Rebelling Traditions

Hello all! This will be my first ever blog post (both for Dr. MB’s class and in general), so bear with me if it’s not as informal as most others will be. Shakespearian plays have always had an impact in my life. From reading Romeo and Juliet during middle school (or high school, one of the two) to listening to Hamlet and watching the five-hour long movie to studying King Lear… Basically a Shakespearian-heavy education for me, minus Othello and Macbeth; no complaints here, though, as I’ve come to appreciate Shakespeare’s impact on culture in hindsight. That doesn’t justify it as something I’d do in my spare time, mind you.

The first two acts of Romeo and Juliet (while attempting not to spoil later acts, not that I remember) pretty much sum up the unintended notion of “rebelling” against older traditions. In this case, imminent disagreements and “flourishes…[of blades]…in spite of me” (15) with little to no explanations combined with the occasional young love connection—“‘Tis but thy name that is my enemy” (71)—set up unpromising circumstances. What is the acceptableness boundary of defying tradition? And can love overpower it?

Given the era (16^th century…? I’m terrible with dates), I believe the answer is no, likely not. Romeo and Juliet are both situated within wealthy families, and in Juliet’s case also an arranged marriage. However, the modern era shows the transformation of relationship-type traditions, some broken and questioned with others changed into a normality. The case between Romeo and Juliet might’ve been tolerated within today’s standards but still dependent on the families’ values.

Divorce, for example, was a significant term growing up. And through various school novels featuring 16^th century impressions on divorce as a sin surprised me, while at the same time not at all, at the rising divorce rates within the modern times and how it’s become a “standard”, in a sense. I’m not saying anything good or bad about marriage and divorce, just that it’s the couple’s decision and has gotten to the point of acceptance.

Romeo and Juliet almost immediately mentioned marriage, which was probably not any different from the potential arranged marriage between Juliet and Paris. The term marriage has evolved into a very sensitive term. Of course it represents the successor to a successful relationship and something one should ponder about once-in-a-while (do I see a future with this person?). But at the same time marriage carries the connotation of a heavy commitment and greater responsibility, of which for some is frightening.

Marriage in the 16^th century was seen as a method of maintaining royalty and wealthy statuses; marriage in the current era is a sign of greater commitment between two people but may not be as significant simply from the abundance of divorces (not discounting it for some couples, just as a whole). And I’ve wondered about the tradition of marrying before living together: how would one grasp the significant other’s lifestyle? Maintaining homework under the parents’ roof is much different than maintaining homework or a job under one’s own rented apartment, shared apartment, etc…