#waking romeo

[cto10121]

Waking Romeo (2021)—Review Part 3

[Part 1] [Part 2] In which Romeo reveals himself to be an arrant villain and other totally canon-compliant things, Jules is girlbossed into doing All the Things(tm) as “development” and my ending thoughts. Spoilers as always.

[Jules POV] “I know,” he says, his hand still resting on my knee. “Your mum told my mum, and she told me. It was probably for the best. We were young, Juliet. Young and impulsive. But we’ve got another chance now.” (261)

Of course this Romeo would be perfectly nonchalant about his and Jules’ child dying. Because Canon Romeo is well-known for his callous indifference to anything regarding his love interest.

[Jules POV] And then I remember. This is Romeo.

All at once, my mind is filling with bits and pieces that I had to write a whole make-believe story just to gloss over. How he was busy telling Rosaline that he loved her one night before we got together at that party. How I cried on his shoulder about Tybalt dying and, somehow, he parlayed my grief into a make-out session. How he always played the victim and blamed others for everything. How he was forever talking up how great he was. How he told me that he loved me, over and over, after only a couple of hours. How the whole marriage thing came about after I told him I wanted to wait. How the drugs were his idea.

He didn't force me into anything. They were my choices. I did those things. I was there, in the thick of it, loving every moment—for the most part. But there was a reason the Romeo in my story was so perfectly romantic—I was compensating. (262)

Didn’t Jules come to this realization pages before??? Ugh, this book is a mess. At this point this Romeo is just an red-flag OC in a flesh suit. Also, didn’t Jules say that Rosaline was the one who broke his heart???

Also, also, if Jules wrote R&J the play, then that means she also wrote Tybalt being the aggressor, Romeo killing Tybalt, and her fictional self being angry at him for it. Why would a delusional lovesick teen girl do that?

[Jules POV] I don’t believe it.

She put him in a pod.

She sent my son forward in time.

“William…he’s alive?”

And here is where things really get stupid.

Apparently Jules’ son (William, aka Frogs) not only survived, but was sent forward in time two years by Jules’ mother and aunt. This was done because Jules was 1) too traumatized and obsessed with Romeo to be a mother to William and 2) too young to raise a whole ass kid. Okay. So why didn’t Jules’ mother and/or aunt raise him? Or idk hire an actual nurse for him?

I don’t know. This book has broken me.

[Ellis POV] It takes a moment for the implication of that to sink in. “You want to pass off Jules’ story as a play actually penned by Shakespeare?” […]

He continues, happily nattering away. “I think you’d like her next story, actually. It’s about a prince this time. Starts with a ghost, just like in Wuthering Heights, and opens with the same first line as the myth of Narcissus.” (297).

Die (Reprise, scherzo)

[Jules POV] “I should have brought him back to you,” she says again, almost a whisper. “I really did mean to. But it was so easy to just push the button once more, sending him forward another year. Just one more year, until you were ready.”

Suddenly her constant mantra about me needing to grow up makes sense. She needed me to show that I was responsible. That I wasn't suicidal or reckless anymore. She needed me to prove that I was ready to be a mother.

Mum looks at me with a kind of raw desperation. I still give her nothing. (302)

Yeah, girl, give her nothing. Jesus Christ, even Jules knows it’s all bullshit. OG Lady Capulet would have done away with the child and that would have been in character.

[Jules POV] “Did my heart love till now? Forswear it, sight, for I ne'er saw true beauty…”

I give a humorless snort at the sappiness of it. If life really was a story, I'd make this a poignant the-wheel-is-come-full-circle moment. It would be all “the true beauty that I needed to see was in me" and “the love that I journeyed to find had nothing to do with a boy,” et cetera.

Well, corny or not, maybe it's true. Either way; when I look in the mirror, I know—and am even starting to like who’s there…which actually strikes me as a pretty good beginning. (317)

[Ellis POV] When he looks at me, the hatred in his eyes is unmistakable.

“You stole my life," he says bluntly, "My wife, my son. I was meant to be the hero. It was meant to be my story, not yours. Romeo and Juliet—that's what was meant to happen."

