to Romeo and Juliet and our own

world. There remains the troubling fact that Romeo quickly changes his affections from Rosaline

to Juliet. When he first sees Juliet, Rosaline is entirely forgotten:

Did my heart love til now? Forswear it, sight,

For I ne’ev saw true beauty till this night. (1.5, 49-50)

The situation—like many in the play—can be read in a multitude of ways. It could be that

Romeo really does feel more deeply for Juliet, but it could also be that he has just moved on to

another infatuation—one that would end the same way as it did for Rosaline if Juliet had not

conceded to move so quickly. Overall, Romeo exhibits a pattern of intense emotions that soon burn out. However, due to the rapid progression of his relationship with Juliet, Romeo was able to coerce vulnerable Juliet—on the heels of her father betraying her trust. As mentioned above,

Juliet simply moves from her father to Romeo for a male figure of stability.

IV. Romeo’s Romanticized, Sexually Coercive Behavior

Another topic that could be explored in the classroom is how Juliet herself questions how quickly her relationship with Romeo progresses, and whether or not she can really trust him.

Scene 2.1—often referred to as the “balcony” scene—is one of the most well known scenes from

Romeo and Juliet. And yet, few people can remember more than, “O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore

art thou Romeo?” (2.1.74-75). The scene is observed as one of the world’s most famous romantic

scenes, and yet, the entire time, Juliet is wavering. She is not running into Romeo’s arms or

telling him that she loves him. She is doubtful of him and what he tells her, requesting:

O swear not by the moon, th’inconstant moon

That monthly changes in her circled orb,

Lest that thy love prove likewise variable. (2.1.151-153)

Juliet feels uneasy here—recognizing that if their love were to progress, it would have dire

consequences because of their family’s feud. At this point, she seems to recognize that she

knows very little about Romeo and how constant his affections might be:

I have no joy of this contract tonight.

It is too rash, too unadvised, too sudden. (2.1.159-160)

And here, she personally addresses what many people have questioned about the story of Romeo

and Juliet. She acknowledges that they have moved very quickly and without thinking about the

costs. The word choice here is significant: “rash,” “unadvised,” “sudden.” None of these are

romantic terms; Juliet does not seem excited about the relationship. On the contrary, these words

express fear, doubt, and discomfort. Juliet is roughly 13-years-old, but she at least has an idea of

what Romeo wants from her and she seems very unsure about giving in to him so quickly.

One way students can identify with this could be through modern hook-up culture with

dating apps and sites such as Tinder and OkCupid. While it might not be discussed in the

classroom, it is something they can use personally as a bridge between their lives and

Shakespeare’s work. On the whole, Romeo can be compared to a “player” in the way his

affections shift so quickly and significantly. Even during this well-known “balcony” scene, a

scene that is almost always portrayed in a romantic light—Romeo expresses a crude lack of

patience for Juliet.

Romeo: O, wilt thou leave me so unsatisfied?

Juliet: What satisfaction canst thou have tonight?

(2.1.167-168)

While Romeo explains that the satisfaction he is seeking is marriage, it also includes many other

factors. By handing herself over as his wife, Juliet will lose a great amount of freedom and

agency—something she already had little of as a young woman in that era. But as we see

throughout the play, she does give into Romeo’s charms and choices.

No doubt this scene is being examined in the classroom, but to what extent and through

what lens? Especially when working alongside a film adaptation, this scene requires extra work.

Rather than just focusing on Romeo’s attempt to woo Juliet, teachers should be simultaneously

addressing Juliet’s reservations and how they provide some foreshadowing for the future of the

young lovers. With any modern playtext copies of Shakespeare’s plays, the lack of set and

choreography notes leaves the plays’ adaptations up to interpretation. Through tools such as

tone, lighting, and music, directors can provide entirely unique adaptations of different scenes

while still using the same playtext. So when film adaptations are used in the classroom, it is

critical to discuss and compare the playtext versus the film rather than simply accepting the film

as is. Film adaptations provide an accessory to the playtext, but should not supersede

Shakespeare’s original work.

Epilogue: Further Studies

I chose to do this tutorial because Shakespeare’s work has always been an undeniable

force in my life. I grew up driven by his words and stories. I longed to be as witty as Beatrice

when I was older—but found myself a jilted Helena by the time I entered the high school dating

scene. Her monologues brought me a lot of comfort at that time. The greatest treat for me was

seeing Shakespeare’s plays performed live—whether I went with my parents or my school. I

used to read the plays aloud to myself, changing my tone for each character. For me, it was even

better than watching television. Even though I was by myself, I never felt alone. Each character

was so rich and visual, I felt as if I had a whole community around me.

Though I grew up loving Shakespeare’s work, most of my peers did not share that sentiment. I struggled to get into their mindset—in hopes of seeing where they had gotten lost—

but I never could. Often I would ask friends if they liked a film adaptation of a Shakespearean

play and they would say that they did. But when I asked if they liked Shakespeare, the response

would be a resounding, “No.” I wondered what the gap was and how I could help them connect

the two. When it came time to pick my tutorial topic, I realized it needed to be something that I

was really passionate about. For me, that thing was Shakespeare. And more specifically, how to

get more people interested in Shakespeare.

Had I more time and space, I would do a close film analysis of the “balcony” scene in

both Zeffirelli and Luhrmann’s film adaptations. This would be in an effort to show the films’

accuracy when compared to the original playext—regarding how closely it follows the dialogue

and few existing stage cues. On a more meticulous level, I would also want to explore how well

the film scene conveys the emotion and plot of the play scene. In general, I would love to

provide more scholarship, research, and analysis on the use of films as supplementary media in the classroom when teaching Shakespeare.

