Category: Fate

Many people in the world are forced into unpleasant situations due to circumstances outside of their control. As Halsey said: “There are great… challenges that ordinary people are forced by circumstance to meet”. Circumstance is where factors out of one’s control affect the way someone’s life begins to shape. Both chance and circumstance are uncontrollable factors. However, William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet is a story of circumstance rather than chance, because although chance is the wrecker of even the best laid plans, these plans would not have been necessary if it weren’t for the circumstances Romeo and Juliet were in. The actions of Montague and Capulet, Friar Lawrence, the demands of the society, and fate create circumstances which Romeo and Juliet could hardly handle, and they meet their tragic ends.

Firstly, Romeo and Juliet are the victims of circumstances created by the members of the houses of Capulet and Montague, as well as Friar Lawrence. For example, Romeo is rejected by Rosaline and is extremely disheartened, because he is “Out of her favour, where I am in love” (I, 1, 162). This causes Mercutio and Benvolio to force him to come to Capulet’s feast, where Benvolio says the he can “Compare her face with some that I shall show, and I will make thee think thy swan a crow” (I, 2, 88-89), meaning that he will show Romeo some other girls, which will make Rosaline look like a crow. At the feast, Romeo and Juliet meet, fall in love, and agree to marry each other the following day. The whole reason that Romeo and Juliet meet is because of Rosaline’s rejection towards Romeo. If Rosaline had decided to give Romeo a chance, or even talked to him, Romeo would not have gone to the party, and would not have met Juliet. His circumstances during that time, Rosaline’s rejection, caused him to go the party and meet Juliet.

Benvolio and Mercutio’s persistence in taking Romeo to Capulet’s masquerade ball would have much higher consequences, although they did not know it. At Capulet’s party, Tybalt recognizes Romeo, and even after reprimands from Lord Capulet, vows to get revenge on Romeo for crashing the party. Tybalt says that “Patience perforce with wilful choler meeting makes my flesh tremble in their different greeting: I will withdraw, but this intrusion shall/ now seeming sweet/ convert to bitt’rest gall.” (I, 5, 88-91). From line 90-91, Tybalt is foreshadowing what is to happen in Act III. In Act III, Tybalt goes looking for Romeo, to get revenge for Romeo’s unwanted arrival at the Capulet masquerade ball. Romeo’s presence at the ball causes the death of Tybalt, Mercutio, and Romeo’s exile from Verona. Romeo’s exile is the stem of Friar Lawrence’s precarious plan to unite Romeo and Juliet, a plan in which so many things could go wrong, and they did.

Friar Lawrence also played a paramount role in the deaths of Romeo and Juliet. Friar Lawrence could very well have declined to marry Romeo and Juliet. However, he says that “In one respect I’ll thy assistant be/ for this alliance may so happy prove to turn your households’ rancour to pure love.” (II, 3, 90-92). On the groundless hope that Romeo and Juliet’s marriage may end the feud between the houses of Capulet and Montague. It should have occurred to Friar Lawrence that the marriage between Romeo and Juliet would only have aggravated both houses even more. Especially if each house had contained anybody else like Tybalt. Furthermore, the feud between Capulet and Montague had been standing from before Romeo was even born. It is unlikely that a sixteen plus year-old feud would end due to two members of the houses falling in love. It is more likely to just heighten the feud.

Secondly, the demands of the society and the law that they were living in at the time also created unreasonable circumstances for Romeo and Juliet. The decades old conflict between Capulet and Montague causes a very intense enmity between the members of the two households. For this reason, Romeo and Juliet’s love must remain hidden due to the extensive fear of rejection of their unification. Apart from this, after the initial fight in Act I, Prince Escalus states that “If ever you disturb our streets again/ your lives shall pay the forfeit of the peace” (I, 1, 90-91). Romeo’s exile is caused by the death of Tybalt, which was caused by the death of Mercutio. Technically, Romeo should not have been banished at all, as according to Montague “His fault concludes but what the law should end,/ the life of Tybalt” (III, 1, 178-179). Meaning that Romeo has only done what the law would have done, which is to sentence Tybalt to death. However, the Prince’s word was law in Verona, and anything uttered by him was not to be ignored. If the society was different, Romeo should have been granted a trial at least, and as he had only done what the law itself would’ve upheld, he would not have been exiled.

