Did Fair Rosaline change your interpretation of Romeo and Juliet at all? What about the author's note?

What do you think of the author's interpretation of the tale of star-crossed lovers? What feature did you like most about her take on the story?

Did Fair Rosaline change your interpretation of Romeo and Juliet at all? What about the author's note?

I am not sure it changed my interpretation of the play...although I would like to see it or read it again, and look through different eyes than I have in the past.

I didn't think Rome was a cad in the play...maybe I was caught up in the romance. This book put Romeo in a bad state.

The epilogue in with the author states that the repeated references to Juliet’s age in the play does seem to imply some disquiet at everyone’s marriage plans for one so young. But I think her portray of the friar as a procurer was a bit much. I’ve always viewed him as a bumbling fool. But certainly the play never showed Romeo as anything but an impulsive youth, flitting from one woman (love) to another. And his emphasis on beauty is truly only a surface attract. He never got to know either of them - both as n the book and in the play.

I originally read the play in 10th grade in 1963. This was certainly a different interpretation! I'd have to do considerably more study to say my mind had been changed, but I do appreciate being given a new way to think about the material.

This book absolutely changed my perception of the play and the movies. as the author states, there is never a clear indication of how old Romeo is in the play--her interpretation that he was a much older predator fits into the overall life in that historical time frame. Women were treated a possessions at best, and nothing most of the time.

I thought it was an interesting interpretation of this centuries-old tale, but it didn't change my opinion or reading of the play. In fact, it inspired me to listen to a performance of the play, and I came away still feeling like it reflected two very young lovers rather than an older male preying on a girl.

It was a good twist on a classic and makes you think about the original. I also want to see the play again. Interestingly enough, recently Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting have sued Paramount for sexual harassment, sexual abuse and fraud because of having to appear naked in the film when they were both underage. Originally they were told they would wear body suits but were convinced by the director, Zeferelli, that the movie would fail if they were not naked.

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-64160726

It's been a long time since I read the play but I recall it told the tale of two young lovers, but this book clearly is making me rethink my interpretation, it certainly does not leave a nice impression of Romeo.

I read many of Shakespeare's plays a long time ago when I was quite young myself. I have wanted to go back and read several of his plays and after having read Hamnet and Fair Rosaline I think I should return to them. In my recollection, Romeo was not as big a cad as he appears in Fair Rosaline. I also thought of him as just a few years, not many, older than Juliet. In the author's note, Natasha Solomons refers to today's version of child protection and abuse. I'm not sure that is a fair interpretation of a play written in the 1500s, or that we should be looking to the 1500s for our definitions of decent relationships. If I were to talk about this book and/or Romeo and Juliet with a young person today, I would compare and contrast relationships in the book and play with what we consider healthy relationships today.

I think it did change my perception a bit as I’m older now and when I read the play I was a teenager then again as a young adult. I found the authors note illuminating and reflected on the fact as a young person I assumed Romeo was similar in age as Juliet. Shakespeares original never reveals Romeos age and only emphasizes Juliet’s young age. I do know Shakespeare was 18 when he married his wife Anne who was 26! So he had some personal experience in romances with large age differences!!

I thought this novel was a very interesting retelling of Romeo and Juliet. We have created many modern versions of this story - two star crossed lovers kept apart by their families - and time and time again it is a romantic story of young people in love. This retelling brought up some interesting thoughts about how the story really would have played out in the 1500's, when women were treated as possessions and often were sent into marriage very young. Men usually were not encouraged to marry until they were somewhat older, so this line up of ages between Romeo and Juliet is entirely possible. And through the lens of so many issues prevalent in our modern times (child abuse, manipulation, societal views of women, etc), I think there were some interesting takeaways to this book.

It definitely made me want to reread the play, which is probably the Shakespeare play I have always disliked the most. I thought this interpretation was really interesting and I would like to see another book telling what happens to Rosaline and Juliet. I hadn't really thought of Romeo as such a manipulator, but I will see how I feel when I read the play again. I intend to dig out my Shakespeare book.

I do think that this is the question that has deepened our thinking about the Romeo and Juliet story, how families are big influences in their children's choice of a marriage partner. Also the customs of the historical time slot. As his children were growing up Shakespeare was absent a lot of the time. Children of the wealthy and titled were certainly more protected than children of the poor and uneducated who had to find work by the time they were 10 yo. many even younger. I was so glad to find at the end the authors note to us and to read how Natasha Solomons used two other Shakespeare heroines, also called Rosaline(Rosalind) to help her construct a character for the story she was about to tell. The author did some valuable research to enrich and validate her reimagined story. Valerie