I believe that using film adaptations set in modern times, but using the original playtext for dialogue, can really help younger generations love Shakespeare. It puts the play into a context with which they are familiar. Suddenly they can visualize what they are reading on the page. They see it more clearly; they can understand it. My intention with my creative piece is to create a play that Shakespeare could have written himself in 2017 and used to attract younger

students. It is set in a modern high school, but all of the lines are pulled from existing

Shakespearean plays to show that many of his plays could provide fodder for adaptation. With my critical and creative piece together, I hope I can help people see Shakespeare’s work the way

I do—for its beauty and complexity. I want his work to change more lives the way it did mine.

Works Cited

Crowl, Samuel. Shakespeare and Film: A Norton Guide. New York: W.W. Norton, 2008. Print.

Davis, Lloyd, and Laura Raidonis Bates. Shakespeare matters: history, teaching, performance. Newark: U of Delaware Press, 2003. Print.

Gibson, Rex, and Janet Field-Pickering. 1998. Discovering Shakespeare’s language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hulbert, Jennifer, Kevin J. Wetmore, and Robert L. York. Shakespeare and Youth Culture. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006. Print.

King, Helen. The disease of virgins: green sickness, chlorosis and the problems of puberty. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.

McAlpine, Fraser. "45 Everyday Phrases Coined By Shakespeare." BBC America. BBC America, 2013. Web. 14 Apr. 2017.

Mudlark. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Apr. 2017.

O'Brien, Peggy, Jeanne Addison Roberts, and Michael Tolaydo. Shakespeare Set Free: Teaching A Midsummer Night's Dream, Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth. New York: Washington Square Press, 2006. Print.

Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC), Education Department. 2008. Teaching Shakespeare: a history of the teaching of Shakespeare in England. Tracy Irish. Stratford-upon-Avon, England. https://cdn2.rsc.org.uk/sitefinity/education-pdfs/articles-and-reports/rsc- education-history-of-teaching-shakespeare.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Rokison, Abigail. Shakespeare for young people: productions, versions and adaptations. London: The Arden Shakespeare, 2013. Print.

Shakespeare, William, Burton Raffel, and Harold Bloom. Romeo and Juliet. New Haven, CT: Yale U Press, 2004. Print.

Shakespeare, William, Stephen Greenblatt, Walter Cohen, Suzanne Gossett, Jean E. Howard, Katharine Eisaman Maus, and Gordon McMullan. The Norton Shakespeare. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, 2008. Print.

Stone, Lawrence. The family, sex and marriage in England 1500-1800. London: Penguin, 1990. Print.

Tolaydo, Michael. 1993. Three-dimensional Shakespeare. In Shakespeare Set Free: Teaching a Midsummer Night’s Dream, Romeo and Juliet, and Macbeth, ed. Peggy O’Brien, 27-34. New York: Washington Square Press.

Wienand, Vicki. "Rex Gibson and Teaching Shakespeare - Education & Schools Resources – Cambridge University Press." Rex Gibson and Teaching Shakespeare - Education & Schools Resources - Cambridge University Press. 2016 Cambridge University Press, 11 Mar. 2016. Web. 26 Oct. 2016.

Winston, Joe. Transforming the Teaching of Shakespeare with the Royal Shakespeare Company. London: Bloomsbury Arden Shakespeare, 2015. Print.

Process Statement and Plot Summary

My tutorial play—Verona High—uses lines from existing Shakespearean plays as well as

my own original lines to create an amalgamated hybrid play. The goal of the play is to appeal to younger audiences with a high school setting and modern characters—while maintaining 16th-

century diction. In the play, Viola is the most popular girl at Verona High School and she is

dating the most popular boy—Orlando. It is their senior year and their biggest concern is trying

to play matchmaker with their friends Cordelia and Othello. Meanwhile, Orlando’s half-brother

Edmund is bent on finally making Viola love him—as he’s been infatuated with her since they

were children. Edmund decides to partner with Tamora—Viola’s seemingly best friend—by

making use of Tamora’s affection for him. Viola and Orlando’s love begins to deteriorate and

Cordelia and Othello try their best to repair it. But, in the end, their efforts prove to be in vain

and the play ends in tragedy.

Lines are derived from Macbeth, Much Ado About Nothing, The Taming of the Shrew, A

Midsummer Night’s Dream, Titus Andronicus, King Lear, Anthony and Cleopatra, As You Like

It, Othello, Romeo and Juliet, All’s Well That Ends Well, and The Merchant of Venice. Some

lines have minor edits for continuity—to fit the language to the situation. Currently the play

relies heavily on lines from Much Ado About Nothing and Othello. Any bolded lines are original

lines that I have written for the play. Detailed notes showing what plays were mined for this text

can be found in the Creative Bibliography on page 74.

Character List

The Persons of the Play

VIOLA: most popular female student, head of popular group (includes Cordelia and Tamora), dating Orlando

ORLANDO: most popular male student, brother of Edmund, dating Viola

EDMUND: villain, unpopular student, bastard brother of Orlando, infatuated with Viola

TAMORA: popular student, ulterior motives, envious of Viola, dating Claudio, infatuated with Edmund and aids him in villainy

CORDELIA: popular student, kindhearted, courted by Othello

OTHELLO: son of the chief of police, courting Cordelia, level-headed and well-liked

CLAUDIO: popular student, best friend of Orlando, jock

HELENA: unpopular student, desperate to fit in and please/join the popular crowd, in love with Viola/would do anything for her

FESTE: the fool, comedic relief, class clown, dating Mercutio

MERCUTIO: boyfriend of Feste

MR. PRINCE: teacher at Verona High School

Act and Scene Summaries

ACT 1, SCENE 1: Viola and Tamora are approached by Claudio, who says Edmund and Orlando have just gotten in a fight.

ACT 1, SCENE 2: Tamora and Cordelia are in the girl’s bathroom with Helena. Tamora bullying the weaker Helena.

ACT 1, SCENE 3: Viola wants to play matchmaker with Cordelia and Othello. She convinces Orlando to help throw a party to get Cordelia and Othello together.