Verona’s society is such that if a command was uttered by the lord of the house, such as Lord Capulet or Lord Montague, it would be extremely disrespectful to disobey it. The lord of the house gives orders that cannot be disputed. Juliet refuses to marry County Paris after the exile of Romeo, and in response to this, Lord Capulet says “I tell thee what: get thee to church a’Thursday/ Or never after look me in the face/ Speak not, reply not, do not answer me!” (III, 5, 161-163). Lord Capulet believes that Juliet should marry Paris due to it being his will, or to never again look him in the face, speak to him, reply to him, or answer him. Due to this, Juliet goes to Friar Lawrence who devises a desperate plan to escape her fate, which again causes the death of both her and Romeo.

The Role of Fate in Romeo and JulietThroughout the play of the Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet, the relationship between Romeo and Juliet has been thwarted by something that could be described as an “outside force.” The idea of fate is strong in the play due Capulets’ and Montagues’ ancient grudge against each other. Throughout the entire play, fate plays a powerful role against Romeo and Juliet’s relationship as their undying love is set to end in death and sorrow with the two “star-crossed lovers” having no control of what happened.In a religious aspect, fate is something that is uncontrollable and predetermines the courses of events that will take place. Both Romeo and Juliet are strongly religious and trust that fate is most definitely real.

Multiple characters go as far as to hold fate accountable for some of their mistakes throughout the play. One example is when Friar Laurence finds Romeo and Paris dead. Friar Laurence exclaims, “Romeo! O, pale! What, Paris too? And steeped in blood? Ah, what an unkind hour Is guilty of this lamentable chance!” (Act v, scene 3, lines 144-147) Instead of Friar Laurence acknowledging that he played a part in the outcome of this situation, he immediately blames fate. Romeo, like Frair Laurence, does not take responsibility for his actions, blindly believed that the following was destined for him. After he duels with Tybalt, leaving Tybalt slain, Romeo exclaims, “O, I am fortune’s fool!” (Act iii, scene 1, line 129) By this remark, Romeo is acting as though fortune has made a fool out of him, causing Tybalt’s death, but in reality, Romeo made the decision to fight Tybalt and left him dead. Though the action was a defensive response to Tybalt’s killing of Mercutio, kinsman of the Prince and friend of Romeo, Romeo stills sought vengeance and made the choice to duel Tybalt.

This reveals fate plays a role in relieving some of the character’s guilt.Acknowledging their household’s extreme feud, Romeo, the son of Montague, and Juliet, the daughter of Capulet, are bound to have their relationship end disastrously. Romeo and Juliet are referred as “star-crossed lovers,” (Act I, prologue, line 6) hinting towards the fact that their relationship will not just end horrifically, but its journey will also be unpleasant. This can be seen as an example of fate in the play, Shakespeare almost sets Romeo and Juliet’s destiny in stone by saying that their relationship will be an atrocious affair and use affair and using fate and chance in multiple events. Numerous affairs support the idea that fate was against allowing Romeo and Juliet to love each other freely. One such event took place when Benvolio, nephew of Montague and Romeo’s friend, saw an opportunity to get Romeo out of his depressed state which was caused by his inability to be with Rosaline, his current love. Lord Capulet, having a party later in the night, sent out an illiterate servant to hand out invitations.

