Romeo Montague in Romeo and Juliet: Character Thursday (64)

Romeo was born in one of the most respectable and wealthiest families in Verona around Middle Ages, when family feud and vendetta coloured many Italian cities’ society and culture. As the only son of Montague, I guess the family expected much from Romeo to continue their generations of feud with the Capulet. From the scenes in this play, it seems that quarrels that led to blood-shedding have almost become everyday’s story in the streets of Verona. So Romeo must have been very familiar with the atmosphere of violence within his family and friends.

From the beginning I could see that he was a young man with a tender heart who read many poetry books. Maybe his love to Rosaline is a way for Romeo to actualize his ideas of love from the books he read. Maybe he didn’t actually and truly love the girl, and that’s why her image slipped so quickly from his mind when he met Juliet. If his love to Rosaline was a puppy love, now his love Juliet was a true and much deeper one.

Romeo’s weakness was perhaps his impulsiveness and the lack of emotion control. It’s clearly showed from how his anger of Mercutio’s murder led him to take avenge to Tybalt. Either he was too young to make consideration or the violent culture where he has grown up led him to that sudden impulse. I believe if Romeo had considered the matter just a few minutes before killing Tybalt, he might remember his plan to make peace with the Capulets because he loved Juliet. Maybe his consideration would prevent the blood-shed. But I doubt whether that would mean much, as killing adversaries seemed to be ordinary business between the two feud Houses.

Leonard Whiting in 1968 movie adaptation

Romeo’s impulsive manner also appeared when he bravely sneaked into Juliet’s garden just to see his lover, while his presence—if detected—would mean death! In the last scene, when Romeo was very sad by the news that Juliet was dead, did not look for confirmation of the news, and just took it as a truth before killing himself. Here I think Romeo was a man who was controlled by his emotion, and when emotion compelled him, his mind would be numbed.

But if Romeo did not die young, I think he would live a very difficult life anyway. By that quality of sentimental heart, Romeo would be torn between family’s expectation and his conscience. Maybe Romeo should have been born as a female in that situation, rather than a male! :P

That is my Character Thursday of this week, an analysis of book character of my choice, who is yours?... Just put your post URL in the linky below. Do you like to join us in discussing characters from books you read? See the details of Character Thursday first.

Dante’s Inferno – Canto I – X Summaries

Inferno—the first part of The Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri—is in my list of Well-Educated Mind Self-Project, and the only book in the Poem section I picked for this project. As usual, I will do several summary posts (3 or 4 posts, depends on the length of each canto), so you might see a lot of ‘Hell’ in the next several days…. :)

Here is my first post, the summary of Canto I – X (of total XXXIV cantos). Although it's not mandatory, but making this summary helps me to highlight Dante's various adventures and encounters.

Canto I: Dante arrived at a valley in dark forest but didn’t know how he ended there. He met a panther, a lion and a she-wolf, and in despair, met a shade of Virgil the Roman poet who agreed to guide him to ascend the hill.

Canto II: Dante plead to the Muses (goddesses) as fear came to him, but Virgil scolded him of being coward. He then told him that a woman in Heaven (Beatrice—Dante’s lover) had told Virgil to guide Dante. Beatrice was told by Saint Lucia, who had been acknowledged by another Lady in Heaven (Mother Mary?) who grieved at Dante’s condition.

Canto III: Dante arrived at the gate of Hell where he saw people suffered continuously from flies and wasps stung and worms—people who were neither good nor evil but just ignorant, and thus were rejected by Heaven and Hell. Dante arrived in a river bank (Ancheron) where dead people’s souls waited to be brought across to Hell by a boat—people who never feared of God.

Canto IV: Dante arrived on the verge of a deep valley. The foremost abyss (Limbo) was for people who were not sinned but had not been baptized, or who were born before Christianity (like Virgil), with the exception of some figures from Old Testament: Noah, Moses, Abraham, David, etc who had been out of Hell. Resided here also, famous poets: Homer, Horace, Ovid and Lucan. They came next to a castle with seven walls encircled by a creek, where Dante saw some great heroes from Greek and Ancient Rome: Aeneas, Hector, Caesar, Brutus, etc. and great philosophers: Socrates, Plato, Seneca, etc.

Canto V: Dante and Virgil descended to second circle of Hell where a monster called Minos judged the sinners according to their confessions to thrust them down in appropriate grades. These people were whirled round continuously by a great storm in black sea which never rested. They were lustful people such as Cleopatra, Helen, Paris, Dido and even Achilles; all were damned because of love and desire.