“But that's not what happened,” says Frogs. “That's not the life she chose.”

“She wanted me. She was obsessed with me,” insists Romeo. “Without Ellis, I would have stayed at the center of everything. I was meant to be important. I was born to be important. So really, this isn't even my fault. Ellis is to blame. I'm just putting things right.” (326)

This Romeo went from “It’s not you it’s me” and not gaf about his kid or Jules to “We were meant to be!!!” simply because the plot said so. This author clearly couldn’t decide which flavor of Romeo the Death Eater she wanted, so she did all of them.

[Jules POV] I close the cover and see that he's changed the order of our names—Romeo & Juliet instead of Juliet & Romeo. Self-centered jerk. I'm about to change it back, then I decide no—it's better that way. In my story I did put myself second.

But not anymore.

🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

I can’t believe I have to explain this as I shouldn’t have to explain this and I resent having to explain this…but the order of the names in a couple has less to do with gender power dynamics and all to do with the literal English language and its peculiar stresses, i.e. how easily the two names roll off the tongue.

Hence Romeo and Juliet >>>> Juliet and Romeo. Bonnie and Clyde >>>>> Clyde and Bonnie. And then there are some couple names that sound good either way, e.g. Bella and Edward ~ Edward and Bella, with the former being a bit more smooth than the latter.

[Jules POV] I lay my notebook back down alongside Ellis's novel. His story and mine, finally united...if only here, on my crummy old desk. For a moment I stare at Wuthering Heights, lauded by history as a tale of epic love. Then I look to my own play, Romeo & Juliet. And I decide, actually, they're both pretty crap examples as far as the women go. I mean, all-consuming love and passion? A focus on nothing but hearts?

No, there’s a much bigger picture. (337)

How dare books about romance be romantic!!!!

Honestly, the hypocrisy of this novel that has focused on tedious UST and stupid time travel shenanigans for over 90% of its page count now suddenly pretending it cares about its cookie-cutter dystopian world is galling. Its attempt to turn Jules into a Mary Sue activist and leader of the Settlement by making her one big grand plan to…plant stuff just adds assault to injury.

[Jules’ POV] “Love isn't everything,” I say again, more forceful.

Ellis says nothing.

On instinct, I gaze down at my son. Then I look back at my friends, my family. They suddenly don't strike me as an audience anymore. Audiences are bad as tourists—watching things go south, but doing nothing. No, they resemble an army. Not soldiers, like in Ellis's “buck up” mantra. Not troops; a “buck up" troupe. Every single person a key player in the new narrative. Everyone big and small—with an important role in the fight to turn the tide. We still have time, and time can mend. I stare at them and decide they really are the seed: the past, the now, and the future. Then I look beyond them…

…and I feel it. (368)

*Aspects of Love voice* Love / Love isn’t everything / But the author / Needs her bag

Conclusion

Ho boy, this reread turned out worse than even my original memories once I got past the actual uniqueness of this book’s premise. I think it’s the fact that this time I was able to follow the time travel narrative more closely and thus I picked up on all the messages the author decided to uncritically impart without considering the misogynistic implications therein.

The whole message of this novel is, basically, don’t be a basic bitch. Romantic love is inherently bad and threatens to subvert the natural order: Obedience and servitude to your community and your hard-working parents. Jules must learn that she had made a grave mistake in committing suicide for love. Fine, except that the novel, realizing the psychological absurdity of a supposedly smart and savvy Jules being so blind to Romeo’s faults, adds the twist that Jules was acting out of unprocessed grief for her cousin Tybalt’s death. Tybalt, who is mentioned no more than half a dozen times in the book and who has no personality or relationship with Jules whatsoever. Awful.

As for Romeo…he is just an OC frat boy turned villain in a Canon Romeo flesh suit. There have been arguably worse instances of his vilification (Juliet Immortal comes to mind) but Barker manages to mix up several different strands of Romeo-is-the-worst-actually into one incoherent muddle. Romeo begins as your typical twink fuckboi and ends up a jealous villainous ex who almost kills Ellis.

