Impulsivity In Shakespeare's Romeo And Juliet
On Friday, November 13, 2015, a series of coordinated terror attacks in Paris darkened the skies across the world. More than 130 casualties were confirmed, and a hundred fifty five others were left injured. The romantic city was left in lockdown, and the rest of the world in fear. Indeed, “the skies have been darkened” (Obama), but between the sadness in the dark skies was a tinge of beauty and light.The terror attacks in ISIS may have killed, scarred and injured many innocent lives, but it also did something else: it brought the world together. On Facebook, users had the opportunity to use a filter that tinted their profile pictures the color of the French flag. In Seattle, the French flag flew on top of the Space Needle, and in Century City, a memorial was done for the lives lost in
…show more content…
the Terror of Paris. Throughout the world, people demonstrated their support. Opposites seemingly led to their counterparts during those few days,and it seemed as though love and hatred merged into a singularity. In Romeo and Juliet, William Shakespeare places much emphasis upon the paradoxical relationships between ideas such as love and hate, right and wrong, and life and death. Through the use of Friar Lawrence’s wisdom, and the relationships surrounding the two star-crossed lovers, Shakespeare makes his audience aware of the complexity of diametrically opposing ideas and how this complexity can influence the decisions of people.
The complexity of love and hatred is illustrated most clearly during the second street fight between Tybalt, Mercutio and Romeo. In the society of Verona, characters appear to establish a fine line between love and hate, but Shakespeare displays the ideas as anything but so. In the tragedy, Mercutio is one of several foils to Tybalt, a red flag that conflict would occur. Thus, it would be reasonable to infer that the street fight which broken out in Act three, scene I, would have been fueled by hatred. While this inference is half-correct, the truth is much more complex. The moments of conflict before the fight rises to its peak when Tybalt tries to comprehend why Romeo would, out of the blue, would “have to love [him]” and “doth much excuse the appertaining rage to such a greeting” (III.i.1-4) Clearly, the street fight between Tybalt and Mercutio seemed to have arised out of an attempt to love. However, Romeo’s sudden kindness to Tybalt was taken in a sarcastic manner, which lead to the commencement of the fight. The friendly love between Romeo and Mercutio however, is crystal clear. Mercutio had commenced the fight to protect Romeo, and Romeo played an active role in the fight only to protect his friend. Yet it is this love that caused Mercutio’s deadly injury. Through Mercutio’s last lines, it comes to the audience’s understanding that Mercutio “was hurt under [his] arm” (III.i.106-107). If Romeo does not defend Mercutio out of love, he would never have fell to his tragic end. Matters only grow more complex when Romeo’s loss of Mercutio only led to transference of his newfound love for Tybalt to hate. Within this scene, the two emotions of passion: love and hate, seemingly unite to create a single consequence. Love for one entity leads to hatred for another. It can even be argued that love and hate are simply passion in different forms. They are one entity which is interchangeable based on circumstance. Each and every character is influenced by the intensity of passion through its different forms, and when these “violent delights” (2.6.9) are acted upon, there may be “violent ends” (II.VI.9)
Equally as significant in the understanding of how the complex nature of love and hate influence characters within the play can be seen in the relationship between the two star-crossed lovers and Lady Montague’s death. On the topic of death, there is no scene more prevalent than the double-suicide of Romeo and Juliet. By the middle of the play, both have suicidal intentions due to the love of the other. Following Romeo’s understanding of Juliet’s distraught state, he questions “In what part of this anatomy doth my name lodge?” (III.ii.116). It is his state as a Montague which causes her distress, and for his love, he is willing to “sack the hateful mansion” (III.iii.117) which houses it. Love for Juliet only led to hatred towards himself. For Juliet, her passion for Romeo is “[her] only love, sprung from [her] only hate” ()Similarly, Juliet’s loyalty drives her to “with wild looks bid [Friar Lawrence] some mean to rid her from this second marriage”(V.iii.249-250). She too is willing to sacrifice her life in order to be loyal and forever joined with her Romeo. Similarly, while Lady Montague’s death is not explained, it can be understood that her “son’s exile hath stopped her breath” (IV.iii.219) through suicide, similar to how Haemon’s mother done the same in Antigone. Love, also considered an emotion, embodies multiple emotions, and at times, they can be too overwhelming to see through. Amongst these characters who commit suicide lay one common strand: they found that the world and the universe was cold and gray after who they loved had passed away. Within this state, they found that love is cruel. And perhaps, just perhaps, that it would be much easier to just hate. Love and hate are closely linked together in a confounding nature which is more puzzling than the pattern of the Mandelbrot. If Love and Hatred were characters, they would be “foils” of each other, but not only because they are based on perception, and human perception requires both to understand one. It is also because love for one entity comes inevitably, hatred for another. Where the source of love is diminished, Love moves down too quickly on the seesaw, springing a newfound hatred, and vice versa.