Canto VI: People in the third circle of Hell were tortured by eternal heavy rain, where Dante met Cerberus as the guard and whom Virgil satisfied with a handful of earth so that they could advance. It is for gluttonous people who must lie on the ground. One of them, Ciacco, foretold the political situation in Florence, and told Dante that politicians involved were in the deeper level of Hell.

Canto VII: Descending to fourth circle, Dante saw two semi circle groups of people crying in anger and pain, wheeled to the other’s end then wheeled back to another after colliding in the middle. They conducted avaricious sin by not distributing Fortune fairly, and so now must keep battling without end (corrupt clergymen were included). Dante then headed to fifth circle of Hell: a marsh called Styx where naked people covered with mud striking each other; they who were always consumed with anger. There were also the Sullen who now gurgled in the mud because they kept sighing under the sun. Finally Dante arrived on the foot of a tower.

Canto VIII: Dante and Virgil took a boat across the Styx and met Philippo Argenti—Dante’s adversary?—whom Dante was pleased to hear being attacked by people in the mire. Dante then arrived at Dis—a city in Hell—where eternal fire kindled from within. The Gates’ guards refused them to enter despite of Virgil’s plead.

Canto IX: Dante was afraid seeing that Virgil has failed. They were at the low part of Hell, far from Heaven, the sixth circle. He saw three Furies who called for Medusa to change Dante into stone. A messenger from Heaven appeared and instructed the guards to open the gate for Dante and Virgil, and he was obeyed. They entered finally a land full of tombs heated with flames within, where the heretics were.