ACT 2, SCENE 1: Orlando and Viola perform their matchmaking party/scheme and it works.

ACT 2, SCENE 2: Everything going well for a while, but Viola and Cordelia have invited Helena. This angers Tamora. Tamora complains to Edmund and he asks her to write a love letter (addressed to him) in Viola’s hand in exchange for him getting Helena to leave. (For modern times it would be that Tamora takes Viola’s phone and texts Edmund with it).

ACT 2, SCENE 3: Edmund shows the “letter” to Orlando and makes him doubt Viola’s loyalty. He convinces Orlando that Viola has been hooking up with Edmund and Claudio. Orlando becomes maddened by jealousy. Helena overhears their conversation and warns Cordelia.

ACT 2, SCENE 4: Cordelia debates telling Viola but eventually does. Viola calmly decides to approach Orlando but he quickly jumps to hitting her. In shock, she runs home.

ACT 2, SCENE 5: Edmund follows Viola and tries to kiss her but she slaps and rebuffs him. Tamora sees all of this and realizes the consequences of what she’s done. She threatens to tell Orlando what Edmund did. Edmund panics, hits her, and knocks her out.

ACT 3, SCENE 1: When Tamora wakes up the next morning, she contacts Edmund at school. He threatens to ruin her reputation unless she keeps quiet about what they’ve done.

ACT 3, SCENE 2: Tamora is not sure who she can talk to, so she approaches Helena before school in the girl’s bathroom to get the details from the night before (what happened after she was knocked out). At first Helena is understandably scared and doesn’t trust Tamora, but Tamora assures her she means no harm. Helena tells Tamora that everyone just assumed she passed out from drinking. And while she was out, Viola and Orlando have officially broken up.

ACT 4, SCENE 1: In school, Viola and Orlando bicker non-stop to the point where they get sent to detention.

ACT 4, SCENE 2: Othello hears about this and plans with Cordelia to break the lovers out of detention and get them to forgive each other.

ACT 4, SCENE 3: Under Othello’s orders, Feste and Mercutio sneak the lovers out of detention (Feste distracts the teacher and Mercutio herds the lovers out)

ACT 4, SCENE 4: Feste and Mercutio take the lovers to Othello/Claudio and Cordelia/Helena. The friends then trick/convince the lovers into forgiving each other.

ACT 5, SCENE 1: Othello throws a party to celebrate and things seem to be going well. Then Edmund convinces Tamora to help him again (by threatening her). He makes her go to the party to get Viola away from Orlando. Edmund tells Tamora that she must ask Viola to be a good friend and convince Tamora to stay with Claudio by listing his good features.

ACT 5, SCENE 2: Tamora does this and Viola says she loves Claudio and Tamora and wants them to stay together—so she will do as Tamora asks. Edmund gets Orlando to overhear the girls’ conversation and makes him believe it’s because Viola actually loves Claudio. Edmund then gets Claudio drunk at the party and gets him to talk about Tamora sleeping around (but convinces Orlando that Claudio is talking about Viola). Orlando becomes enraged and goes after Viola and Tamora. He becomes aggressive and locks them in a bedroom with him. He yells at Viola and Helena overhears them. She runs to get Cordelia and Othello and they try to convince Orlando to unlock the door and let the girls out. They can hear violent noises and everyone is concerned. Othello and Claudio break down the door and Viola tries to run home again. Orlando goes after her and they begin fighting in the street as he tries to hold her still and she tries to escape. A car comes and almost hits Viola, but Orlando saves her, by pushing her out of the way and letting himself get hit instead. Viola is overcome with grief and mourns Orlando.

ACT 5, SCENE 3: Tamora comes forward about everything and tells Viola and Othello all about what she and Edmund have done. They forgive Tamora, but Othello says will tell his father about Edmund—to get Edmund to face justice. Cordelia, Helena, and Claudio arrive saying that Edmund has fled.

Verona High: An Excerpt

ACT 1, SCENE 1:

[At school]

Enter VIOLA, TAMORA, and CORDELIA

Enter CLAUDIO

CLAUDIO: [to VIOLA] Your lord, my lady, has paid a soldier’s debt.

TAMORA: Had he his hurts before?

CLAUDIO: Ay, on the front.

TAMORA: Why then, God’s soldier be he. Had I as many lords as I have hairs I would not wish them to a fairer death. And so his knell is knolled.

VIOLA: He’s worth more sorrow, and that I’ll spend for him.

TAMORA: He’s worth no more. They say he parted well and paid his score. And so God be with him.

VIOLA: Good Claudio, will you bid my lord come to me?

Exit CLAUDIO

VIOLA: Tamora, you have acquired the temper of a shrew and something of its beaked likeness, have you not?

TAMORA: I wonder that you will still be talking, my lady Viola. Nobody marks you.

VIOLA: Come, come, you wasp, i’faith you are too angry.

TAMORA: If I be waspish, best beware my sting.

VIOLA: My remedy is then to pluck it out.

TAMORA: Ay, if my lady could find where it lies.

CORDELIA: Come sisters—

Is all the counsel that we three have shared— The sisters’ vows, the hours that we have spent When we have chid the hasty footed time For parting us—O, is all quite forgot? All schooldays’ friendship, childhood innocence?

VIOLA: And you, Cordelia, the temper of a dove.

Enter CLAUDIO and ORLANDO

VIOLA: And what was the battle today, my lord?

ORLANDO: Your honor, my lady.

VIOLA: And were she a worthy battle?

ORLANDO: A thousand war’s worth, my lady.

VIOLA: I pray you, is Signor Melancholy returned from the war?

ORLANDO: O, he’s returned as contemptuous as ever he was.

TAMORA: Faith, friends, you tax Sir Edmund too much. Orlando, my lord, is he not your own blood?

ORLANDO: Tainted blood if blood be the only evidence. And a good soldier too, lady.

[ORLANDO gestures to his wounds]

TAMORA: And a good soldier to a lady.

