you’re not even remotely correct. because love in the play is even a central theme, one of many. a rooted assertion such as this in a field like literature is paltry. dead on arrival. i can write a solid essay justifying that allusion and it would make sense to the readers. let me explain why this assertion doesn’t apply: first off, the phrase “romeo and juliet” has been shrouded by another meaning in our society and culture today (i’m talking bout nigeria that i know of), you hear things like: “romeo kiss your juliet”, at a wedding reception. “romeo and juliet, beeni tiyin ri” the allusion of romeo and juliet here is devoid of that tragedy. and literature allows it. if you even look into sociology, you’d see that culture has a way of preserving the beauty of a story or an event while limiting its moral and narrative complexity. symbols may be adopted, but often times the contradictions that gave rise to them are shunned (subconsciously or consciously). for instance, if we look at yoruba mythology (philosophy), the osun deity precisely; she was a tragic heroine. this was someone that struggled with fertility, had marital issues, her once beloved husband turned his back on her, called her barren, her co wife taunted her, etc. osun never had a justifiable and fair resolution. she metamorphosed into a river. her story ended on a note of absolute loss. what is the irony today? osun is a deity now associated with fertility. good health, prosperity, etc. her worshipers tailor her name with that of their children’s: osunfunto, osunbunmi, osunfunke, etc. and i think female children are named after her more than their male counterparts (correct me if I’m wrong please, i made the comment based on observation). after a deity that struggled with fertility and had a sour marital life. the play is complicated, yes. still, it is from the complexity that popular culture fetches elements that give this almost pristine romantic imagery of the characters: romeo and juliet. for instance, the balcony scene, the declarations: “my bounty is as boundless as the sea, my love as deep, the more i give to thee, the more i have, for both are infinite” yes, the love/union was extinguished by death. but we could raise an argument on the inevitability of death and how we shall all depart someday — whether we allude our marital union to a comic play or a tragic one. we could also metaphorically say that their death is poetic. or that they could possibly reunite in the celestials, metaphysically/allegorically speaking. the interpretation many of the audience have of romeo and juliet is that of an indivisible romantic love. and it makes sense, because in the theme of love in the play, we can see devotion, sacrifice, defiance, disregard for barriers, and feud, etc. and this makes more sense, if you compare othello to romeo and juliet, because both have the theme of death, but the circumstances that led to them differ. in the theme of love and death in othello, you’d have minor themes like infidelity, betrayal, penance, etc. as such, i doubt if anyone would want to model othello and desdemona for an ideal marital relationship. ps: aiming at the artist like that is not only unnecessary but also very unfair. because, let’s even pretend that you have a point, there is something called poetic license, which is applicable to fashion designers as well. they have the right to sacrifice logic, break function, etc for artistry expression.