But even with Romeo’s vilification and Jules’ girlbossification (which to me feel strangely complementary), the new pairing with Ellis still doesn’t work. Barker does a piss-poor job of creating a believably 18th century time traveler and of course Ellis is not at all turned off by Jules’ tomboy Not Like Other Girls behavior the way he should. The whole part where Jules suddenly warms up to Present Ellis and his jerkishness just because Future Ellis was sweet to her exemplifies the novels’ stupid double standards regarding Romeo. As a result, what little interest their budding relationship stirs up is completely dissolved. As if realizing this, the novel tries to retcon the romance by having Jules deny she was truly in love with him—because of course she couldn’t be, since she only barely knew him—only to then have her be with him in the end after a convenient time jump.

And then there is the fact that Barker really had Romeo and Juliet’s biological kid Frogs be a super time traveling genius. He is raised by Ellis, though, so his biological father doesn’t ~really matter. Of course. And of course he survived his mother’s suicide attempt and a cocktail of drugs with only a cool deformity (mismatched eyes) and the ability to see time. Of course.

Other assaults to reason abound. A sixteen-year-old becoming the leader of a community over adults without any pushback is a fantasy more ludicrous than the time travel. The nice and benign adults lied to Jules and robbed her of her choice to raise her child, possibly endangering him in the process, and Jules’ reaction is that of uncritical acceptance.

In short, it seems to me that somewhere in the middle of writing her draft Barker got some reader/editor feedback/pushback on some key points in her narrative and decided to switch thematic gears hastily from basic-girl-learns-about-toxic-relationships-by-comparing-ex-douchebag-with-new-love-interest to basic-girl-learns-how-to-be-a-girlboss-and-girlbosses-awesomely-because-she-needs-no-man-actually. Either way, R&J and Wuthering Heights are left mangled for no good reason. Oy.

[blobbei-art]

When your dog ominously opens your door and stares at you at 3 am except it’s a giant 8th generation high density reinforced beframe

[rubixcubi]

Am I crazy or does Romeo look like….

[marshsano]

… soulmates?

[xbraveheartx]

Romeo and Carlo were such troublemakers, look at them graffitiing all over a painting at the red lobster inn… unbelievable…

[knightforflowers]

self indulgent doodle hours

[cerubean]

*insert ben affleck smoking pic*

these children are running me ragged i swear. they both got the hates bedtime quirk AND romeo got the destructive and the aggressive quirk oml oh also priscilla is kicking akira to the curb

[grem-archive]

giving goofy gym coach

wrestling singlet sponsored by stream participants (you know who you are):

i'm telling you guys i have an entire list of things i have been ordered to draw alfred in by discord friends (once again, you know who you are...).

all i can say is that i have the honor to be, your obedient servant.

[anonymergremlin]

Me: *watching Romeo's mech puppet exploding to introduce him, the precious and lovely puppet-man who got his face blown off, who tried to help Krat and who wanted to warn P, only to end up killing him*

[timesnewnoir]

wanita cantik

[spindrifters]

harold perrineau's mercutio is sirius black-coded, do you understand?

[Mercutio and Romeo] were [in love], but in the way that 14-year-old boys can be in love with each other. It doesn’t necessarily have to be a sexual thing. But sexuality is a thing that young men are always talking about. So it could be confusing. And Mercutio is full of great passions. Of the badasses that could be out there, Mercutio was the baddest ass there was. And wearing a skirt was no problem for him, because if you were going to challenge his manhood, he was ready for that, as well. [x]

[cto10121]

Waking Romeo (2022)—Review Part 2

[Part 1] In which Jules and Ellis bond over mutual trauma while getting followed by a mysterious threat, Jules comes to the most basic of revelations, Shakespeare gets mangled, soap opera-level twists, and the Romeo Hate Dumb train trudges serenely on. Spoilers, of course.

“Why?” he asks again.

“It was love,” I say automatically.

Ellis steps away, running his hands through his hair.

“You wish to be reunited with a boy who would let you do that to yourself?" he says, getting worked up.

“Starting was such sweet sorrow. I mean parting. I mean—”

“That is not what love is,” says Ellis, surprisingly forceful. “That is the opposite of that. It is about protecting this.” He puts his hand firmly over my scar, over my heart. (159)

Romeo let Juliet commit suicide.