Throughout the monologue, Friar Lawrence contrasts the attributes of various entities in the world, including mother nature, herbs and people prospectively. Unlike people, “What is [nature’s] burying grave, that is her womb” (II.iii.9-10). Although it is from mother nature that any life can result, it is due to mother nature that life ends. Once again, there is the idea of two diametrically opposing ideas being two forms of the same entity. Friar Lawrence utilizes this idea when he attempts to reverse life and death with Juliet. He utilizes nature’s tomb to create an opportunity for Juliet to lead a new life with Romeo away from Verona. While this plan appears to be a brilliant idea, it is far from flawless. Poison is seen as vice, but Friar Lawrence justifies that “vice sometime by action dignified” (2.3.21-22) . Yet this idea of reversing nature proved to be “misapplied” as “virtue [turned] to vice” (II.iii.21-22) . Similarly, the quote foreshadows the effects of love and hate, where the death of the two lovers lead to the “birth” of love between their feuding families. Within the “infant rind” of the flower in which Friar Lawrence picks, “poison hath residence and medicine power” (II.iii.24). Depending on how the flower is utilized, it can either lead to detrimental or healing effects.The flower is a single entity, and it depends on circumstance whether good or bad is expressed. Nothing by itself can be good or bad, there must be another influence. In this manner, "Virtue itself [can] turn to vice, being misapplied, And vice sometime by action dignified” (II.iii.21-22) A faulty allele for Cystic Fibrosis may be deadly, but only so if the other allele is faulty as well. It is only through the paradoxical relationships described by Friar Lawrence that the conclusion of both tragedy and reunion can occur almost simultaneously.
There is much criticism from students about Romeo and Juliet being a “simple comedy” about how impulsivity is a negative trait.
However, after careful analysis,it becomes evident that it is anything but so. Shakespeare had envisioned his tragedy to be one which blurred the lines between right and wrong, good and bad, and love and hate. The “good and bad” that children learn about in fairytales is not as simple as it is displayed to be. Yet, entire societies and groups are controlled by this complexity without realizing so. It cannot be denied however, that these ideas are more difficult to identify in real life as compared to text. On Wednesday, March 22, 2017, another terror attack has taken place, this time in London. Once again the ideas of love arising from hate and unification from dissension seems to have taken place. However, in real life, these ideas grow even more complex and gray the more they are explored. Like the feud between the Montagues and Capulets, there is no apparent cause for the hatred expressed by these terrorists. Romeo and Juliet is a simple play in comparison to other works of Shakespeare, but that does not undermine the significance and beauty of its
themes.
the Terror of Paris. Throughout the world, people demonstrated their support. Opposites seemingly led to their counterparts during those few days,and it seemed as though love and hatred merged into a singularity. In Romeo and Juliet, William Shakespeare places much emphasis upon the paradoxical relationships between ideas such as love and hate, right and wrong, and life and death. Through the use of Friar Lawrence’s wisdom, and the relationships surrounding the two star-crossed lovers, Shakespeare makes his audience aware of the complexity of diametrically opposing ideas and how this complexity can influence the decisions of people.
The complexity of love and hatred is illustrated most clearly during the second street fight between Tybalt, Mercutio and Romeo. In the society of Verona, characters appear to establish a fine line between love and hate, but Shakespeare displays the ideas as anything but so. In the tragedy, Mercutio is one of several foils to Tybalt, a red flag that conflict would occur. Thus, it would be reasonable to infer that the street fight which broken out in Act three, scene I, would have been fueled by hatred. While this inference is half-correct, the truth is much more complex. The moments of conflict before the fight rises to its peak when Tybalt tries to comprehend why Romeo would, out of the blue, would “have to love [him]” and “doth much excuse the appertaining rage to such a greeting” (III.i.1-4) Clearly, the street fight between Tybalt and Mercutio seemed to have arised out of an attempt to love. However, Romeo’s sudden kindness to Tybalt was taken in a sarcastic manner, which lead to the commencement of the fight. The friendly love between Romeo and Mercutio however, is crystal clear. Mercutio had commenced the fight to protect Romeo, and Romeo played an active role in the fight only to protect his friend. Yet it is this love that caused Mercutio’s deadly injury. Through Mercutio’s last lines, it comes to the audience’s understanding that Mercutio “was hurt under [his] arm” (III.i.106-107). If Romeo does not defend Mercutio out of love, he would never have fell to his tragic end. Matters only grow more complex when Romeo’s loss of Mercutio only led to transference of his newfound love for Tybalt to hate. Within this scene, the two emotions of passion: love and hate, seemingly unite to create a single consequence. Love for one entity leads to hatred for another. It can even be argued that love and hate are simply passion in different forms. They are one entity which is interchangeable based on circumstance. Each and every character is influenced by the intensity of passion through its different forms, and when these “violent delights” (2.6.9) are acted upon, there may be “violent ends” (II.VI.9)
