6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
What, art thou mocking R&J and talk of true love? I hate the idea, as I hate hell, all misinterpreters, and thee., August 12, 2010
This review is from: Romeo's Ex: Rosaline's Story (Hardcover)
(To demonstrate the language, this review will be written in the meld of rudimentary Shakespearean English, romance-novel flowery prose, and modern phrasing of the book. If you make it all the way through without rolling your eyes, who knows, you just might be able to read the book. Not that you'd want to.)
Lady Lisa Fiedler, thou sayeth characters such as Rosaline hath a raw deal, and that thy writing bestoweth upon them guts to challenge their destinies. But, oh, I feel as if it is the already-established characters slighted, in Romeo's Ex: Rosaline's Story.
It is clear thou believes Romeo and Juliet's love fickle, the feud foolish, and the sacrifices made o'er them unnecessary. For mine own part, I agree with thee; popular culture shall never understand the two lovers.
Yon original text, though, is clearly a cautionary tale of foolish youth whose dead bodies accomplished what their infatuation failed.
Pray, what makes thee believe the examples Shakespeare created require elaboration? Be the subtext so far removed that nearly each major character must sneer and sigh at their relationship to prove it shallow?
Rosaline, whose rejection Romeo bemoans at the beginning of the play, is defined by two details, her beauty and chastity, only. Is that why thee chose her for thy heroine, authoress?
Ye make her a fiery maid who flouts the conventions of the age, scampering around walls and alleys, indulging in the company of men who as equal treat her, being horrified by, e'en arguing against, marriage for anything but love.
Thee could have created Rosaline a lady of her time, raised with Renaissance values imposed upon her, who grows within her role. Aye, for each modern tomboy placed in history, youths would do better to read of a flawed woman using what power she hath been afforded.
One to come of age in fighting for her desires despite the reasonable restrictions and advice of her respected elders. One whose want to give herself wholeheartedly to her beliefs is not only admirable but foolish.
One such as Juliet.
Zounds, wherefore art thou so cruel to the maid? Shakespeare's Juliet, Lord love her, 'tis an innocent, whose love is baseless as her struggle to keep it is valiant. Her anguish o'er Tybalt and brave downing of the Friar's potion wert beautiful in watching. I'faith, I believe her the strongest woman Shakespeare wrote.
What harm hath Juliet done thee for the maltreatment thou bombards her with? In thy novel, she is so addlebrained as to rejoice that she will bring her affair to light, be accepted of immediately, save the families. Her decisions art constantly panned by other characters, who, shall we say, as a bitch in heat, whine about them.
Worst is the reactions to her plan and play suicide. I would dearly love to see thee, lady Fiedler, be so loyal and brave at thirteen.
As a better example of young love, thou presenteth Benvolio and Rosaline. Blatantly, after Friar Lawrence tells Romeo off for scarce knowing Juliet a night before they wed, thou hath inserted a scene where Benvolio and Rosaline talk of the other's follies and hatreds to each other.
Tis not only telling and stilted, but heavy-handed. In case thou hast forgot, thy couple hardly knowst each other two days before they art in love!
Benvolio is a saint on earth. He careth for orphans and stray dogs, whereas Mercutio, the unstable, bawdy, yet valiant wordsmith of the original, is to thee a leering cad. Thy soft, mischievous Tybalt should be whipped by the fiery original. Paris, truly loyal and romantic, is called jester and bore.
After awhile tis clear that thy setting is not Renaissance Verona, but plucked straight from the Harlequin historical era. Twould be more brief to list the correct social customs and factual details than the rose-colored inaccuracies. Only let me say: Rosaline, in the true lives of Romeo and Juliet, twould be abandoned by her kin, the shame of Verona.
Lady Fiedler, in thy rush to out-Shakespeare Shakespeare, thou hast created an obnoxious morality tale that has no place unfolding behind the scenes of the most famous romance of all time.
More interesting are the true scenes of Romeo and Juliet, described in lengthy narration by their participants, that are interspersed. By the end, one longs heartily for the epic love, violent swordplay, and heart-wrenching choices of Juliet and her Romeo.
I claim not that Romeo's Ex shall ne'er influence students of my tender years to take up the real story. Nor that it is devoid of pleasure for casual fans who still believe Shakespeare thought and wrote the lovers as sane in their decisions, and smugly assert they hath seen the true characters the Bard romanticized.
My words are thus: this book romanticizes a different kind of false love. Tis one filled with rescues by strong arms, with women sworn they shall be buried before they wed only to swoon the second a decent knave gives them heed.
Thou might have added to Romeo and Juliet. But bloody hell, what maggot-brained spirit bewitched thee to try bettering it?
Those of teen age shall be better introduced through the real cleverness, emotion, sexual innuendos, and escapades of Shakespeare well-taught than thy work. Get thee back to Mary Kate & Ashley serializations.