Since she was illiterate, the servant was in search of help to read the paper given her by Lord Capulet when she asked Romeo and Benvolio for help. The chances of this happening are very low, and because of that, this event can be seen as an act of fate. Benvolio, in light, if a favorable time to get Romeo out this depressed state, insisted that Romeo should attend the party to compare Rosaline to other girls with an “unattainted eye.” (Act I, scene 2, line 85) Once at the party, Romeo, looking for Rosaline, see his love, at first sight, Juliet, but he is quickly spotted by Tybalt, the hot-headed nephew of Lady Capulet. The fact that Romeo happened to go to the party and fall mutually in love with Juliet, his enemy while being spotted by Tybalt, also his enemy, at the very same moment is extremely unforeseen and a product of fate.Before Romeo attended the party, where he so easily fell with Juliet, he had some doubts about what the future withheld as he feared, “…for my mind misgives Some consequence yet hanging in the stars Shall bitterly begins his fearful date…and expired the term of a despised life closed in my breast By some vile forfeit of untimely death.” (Act I scene 4, line 106-113) Romeo had a feeling, which he feared, that something destined is going to happen. Not only does he feel this, but he also mentioned a despised life coming to an untimely death, foreshadowing young death on the play. This thought is proven true once both Romeo and Juliet passed away due to their passion for each other. Once again, Shakespeare uses predetermined destiny when Juliet cries, “If he married, my grave is like to be my wedding bed.” (act 1, scene 5, line 32-33) juliet foreshadowed her own death and her wedding bed does indeed become her grave. This shows how Shakespeare used predetermined destiny to foreshadow events that would later happen in the play.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the tragedy Romeo and Juliet, Shakespeare uses fate to foreshadow future events, relieve the character of guilt, and have a powerful force against the connection of Romeo and Juliet. Romeo and Juliet are referred as “star-crossed lover” at the beginning of the play, and after multiple tragic events that are highly coincidental, the ending of the love story of Romeo and Juliet is extremely dreadful. Fate can be seen in many of the scenes of the tragedy Romeo and Juliet, and this leads me to conclude that young, impulsive relationship of Romeo and Juliet was destined to be dramatic and sad.

The Odyssey by Homer and translated by Robert Fitzgerald is a complex novel pertaining the main characters complicated journey home from Troy to his throne in Ithika. The Greek gods play a big part in his long 10-year journey back home. Are they to blame for the difficult times Odysseus had to endure? It is important to remember that the Greek gods supposedly had full control over mortals like Odysseus, Telemakhos and Penelope. This entails that mortals are the Greek gods’ “puppets”, any mortal that fails to follow the Greek Ethos may be eternally punished. Choice and fate both play a part in The Odyssey, but essentially it comes down to the choices that the characters make. Odysseus and his men make controversial decisions that anger the gods, which play a part in their prolonged journey. The choices that characters in the Odyssey make can change their fate. The characters fates are decided by the Greek gods that have total control over them, if a character’s fate is suffering, it is likely that the certain character has angered the gods by not following the Greek Ethos. These bad choices most certainly can affect a character’s fate, it is possible to reverse it by proving to be a good citizen to the gods. Rather than fate good and bad choices play a major part in Odysseus’ decade long journey back to Ithika.

There are some vital decisions that Odysseus and his men make that directly affect their journey home. In book IX when Odysseus is telling his story to the Phaikans, he tells the story of how they pillaged a village of the coast of Kikones. Odysseus proceeds to explain that they enslaved the woman on the island, that they killed all men. He explains that they butchered all the sheep, but quickly the survivors informed the main army of Kikones. After the battle “Six benches were left empty in every ship” (Homer. IX. 67). The pillage of the city on the coast of Kikones is one proof that it is Odysseus’ choices that caused his journey home to take 10 years. “So, doom appeared to us, dark word of Zeus for us” (Homer. IX. 59-60). Odysseus explains that him and his men knew doom was approaching because of what they did. The severity of the issue caused an enemy (Kikones army), this proves that choice played a role in this instance of The Odyssey.

In The Odyssey there are two moments where Odysseus, the main protagonist of the story, falls asleep at a very important moment. The first occurrence is after Odysseus and his men leave Aiolos’ island. Before they leave, Aiolos gives Odysseus a bag of wind to help him on his journey home, they sail for nine days until finally they can see Ithika. Odysseus however is very tired and falls into a deep slumber, leaving his men are curious as to what is inside the bag since Odysseus has not told them. They open the bag because they are filled with temptation as they expect to find treasures inside. When they open the bag, the wind blows against them and sends them back to Aiolos’ island. This is a major setback in Odysseus journey home because he was almost home until his choices got in the way. Not only is it his men’s fault but it is also his. His decision not to tell them what was in the bag created an even stronger temptation for his men to open to open the bag. As well as that Odysseus fell asleep when they were almost home, this invocates that Odysseus was not being a good leader towards his men. There is a second time where Odysseus falls asleep, this is when he and his men are on Helios’ island. They were told not to eat Helios’ cattle, once again his men’s temptation gets the better of them and they kill and eat the cattle while Odysseus has fallen asleep. “‘O Father Zeus and gods in bliss forever, punish Odysseus’ men!’” (Homer. XII. 484-485). The choice Odysseus’ men make affects the groups’ fate. They have angered Helios’ which angers Zeus. Their choices completely affected their fate since Zeus has total control over it. Before this passage Odysseus tries to blame his men for this, since they are the ones that killed the cattle. Affectively it is also Odysseus fault for falling asleep and not remaining in control of his men. This occasion really proves how by making bad choices Odysseus and his men suffer because their fat has been changed by Zeus himself.

