“When You Were Mine”Author: Rebecca Searle
Publisher: Simon PulsePages: 334.
Summary (taken from Goodreads): In this intensely romantic, modern recounting of the greatest love story ever told, Romeo’s original intended—Juliet’s cousin Rosaline—tells her side of the tale. What’s in a name, Shakespeare? I’ll tell you: Everything.
Rosaline knows that she and Rob are destined to be together. Rose has been waiting for years for Rob to kiss her—and when he finally does, it’s perfect. But then Juliet moves back to town. Juliet, who used to be Rose’s best friend. Juliet, who now inexplicably hates her. Juliet, who is gorgeous, vindictive, and a little bit crazy...and who has set her sights on Rob. He doesn’t even stand a chance.
Rose is devastated over losing Rob to Juliet. This is not how the story was supposed to go. And when rumors start swirling about Juliet’s instability, her neediness, and her threats of suicide, Rose starts to fear not only for Rob’s heart, but also for his life. Because Shakespeare may have gotten the story wrong, but we all still know how it ends…
Sometimes a book calls out to you, be it for
all the right or wrong reasons. When it comes to re-imaginings of age-old tales
and classics of the literary pantheon, one must tread lightly, particularly
when entering the realm of William Shakespeare. It’s important to remember the
cultural and historical context of his work when applying it to a modern day
setting. It’s possible to remain faithful to the source material while still
adapting it to fit today’s moral & societal changes. A good example of this
is the movie “10 Things I Hate About You”, a high school retelling of the very
archaic “The Taming of the Shrew”. Said play is pretty misogynist, emphasising
the important of subduing a woman’s fiery spirit in favour of making her an
obedient wife. In “10 Things I Hate About You”, the “shrewish” heroine does not
change for a man, nor is she forced into it. Their romantic resolution is
witty, equally matched and doesn’t rely on either of them completely changing
their personalities. I highly recommend the film if you haven’t seen it.
However, today’s review is about a less successful Shakespeare modern day
retelling. “When You Were Mine” actually manages to be just as, if not more
sexist than the play it’s taken from, the ever popular “Romeo and Juliet”.
I have a big revelation for you all, dear
readers. It may shock you, it may not (I hope not), but I’m sick of the world
still living by this false assumption in 2013 and think it’s time to set the
record straight for the good of us all.
There is no such thing as a slut.
Seriously. They don’t exist.
If someone calls you a slut, then ask them to
define it. Usually they can’t, or the definition changes with every person you
ask.
That’s because there’s no such thing as a slut.
The term “slut”, and variations on that term,
are so casually tossed around towards women, basically exist to shame women for
being vaguely sexual, although they’re just as commonly used as insults to women
for completely unrelated reasons (wearing a low-cut top is tantamount to being
the whore of Babylon according to some). Women are often depicted as being manipulative,
stupid, malicious or just plain evil solely based on their sexuality – they’re
evil because they’re a slut, and they’re a slut because they’re evil. Poor
innocent men are snatched from their true loves by those evil sluts, who don’t
have real human emotions like the nice girls, and leave men completely
merciless to their slutty wiles. These women all look a certain way – usually blonde,
wearing lots of make-up and revealing clothing, often compared to porn stars or
blow-up dolls, frequently cheerleaders. Many jokes will be made about sexually
transmitted diseases towards these sluts, although male “players” are clean on
this front. More often than not, bad things happen to these women, but don’t
worry, because they deserve it.
Remember, these women don’t exist.
I stress this because after reading “When You
Were Mine”, I seriously began to believe that the author, a woman herself,
hates other women, or had a cousin who seriously messed with her at some point
during her life. In this modern version of the oft-imitated tale of star-crossed
lovers, Rosaline is beginning a relationship with Rob Caplet (see what they did
there?) just as her cousin Juliet returns to the scene and immediately snatches
him away. Rob goes from being besotted with Rosaline to completely obsessing
over Juliet, that slut. Juliet is, of course, a heavy make-up wearing spoiled
brat with bleach blonde hair who snatches away innocent men and turns them into
little lapdogs. But never fear, good readers, because underneath that harsh and
fake exterior is a broken little girl who is just jealous of her plain but
intelligent cousin, and will meet a tragic end that will be entirely blamed on
her.
Do you see where this book goes wrong?
In “Romeo and Juliet”, Rosaline is never on
stage, and serves more as a plot point than anything else. She is a means for
Romeo to attend the Capulet family’s party and meet Juliet, his true love. A
lot of great literary analysis has been written on her and I implore you to
check some out because you won’t find any of that here. In the play, where
Rosaline serves as a contrast and plot point, here she is the angel to Juliet’s
whore. The naïve teenage girl consumed by first love in the face of petty
familiar conflict has been turned into a slut, and later on a dead slut.
This is not okay.
There is literally nothing else to Juliet’s
character except her evil sluttiness and the consequences of it. In this book,
being a slut is literally described as being a defining quality!
"Charlie
says there's a difference between being a slut and being slutty. She thinks
Olivia was slutty for hooking up with the Belgian, but she would never call her
a slut. Her theory is that the distinction is between how you act and who you
are. Olivia's was an action, whereas Darcy's is a defining quality."
Charlie and Olivia are Rosaline’s friends. So
there you go – good friends can be slutty but they’re never sluts. That’s for
other women.
Juliet is entirely blamed for Rob’s actions,
which is both sexist and daft. The last time I checked, men were autonomous
creatures completely capable of doing as they pleased. Women can do that
sometimes as well. By putting all the blame on Juliet for Rob’s actions (as if
his penis just fell into her vagina), his responsibility is completely removed
from him. He’s not a victim; he knew exactly what he was doing! Of course, in
the end he tries to run back to the good and sweet Rosaline, but it all ends
badly (do I even need spoiler alerts for “Romeo & Juliet”?) because that is
the normal way of things. In 2013.
I actually have nothing else to say about this
book because I can’t remember a single thing about it outside of the weapons
grade level of slut-shaming. Taylor Swift looks like bell hooks in comparison
to “When You Were Mine”. I honestly can’t get over how much this book hates
women. It’s archaic and makes Shakespeare’s Elizabethan era play look
progressive in comparison. At least in “Romeo & Juliet” the pair were
supposed to be blind with infatuation and Juliet didn’t shove the poison down
Romeo’s mouth. It’s not as if the original material is untouchable, and it’s
not as if there isn’t great potential in giving some depth to Rosaline, but
absolutely no effort is put into that here because the author is so concerned
with demonising Juliet to the point of insanity. Take my advice and stick to
the source: It’s better written, makes some sense and doesn’t loathe women.
1/5.