Romeo let her.

ROMEO LET—

Okay, put aside the obvious fact that this astounding bit of clownery is not true, not even in this twisted AU. Barker’s Romeo overdosed while getting high and Jules thought he had died. So not even Romeo the Death Eater compelled/persuaded Jules to give her life for him. Let’s put all that aside.

Have not women their own fucking agency??!!! Jules made her own decision to shuffle off this mortal coil. She was acting out of unresolved grief for her dead cousin, which she later realized, and Romeo’s seeming death only just compounded it. So Barker’s warning against girls giving up everything for their boyfriends not only falls flat but is contradicted by the narrative itself.

My eyes are hot, verging on tears. I've cried plenty since what happened. I’ve shed rivers of tears over my husband though they were mostly the civilized kind, like Rosaline musters. Romeo got my pretty tears. But the ugly ones, the ones what make me keen and shake and let out strange noises? They belong in the dark, to my secret, and they can't come out now.

Something has to come out now, though—I can't keep it all down. So in the reflection with me, I imagine Romeo. Only this time I see him as he really was. A world away from the fourteenth-century honor and frills of my story.

“Did my heart love till now? Forswear it, sight, for I ne'er saw true beauty…” he whispers in my ear as he kisses my neck, as his hands run the length of my body. But, of course, that’s not quite the line he delivered that night in my bedroom. His language was mostly grunts and moans. The precious few words he used were…less poetic.

“Juliet Capulet tried to kill herself over a boy that she barely even knew,” I say to my reflection. (161)

Shocker.

So. A lot of bullshit to sort out here. 1) I don’t believe for one single second that Jules never ugly cried over Romeo. Not when she saw his dead body? Not when she saw him in a coma? Homegirl was really just 🥺 all along over a traumatic overdose and death attempt?

And 2) Barker’s penchant for recontextualizing lines from OG Romeo’s soliloquies/monologues as pick-up lines said directly to Juliet is truly pissing me off, especially since elsewhere Barker has shown extensive knowledge of Shakespeare, even the more obscure lines.

[Ellis POV] “I am in every word of it. I am in the people and the places and even in the weather. It is full of little jokes and references that only I would understand," I add, without humor. “She even used my Christian name for her character, and my surname as the pseudonym that she published the book under it is all in reference to me. Everything comes back to me. She was—”

I break off, unsure how to finish. I have never spoken of Emily to anyone. Frogs knew. In the first year when I pined for her so keenly, Frogs matter-of-factly announced that she had written a book. Afterward, he found me a copy and taught me to read it. Though we never discussed her. (166)

And then there’s the Wuthering Heights hate dumb. Emily Brontë was apparently such a bigot meanie that after Ellis disappeared from her life she wrote a whole-ass book about him as a sexy if monstrous Byronic anti-hero/antagonist and one-half of a dark star-crossed lover pair as a coping mechanism. And because of this Ellis is perfect for the similarly-wronged Jules.

“What I'm saying is…I don't actually believe that what I wrote is true.” Jules sounds surprised as she speaks, as though she has just worked that part out for herself. “I don’t think that the version of Romeo in these pages is the real boy or that it's what his character is actually like, deep down. The story is simply...an alternative version of events to help me move past the real ones. Maybe it was the same for her. Maybe your girl wrote that story, not because it was true, but because it wasn’t.” (167)

You seemed to be convinced yourself of it before, Jules. Hell, she barely even thought of Tybalt, the supposedly real catalyst for events, just Romeo and her love affair and then Ellis. I’m beginning to think the whole Tybalt’s-death-as-the-real-catalyst-for-Jules is a late retcon on Barker’s part when she realized it didn’t make a lick of sense.

“May I read it?” I nod at the notebook.