The third instance where Odysseus experiences a setback in his journey home to Ithika, is after he stabs the Kyklops in the eye. Part of the trick that Odysseus plays on Polyphemos (the Kyklops) is that he tells him his name is Nobody. When Odysseus heads back to his ship Polyphemos has no way of knowing who stabbed him in the eye. Odysseus’ hubris kicks in and he tells the Kyklops that he is the one who stabbed him in the eye. This choice ends up cursing Odysseus, since Polyphemos tells his father Poseidon the god of the sea. “Should destiny intend that he shall see his roof again among his family in his father land, far be that day” (Homer. IX. 580-582). This is implying that the Kyklops is asking Poseidon to change Odysseus destiny in other words his fate. This passage once again proves that in The Odyssey, your free will or choices change your fate. Since Odysseus blinded the son of Poseidon, he becomes his enemy and Poseidon later sinks the boat of the Phakains who had helped Odysseus back to Ithika. The Greek gods can change characters’ fates at any time depending on their decisions.

Some may argue that fate plays a bigger part in The Odyssey since this is the eternal reason why Odysseus is being held back. This argument links to gods being in power, which can affect what will happen to a mortal. What is important to remember is that if Odysseus and his men hadn’t made several bad decisions their fates would have never been changed. Arguing towards that fate plays a bigger role, would disregard all horrible choices that Odysseus and his men made. This would mean acknowledging that raiding the city of the coast of Kikones and enslaving the women did not have any consequences. When Odysseus did this, they disregarded being good guests, they instantly received a punishment. Being an unwelcoming guest can end up with severe consequences since it plays a big role in being a good Greek citizen.

Finally, Odysseus comes home through some luck and a lot of help from Athena. This proves that his choices changed his fate causing him to need multiple divine interventions from Athena in people’s dreams and visions. The three main occurrences where Odysseus makes poor decisions instantly change his fate. The first is the raiding of the village of the coat of Kikones were Odysseus and his men were bad guests. They were punished instantly by Zeus and provoked the island of Kikones’ army to come. The second moment was the two times where Odysseus decided to go to sleep, in these moments his men made very poor choice resulting in severe consequences. What is important to remember is, that the stories that we are reading are being told by Odysseus. When he is explaining the two times where he fell asleep, he is saying that it wasn’t his choice and that his sleep took him away. Odysseus is telling the Phaikans his story while acting as innocent as possible, and it is very possible that Odysseus decide to go to sleep instead of his sleep taking him away. “I believe that fate is choices – it’s not chance.” (Newton).

“There was once a merchant in the famous market at Baghdad. One day he saw a stranger looking at him in surprise, and he knew that the stranger was Death. Pale and trembling, the merchant fled the marketplace and made his way many-many miles to the city of Samarra. For there he was sure that Death could not find him. But when, at last, he came to Samarra, the merchant saw waiting for him the grim figure of Death. ‘Very well’, said the merchant. ‘I give in. I am yours. But tell me, why did you look surprised when you saw me this morning in Baghdad?’. ‘Because’, said Death, ‘I had an appointment with you tonight… in Samarra’”. Just like the novel ‘Appointment in Samarra’ by John O’Hara, the tragedy ‘Romeo and Juliet’ is shown to have a strong belief in fate. In William Shakespeare’s tragedy, Romeo is shown to have a strong belief in fate and destiny and believes that a supernatural entity is guiding him to his destiny. He believes that no matter what he does, he will eventually cross over into the destiny that he was supposed to take in the beginning. As is described, fate is depicted to have a tyrannical hold on someone so that one can control what actions they take, but whatever course they decide to take, they cannot control what happens to them as time continues.