Equally as significant in the understanding of how the complex nature of love and hate influence characters within the play can be seen in the relationship between the two star-crossed lovers and Lady Montague’s death. On the topic of death, there is no scene more prevalent than the double-suicide of Romeo and Juliet. By the middle of the play, both have suicidal intentions due to the love of the other. Following Romeo’s understanding of Juliet’s distraught state, he questions “In what part of this anatomy doth my name lodge?” (III.ii.116). It is his state as a Montague which causes her distress, and for his love, he is willing to “sack the hateful mansion” (III.iii.117) which houses it. Love for Juliet only led to hatred towards himself. For Juliet, her passion for Romeo is “[her] only love, sprung from [her] only hate” ()Similarly, Juliet’s loyalty drives her to “with wild looks bid [Friar Lawrence] some mean to rid her from this second marriage”(V.iii.249-250). She too is willing to sacrifice her life in order to be loyal and forever joined with her Romeo. Similarly, while Lady Montague’s death is not explained, it can be understood that her “son’s exile hath stopped her breath” (IV.iii.219) through suicide, similar to how Haemon’s mother done the same in Antigone. Love, also considered an emotion, embodies multiple emotions, and at times, they can be too overwhelming to see through. Amongst these characters who commit suicide lay one common strand: they found that the world and the universe was cold and gray after who they loved had passed away. Within this state, they found that love is cruel. And perhaps, just perhaps, that it would be much easier to just hate. Love and hate are closely linked together in a confounding nature which is more puzzling than the pattern of the Mandelbrot. If Love and Hatred were characters, they would be “foils” of each other, but not only because they are based on perception, and human perception requires both to understand one. It is also because love for one entity comes inevitably, hatred for another. Where the source of love is diminished, Love moves down too quickly on the seesaw, springing a newfound hatred, and vice versa.
Throughout the monologue, Friar Lawrence contrasts the attributes of various entities in the world, including mother nature, herbs and people prospectively. Unlike people, “What is [nature’s] burying grave, that is her womb” (II.iii.9-10). Although it is from mother nature that any life can result, it is due to mother nature that life ends. Once again, there is the idea of two diametrically opposing ideas being two forms of the same entity. Friar Lawrence utilizes this idea when he attempts to reverse life and death with Juliet. He utilizes nature’s tomb to create an opportunity for Juliet to lead a new life with Romeo away from Verona. While this plan appears to be a brilliant idea, it is far from flawless. Poison is seen as vice, but Friar Lawrence justifies that “vice sometime by action dignified” (2.3.21-22) . Yet this idea of reversing nature proved to be “misapplied” as “virtue [turned] to vice” (II.iii.21-22) . Similarly, the quote foreshadows the effects of love and hate, where the death of the two lovers lead to the “birth” of love between their feuding families. Within the “infant rind” of the flower in which Friar Lawrence picks, “poison hath residence and medicine power” (II.iii.24). Depending on how the flower is utilized, it can either lead to detrimental or healing effects.The flower is a single entity, and it depends on circumstance whether good or bad is expressed. Nothing by itself can be good or bad, there must be another influence. In this manner, "Virtue itself [can] turn to vice, being misapplied, And vice sometime by action dignified” (II.iii.21-22) A faulty allele for Cystic Fibrosis may be deadly, but only so if the other allele is faulty as well. It is only through the paradoxical relationships described by Friar Lawrence that the conclusion of both tragedy and reunion can occur almost simultaneously.
There is much criticism from students about Romeo and Juliet being a “simple comedy” about how impulsivity is a negative trait.
However, after careful analysis,it becomes evident that it is anything but so. Shakespeare had envisioned his tragedy to be one which blurred the lines between right and wrong, good and bad, and love and hate. The “good and bad” that children learn about in fairytales is not as simple as it is displayed to be. Yet, entire societies and groups are controlled by this complexity without realizing so. It cannot be denied however, that these ideas are more difficult to identify in real life as compared to text. On Wednesday, March 22, 2017, another terror attack has taken place, this time in London. Once again the ideas of love arising from hate and unification from dissension seems to have taken place. However, in real life, these ideas grow even more complex and gray the more they are explored. Like the feud between the Montagues and Capulets, there is no apparent cause for the hatred expressed by these terrorists. Romeo and Juliet is a simple play in comparison to other works of Shakespeare, but that does not undermine the significance and beauty of its
themes.