Romeo And Juliet Love Or Hate
Is Romeo and Juliet more about Love or Hate and Violence?
A story of star cross'd lovers or hate bound fighters?
“What we see depends mainly on what we look for.” - (John Lubbock)
As Lubbock stated, one tends to overlook all else to see what they want to interpreting only what they want to; so what you believe Romeo and Juliet’s main theme is, depends more so on your worldviews than what was written. The human eye sees only what it wants to. However, Romeo and Juliet, is always remembered as the greatest love story ever written It’s made very clear that there is a budding romance, tragically put to an end, but is that really the main idea behind the play, the way William Shakespeare originally intended the play to be interpreted? Perhaps …show more content…
the reason why so many believe the play to be a love story is because that is what we do. Love and affection is what most people desire above all else. Ah, but then again, what is love without hatred, without the allure of the forbidden and fear of rejection? But was the tale of the two doomed lovers originally intended by its writer, the infamous William Shakespeare, to be about love? There is violence throughout the play, but also so many forms of love.
Both sides of this argument have such good points, the more traditional of which shall be more-so explored. Romeo and Juliet, the main romantic relationship in the play, the two doomed lovers are the title. This of course leads one to believe that the play is about their love and tragedy. It could also be argued that the title is their names because all the mishaps and consequences derive from their actions. But, what is in a name? The first of two for one, makes more sense and two, is more logical, but would a writer as sly as Shakespeare really make the meaning of his words so simple? In my personal opinion, the answer is yes. I believe this because as many metaphors and double meanings to things as he puts in his writing, he wouldn’t be so cynical as to mislead the audience with such an ironic title… or would he?
It is often overlooked that there are other forms of love throughout the play.
The familial, maternal love from both families, especially after the lover’s bodies are discovered. The obsessive love Romeo has for Rosaline, and then Juliet. The infatuation Romeo and Juliet share. The unrequited love from Paris felt for Juliet and the everlasting ‘love’ between the dead lovestruck teenagers. Can that even be classed as love? What they felt for each other was either lust or infatuation, neither of which usually end romantically. Were the most famous fictional lovers in history ever truly in love at all? However, has anyone ever really been in love? Is love just a myth, the holy grail of emotions that seemingly everyone would, without question, die for? Love sells, this much is unquestionable. All anyone ever does is to be loved, by themselves or others. Every action made can be derived down to one driving force, love. Humans crave the feeling of being loved, some even get addicted to the feeling of falling in love like it’s a drug to be abused. It makes us weak, open to harm, and yet we still chase it like junkies craving another hit because there is no love without the possibility of pain. Thus making us all weak, but strong at the same time. There is almost nothing one wouldn’t do for true love but if one does not know true love but believes their fling to be it, they leave themselves completely open for the other to destroy them. The ultimate act of trust that Shakespeare's …show more content…
Romeo and Juliet highlights perfectly, capturing the essence of heartache and underlining the idiocy of two young fools that think they know love.
This play might not be about true love but it is about the ‘love’ that isn’t there.
The absence of substance; the embodiment of teenagers romanticising their foolish hormonal lust. What if the intention of this play wasn’t to show the audience what love was, or to show how love can trump hate, or how hate makes love thrive? No. I now believe the play to be almost satirical, as if Shakespeare knew how demented it was to marry off what are essentially children. Or perhaps it was to show his take on love, maybe he was as jaded as the play. Tormented by a love he, as a sensible man with common sense and wisdom, knew was false.
Ultimately, Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, shows that there is basically nothing that would stop someone seeking their true love, but by not knowing they leave themselves vulnerable for the other to destroy. Is the meaning behind this play really as simple ‘Love trumps hate’? Of course not, a writer as great as he that gives everything he writes two or more meanings would not write something so simple. He perfectly captures the pain and mindlessness of two naive adolescents that think they’re in love. They are too young to know, but too young to care.
Word Count:
874
A story of star cross'd lovers or hate bound fighters?
“What we see depends mainly on what we look for.” - (John Lubbock)
As Lubbock stated, one tends to overlook all else to see what they want to interpreting only what they want to; so what you believe Romeo and Juliet’s main theme is, depends more so on your worldviews than what was written. The human eye sees only what it wants to. However, Romeo and Juliet, is always remembered as the greatest love story ever written It’s made very clear that there is a budding romance, tragically put to an end, but is that really the main idea behind the play, the way William Shakespeare originally intended the play to be interpreted? Perhaps …show more content…
the reason why so many believe the play to be a love story is because that is what we do. Love and affection is what most people desire above all else. Ah, but then again, what is love without hatred, without the allure of the forbidden and fear of rejection? But was the tale of the two doomed lovers originally intended by its writer, the infamous William Shakespeare, to be about love? There is violence throughout the play, but also so many forms of love.
Both sides of this argument have such good points, the more traditional of which shall be more-so explored. Romeo and Juliet, the main romantic relationship in the play, the two doomed lovers are the title. This of course leads one to believe that the play is about their love and tragedy. It could also be argued that the title is their names because all the mishaps and consequences derive from their actions. But, what is in a name? The first of two for one, makes more sense and two, is more logical, but would a writer as sly as Shakespeare really make the meaning of his words so simple? In my personal opinion, the answer is yes. I believe this because as many metaphors and double meanings to things as he puts in his writing, he wouldn’t be so cynical as to mislead the audience with such an ironic title… or would he?
It is often overlooked that there are other forms of love throughout the play.
The familial, maternal love from both families, especially after the lover’s bodies are discovered. The obsessive love Romeo has for Rosaline, and then Juliet. The infatuation Romeo and Juliet share. The unrequited love from Paris felt for Juliet and the everlasting ‘love’ between the dead lovestruck teenagers. Can that even be classed as love? What they felt for each other was either lust or infatuation, neither of which usually end romantically. Were the most famous fictional lovers in history ever truly in love at all? However, has anyone ever really been in love? Is love just a myth, the holy grail of emotions that seemingly everyone would, without question, die for? Love sells, this much is unquestionable. All anyone ever does is to be loved, by themselves or others. Every action made can be derived down to one driving force, love. Humans crave the feeling of being loved, some even get addicted to the feeling of falling in love like it’s a drug to be abused. It makes us weak, open to harm, and yet we still chase it like junkies craving another hit because there is no love without the possibility of pain. Thus making us all weak, but strong at the same time. There is almost nothing one wouldn’t do for true love but if one does not know true love but believes their fling to be it, they leave themselves completely open for the other to destroy them. The ultimate act of trust that Shakespeare's …show more content…
Romeo and Juliet highlights perfectly, capturing the essence of heartache and underlining the idiocy of two young fools that think they know love.
This play might not be about true love but it is about the ‘love’ that isn’t there.
The absence of substance; the embodiment of teenagers romanticising their foolish hormonal lust. What if the intention of this play wasn’t to show the audience what love was, or to show how love can trump hate, or how hate makes love thrive? No. I now believe the play to be almost satirical, as if Shakespeare knew how demented it was to marry off what are essentially children. Or perhaps it was to show his take on love, maybe he was as jaded as the play. Tormented by a love he, as a sensible man with common sense and wisdom, knew was false.
Ultimately, Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, shows that there is basically nothing that would stop someone seeking their true love, but by not knowing they leave themselves vulnerable for the other to destroy. Is the meaning behind this play really as simple ‘Love trumps hate’? Of course not, a writer as great as he that gives everything he writes two or more meanings would not write something so simple. He perfectly captures the pain and mindlessness of two naive adolescents that think they’re in love. They are too young to know, but too young to care.
Word Count:
874