“No, it's silly,” says Jules, without missing a beat. “I wrote it in the style of Shakespeare, so the language is tricky. Besides—it’s not finished. I’m having trouble with the ending.” (167)

Again, I have to question the fact that Emily is framed critically for writing a whole-ass book about Ellis while our protagonist is framed favorably for writing a whole-ass book about Romeo. Maybe Romeo should go on a similar time travel adventure after he discovers Jules’ false portrayal of him in Waking Romeo and meets a secondary love interest who actually appreciates him and calls out her weird sexist double standard.

[Ellis POV] And then I think of her words from before: “What if he had gotten my note?” And I cannot help but speculate...what are the chances that the note in question was not the one that Frogs sent me to retrieve from her family crypt all those years go? The one with the two entwined hearts on the front, which smelled of perfume? The odds are not good, I would wager. (168)

So Jules sent a message to Romeo which did not get to him because Ellis had taken it first as part of his time travel missions. This leaves Ellis as directly responsible for R&J’s tragic ending…or at least he would be had not the author retconned this later and had her douchebag Romeo say he did read it and laughed at it. Yeah, that happened.

[Jules POV] “I thought you knew,” she says softly, “that I visit him after you leave.”

I feel sick. “How long? How long have you been coming?”

She smiles sadly.

“Always.”

Rosaline has always come? I think back to all those cheesy tribute assemblies and the rivers of fake tears. Were they real after all? Was it all real? Does she genuinely love him?

“We were together for years before you entered the picture,” Rosaline reminds me. “I care about him too.” (215)

Oh, no, no, you’re not getting away with this, Barker!!!

So Rosaline’s “pretty tears” and clichéd speeches for Romeo turn out actually genuine, one of the most blatant retcons of this piece. I have a feeling halfway through Barker read her editors’ notes, realized the backlash against the Not Like Other Girls trope, and did some hasty backtracking.

And of course, there’s the 483727733th iteration of ‘Rosaline and Romeo were actually a thing after all.’ Kill this with fire.

“I am glad you got your…what was it that you called him? Your pretty piece?” I say, repeating her words from before, perhaps somewhat unkindly.

“Pretty…to imply not manly.” Jules shakes her head. “Yes, I used to do that all the time, even in my head—describe ‘feminine’ traits in men as somehow a weakness. I didn’t do it consciously: But even in my writing, the bias was there.”

Is this a rebuke of herself and of Emily? Wuthering Heights is known for subverting gender stereotypes, yet also for portraying femininity…less favorably. (221)

The author accidentally included her notes in the book, I see. These editors are getting more incompetent by the day.

So as part of the whole “whoops, I just realized my earlier Not Like Other Girls shit is now unpopular” thing (a working theory), our author is now bravely trying to convince us she was making a point about internalized misogyny. Except that OG Juliet does not describe Romeo with femininized imagery. Probably the closest is the little bird metaphor…but even then that just reads as kinky.

[Jules POV] And I was wrong—love isn't everything.

I decide that, if I ever write another play, it won't be a love story. It will be about action—taking action versus not taking action. Because standing on my balcony, looking out at the in-tatters world? It's becoming clear that we have to act. That we have to do it today, or tomorrow won't happen.

With that, my thoughts return to Shakespeare. His plays used to be performed at a theater called “the Globe.” I figured it was just a cool name—I never really thought about the metaphor of it. The idea that all the drama was literally playing out on the world's stage. That each story, however small, was part of a bigger picture. (225)

*sings in Aspects of Love* Love / Love isn’t everything

Yes, because that was what was wrong with the OG Juliet—her just standing in her balcony babbling about love when she should have been out there girlbossing an end to the feud!!! What do you mean, she’s a 13-year-old in a patriarchal society that raised her to be meek and obedient and subservient to men? That’s no excuse for being such a basic bitch!!!!

Also. OG R&J are many things. But passive ain’t one of them. Romeo approaches Juliet, Juliet flirts back, he climbs high-ass garden walls, she tells him to arrange for their marriage and sends her Nurse to him, Juliet comes to the church to get married, they marry, Romeo tries to intervene in the fight, he fights and kills Tybalt, Juliet meets with the Friar and drinks the coma potion, Romeo flies to Mantua, buys poison, and returns when he hears Juliet is dead, kills Paris and then himself, and Juliet wakes up and kills herself. What part of all of that reads passive to you?????