Canto X: Among the heretics tombs was Epicurus and his followers. The soul of Farinata—political leader of Dante’s era—suddenly talked to Dante. He could see the future but not the present, and it was the Heretics’ punishment. With Farinata, Frederick the 2^nd and the Cardinal stayed also there. Then Virgil brought Dante to a valley where he would meet a soul from whom Dante would learn about his future.

~~~~~~~~

Romeo and Juliet Theme Song: Play Monthly Meme May

As Baz Luhrmann’s modern adaptation is the only Romeo and Juliet’s movie I’ve ever seen, I have started to browse its soundtrack when I was preparing this month’s theme for Play Monthly Meme—a monthly meme for Let’s Read Play. One song has intrigued me when I watched the movie: Des’ree’s ‘Kissing You’—remember when Romeo and Juliet first met each other ‘through’ a giant aquarium? The song fits the scene very beautifully. However, I still thought that the song was too sweet and romantic to represent the whole play, which is in fact a tragedy. Then youtube brought me to another theme song of Romeo and Juliet…. ‘A Time for Us’.

Well…. I am always a fan of 1960-70s songs, so I know very well Andy Williams’ A Time for Us; it’s one of my favorites. What I didn’t know until few days ago was, that ‘A Time for Us’ was originally the theme song of Romeo and Juliet 1968 adaptation. Well then, perfecto! I think this song could perfectly reflect the soul of Shakespeare’s play, which he might have intended to be. Just read the lyrics, it’s simple but deeply touching… (and now makes me wanting to watch the movie!)

A Time for Us

by: Andy Williams

A time for us someday there'll be

When chains are torn by courage born of a love that's free

A time when dreams so long denied

Can flourish as we unveil the love we now must hide

A time for us at last to see

A life worthwhile for you and me

And with our love through tears and thorns

We will endure as we pass surely through every storm

A time for us someday there'll be

A new world, a world of shining hope for you and me

A time for us at last to see

A life worthwhile for you and me

And with our love through tears and thorns

We will endure as we pass surely through every storm

A time for us someday there'll be

A new world, a world of shining hope for you and me

Jordan Baker in The Great Gatsby: Character Thursday (64)

Being a rather outsider from Gatsby-Buchanans circle, Jordan Baker is one of the most interesting characters in this book—well, apart from Jay Gatsby, of course. Jordan is a professional golfer, and this makes her being in the circle of those glamorous wealthy people. She often attends Gatsby’s parties, and befriends with the Buchanans. But unlike Daisy Buchanan, she is not a kind of drama queen who is always fluttering, sighing and whispering. Jordan is firm, strong and self-esteemed (maybe her career makes her like that).

Her quality first appears when Nick arrives at Buchanans resident, where the wind blew up the white curtains, while Daisy and Jordan’s white dresses were fluttered and rippled by the breeze. I can imagine Daisy in this condition with her dreamy expression, while Jordan—through Nick’s eyes—was portrayed as “extended full length at her end of the divan, completely motionless, and with her chin raised a little, as if she were balancing something on it which was quite likely to fall.”

Later on it is also revealed through her relationship with Nick that Jordan has a tendency of cheating. That’s why she was attracted to Nick: “Jordan Baker instinctively avoided clever, shrewd men, and now I saw that this was because she felt safer on a plane where any divergence from a code would be thought impossible. She was incurably dishonest. She wasn't able to endure being at a disadvantage.” So I guess, Jordan is only attracted to Nick because with him she doesn’t have to wear her masks all the time. She might be the kind of person who always seeks for acknowledgment from others, she needs to be accepted in the sophisticated circle of wealthy and famous people. I don’t think Jordan really falls in love with Nick, she just need someone with whom she can be herself. Maybe she is a bit tired of being hypocrisy; wearing ‘mask’ all the time is a tiring job, isn’t it?

Moreover, Jordan is selfish and indifferent. We can see this when she is driving with Nick—who criticizes her of being a danger for others with her careless style of driving. But she merely says that it’s not her business, and it seems never occur to her that her driving should relevant to others than herself. I guess that’s why Jordan—despite of being a bit uneasy with Myrtle accident—keep continuing her normal life after that. Maybe the need to emerge to a glamorous life makes Jordan abandoning her own conscience. And I think Nick is right by breaking her up, she shares the amoral qualities of Daisy and Tom.

That is my Character Thursday of this week, an analysis of book character of my choice, who is yours?... Just put your post URL in the linky below. Do you like to join us in discussing characters from books you read? See the details of Character Thursday first.

Romeo and Juliet [Play + Movie]

Let’s Read Play’s theme for this month is tragedy, and I have picked one of Shakespeare’s most famous tragedies of all time: Romeo and Juliet. Although I‘m not a fan of romance story, least of all teenagers romances, I braced myself to give a try on this particular play. Well, I must say that my instinct has never failed me before, and it doesn’t this time also. It turns out that I could not enjoy this play, and it didn’t move me like Julius Caesar did me, for instance.

First of all, I am annoyed by the harsh—and sometimes very vulgar too—humour Shakespeare put in this play. I know that somehow it is his style, but I think it has come at an annoying point this time. Maybe it’s because I have been expecting ‘Romeo and Juliet’ comes as a romantic yet tragic love story, that there would be flowery sentences and paragraphs. They do appear of course, but especially in the beginning, there are also harassing comments or insults from Romeo and Mercutio around sexual topics. And as this has happened in the very early Act, it diminished my mood (and respect) to read the rest.

What interesting me is the eternal hostility of two Houses in Verona: Montague and Capulet. The play can portray very well how each of the families took their hostility; how the youngsters especially, were eager to ignite strife whenever they met the enemies. It is in the situation that Romeo Montague and Juliet Capulet found themselves in love. And apparently, the hostility of the two families could only be resolved by the two teenager’s sacrifice. It’s quite ironic, considering that these two youngsters were merely thinking about their passionate love, but from them the adults would have to learn much about the real meaning of ‘love’.

Considering that this is about teenagers’ love, the story is as ridiculous as you could have expected, but I think the plot is interesting; how the mistiming and misunderstanding caused the tragedy. It’s only proving how love can sometimes be blind for naïve (or foolish?) people. Three stars for this tragic play—which did not really moved me, honestly…

~~~~~~~

Right after finishing the play, I jumped to the movie adaptation. I picked Baz Luhrmann’s version, partly because that’s the only one I had (:D), and partly because I was curious to see the earlier collaboration of Baz Luhrmann and Leonardo diCaprio (before The Great Gatsby).

I’ve already known that the movie would be in modern settings, before I watched it, so I was a bit surprised to see that Luhrmann only alter the settings, but not the dialogues! The dialogues were really picked from the original play, and that makes the whole movie is really unique. Listening to those punk boys speak in Shakespearean language was weird but interesting.

Here Leonardo diCaprio is in his earliest career, and this movie shows distinctly the difference with his present acting. However, I think he plays Romeo quite convincingly as the waverer and sentimental young man. The rest of the stars are not very prominent, except for Harold Perrineau, Jr who plays as Mercutio, who is the most interesting character in this movie.

