A Fragrance By Any Other Name…

via Daily Prompt: Fragrance  

   July 24, 2017

   “Monday’s Child is fair of face…”   


   Hmmmm….A famous line from Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet” fits the theme I’m going to expound upon here:

“What’s in a name?  That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.” [Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene II by Wm. Shakespeare]

   Was Juliet right about that?  Of course she was.  It’s literally a ‘fragrance’ by any other name would smell the same–right?  So, if I were to take a label off of my all-time favorite cologne, which is Yardley’s English Lavender, and slapped the label from a bottle of one of my other favs, which is Emeraude, it wouldn’t affect the scent in the bottle of English Lavender now would it?  No.

   However, that fact does not apply to real people.  So, if I were to take someone’s face and slap it onto the face of someone else, that wouldn’t make the person wearing the face of another person become that other person, now would it?  Of course not!  It wouldn’t even matter if the person now wearing the fake face decided to go the whole way and try imitating the voice of the person’s who’s face he was now sporting.  Nor would it matter if the imitator began wearing the same clothes worn previously by the rightful owner if his now-fake face, and telling everyone that he was the person who’s face he was now sporting.  Anyone would agree with that, right?  Of course.

   That all makes Juliet’s comments concerning the rose’s name totally correct–she, of course, was referring to Romeo being a Montague, which was causing such trouble for them both, due to the mutual hatred shared for one another by each of their families.  “Deny thy father and refuse thy name…” she proclaims, but then she says that, if he doesn’t wish to go that far, then if he’ll swear his love for her she will “…no longer be a Capulet.”  I can sympathize with her on that, but only because I have an imagination.

   In Juliet’s case, though, she is suggesting that Romeo ‘deny’ his family name only if he wants to do so.  She’s not going to force it off on him, since she realized that, if he doesn’t wish to go that far, then she would.  She gave Romeo a perfect ‘out’, because she loved him.  Sweet.  Touching. So loving.

    A HUGE problem arises, though, if the person being addressed doesn’t wish their ‘face’ changed–their personal ‘fragrance’ mislabeled.  That could pose a big problem for those wanting that person ‘relabeled’, so to speak.  In a case such as that, if one person is somehow ‘replaced’ by another–permanently–now, that’s a real “Horse of different color”, isn’t it?  In that case, it’s not merely the original label that’s been switched, but the entire body of the person in question, with a mere copy of the original label being ‘slapped’ onto someone else, who is now posing as the one who’s ‘face’ he is now wearing.  That would be just fine–sort of–if the switch made was with the consent of the one who is now this plot’s victim.  I’d say so at least.

   The summer of 1967 was one of the most memorable for me.  It was the summer after my graduation from high school, for one big thing.  It also saw my very first flight on a jet airplane, and my first trip out of California, and the first time I’d ever seen Mt. Rainier, and the beautiful, wonderful city of Seattle.  It was also the summer during which I first heard the new Beatle’s album, “Sgt. Pepper’s…”  I think the kids in the neighborhood must have played that thing for us about a zillion times in the few weeks I was there, too.  At first we LOVED it, couldn’t get enough of it, had to hear it morning, noon, and night–hear first thing in the morning, the last thing before retiring.  We also realized the entire album was a complete change for the Beatles–a total ‘transformation’–it was amazing.

  The strange effect it had on me, personally, though, was that, the more I heard it, the more I loathed it!  There was something about that type of music that began causing me revulsion–totally–until, even today, if I hear even some of one of the songs from that album, I feel like tossing the radio responsible for my hearing it OUT the window!!  It wasn’t until years–decades–later, that I literally stumbled onto what I now believe is the reason why.  I found it while pursuing information on a subject that might not seem linked to what I now believe is behind a ‘change of fragrance’ within the Beatles, that led to not just my rejection of that group after 1967, but by a larger selection of those who used to just love the Beatles, as I did.

   Because, sometimes, a change in labels doesn’t quite ‘smell as sweet’, if what’s under it might appear on it’s surface to be what you love, yet it’s genuine scent exposes the truth:  that the fragrance you loved is not the one you just smelled!  

     {The original movie poster for “Help!”, starring the Beatles}

“Help!”, in need?  “Help!”, yes, indeed.

   “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.”  ~Albert Einstein~*


A “White Knight” Production


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s