Suicide in Romeo & Juliet - my children

[sek]

Hello:

The grandparents want to take my 8 and 7 year old girls to a Romeo & Juliet Ballet on Saturday. Usually, I like my children going to the ballet and the symphony, but I am worried that the Suicide in Romeo & Juliet could be confusing and damanging to my children. I’m also not extatic about the probable kissing etc., between two unmarried people, but that is less problematic.

Does anyone have any advice for me? Should I stop them from going? Should I talk to them about the them of suicide beforehand? If so, what should I say.

In Christ,

Sean.

 

[chicago]

In storytelling, you have tragedies and comedies. Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy. It shows us how bad despair can be and the terrible places it leads. When we tell stories, we have to be honest in our depictions. And sometimes that honestly forces us to address hard and difficult realities of life. But without such representations, the stories could not even connect with our humaity. The key is to realize the larger truths which such storylines are contextually in relation to. Now, whether you want your 7 and 8 year old dealing with these things is up to you to discern if they are ready for. But I don’t find it to necessarily be bad for children to witness, in and of itself. It is more a matter of whether this can open up a conversation which would help them to process the conflicts of human nature which we all face.

 

[Forest-Pine]

What age are the kids? How sensitive are they to the subjects at hand? What kind of knowledge do they have about it? What experiences have they had in the past with the topic at hand (high literary exposure? deeply emotional personal experience?) Are they adequetly prepared or innocent enough to deal with it? Is the play going to be overly graphic or is it family friendly? These are all things you as a parent are best able to judge.

 

[allhers]

You know what’s funny? I saw it when I was very young and I had to check out this thread to see what suicide you were talking about, now I remember.
All I had retained from it was how romantic it was ,“romeo oh romeo, wherefore art thou o romeo.” I remember thinking that I would have never ended it that way.
Sometimes I think that children can only understand so much. At their age, they would probably be bored to tears.

 

[sek]

Actually, when my children (7&8) go to the symphony, ballet, or opera, they are riveted to their seats for the entire event. I am not sure about this, but I believe there are two reasons for this: (a) we don’t have TV in our house, and (b) they read a lot.

Thanks for your insight on what you remembered from your youth. Does anyone have any insight on how I deal with the suicide specifically. Should I say that it is probably that they both go to hell because of his suicide etc.? And yes, my children will ask these questions.

 

[chicago]

sek:

Does anyone have any insight on how I deal with the suicide specifically. Should I say that it is probably that they both go to hell because of his suicide etc.? And yes, my children will ask these questions.

I don’t think it is that hard at all, really, Life (even a life with many difficulties) is better than death. Suicide is a sad, tragic, ending of despair and hopelessness. Not a good thing, even if it is portrayed as Romantic. (I suppose that a deeper/better question could actually be how to best help them understand the genuine value and pitfalls of romanticizing.)

 

[kage_ar]

sek:

Actually, when my children (7&8) go to the symphony, ballet, or opera, they are riveted to their seats for the entire event. I am not sure about this, but I believe there are two reasons for this: (a) we don’t have TV in our house, and (b) they read a lot.

Thanks for your insight on what you remembered from your youth. Does anyone have any insight on how I deal with the suicide specifically. Should I say that it is probably that they both go to hell because of his suicide etc.? And yes, my children will ask these questions.

I would quote the CCC:

**2282 **If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.
Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.

 

[siamesecat]

chicago:

I don’t think it is that hard at all, really, Life (even a life with many difficulties) is better than death. Suicide is a sad, tragic, ending of despair and hopelessness. Not a good thing, even if it is portrayed as Romantic. (I suppose that a deeper/better question could actually be how to best help them understand the genuine value and pitfalls of romanticizing.)

You’re a Catholic, right? so wouldn’t death (and therefore Heaven) be WAY better than a troubled life? I am NOT condoning suicide, but I often wonder why people who believe in God and Heaven very literally fear death so much.

 

[Ghostgirl]

Censoring Shakespeare now? I guess I shouldn’t be so surprised. Still, it raises the question, what won’t people censor?

 

[Forest-Pine]

siamesecat:

You’re a Catholic, right? so wouldn’t death (and therefore Heaven) be WAY better than a troubled life? I am NOT condoning suicide, but I often wonder why people who believe in God and Heaven very literally fear death so much.

Catholics are not fearful of death and look forward to eternity with the Lord (hopefully). However, we also value life. We are the very image and likeness of the Lord. It is not morally permissible to tell God that he was wrong to give us life or to defame the image and likeness of God, the very temple of the Holy Spirit–our bodies.

GhostGirl:

Censoring Shakespeare now? I guess I shouldn’t be so surprised. Still, it raises the question, what won’t people censor?