One of my favorite scenes is Juliet’s tomb—which in this case doesn’t look at all like a tomb. It is very eloquent and glamour (typical Baz Luhrmann, of course), and the scene of Romeo and Juliet in their last agony is superb! Only while watching Romeo drinks the poison not knowingly that Juliet is stirring beside him, and Romeo’s expression when he knows the truth, that I am really moved. So in this case, for me, the movie has enlightened the play rather than the other way round. 7 to 10 is my final rating for this adaptation.

~~~~~~~~

I read the ebook version from Feedbooks dot com

This book is counted for:

May theme of Let’s Read Plays: Shakespeare’s tragedy

5^th book for Back to the Classics 2013

11^th book for What’s in A Name Reading Challenge 2013

43^rd for The Classics Club

I watched the movie for Books Into Movies Monthly Meme #6

[Classics Movie] The Great Gatsby

I don’t know which one is the truest; rereading the book for the second time has given me an advantage to enjoy the movie, or watching the movie has intensified my emotion as well as my understanding of the book. I believe it’s more of the second than the first one. The film has vividly showing the real emotion of all scenes from the book, which makes it easier for me to (more) understanding the book. Overall, the latest 2013 Baz Luhrmann’s adaptation of The Great Gatsby IS indeed Great!

Castings

I have no complaints for the main characters. First of all, Leonardo diCaprio is superb! He could perfectly transform into Jay Gatsby’s enigmatic character. Although his portion is perhaps three quarters of the whole film, I can feel the strong charisma of Gatsby distinguished from others. Gatsby as the glamour and lavish parties host; Gatsby as an awkward lover (who was between excited to reunite with his long-time lover and anxious that there would be anything wrong that could break his bubbles of hope); and Gatsby as a fragile man full of hope. And let’s not forget those ‘rare understanding smiles’ that Leo has presented dashingly while raising his glass: “He smiled understandingly—much more than understandingly. It was one of those rare smiles with a quality of eternal reassurance in it, that you may come across four or five times in life.”

Carey Mulligan fits Daisy Buchanan’s character; she could represent the dreamy, spoilt and indifferent style of Daisy convincingly. Joel Edgerton is also good in performing the rough and brutal Tom Buchanan by his gesture and the way he speaks. Jordan Baker is the one who quite surprised me; Elizabeth Debicki performs beautifully as Jordan. Now I see why Nick is attracted to her. She is the most fasionable one here, and really...I love her stylish hats! 

I was first curious about how Amithab Bachchan would play as Meyer Wolfsheim. Apparently, he can perform quite convincingly, if you don’t take quite seriously of the fact that Wolfsheim is a Jewish, of course! :D

Story and Plot

Thank God Baz Luhrmann chose to stick mostly to the original story and plot of the book. And even if there are slight alterations here and there to make the movie smoother, I think they just make the story more convincing. In the scene of Gatsby’s murder, I know very well that—from the book original version—he was really alone at that time and no phone call was coming. However in the movie, a phone call comes when Gatsby is swimming, and when he is reaching his hand to pick the receiver, the deadly gunshot arrives. Both scenes emphasize both tragedy and irony of Gatsby’s death, but the movie version emphasizes them in a more dramatic way which suits well for a movie which gives Leo room to express his mixed emotion—from hope (of a call from Daisy); satisfaction (from thinking that it was from Daisy, while it’s in fact from Nick); to surprise, disbelief, disappointment, and maybe fear in few seconds before he finally collapsed to death. [Confession: my eyes were wet on this scene… :( ]

One particular scene has confirmed my suggestion; it’s when Nick is eavesdropping Tom and Daisy as Tom is convincing Daisy that everything is going to be alright, after the accident. This scene confirms my idea that Daisy has admitted to Tom that it was her who actually drove the car; and that’s why they suddenly flee from their mansion (and the butler’s lie to Nick seems to point out Daisy’s selfishness to only seek security on top of everything); a really brilliant alteration of the scene that’s just emphasizing the meaning.

Setting and Costumes

I think the costume designers have done a great job to put the 1920s fashion into the movie. I like Jordan Baker’s style the most from the women, and of course….Gatsby’s suit from the men (except the pink one!). And of course Gatsby’s mansion and all the parties are gorgeous and entertaining, but still, my favorite is the characters and their emotions.

So, is it surprising you that I am giving this 2013 version of The Great Gatsby movie adaptation a 9.5 of 10 rating, old sport? :) Oh, and I think the idea that Nick has first typed his original script’s title as “Gatsby” and then later on adding “The Great” in handwriting is just topping all my feelings after the movie ends. Gatsby is great, the book is great, and this movie is great! Well done, old sport! ;)