[CLAUDIO, shocked, moves to speak]

[The school bell rings]

Enter FESTE

FESTE: But what is he to a lord? Come, friends, we must follow the leaders.

CLAUDIO: In every good thing. [Said with disdain]

ORLANDO: Why, how now, friend, wherefore are you sad?

CLAUDIO: Not sad, my lord.

ORLANDO: How then? Sick?

CLAUDIO: Neither, my lord.

FESTE: The right noble Claudio is neither sad, nor sick, nor merry, nor well, but civil count, civil as an orange, and something of that jealous complexion.

VIOLA: [to TAMORA] Speak, cousin. Or, if you cannot, stop his mouth with a kiss, and let not him speak neither.

[The school bell rings again]

Exeunt

ACT 1, SCENE 2:

[In the Girl’s Bathroom]

Enter TAMORA, CORDELIA, and HELENA

HELENA: Some say that ravens foster forlorn children The whilst their own birds famish in their nests. O, be to me, though thy hard heart say no, Nothing so kind, but something pitful.

TAMORA: Strive to be interessed, what can you say to draw. Speak.

HELENA: Nothing, my lady.

TAMORA: Nothing?

HELENA: Nothing.

TAMORA: Nothing will come of nothing. Speak again. Mend your speech a little lest it may mar your fortunes.

HELENA: O Tamora, be called a gentle queen.

TAMORA: I will not hear her speak. Away with her!

CORDELIA: What, shall Cordelia speak?

[TAMORA moves to push HELENA but CORDELIA stops her]

CORDELIA: Have you no modesty? No maiden shame? No touch of bashfulness?

TAMORA: Come not between the dragon and his wrath

HELENA: Let her not hurt me. I was never curst. I have no gift at all in shrewishness. I am a right maid for my cowardice. Let her not strike me.

Exit HELENA and CORDELIA

TAMORA: [Aside] Look like the innocent flower, but be the serpent under’t.

[The school bell rings]

Exit TAMORA

ACT 1, SCENE 3:

Enter CORDELIA and OTHELLO

[CORDELIA and OTHELLO speak cordially]

Enter VIOLA and ORLANDO

VIOLA: [to ORLANDO] My lord Orlando, dost thou note how amiably Cordelia and Othello speak?

ORLANDO: There does seem to be a merry match between them.

VIOLA: A merry match indeed! And for that match, we must play Cupid’s men.

ORLANDO: Come, Viola, come. No other matters need thy tending?

VIOLA: None but these.

ORLANDO: Were you a man of Cupid, your quiver should run bare.

Exit CORDELIA

[OTHELLO approaches VIOLA and ORLANDO]

OTHELLO: How now, friends, you seem in a puckish spirit.

VIOLA: Good Othello, what think you of fair lady Cordelia?

ORLANDO: Is she not a modest young lady?

OTHELLO: Do you question me as an honest man should do, for my simple true judgement, or would you have me speak after my custom, as being a professed bore to your amusements?

ORLANDO: I pray thee speak in sober judgement.

OTHELLO: I do profess I love her. In mine eye she is the sweetest lady that ever I looked on.

ORLANDO: That she is worthy, I know. And there milady he is baited and hooked, as a cod, to your designs.

OTHELLO: Friends, and what designs be these? You speak this to fetch me in, my lord.

ORLANDO: Nay, but to aid, my friend.

OTHELLO: Then friend, my lord now may do me good.

ORLANDO: My love is thine to teach. Teach it but how And thou shalt see how apt it is to learn Any hard lesson that may do thee good. If thou dost love fair Cordelia, cherish it.

VIOLA: We shall have reveling tonight. My lord, Orlando will assume thy part in some disguise And tell fair Cordelia he is Othello, And in her bosom he’ll unclasp his heart And take her hearing prisoner with the force And strong encounter of his amorous tale. Then after to Cordelia, will I break, And the conclusion is, she shall be thine. In practice let us put it presently.

Exit OTHELLO

ORLANDO: He’s limed, I warrant you.

VIOLA: Some Cupid kills with arrows, some with traps.

Exeunt

ACT 2, SCENE 1:

Enter ORLANDO, VIOLA, CLAUDIO, and OTHELLO

ORLANDO: My, good Othello, you look pale!

VIOLA: Pale with love, my lord?

OTHELLO: Aye. Love and his companion: Worry.

CLAUDIO: This is worry for another eve, friend. Come, the revellers are entering. Make good room.

Enter TAMORA, CORDELIA, EDMUND, MERCUTIO, and FESTE

ORLANDO: [to CORDELIA] Lady, will you walk a bout with your friend?

CORDELIA: So you walk softly, and look sweetly, and say nothing, I am yours for the walk; and especially when I walk away.

ORLANDO: With me in your company?

CORDELIA: I may say so when I please.

ORLANDO: And when please you to say so?

CORDELIA: When I like your favour; for God defend the lute should be like the case.

ORLANDO: My visor is Philemon’s roof. Within the house is Jove.

CORDELIA: Why, then, your visor should be thatched.

ORLANDO: Speak low if you speak love.

[They move aside]

CLAUDIO: [to TAMORA] Well I would you did like me. TAMORA: So would not I, for your own sake, for I have many ill qualities.

CLAUDIO: Which is one?

TAMORA: I say my prayers aloud.

CLAUDIO: I love you the better—the hearers may cry amen.

TAMORA: If it be love indeed, tell me how much. God match me with a good dancer.

CLAUDIO: Amen.

TAMORA: And God keep him out of my sight when the dance is done.

[They move aside]

VIOLA: [to OTHELLO] Come, Worry, let us soothe your spirit with a dance.

[They move to dance]

[ORLANDO and CORDELIA approach]

ORLANDO: Here, Othello, I have wooed in thy name, and fair Cordelia is won. God give thee joy.

VIOLA: Speak, friend, ‘tis your cue.

