Considerations about Shakespeares "Romeo and Juliet".

There are only loneliness and emptiness in his soul. The senselessness of life is haunting him. Chasing the illusion he finds her. And then their eyes meet and they understand - this is the only love of their lives… this is how Shakespeare presents the story.

In fact this is more like this: he is a romanticist who, when his former dream is at an end, finds a new love, with beautiful words mutilates a young woman's head and imagines her his ideal…

"Romeo and Juliet" is one of the brightest examples of classic, which, when read with a critical sight, turns out to be worse than it is believed to be. Although it is unpleasant to find out that the greatest love story ever is actually just nothing, it does help to fight with stereotypes. In this case - with the one that says the classic is the best and nothing better and even half as ingenious can be created in art, literature and music nowadays. Broken illusions about "Romeo and Juliet" can help being more critical to decide oneself is the peace of art (literature, music) the masterpiece, a good one or something senseless and stupid in ones own opinion.

At first - there cold be no love between the both 'lovers'. They noticed each other, met, talked for few hours and married. And after this, of course, died. At first sight they felt sympathies and were interested in getting to know each other. This is a good beginning for a love from the first sight. But during those few hours they spent together their conversations consisted mainly from Romeo's compliments (most of them banal nowadays and idiotic even then, for example: 'O! that I were a glove upon that hand,

That I might touch that cheek') and Juliet's prosaic phrases such as 'oh, we can be caught, run'. So both 'lovers' did not know each other at all, because conversations like these do not reveal the true nature and inner self. And that's why their death because of such 'love' is unreasonable and senseless. Despite that this story about 'true love' without love is still considered a masterpiece.

Even if this is heeded as a love (there can be different opinions), the story remains absurd because of Juliet's attitude to their marriage. It's rather obvious, that she was ashamed of it. This is the only way to explain her fear of anyone getting to know about their marriage. This was not a fear for people to interfere their love, because young people do not have such an attitude often, the youth in its maximalism fight for what they believe in (this case it is love). As a prove to this can serve the Shakespeare's idea itself. If believe (as the writer does), that this love was the protest of two deserted souls to the existing order, then this can only be meant as a struggle for this love, otherwise it does not certify the idea. Other fact that supports this view is that Juliet, if afraid of people confronting their love, could not have such a strong character as showed. She was afraid of the society castigating her for getting married without the permission of her parents. Juliet's shame came from those prejudices she can lived among and which were rooted deeply in her mind. But the inanity of the situation again comes from the Shakespeare's idea of the story. If writer would have meant to tell about prejudices destroying the love it would be a fine play about this problem, but he wrote it as if the 'bad guys' would have demolished the love.

The most ridiculous in this story is the most 'tragic' part of it - the death of the lovers,

'Things that, to hear them told, have made me tremble;

And I will do it without fear or doubt,

To live an unstain'd wife to my sweet love', says Juliet. It is idiotic to prefer the death (suicide) to leaving home, running away with Romeo - her 'sweet love'. Teoretically it was not so hard to do at all.

Although it is obvious that shame or fear of a strong charactered and intelligent young women would never make her to think that anything is better than following her love, this is considered as a courageous decision instead of inane. And, despite the fact many people see these illogic facts, the critics keep assuring 'Romeo and Juliet' is a tragedy, not comedy, and people, not analysing what they read, keep believing in it.

Romeo and Juliet are regarded as heroes, not noticing, that their tragic love ended with death not because of the society, but because of themselves, mainly Juliet. She is considered to be the strongest personality, the smartest person of the pair. It is largely associated with the last words in the play:

'Juliet and her Romeo'. It would be gorgeous; the feminist movement could take it as their motto, if only this would not be such a baseless consideration as all the others about this story. For Juliet was the one who destroyed both of them. Romeo was a young, romantic man who was up to his head in the clouds, so the opinion of the society could not have meant as much to him as to his beloved. Romeo wanted to tell the world about his love, but Juliet did not let him to. She made the decisions that led to their death. So the tragic in this story is in the way she ruined their love and lives, though it seems too silly to cry.

When people will start thinking themselves not relying on public opinion, then such inane pieces of literature and other arts will not be the objects to try to find hidden thoughts in. And everything what is old will not be considered as great and eternal masterpieces. So people should become individualities with their own opinion, not just the one of masses and this can be reached by analysing all one sees, reads, hears.