~~~~~~~~

I watched this for Books Into Movies Monthly Meme #5

The Great Gatsby [Final Review]

If there are books I would love to read over and over again, The Great Gatsby must be one of them. This was my second read and I gained much more than my first one, and I have a feeling I would still find more in the future reads. Reading The Great Gatsby is really like peeling an onion, you must peel layer by layer to get what is inside. This book is full of metaphors, and Fitzgerald does not always reveal everything straight forward; he likes to speak his ideas in broken sentences, challenging the readers to catch the hidden meanings. And that is why this book provides never-ending debates and discussions, which make me love it more.

As I have done many chapter posts and tasks for WEM, I won’t waste time by writing what Gatsby is about. In short, it’s about Gatsby’s false dream—how a poor man fights persistently to win his dream lover, becomes wealthy by disrespectable businesses and ready to snatch the woman from his husband; but after an accident that has killed a woman, he finds that she is only an empty idea, and that lavish prosperity in the end only leaves traces of moral corruption [taken from my first level inquiry post].

I have also peeled many aspect of the story in my three levels inquiries, that I have almost nothing left now to make a decent review (LOL). But instead, I have challenged myself earlier to ask one important question, which I also invited others with whom I read this along to answer.

Do you think Gatsby is really ‘Great’? If yes, why? If no, why did Fitzgerald put it in the title?

--My answer--

First I must think about the criteria of ‘Great’; what do people usually mean when they say that someone is great? Success would be the answer. Great people are they who succeed in their fields. Now let’s apply this to Gatsby—does he succeed? A big no; he worked hard to reach his dream, not knowing that it has vanished. It’s not only failure; I can say he’s pathetic. So Gatsby must be far away from being great—although in a way, I admire his discipline, focus, and persistency to reach his dream. If we want to label him as ‘Great’, he is certainly great in accomplishing a personal target. Nonetheless, he is failed in the end; and one’s greatness is always defined by the result, right? Yeah, we are result-based generation. I can talk about this forever, but for now, let’s get to the second part of the question.

If Gatsby is not great, why is the book given The Great Gatsby as its title? What did Fitzgerald want to say to us? It came to me that maybe Fitzgerald wanted to emphasize that our way of defining greatness has been wrong. Maybe one’s greatness should not be valued only from the visible quality of success; it is merely the outer aspect of men; our old concept of success. I think Fitzgerald wanted us to look deeper into the inside of humanity. From the beginning Nick has been writing about morality: “A sense of the fundamental decencies is parceled out unequally at birth.” –(Chapter 1); so it makes sense that that is what Fitzgerald wanted to say to us through The Great Gatsby: morality. Morality is far more important than physical achievement.

American first dream was about discovery, individualism, and the pursuit of happiness [from Sparknotes]. However, the rise of stock market post-war had created a sudden euphoria, where people started to spend and consume at unprecedented levels. With that, unfortunately, morality started also to decay and corrupted. In Jay Gatsby, Fitzgerald wanted to show two different things.

First, the empty pursuit of dream; in Gatsby, American people should see that their first original dream had been vanished, and replaced by the moral corruption (Daisy is no longer the fresh-innocent girl Gatsby used to know, she had been…you know what). Second, the good morality; although Gatsby gained his wealth in disrespectable ways, he still have pure conscience in him (he stood up to take the blame of Myrtle Wilson’s murder although he did not do it). Between the two, while the empty pursuit of dream won’t make one great, I believe the good morality will.

At the end I think, Fitzgerald wanted to say that it is great of Gatsby to do what he did at the end of the story. It is also what has made Nick complimenting him: “They’re a rotten crowd; you’re worth the whole damn bunch put together”.

But most of all, I think, The Great Gatsby itself is a great literary work by Fitzgerald; maybe not the greatest one, but obviously one of the greatest… ;)

Five whole stars for The Great Gatsby, a novel I will certainly read and read again in the future.

~~~~~~~

I read the Penguin Classics hardback edition

This book is counted for:

6^th book for Turn of The Century Salon

4^th book for Back to the Classics 2013

10^th book for What’s in A Name Reading Challenge 2013

43^rd book for The Classics Club

6^th book for The Well-Educated Mind Self-Project