Every year
at this time, I teach Romeo and Juliet
to my eighth grade English class.
I love teaching this play to this age group. Most of them enter into reading and discussing it thinking
that it’s a touching romantic love story.
They’re very surprised to discover that the whole debacle unfolds over a
five day period and leaves six people dead. Far from a touching romance, it’s a bloodbath born of five
varieties of unrestrained love. My
class this year is a really special group of people. While there is the usual contingent of squirrely
adolescents, they’re also wise beyond their years, highly verbal and deeply
thoughtful. As we discussed the
five types of love in the play, one of my students said, “When we’re talking
about familial love, love of your family’s honor, aren’t we really talking
about loyalty?”
What an
interesting thought. Loyalty is
generally good, isn’t it? But
then, so is love. Can’t loyalty be
taken too far? If you love your
family, or the idea of your family,
too much, as Tybalt does, isn’t that just as bad as loving someone so much that
your own identity is subsumed in his?
Juliet gives up her name for Romeo when she has known him all of fifteen
minutes. She can imagine no world
without him by her side, as he can imagine no world without her. Is that really healthy? Tybalt is rude to his uncle and risks
bringing social embarrassment on his household because he is so zealous about
protecting his family’s “honor” that he is willing to kill Romeo while Romeo is
a guest at a Capulet party. When love
for, or loyalty to, a group overwhelms respect for the individuals in that
group, doesn’t that presage disaster?
Shakespeare certainly seems to think so.
I grew up at
a time when loyalty to country, AKA patriotism, meant that you should never
question your government’s actions.
America, love it or leave it.
These days, loyalty to a political party seems to trump loyalty to
country. If the other guy wins the
election, that’s tyranny and we gotta secede. If we win, that proves our ideas are best and the other side
is morally bankrupt. Or is that
just what the media feeds us? Do
most of us really live in a grey area of nuance? The place where loyalty and constructive criticism
meet?
It’s been
brought to my attention over the years that my sense of loyalty doesn’t always
serve me well. For years, I’ve
gone to the same woman to cut my hair not because she’s particularly good at it
(as my husband and certain friends have pointed out on multiple occasions), but
because I like her. We developed a
friendship over the years, and I care about her. She knows about my trials and tribulations raising my
step-children and I know about her divorce, her subsequent dating fiascos, her
child rearing quandaries. She’s
funny and sassy and opinionated, all of which I love. But I’d rather see her for a glass of wine than a
haircut. So after years of
dithering and hesitation, I’m now going to someone new. I feel guilty and I don’t like her as
much, but my hair looks great.
Perhaps in a
slightly more meaningful context, I felt a decidedly misplaced loyalty to the ophthalmologist
who performed my Lasik surgery.
Oh, him I disliked intensely, but I always figured, because he did the
surgery, he knew what he was doing.
I finally realized what an arrogant jerk he was when John and I
encountered him at a local restaurant.
He was solo, a good three sheets to the wind when he staggered up to us
and shook my hand. Then, turning
to John, he said, “Don’t worry, I’m her doctor, not her lover.” Okay, eww! I mean, really?
What do you even say to that?
John looked like he wanted to deck the guy. And, by the way, came up with a pretty good comeback which
he chose not to say until the jerk was out of earshot, showing yet again the
class that is one of the many reasons I love him. So after putting off my yearly eye appointment because I
didn’t want this slimeball anywhere near me, I finally found a new optometrist
who quickly informed me that, although I have been told for years that my eyes
are corrected to 20-25, they are nowhere close to that. Not only that, but it is no big deal to
actually correct them to 20-25. So
after over a decade of accepting that when someone said to me, “See that dog
over there?” I would have to answer, “No,” it turns out that in a few days, I
will.
So that’s
why I’ve been questioning the value of loyalty lately. Then, the other day, a friend sent me an
article about a German Shepherd, Tommy, who continues to attend mass every
day at his owner’s church even though she died over a year ago. If you knew my friend, you’d recognize
why this story was such a profound example of canine loyalty; she can be polite
during a church service when she’s required to go, but she would never attend
one voluntarily. Were she Tommy
the German Shepherd, it’s far more likely that you’d find her hoisting one to
her owner’s memory at the local sidewalk café.
Pluis, our
trainer, often admonishes the class, “Our dogs must find us terrifically boring.” All we do is stare at a computer
screen, sit around reading, leave them alone, worry about the state of the
world. Any sensible being should
know that if you are not sleeping or eating, you should be playing, running,
chasing, digging, sniffing, tasting, repeat. Yet here is Cleo on this most boring weekend when I have
been laid out by either the flu or the worst cold I’ve had in years (and after
reading the flu.gov site, I’m going for the former), and what is she
doing? Well, right now she’s lying
on the chaise in her characteristic Kilroy position, chin hanging over the back
edge, so that she can watch me type.
Moments ago when I got up in search of my water glass, she followed me
into the bedroom (Are we napping again?), back to the kitchen (What are you
gonna do in here?), to the living room (Are we going somewhere?), back to the
bedroom (I guess we’re napping), back to the kitchen (What are you doing?) and
finally into my office where, with a resigned sigh, she left me at the computer
and returned to the chaise. As I
napped earlier, she stood guard (snoozed guard?) over me, springing up at odd
sounds, ready to protect and defend if the need arose. Or at least, that’s how I interpret her
sudden leaps to rigid-legged attention and heart-stopping outbursts of
alarm-bark. Dogs are not in
relationships with us for what they can get. They love us in a way that is far too easy to take for granted.
And that is
the true meaning, and the real value, of loyalty.
Intersting insights, Joyce!
ReplyDelete