OTHELLO: Silence is the perfectest herald of joy. I were but little happy if I could say how much. [To CORDELIA] Lady, as you are mine, I am yours. I give away myself for you, and dote upon the exchange.

VIOLA: Proceed, proceed. We’ll so begin these rites as we do trust they’ll end, in true delights.

[They dance; then] Exeunt

ACT 2, SCENE 2:

Enter TAMORA

TAMORA: How happy some o'er other some can be! Through Verona I am thought as fair as she. But what of that? Edmund thinks not so. He will not know what all but he do know. And as he errs, doting on Viola's eyes, So I, admiring of his qualities. Things base and vile, holding no quantity, Love can transpose to form and dignity. Love looks not with the eyes, but with the mind, And therefore is wing'd Cupid painted blind. Nor hath love's mind of any judgement taste. Wings and no eyes figure unheedy haste. And therefore is love said to be a child Because in choice he is so oft beguiled. As waggish boys in game themselves forswear, So the boy Love is perjured everywhere—

Ah! Mayhaps fortune favors me. Here he comes now!

Enter EDMUND [looking upset]

TAMORA: What the goodyear, my lord, why are you thus out of measure sad?

EDMUND: There is no measure in the occasion that breeds it, therefore the sadness is without limit.

TAMORA: You should hear reason.

EDMUND: And when I have heard it, what blessing brings it?

TAMORA: If not a present remedy, at least a patient sufferance.

EDMUND: I wonder that thou—being, as thou sayst thou art, born under Saturn goest about to apply a moral medicine to a mortifying mischief. I cannot hide what I am. I must be sad when I have cause and smile at no man’s jests; eat when I have stomach and wait for no man’s leisure; sleep when I am drowsy and tend on no man’s business; laugh when I am merry and claw no man in his humour.

TAMORA: Yea, but you must not make the full show of this till you may do it without controlment. You have of late stood out against your brother, and he hath ta'en you newly into his grace, where it is impossible you should take true

root but by the fair weather that you make yourself. It is needful that you frame the season for your own harvest.

EDMUND: I had rather be a canker in a hedge than a rose in his grace, and it better fits my blood to be disdained of all than to fashion a carriage to rob love from any. In this, though I cannot be said to be a flattering honest man, it must not be denied but I am a plain-dealing villain. I am trusted with a muzzle and enfranchised with a clog; therefore I have decreed not to sing in my cage. If I had my mouth, I would bite; if I had my liberty, I would do my liking. In the meantime, let me be that I am, and seek not to alter me.

TAMORA: Can you make no use of your discontent?

Enter HELENA

TAMORA: Fie! Fie! Detestable, clinging lamb.

EDMUND: The lady doth affect you so?

TAMORA: A wolf pities not the sheep. It provides little nourish’.

EDMUND: But will it serve for any model to build mischief on?

TAMORA: It may serve a bargain.

EDMUND: A bargain I’ll buy. Tell me, fair Tamora, in your years by lady Viola’s side, learnt you to mimic her hand?

TAMORA: As a jay to a tune.

EDMUND: And for that hand, a deal is struck. Bring forth a counterfeit and your bidding is my charge.

TAMORA: Her subject, my lord?

EDMUND: Love, good Tamora—and I the object of desire. Make haste, we have much work and precious little time.

Exunt

ACT 2, SCENE 3:

Entet EDMUND and TAMORA

EDMUND: How now, come you bearing good tidings?

TAMORA: Better still. I have a thing for you.

EDMUND: You have a thing for me? It is a common thing.

TAMORA: Ha?

EDMUND: To have a foolish accomplice.

TAMORA: O, is that all? What will you give me now for that same counterfeit you did bid me write? The canvas being of her own as well.

EDMUND: Hast stol’n it from her?

TAMORA: No, faith, she let it drop by negligence. And to th’advantage I being here, took’t up. Look, here ‘tis.

EDMUND: A good wench! Give it me.

TAMORA: What will you do with it, that you have been so earnest to have me produce it?

EDMUND: Its purpose is further production—as a seed to a tree. These are the forgeries of jealousy, fair Tamora.4 Leave me now, my brother approaches.

Exit TAMORA. Enter ORLANDO [and HELENA to the side]

[EDMUND reads the letter]

ORLANDO: Edmund, how now, brother? What news?

[EDMUND pretends to hide the letter]

EDMUND: So please your lordship, none.

ORLANDO: Why so earnestly seek you to put up that letter?

EDMUND: I know no news, brother.

ORLANDO: What paper were you reading?

EDMUND: Nothing, brother.

ORLANDO: No? What need then that terrible dispatch of it into your pocket? The quality of nothing hath not such need to hide itself. Let’s see. Come, if it be nothing I shall not need spectacles.

EDMUND: I beseech you, dear brother, pardon me. It is a letter from lady Viola that I have not all o’er-read; for so much as I have perused, I find it not fit for your liking.

ORLANDO: Give me the letter, brother.

EDMUND: I shall offend either to detain or give it. The contents, as in part I understand them, are to blame.

ORLANDO: Let’s see, let’s see.

EDMUND: I hope for fair Viola’s justification she wrote this but as an assay or taste of my virtue.

[EDMUND gives ORLANDO the letter, and ORLANDO reads it silently]

ORLANDO: My lady Viola… had she a hand to write this, a heart and brain to breed it in?

EDMUND: It is her hand, brother, but I hope her heart is not in the contents.

ORLANDO: Hath she ever heretofore sounded you in this business?

EDMUND: Never, but I have often heard her…

ORLANDO: Speak brother!

EDMUND: What if I had said I had seen her do you wrong? Or heard men say—as knaves be such abroad, who having by their own importunate suit or voluntary dotage of some mistress convinced or supplies them, cannot choose but they must blab—

ORLANDO: What hast thou heard?

EDMUND: The most noble Claudio and your fair Viola—

ORLANDO: Hath he said anything?