Lady Fiedler, the classic canon hath no room for you to dally with Shakespeare in. The man wrote more feminist heroines than thy feminist takes on his heroines.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Spoiler Alert!, October 9, 2010
This review is from: Romeo's Ex: Rosaline's Story (Hardcover)
Okay, so at the library last night I picked up two loosely-based-on-Shakespeare YA novels. I have a weakness, both for Shakespeare and for YA fiction, so it was fairly inevitable. I haven't yet begun Ophelia, but Romeo's Ex: Rosaline's Story I began and finished last night.
My first impressions were moderate- the author's use of quasi-Elizabethan language seems more of a forced affectation than an effective way to tell a story. It's understandably simplified for the sake of modern readers (I don't really believe in reading Shakespeare's plays- watching them and hearing the words spoken aloud leads to a much richer and easier to understand experience.), but it still feels pretentious, particularly when lines from the actual play are interspersed in the book- always, always, in italics.
Until two hundred pages into this 246 page book I was unimpressed, but still sorta enjoying it. Rosaline was far more of a modern woman than would be acceptable in 1595, and her affections seemed just as fickle as Romeo's (seriously, she kissed Mercutio and Benvolio in the same night, each time affirming that she loved the man with all her heart). It was nice to see the notion reflected that Romeo and Juliet are foolish, and not the Most Romantic Couple Evah. (I still remember the arguments I had about that when I was taking my Shakespeare class up in Madison... several middle aged women were absolutely aghast at my irritation with the pair.)
But the story lacked heart. We're told that Rosaline wants to be a healer when she grows up (regardless that in 1595 a 16-year-old was considered an adult), but her healing skill seem to involve only patching up Romeo's friend Petruchio (yes, he of Taming of the Shrew fame) at the beginning, and then noticing- with alarming frequency- that people Are Not Dead.
For a play where Mercutio, Tybalt, Paris, Romeo, and Juliet all end up dead, only two of them are actually DEAD dead when Rosaline comes across them. Tybalt is in a coma- not from the sword-wound, but from hitting his head when he fell. Rather than telling the authorities, of course, Rosaline take him back to the healer and tries to cure him herself, while getting a replacement body to be buried in the Capulet tomb. While in the coma, Tybalt's ghost watches over Juliet (which felt like a very forced way to keep an eye on the Romeo-and-Juliet part of the story while Rosaline's stuff happens).
Don't worry, she didn't kill the replacement body- it was a man who was killed by a dog while trying to abduct 10-year-old Viola (from Twelfth Night- she and Sebastian are orphans being cared for by Benvolio).
Insert eye-roll here- but that wasn't even the point where I lost my suspension of disbelief entirely. That may shock you, but I haven't yet gotten to that point yet.
The story continued to be derivative in unnecessary ways. Rosaline had a balcony scene (with Mercutio), and planned a fake engagement with Benvolio to try to convince the families to stop feuding.
The truly ridiculous part comes directly after "for never was a story of more woe, than this of Juliet and her Romeo."
So, Paris, Romeo, and Juliet are all lying dead in the crypt. The parents have sworn to call off the feud and erect statues. Then, everyone proceeds to leave the bodies there in their varying states of disarray, and go off and do... something. Benvolio, Rosaline, and Viola (for some reason), are there, and they're trying to sneak Tybalt's now actually-dead-body into the crypt. (Oh, did I mention that Tybalt's ghosty-self went back to his body to die so that he could lead Juliet to heaven because Juliet's ghosty-self was full of guilt over the suicide? No?)
They get inside and! Romeo and Juliet aren't really dead yet! Rosaline can tell from some super-sense that Juliet is dying, but perhaps she can save them both!
And this is where I shrieked at the book.
Juliet is a breath from dying, Tybalt has been dead for at least an hour, and IN 1595, Rosaline decides she wants to DO A HEART TRANSPLANT.
I am not even joking. She wants to do a heart transplant using only Romeo's dagger and Juliet's wedding ring for a singular clamp. Now, I don't know about you, but having a baby sister who has undergone several heart surgeries (no transplants) gives me the knowledge that THAT IS DAMN WELL IMPOSSIBLE.
After several pages, though, she's convinced to not do it- why? Because Rosaline doesn't know if Juliet could love Romeo if she had Tybalt's heart.
WTF.
All of the good reasons she has to not do it- like... infection, blood types, white blood cells, SANITATION (these are people who thought bathing too often made one ill!), lack of training, lack of equipment... and she decides that Tybalt's heart would prevent Juliet from loving Romeo.
So she instead make Romeo puke up all the poison, and he's okay. They all sit there in the crypt until Juliet really dies (and no one else comes back), and 10-year-old Viola teaches herself to read, overnight, from gravestones.
Yeah.
Then, to teach the Monteagues and Capulets a lesson, Benvolio and Rosaline decide to make them responsible for Viola and Sebastian's upbringing- because Viola looks so much like Juliet, it's giving them a second chance.
Then Rosaline goes off to study medicine at a university in Padua. In 1595.
In a mere 46 pages, this book went from meh to WHAT THE CRAP IS GOING ON WHAT WAS THE AUTHOR THINKING!!!
I ranted for a good hour yesterday about it. ARGH.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