What makes Shakespeare so great? He (supposedly) wrote plays to entertain his countrymen–not children and not women, neither of which were the plays even in Shakespeare’s time viewed as appropriate for! (There is much dispute on IF he wrote them, but nonetheless…) They often follow stereotypical story lines when studied from a humanities perspective, but the man couldn’t even spell his own name! Children are very much products of their environments, and our cultural emphasis is very different than in Shakespeare’s times. We do need to worry about every story line they hear and see because we do not have the cultural re-enforcement of the message we wish them to receive. Youth suicide was not a huge problem during Shakespeare’s time, and neither was the proliferation of the liberal message on the media. Shakespeare (in his time) was taken appropriately–as exaggeration to make a story. In our times, young children who have not previously been introduced to the historical perspective of literature might easily take it out of context and romanticize the actions, which our society at large would encourage them to do. There have been more than one or two teenagers in our day who thought it so romantic to “go out” like Romeo and Juliet, and have staged their suicides based on the story.

This is not censoring the public–this is being a parent and knowing your children and what is best for them. A 7 or 8 year old does not need to know about Romeo and Juliet, and if the mom is worried that now is not the right time to introduce the material than we must respect Mom’s assessment of the situation.

 

[Shiann]

I vote for letting them go- without a pre-ballet talk.

When they get back, use the opportunity to find out what their opinion was of it…

Then work from there.

I find this method an EXCELLENT and PURE way to guage my dd understanding of these more ‘untangible’ issues without the ‘stain’ of my opinion or thoughts. She often surprises me with her understanding and opinions of boarderline issues like this.

It sounds like your kids are probably more mature for their age, and can understand these issues. I would categorize my dd this way, and I am less likely to ‘censor’ these types of things she is involved.

 

[siamesecat]

Forest-Pine:

Catholics are not fearful of death and look forward to eternity with the Lord (hopefully). However, we also value life. We are the very image and likeness of the Lord. It is not morally permissible to tell God that he was wrong to give us life or to defame the image and likeness of God, the very temple of the Holy Spirit–our bodies.

I understand you respect life and value it. But the above poster said “even a horrible life is worse than death”…implying death was awful or you were simply gone once you died. If she had said “we are all called to live, even if life is hard, and go when God chooses us too”, id have no issue. But this is making it seem like there is no afterlife or something.

 

[Forest-Pine]

siamesecat:

I understand you respect life and value it. But the above poster said “even a horrible life is worse than death”…implying death was awful or you were simply gone once you died. If she had said “we are all called to live, even if life is hard, and go when God chooses us too”, id have no issue. But this is making it seem like there is no afterlife or something.

Ahh, I understand.

 

[allhers]

siamesecat:

You’re a Catholic, right? so wouldn’t death (and therefore Heaven) be WAY better than a troubled life? I am NOT condoning suicide, but I often wonder why people who believe in God and Heaven very literally fear death so much.

If it were God’s idea to end a life, but not if it is at your own hand, (or some other’s human’s).
We are to unite our suffering’s to the Cross of Christ, not think that a troubled life is to be ended with suicide. That is never the answer.
I don’t fear death.

(by the way, up above, I didn’t mean that I thought that the sucide was romantic in any way, shape or form, just that all I had retained from seeing it at a young age was the romantic parts.)I didn’t think in terms of “sex”, just romance. My parents were very openly romantic. I didn’t watch much television either and I read a lot and I didn’t even think in terms of sucide, it’s still not an option.

 

[rayne89]

When I was about 9 the musical Evita was being advertised on TV and everytime it came on I told my parents I wanted to go see it. My parents couldn’t figure out why a 9 year old would be interested. My dad got tickets and I absolutely loved it. The politics are completely lost on a 9 year old and even the revolving door of boyfriends didn’t really register. I loved the music and the singing. I seriously doubt the suicide will have any adverse affect on their moral developement.

I also would not say they both went to hell if the subject should arise because if this were a true story for one the church never declares with certainty whether some has gone to hell. They only declare the ones that have gone to heaven (saints). And the church gives consideration for the mental state of those who commit suicide. You can discuss how sad it was that they fell in despair and forgot the love that God had for them and that is wrong to take one’s life. In other words there are better ways to explain the wrongs of suicide the “to scare the hell out of them.”

 

[chicago]

siamesecat:

I understand you respect life and value it. But the above poster said “even a horrible life is worse than death”…implying death was awful or you were simply gone once you died. If she had said “we are all called to live, even if life is hard, and go when God chooses us too”, id have no issue. But this is making it seem like there is no afterlife or something.

Well, for one I (a he BTW) said “Even a life with many difficulties”, not (technically) a “horrible life”. But, nonetheless, I might argue that “even a horrible life” is better than death, particularly if we have the same understanding of what constitutes a “horrible life”, or at least acknowledge that if this “horribleness” is due to a life not well lived, that where there is life, there is hope.

The ultimate point is that life is always better than death. This is the context in which I noted that, even with many difficulties, life is indeed better than death. Death is never a truly “good” thing for man, in and of itself. (Though I suppose it is good in the sense of a purification and call to remember life.) It is, rather, the wages of sin; imposed upon us only because of Adam’s disobedience. It is, therefore, something to truly tremble before as it brings us to an end of this life; an end for which we were not originally, nor ultimately, created as immortal beings.