EDMUND: He hath, brother. But, be you well assured, no more than he’ll unswear.

ORLANDO: What hath he said?

EDMUND: Faith, that he did—I know not what he did.

ORLANDO: What, what?

EDMUND: Lie—

ORLANDO: With her?

EDMUND: With her, on her, what you will.

ORLANDO: Lie with her? Lie on her? We say ‘lie on her’ when they belie her. Lie with her? ‘Swounds, that’s fulsome. Letter—confessions—letter. To confess and be hanged for his labour. First to be hanged and then to confess! I tremble at it. Nature would not invest herself in such shadowing passion without some instruction. It is not words that shake me thus. Pish! Noses, ears, and lips! Is’t possible? Confess? Letter? O devil!

EDMUND: [Aside] Work on; my medicine works. Thus credulous fools are caught, and many worthy and chaste dames even thus, all guiltless, meet reproach.

Exit ORLANDO and EDMUND

HELENA: Complots of mischief, treason, villanies! I must warn my mistress Viola!

Enter CORDELIA

HELENA: [to CORDELIA] My lady! Fearsome wicked work is afoot! We must warn lady Viola!

CORDELIA: What wickedness, dear Helena? You seem in a trance.

HELENA: My lady, I heard such venom from the mouth of the viper—Edmund. He has plotted against Viola and noble Orlando. We must consult with her at once!

CORDELIA: What shall Cordelia speak? Love, and be silent?

HELENA: There isn’t a moment to spare!

Exeunt

ACT 2, SCENE 4:

Enter CORDELIA, VIOLA, and HELENA

VIOLA: I am grateful for your counsel, but my lord is of sound mind. He will not let this poison get the better of his good judgement.

HELENA: My lady, it already has.

VIOLA: Here comes my lord now. He can speak for himself.

Enter ORLANDO and EDMUND

[VIOLA gives ORLANDO a greeting kiss]

ORLANDO: Alas, poor heart, that kiss is comfortless as frozen water to a starved snake.

VIOLA: My lord?

ORLANDO: Wilt thou leave me so unsatisfied?

VIOLA: What satisfaction canst thou have tonight?

ORLANDO: [Aside to EDMUND] She would lie with a friend, but not with her lord?

EDMUND: The lady is disloyal.

ORLANDO: Viola…

EDMUND: Even she. The word is too good to paint out her wickedness. I could say she were worse. Think you of a worse title, and I will fit her to it. Wonder not till further warrant. Go but with me tonight, you shall see her chamber window entered, even as she swears her chastity.

VIOLA: My lord, Orlando, why do you speak so faintly? Are you unwell?

ORLANDO: I have a pain upon my forehead here.

VIOLA: Faith, that’s with watching. Twill away again. Let me but bind it hard, within this hour it will be well—

[VIOLA moves to touch ORLANDO’s face but he draws away and slaps her]

[VIOLA begins to cry]

VIOLA: Why, why? [to CORDELIA and HELENA] Why, there 'tis; so say I too. My lord is poisoned water. [to ORLANDO] I’ll drink from you no more.

Exit VIOLA

Enter TAMORA

TAMORA: What mischief here took place?

Exit EDMUND

Exeunt

ACT 2, SCENE 5:

Enter VIOLA, EDMUND, and TAMORA

EDMUND: [to VIOLA] Where your lord offers venom, I offer you sonnets. Fair Viola I offer you words of honey, silk, to equal your temperament

VIOLA: Get thee away, snake charmer! Any venom is your own!

[EDMUND attempts to grab VIOLA, she slaps him in response]

Exit VIOLA

TAMORA: [to EDMUND] You have misused our sex in your mischief. I can no longer be the tributary for your poison. I will tell my lady and your brother of your designs. I will see you face justice, yet.

EDMUND: Fool of a woman, you forget you had a hand in this. A hand to forge a hand—to be exact. A bargain was struck and if you cast me down the river, you drown alongside me.

TAMORA: She will listen to reason. Another bargain I’m willing to take.

EDMUND: Another bargain you will never make.

[EDMUND hits TAMORA, knocking her unconscious]

Exit EDMUND

ACT 3, SCENE 1:

[At school]

Enter TAMORA

TAMORA: O, why should nature build so foul a den, Unless the gods delight in tragedies? All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and their entrances;

Enter EDMUND

EDMUND: Was your rest sufficient?

TAMORA: If there be devils, would I were a devil, To live and burn in everlasting fire, So I might have your company in hell But to torment you with my bitter tongue.

EDMUND: I see your temper has healed. But let not your pride heal with it. I need not raise my hand again but to stay your wagging tongue. Our work is unfinished.

Exit EDMUND

Exit TAMORA

ACT 3, SCENE 2:

[In the Girl’s Bathroom]

Enter HELENA

Enter TAMORA

HELENA: Tamora! Ay, come, Semiramis—nay, barbarous Tamora, for no name fits thy nature but thy own.

TAMORA: I seek no quarrel on this day, fair Helena. Only news. What transpired in the course of the night?

HELENA: Well, lady, as you dreamed heavily on heady spirits, good lady Viola and her Orlando have renounced their affections. Now they meet only for a battle of wits between them. A merry sport to view, though bitter for lovers.

TAMORA: I might imagine so. Thank you Helena—leave me if you will. I have much to remedy.

Exit HELENA

Exit TAMORA

ACT 4, SCENE 1:

[In class]

Enter MR. PRINCE

Enter ORLANDO and VIOLA, bickering

ORLANDO: What, my dear Lady Disdain! Are you yet living?

VIOLA: Is it possible disdain should die while she hath such meet food to feed it as Lord Orlando? Courtesy itself must convert to disdain if you come in her presences.

ORLANDO: Then is courtesy a turncoat. But it is certain I am loved of all ladies, only you excepted. And I would I could find in my heart that I had not a hard heart, for truly I love none.