[Jules POV] And then I'm thinking about how it all played out. How everything happened because my cousin had died the week before. Tybalt was dead, so I went to that goddamn party. My heart was all bleeding and raw. I needed something to numb the pain, and there he was—Romeo. I used the attention of a boy as my drug and distraction.

Tybalt's death was the tragedy that sparked all disaster to follow. Without him dying, I would never have been at that party, would never have fallen for Romeo. My story would have been different. Everyone's story would have been different. So why the hell did Tybalt have to die? (243)

Before this moment, Jules has only spoken about Tybalt like maybe TWICE in the whole goddamn book. I read this book from cover to cover and I cannot tell you anything about who Tybalt was, his personality, nor his relationship to Juliet—only that he died. We get absolutely no insight or even inkling into Jules’ past relationship with him beyond one or two vague anecdotes. So yes, I count this whole psychological explanation as a retcon, and a badly done one too.

Anyway, with Ellis’ help Jules finally manages to wake Romeo with the drug, but as a cop-out she leaves before he fully awakens. When she does meet him at his parents’ house, Jules drops this bombshell on him:

“That night when we were together in my room…” I say, my voice trailing off. How pathetic am I that I can't even say it? I didn't even put it in my story—I merely alluded to it as “the love-performing night,” of all the childish cop-outs.

There’s a long, drawn-out silence.

“I got pregnant,” I finally say. “I didn’t know it when I went to the crypt that night. When…” I leave that part unsaid. “The nurses didn’t realize until after the third operation. By that point, they'd already pumped me full of every kind of drug to keep me breathing.” I try to keep my voice clinical. “They said it was a miracle the baby wasn't gone already, but that if it survived, it would be ... different.” At the mention of “different,” Romeo's eyes automatically travel to my arm—the numb one. I try to ignore it.

“Mum, Dad, and Aunt Miranda kept it a secret. I basically stayed in my room for a whole year. People thought I was grieving,” I continue. “Or they thought my parents had locked me up because I was out of control.” (260)

Jules had a secret baby even though by all accounts she should have miscarried it from both her suicide attempt and the drugs they used to save her. We are officially in soap opera territory.

[brokenbackmountain]

rip to romeo but i'm built different. i would not have drunk that poison that fast.

[mattodore]

Theo is bi?? Not trying to be rude I swear but he really comes across as a gay man? I somehow can’t picture him with a woman

hm... well, i can't say it's surprising that you'd think that, because i'm pretty sure i've only ever talked about his attraction to women on here once and it was only very recently (i think i mentioned it in his 60 questions post?). but theo's bi with a very strong preference for men.

the thing about theo is that he's very much real to me... so honestly i'm not gonna say he's 100% bisexual because i think it's something he's not even certain of himself. theo has a very hard time understanding his desires and knowing what he wants. um, and i think he's very averse to relationships, so he can try picturing himself with a woman the way you mentioned and he's always gonna be like hm... that's not for me. but he also has an even harder time picturing himself in a relationship with a man. so. his sexuality is something he struggles with alongside his desires. obviously his attraction to men is... really complicated and hard and he's repressed it for years of his life. but his attraction to women is also hard for him because of HOW exactly he's attracted to them... he doesn't want women the same way a straight man would want a woman ykwim? he doesn't want to perform masculinity the way society wants him to and i think he feels... almost as if he's doing something wrong no matter which way he acts on his attractions. so, yeah, he struggles a lot with his sexuality and he doesn't exactly know what he really wants.

but where I'M at with his character rn is that he's bisexual. maybe down the line this changes, but maybe not. i think where he's at right now is that while he hooks up with men most often, he still feels some attraction to women.

[marshsano]

“we grew up together in the monad charity house. remember?”

here’s the sketch!

[vjestyca]

WANDA MAXIMOFF FANCAST    * bc nobody should be using el*zabeth olsen for wanda anymore.      here’s 8 of the many romani options out there. pick one. 

alina serban  /  franciska farkas  /  mihaela dragan  /  alba flores  /  gratiela brancusi  /  katalin barsony  /  taisiya schumacher  /  doinita oancea