This is why the Sequence from the Catholic Mass for the Dead (Requiem Mass) ponders the subject of death and judgement quite seriously. Much of the Dies Irae (Day of wrath, O Day of mourning, All the world in ashes burning) is not pretty stuff. Nor is a good crucifix, for that matter. The best of crucifixes are very real, extremely bloody, and can cause you to tremble (tremble, tremble) as if you were there. It is, afterall, quite horrific to gaze upon the God-man, dead on a cross.

In the Christian context, of course, because of the death and ressurrection of Christ, our mortal earthly lives can be transfigured into eternal life. Sacrificial giving up of one’s life for a greater good of preserving or redeeming another’s life can be an even greater good. As can uniting our difficulties in union with the cross. Which, therefore, ratifies all the greater that life is always better than death. Yes, eternal life is EVEN BETTER than earthly life alone, particularly in it’s fallen mortal state. And death is the veil through which we must pass to enter in. As such, death might be considered a friend. But, only when it truly being entered into via union with Christ, who is Life!

 

[Kay_Cee]

I used to teach this play in an all-girls Catholic high school. Some of the girls tended to view the suicides in the play as the height of love between a boy and girl, so one of the assignments I gave was for the students to figure out a different way for Romeo and Juliet to solve their problems.

 

[wabrams]

sek:

Hello:

The grandparents want to take my 8 and 7 year old girls to a Romeo & Juliet Ballet on Saturday. Usually, I like my children going to the ballet and the symphony, but I am worried that the Suicide in Romeo & Juliet could be confusing and damanging to my children. I’m also not extatic about the probable kissing etc., between two unmarried people, but that is less problematic.

Does anyone have any advice for me? Should I stop them from going? Should I talk to them about the them of suicide beforehand? If so, what should I say.

In Christ,

Sean.

Whats wrong with that?

 

[sek]

Ghostgirl:

Censoring Shakespeare now? I guess I shouldn’t be so surprised. Still, it raises the question, what won’t people censor?

I’m not sure what you mean by censor. It is common for our family to discuss books, plays, operas, etc. We are real Catholics (i.e. we accept all of the Church’s teachings), and one of the things the Church teaches is that it is my responsibility to raise my children in the Lord. I am under no obligation to let the world market to my children in an unfiltered fashion. You seem to think Shakespeare should be some sort of exception to this, but Shakespeare is nothing special. I teach my children art, history, philosophy, theology, science, mathematics, technology, sociology, and languages so that when they are older they will be independent, critical thinkers (like Augustine, Aquinus, Alice von Hildebrand, Joan of Arc, Mother Angelica etc., not fragile followers of trends). My children will grow up able to speak several languages and be sensitive to the many cultures of the world. They wil grow into confident, well educated adults who are able to defend the oppressed and strive for excellence. I don’t hide my children from challenging subjects; in fact my children are much more mature and sophisticated than children whose parents outsource child rearing to MTV and other organizations.

Anyway…My wife and I decided to take our children to the Romeo & Juliet ballet (rather than have the grandparents take them). The production was stunningly beautiful. We did discuss the issue of suicide in a Catholic context (many of the posts on this thread were helpful to gain perspective - so thank you to you all). My children were riveted to their seats for both halfs and it was a wonderful evening all around.

God Bless,

Sean.

 

[MEP]

You know, it’s not like Shakespeare condones suicide or something. The whole point of the story is to show how tragic and wrong it is when people war with each other for no reason (the feud between the two families is supposed to be the source of the tragedy and is intended to show people what NOT to do).

If your kids can’t discern for themselves that the ending of Romeo & Juliet is a Bad Thing ™, then they shouldn’t go. If it’s because they’re too young to make that determination on their own, then wait until they’re older. If they’re old enough to see a PG-13 movie (or heck, younger than that) then they really should be able to discern on their own that R&J is meant to serve as an example of what NOT to do.

Personally, I think Romeo & Juliet is Shakespeare’s weakest effort and it baffles me that so many people consider it romantic. The real lesson to be learned here is “idiots shouldn’t fall in love with each other”, because it wasn’t the family feud that really did the title characters in so much as it was their own pride, fear and bald-faced stupidity (seriously, why didn’t they just leave town if they were so in love? They couldn’t live without their parents money or something?). I always though that R&J had more plot holes, contrivances, and inconsistencies than most of Shakespeare’s work and I never really liked it or any of the myriad stories based on it. Even his plays with supernatural elements seem less contrived than Romeo & Juliet does. The only thing romantic about it is some of the dialogue, but ultimately both characters are too childish to express real love or anything else more than the superficial appearance of romance. What the hell is romantic about unfulfilled love, and constant despair ending in suicide?

Now Merchant of Venice, that was a fantastic play! Don’t waste your time with the recently produced movie though. Al Pacino plays a lousy Shylock.