VIOLA: A dear happiness to women. They would else have been troubled with a pernicious suitor. I thank God and my cold blood I am of your humour for that. I had rather hear my dog bark at a crow than a man swear he loves me.

ORLANDO: God keep your ladyship still in that mind. So some gentleman or other shall scape a predestinate scratched face.

VIOLA: Scratching could not make it worse an ‘twere such a face as yours were.

ORLANDO: Well, you are a rare parrot-teacher.

VIOLA: A bird of my tongue is better than a beast of yours.

ORLANDO: I would my horse had the speed of your tongue, and so good a continuer.

VIOLA: I am sick when I do look on thee.

ORLANDO: Thou art a boil, a plague sore, an embossed carbuncle in my corrupted blood.

MR. PRINCE: Rebellious subjects, enemies to peace Throw your mistempered weapons to the ground, And hear the sentence of your movèd Prince. Three civil brawls bred of an airy word Have thrice disturbed the quiet of our streets And made Verona’s ancient citizens Cast by their grave-beseeming ornaments

To wield old partisans in hands as old, Cankered with peace, to part your cankered hate. If ever you disturb our streets again Your afternoon shall pay the forfeit of the peace.

VIOLA: I'll plague him; I'll torture him: I am glad of it. A plague upon him! muffled! he can say nothing of me: hush, hush!

MR. PRINCE: Lady Viola…

VIOLA: Understood, my lord.

ORLANDO: Understood, my lord.

[VIOLA focuses on her work, ORLANDO makes a face at her]

VIOLA: Such an expression is almost an improvement on something so marred by nature.

MR. PRINCE: Enough! Your afternoon is now mine to mold. We will meet again after the last bell.

[The school bell rings]

[Exeunt]

ACT 4, SCENE 2:

Enter OTHELLO and CORDELIA

OTHELLO: My lady, we have a duty to our kin to mend their hearts.

CORDELIA: But are they mendable? They appear as splintered glass to me…

OTHELLO: Where love once grew, love can always be planted. Heard you of the lovers’ punishment?

CORDELIA: Beyond that which they inflict themselves?

OTHELLO: Aye.

CORDELIA: An afternoon under the Prince’s guard.

OTHELLO: I have devised an escape for the young lovers. Feste and Mercutio will execute the plan. We need only wait for their signal. But then, dear Cordelia, I am in need of your aid.

CORDELIA: And what aid is this?

OTHELLO: With Helena and Tamora, teach Viola to love again. Open her heart to Orlando. We men will play our part as well. We will undertake one of Hercules’ labours, which is to bring Orlando and Viola into a mountain of affection th’one with th’other.2 I would fain have it a match, and I doubt not but to fashion it, if you will but minister such assistance as I shall give you direction.

CORDELIA: My lord, I am for you. I will do any modest office to help Viola to her good lord Orlando again.

Exeunt

ACT 4, SCENE 3:

[In detention]

Enter MR. PRINCE, ORLANDO, and VIOLA

MR. PRINCE: This penance requires silence and diligence. I recommend—

FESTE: Good sir, Prince, might I a word with your lordship?

MR. PRINCE: I can spare—

FESTE: Most excellent. I see Queen Mab hath been with you. She is the fairies' midwife, and she comes In shape no bigger than an agate-stone On the fore-finger of an alderman, Drawn with a team of little atomies Athwart men's noses as they lie asleep; Her wagon-spokes made of long spiders' legs, The cover of the wings of grasshoppers, The traces of the smallest spider's web, The collars of the moonshine's watery beams, Her whip of cricket's bone, the lash of film, Her wagoner a small grey-coated gnat, Not so big as a round little worm Prick'd from the lazy finger of a maid;

Enter MERCUTIO, silently

Her chariot is an empty hazel-nut Made by the joiner squirrel or old grub, Time out o' mind the fairies' coachmakers. And in this state she gallops night by night Through lovers' brains, and then they dream of love; O'er courtiers' knees, that dream on court'sies straight, O'er lawyers' fingers, who straight dream on fees, O'er ladies ' lips, who straight on kisses dream, Which oft the angry Mab with blisters plagues, Because their breaths with sweetmeats tainted are: Sometime she gallops o'er a courtier's nose, And then dreams he of smelling out a suit; And sometime comes she with a tithe-pig's tail Tickling a parson's nose as a' lies asleep, Then dreams, he of another benefice:

[MERCUTIO leads the lovers out of the classroom]

Sometime she driveth o'er a soldier's neck, And then dreams he of cutting foreign throats, Of breaches, ambuscadoes, Spanish blades, Of healths five-fathom deep; and then anon Drums in his ear, at which he starts and wakes, And being thus frighted swears a prayer or two And sleeps again. This is that very Mab That plats the manes of horses in the night, And bakes the elflocks in foul sluttish hairs, Which once untangled, much misfortune bodes: This is the hag, when maids lie on their backs, That presses them and learns them first to bear, Making them women of good carriage:

Exit MERCUTIO, ORLANDO, and VIOLA

This is she— Ah, me, she has went away.

MR. PRINCE: She?

FESTE: Mab, sir.

MR. PRINCE: Mab.

FESTE: I must run her errands now. She is an ever-demanding muse. Adieu, my lord.

Exit FESTE

MR. PRINCE: As I was saying—

[MR. PRINCE is shocked by the empty room, sighs, and moves to leave]

Exeunt

Critical Bibliography

Adamson, Sylvia, Gavin Alexander, and Katrin Ettenhuber. Renaissance Figures of Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007. Print.

Aebischer, Pascale. Screening Early Modern Drama: Beyond Shakespeare. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2013. Print.

Brown, John Russell. Studying Shakespeare in Performance. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. Print.

Brown, John Russell, and Stephen Di Benedetto. Designers' Shakespeare. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2016. Print.

