University Literature:
Literature and Performance: Assignment 1, Romeo and Juliet Act I Scene 4, lines 1 – 50.
The deliberate allusions between the pessimistic Romeo who “[sinks]” “under love’s heavy burden” (I iv 20) and the quintessential Petrarchan lover are obtrusively evident from the outset of Scene IV, Act I. Here, Shakespeare contrasts an early depiction of a “sore” (I iv 17) apathetic Romeo with the realities of his character once he has “[borrowed] Cupid’s wings” (I iv 15), and found true love with his counterpart Juliet. Shakespeare exaggerates Romeo’s depressed musings throughout this passage and highlights the aggressive nature of his verbal interactions with Mercutio in an attempt to question the truisms of love.
Shakespeare employs the oxymoronic dichotomy of “heavy” and “light” (I iv 10) in order to exaggerate Romeo’s typical correlations with the classic Petrarchan lover. The extended imagery is again evoked as Shakespeare contrasts the “nimble soles” (I iv 13) of the lighthearted lovers with Romeo’s “soul of lead” (I iv 13) – again inferring Romeo’s similarities to the Petrarchan archetype. As Romeo reflects on his inability to woo Rosaline, he identifies as a paradigmatic Petrarchan lover by mediating upon his misfortunes and claiming that his “dull woes” (I iv 19) will not allow him to “soar with…light feathers” (I iv 18) and escape depression. Shakespeare’s adoption of iambic pentameter further emphasizes Romeo’s similarities to the lacklustre lover, as this formalized structure of speech bares connections with that which would occur in a conventional Petrarchan sonnet. This depiction of Romeo is vastly different to his portrayal later on in Scene IV; once he is acquainted with Juliet it seems that Romeo has satirically managed to “soar above…a common bound” (I iv 16) and detached himself from the Petrarchan stereotype, having found a love that can be requited. The contradictions between these two characterizations of Romeo contribute to the establishment of the ironic mode of the play and encourage the audience to recognise the misplaced humour hidden within it.
Shakespeare’s contrast of “love’s heavy burden” (I iv 20) with the “light feathers” (I iv 18) of the easygoing cupid also draws attention to the greater thematic concerns of the play. Though this imagery, Shakespeare invites his audience to consider the true consequences of love, asking viewers to contemplate the potential unfortunate repercussions embedded within it. Shakespeare suggests the underlying theme of fate through Romeo’s proclamation that “’tis no wit to go…I dreamt a dream tonight”(I iv 47/49). As Shakespeare compares the passionate joy of Romeo and Juliet’s affection with the lovers’ coincidental death at the play’s close, Shakespeare ponders the “heavy” (I iv 20) feasibilities of fate. A predetermined series of coincidences draw these “star-crossed” (I i 6) individuals together in the “light” (I iv 10) of their lively bond, allowing them to “soar” (I iv 18) within the realms of passion and then forcing them to “sink” (I iv 20) tragically in their love for one another through death. Hence, Shakespeare not only foreshadows the play’s conclusion within Act I, Scene IV but also draws attention to the ways in which fate can work both fantastically and maliciously, asking the audience “is love a tender thing?” (I iv 23).
Within this passage, Shakespeare establishes an amalgam of both tragic and comedic elements crucial to his plot. The excessive wordplay of Romeo and Mercutio that saturates the dialogue within the passage - for instance, Mercutio plays upon Romeo’s exclamation that he is “done” (I iv 37) by utilizing double entendre “dun” (I iv 38/39) - almost identifies these two as stock characters, driving the humour within the play. Thus, Shakespeare relies on curious compositions of misplaced comedic conventions, embedding them within the fundamentally tragic storyline to successfully establish an ironic mode of humour. Romeo’s identification with the stereotypical Petrarchan lover also adds to this humour; Mercutio, comparatively “light of heart” (I iv 33), makes feigned attempts to pull Romeo from the depths of his irrational sorrow, contributing to the comedic undercurrents of the tragedy. This combination of tragedy and comedy highlights the paradoxical conventions of these two structural genres, combining them in a single rendition.
Furthermore, the aggression of Mercutio and Romeo’s wordplay, evident in Romeo’s punning of Mercutio’s “soar” (I iv 16) to “sore” (I iv 17), is a direct contrast to the punning that occurs between Romeo and Juliet. The lovers’ interactions are comparatively gentle, apparent as Juliet exclaims that “palm to palm is holy palmer’s kiss” (I iv 213). Shakespeare deliberately compares the realities of these two relationships, contrasting friendship with love. Whereas Mercutio battles Romeo’s declarations with bawdy puns, the banter between Romeo and his lover is increasingly harmonious in nature. While Mercutio attempts to “draw [Romeo] from the mire” (I iv 39) and free him from his obsession with love, Juliet envelopes Romeo further within passionate affection. The perfect aspects of Romeo and Juliet’s love are further examined through Shakespeare’s contrast of unconventional rhyming between Romeo and Mercutio, occurring at the end of the passage – “come we burn daylight, ho!/nay, that’s not so” (I iv 41/42) – with the first meeting of Romeo and Juliet, where dialogue between the two lovers constructs a perfect sonnet. These converse interactions encourage the audience to ponder the “light” (I iv 33) and carefree aspects of love, and the potential beauty it may evoke.
Within this passage, Shakespeare pertains to the hidden contrasts that are embedded within his play – the love of Romeo and Juliet and the friendship between Romeo and Mercutio, the perception of Romeo as a satisfied lover and Romeo as a Petrarchan admirer, and the combination of both comedic and tragic conventions within the dramatic structure. It is in the realisation of these antitheses that Shakespeare encourages his audience to question the nature of love and decide whether it is “a tender thing” (I iv 23) or whether it be ready to “prick” its subjects “like a thorn” (I iv 24), resulting in dire consequence.
Conclusion - it's an adequate text for all ages.
Home
Help
Search
Login
