In which an Instagram video posits this very old question by this point. The headcanon isn’t inherently clownish…but the reasoning definitely is. And so 🍽️

First, look at how he talks about Romeo. “Gentle Romeo.” “Rose-cheeked Romeo.” “Poor Romeo.” It’s surprisingly affectionate.

Capulet calls Paris “gentle Paris” once, so I guess he was secretly in love with him. 🤷‍♀️ Sorry, OP makes the rules, not me.

So “gentle” in Shakespeare’s time meant “the qualities of being a gentleman.” This could mean being kind, soft, and respectful, as in our modern meaning, but it was primarily as a marker of social status. A gentleman was one who was educated, did not have to work for a living, and could defend himself and fight for his honor. Mercutio is actually being a little formal in his address than is strictly warranted, given that he and Romeo are friends.

(Also, Mercutio doesn’t call Romeo “rose-cheeked”; that phrase doesn’t appear anywhere in the play.)

Then compare that to how he talks about women. Rosaline, for example. “That pale, hard-hearted wench.”

The rest of the line is: “That Rosaline / Torments him so that he is sure to run mad.” The whole point of this descriptor is to express Mercutio’s frustration and concern at seeing Romeo pining after a girl who doesn’t like him back. Move on already, Romeo!!!

Otherwise it’s Mercutio, shockingly enough, who gives this very flattering physical description of Rosaline: “I conjure thee by Rosaline’s bright eyes, / By her high forehead and her scarlet lip, / By her fine foot, straight leg and quivering thigh / And the demesnes that there adjacent lie.” This is supposedly mocking Romeo’s own (hypothetical? actual?) words for Rosaline…except he never gives such a description of Rosaline to Benvolio or anyone. Most likely Mercutio is 1) improvising or 2) actually giving what he feels is an accurate (and hot) description of Rosaline.

He mocks Romeo for chasing women throughout the play.

Mercutio mocks Romeo for mooning—not even chasing, because Romeo never pursues Rosaline in-play—after one (1) woman: Rosaline. Not even for chasing women; actually, he advises Romeo to forget Rosaline by getting laid. He doesn’t know about Juliet—no one in the play does except the Friar, the Nurse, and Balthazar.

But then Shakespeare gives Mercutio one of the filthiest monologues in the canon […] And Mercutio is obsessed, telling Romeo where he should and shouldn’t pop his bits. Even by Shakespeare’s standards, he is obsessed.

The “pop’rin pear” speech is Mercutio trying to get Romeo to respond to him and/or return to him (and, implicitly, the bro fold). Benvolio even warns him Romeo would get angry at his words, so there’s a great possibility Mercutio is doing purposeful ragebait, which is 100% within his character.

Also, ~obsession. 🤣 It is five lines in a speech, and when Romeo doesn’t respond, Mercutio drops it immediately and calls it a night. He never says anything this lewd about Romeo again after this scene.

Then there’s the invitation. “Mercutio and his brother Valentine.” Now, you could interpret this as Mercutio and his brother, Valentine. But Shakespeare loved wordplay. And what if “brother” didn’t mean biological brother, but close person, intimate friend, dare I say lover?

I checked David and Ben Crystal’s Shakespeare’s Words: A Glossary and Language Companion, and “brother” was never used this way in Shakespeare. The closest is “sworn brother,” which does mean companion or devoted friend, which is clearly not the meaning in this context.

Nor would Shakespeare use it in this sense, frankly. On the contrary, brother relationships are almost always fraught and problematic in his plays, especially between legitimate-illegitimate brothers. It’s safe to say Valentine is Mercutio’s actual brother, as Capulet’s invitation would specify blood relations in this context, and as fandom has largely taken it.

And don’t forget, Romeo and Juliet is set in Italy, where the rules of same-sex love is very different to Renaissance England. It wasn’t quite as, like, frowned upon.

I am not an expert on 16th century Italy, so I can’t say whether the Italians were more chill about same-sex relations than the Anglos during this time (if any of you do, feel free to comment). But even if that were indeed the case, that doesn’t necessarily mean anything, since Shakespeare most likely knew shit about Italy beyond the barebones (except for what he learned from John Florio maybe).

Also, while same-sex relationships between men were rarely if ever prosecuted and there was a queer culture in London, the overall medieval culture of Renaissance England was still savagely homophobic. If you were highborn enough, you could get away with anything and everything, but same-sex relations were still classified as sodomy, along with straight infidelity.

Rumor has it that Shakespeare went and lived in Italy for a few years. And he did write all those lusty sonnets about a young boy.

Shakespeare going to Italy is not a rumor—it’s a very old scholarly headcanon that is frankly outdated by now. We know now that, most likely, Shakespeare did not know much about Italy and only included some details for verisimilitude (he even thought Illyria and Vienna were Italian cities, ha). And authors of any sexuality can write characters of any sexuality or none at all.

(Also, ~lusty, lol. Tell me you haven’t read Shakespeare’s Sonnets without telling me you haven’t read Shakespeare’s Sonnets.)

His protectiveness of Romeo, his jealousy of how Romeo obsesses over women. The homoerotic banter throughout the play.

I don’t see Mercutio as particularly protective of Romeo. He shows no concern for Romeo climbing over the garden wall into the backyard of his enemy Capulet (!!) or about Tybalt possibly hurting or killing Romeo in a duel. On the contrary, he is outraged when Romeo refuses to duel Tybalt. Mercutio does show lowkey concern with how Romeo is still mooning after Rosaline, but after their battle of wits, that concern is largely gone.

The only real bro banter that could be interpreted as even the slightest bit homoerotic, in my view, is Mercutio’s and Romeo’s battle of wits before the Nurse’s arrival. Even then Romeo calls Mercutio a horndog who is only ever with him for the “goose” (prostitute). Two bros, ribbing each other for liking paid sex with women, because they’re so…gay.

Comments

Mercutio does not speak highly of Tybalt or even his fighting style. Not even once. And no, he does not disguise any admiration through his mockery, if just because there is no underlying subtext of admiration, period.

His whole mini monologue is about how Tybalt’s dueling style is by-the-book (“he fights as you sing prick-song”) and even weak (“the very butcher of a silk button”). He then goes on another rant on how he absolutely hates duelists who are overly obsessed with the latest dueling fashions and protocol.

As for Romeo’s speech about Mercutio’s spirit, this was spoken when Romeo is challenging Tybalt to a duel: “Now, Tybalt, take the villain back again, / That late thou gavest me; for Mercutio’s soul / Is but a little way above our heads, / Staying for thine to keep him company: / Either thou, or I, or both, must go with him.”

Romeo is saying that either he, Tybalt, or both will join Mercutio’s soul. In other words, this is a duel to the death. He absolutely does not mean this in a romantic sense at all, but is goading Tybalt to fight him. Because Romeo does not speak sweet nothings 24/7!!! Nor would he ever say that Mercutio’s ~destined lover is the man who killed him!!! What is this nonsense!!!!

I’m sorry you’re annoyed, but I just can’t help myself when I see things that remind me of you…