Burnett, Mark Thornton., and Ramona Wray. Screening Shakespeare in the Twenty-First Century. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 2006. Print.

Carson, Christie, and Peter Kirwan. Shakespeare and the Digital World: Redefining Scholarship and Practice. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

Cartelli, Thomas, and Katherine Rowe. New Wave Shakespeare on Screen. Cambridge: Polity, 2007. Print.

Cartmell, Deborah, and Michael Scott. Talking Shakespeare: Shakespeare into the Millennium. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave, 2001. Print.

Crowl, Samuel. Shakespeare and Film: A Norton Guide. New York: W.W. Norton, 2008. Print.

Davies, Anthony. Filming Shakespeare's Plays: The Adaptations of Laurence Olivier, Orson Welles, Peter Brook, and Akira Kurosawa. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1988. Print.

Davis, Lloyd, and Laura Raidonis Bates. Shakespeare matters: history, teaching, performance. Newark: U of Delaware Press, 2003. Print.

Fischlin, Daniel. Outerspeares : Shakespeare, Intermedia, and The Limits Of Adaptation. Toronto [Ontario]: University of Toronto Press, Scholarly Publishing Division, 2014. eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 24 Mar. 2016.

Fischlin, Daniel, and Mark Fortier. Adaptations of Shakespeare: A Critical Anthology of Plays from the Seventeenth Century to the Present. London: Routledge, 2000. Print.

Fliotsos, Anne L., and Gail S. Medford. Teaching Theatre Today: Pedagogical Views of Theatre in Higher Education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. Print.

Gibson, Rex, and Janet Field-Pickering. 1998. Discovering Shakespeare’s language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Grady, Hugh. Shakespeare and Modernity: Early Modern to Millennium. London: Routledge, 2000. Print.

Henderson, Diana E. A Concise Companion to Shakespeare on Screen. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2006. Print.

Hulbert, Jennifer, Kevin J. Wetmore, and Robert L. York. Shakespeare and Youth Culture. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006. Print.

King, Helen. The disease of virgins: green sickness, chlorosis and the problems of puberty. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.

Lehmann, Courtney. Shakespeare's Romeo And Juliet : The Relationship Between Text And Film. London: Methuen Drama, 2010. eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 24 Mar. 2016.

Marowitz, Charles. Recycling Shakespeare. New York, NY: Applause Theatre Book, 1991. Print.

McAlpine, Fraser. "45 Everyday Phrases Coined By Shakespeare." BBC America. BBC America, 2013. Web. 14 Apr. 2017.

Mudlark. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Apr. 2017.

Novy, Marianne. Transforming Shakespeare: Contemporary Women's Re-visions in Literature and Performance. New York: St. Martin's, 1999. Print.

O'Brien, Peggy, Jeanne Addison Roberts, and Michael Tolaydo. Shakespeare Set Free: Teaching A Midsummer Night's Dream, Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth. New York: Washington Square Press, 2006. Print.

Ramnanan, Angela, and Michael J. Collins. Introducing Shakespeare Early: Why, When, and How to Teach Shakespeare to Elementary and Middle School Students. Thesis. N.d. Washington D.C.: Georgetown U, 2016. Print.

Rokison, Abigail. Shakespeare for young people: productions, versions and adaptations. London: The Arden Shakespeare, 2013. Print.

Shakespeare, William, Burton Raffel, and Harold Bloom. Romeo and Juliet. New Haven, CT: Yale U Press, 2004. Print.

Stone, Lawrence. The family, sex and marriage in England 1500-1800. London: Penguin, 1990. Print.

Teague, Frances N. Shakespeare and the American Popular Stage. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006. Print.

Warm Bodies. Dir. Jonathon Levine. Summit Entertainment, 2013. DVD.

William Shakespeare's Romeo Juliet. Dir. Baz Luhrmann. Released by Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 1996. DVD.

William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet. Dir. Franco Zeffirelli. Paramount Pictures, 1968. DVD.

Winston, Joe. Transforming the Teaching of Shakespeare with the Royal Shakespeare Company. London: Bloomsbury Arden Shakespeare, 2015. Print.

Creative Bibliography

ACT 1, SCENE 1: Macbeth, 5.11; Much Ado About Nothing, 1.1; The Taming of the Shrew, 2.1; A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 3.2; Much Ado About Nothing 1.1; Much Ado About Nothing, 2.1; Much Ado About Nothing, 1.1

ACT 1, SCENE 2: Titus Andronicus, 2.3; King Lear, 1.1; Titus Andronicus, 2.3; King Lear, 1.1; A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 3.2; King Lear, 1.1; A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 3.2; Macbeth, 1.5

ACT 1, SCENE 3: Much Ado About Nothing, 1.1; Much Ado About Nothing, 3.1

ACT 2, SCENE 1: Much Ado About Nothing, 2.1; Anthony and Cleopatra, 1.1; Much Ado About Nothing, 2.1; As You Like It, 5.4

ACT 2, SCENE 2: A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 1.1; Much Ado About Nothing, 1.3; Othello, 3.3; A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 2.1; King Lear, 1.2; Othello, 4.1; Titus Andronicus, 5.1; King Lear, 1.1; Titus Andronicus, 3.1; Romeo and Juliet, 2.1; Much Ado About Nothing, 3.3; Othello, 3.3; All’s Well That Ends Well, 2.3

ACT 2, SCENE 3

ACT 3, SCENE 1: Titus Andronicus, 4.1; As You Like It, 2.7; Titus Andronicus, 5.1

ACT 3, SCENE 2: Titus Andronicus, 2.3

ACT 4, SCENE 1: Much Ado About Nothing, 1.1; A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 2.1; King Lear, 2.4; Romeo and Juliet, 1.1; The Merchant of Venice, 3.1; All’s Well That Ends Well, 4.3

ACT 4, SCENE 2: Much Ado About Nothing, 2.1

ACT 4, SCENE 3: Romeo and Juliet, 1.4