Fate has an almost tyrannical grip on a person, and a person can do nothing but go on with fate, doing as fate pleases. The first instance of this concept happening is when Romeo is about to crash the Capulet’s party, when he remembers his dream and says: “Some consequence yet hanging in the stars/ Shall bitterly begin his fearful date/ But he who hath the steerage of my course, direct my sail” (Shakespeare, 113-120). This displays the idea that a person can begin with a single choice, but once that choice is made, their fate cannot be undone. A person’s fate is also decided long before they are born, no matter what they may believe about it. In the prologue of the play, both Romeo and Juliet’s fate has been decided since, “…From forth the fatal loins of these two foes, A pair of star-cross’d lovers take their life…” (Shakespeare, 7), solidifying the claim that a person’s fate is decided long before it happens, so that no matter what courses a person takes, they always end up going back to what will happen.

No matter which side of a crossroads a person chooses to go down the road of fate, they always will end up in the location that they were supposed to end up in. It does not matter is Romeo did kill Tybalt to avoid his death, by becoming “… Fortune’s Fool!” (Shakespeare, 142), since even if he survives this fight, the pair of lovers will still kill themselves. In the prologue, it states that both Romeo and Juliet would die, so even if Romeo did not die in this fight, he is still destined to die in the near future. Even if Romeo did not survive this fight, Juliet would have killed herself in her grief of losing Romeo. Surviving the attack just prolonged their longevity by a few days, and failed in changing anything. Even if someone has controversial viewpoints with what fate had planned for them, their view will change. In the play, Juliet just asked the nurse about who the man she had just danced with was. When she told her that she danced with her family’s only enemy, she did not repent inside, and instead believed that it was, “[her] only love sprung from [her] only hate! Too early seen unknown, and known too late!” (Shakespeare, 152-153), showing that it does not matter to fate about who one is supposed to hate. Since as soon as one sees someone their fate is entangled to, they will go with each other, no matter if they are enemies or not.

Since one’s fate is unstoppable, what can one do? The best one can do is to embrace their own fate, no matter how dark it may be. In the play, Romeo knew that his fate was sealed as soon as he went to Capulet’s Party, but he embraced his fate since he was not the one who controlled his fate, “But he who hath the steerage of my course, direct my sail” (Shakespeare, 120), displaying one way how someone can embrace their fate. Another example of this happening is after Romeo is pronounced banished and is leaving Juliet’s room for Mantua, when Juliet has a premonition about Romeo dying, but Romeo puts it aside. When Juliet notes how pale he looks, Romeo remarks that she looks pale too, and that “Dry sorrow drinks our blood. Adieu, adieu!” (Shakespeare, 58-59), showing the reader how at ease Romeo is with his fate. As one embraces their own fate, they become more at ease with what will happen to them, good or bad. Even if other people worry about their fate, they are still at ease, and one with their fate.

Fate is shown to have a true grip on someone so that one can control what actions they take, but whatever course they decide to take, they cannot control what happens to them as time continues. Since Romeo and Juliet couldn’t be together, they both tried to get to each other in their own ways, in order to defy the fate given in the prologue, but by doing that, they ended up accelerating their fate. It doesn’t matter what turning point in the crossroads of fate one takes on the journey to their end, for they will always reach the same destiny they were sentenced to uphold. When the merchant decided to go from Baghdad to Samarra to avoid his own death, he unintentionally set in the events for it. If our fates are already predetermined, we should worry less about what we think, speak, and interact with, and should be more confident in ourselves, knowing that we are going to end in the same place as where we were determined to be.

Citations

1. ‘The Appointment in Samarra’ (W. Somerset Maugham’s Version), http://k-state.edu/english/baker/english320/Maugham-AS.htm
2. Rev. ‘Shakespeare’s Macbeth: A Lesson In Fate’. Medium, Literally Literary, 15 May 2017, http://medium.com/literally-literary/shakespeares-macbeth-a-lesson-in-fate-9698205f2d36

Are human beings in control of their fate? The story of Oedipus shows that it is not. Oedipus did try to escape his fate a lot of times, but couldn’t because no matter how much you try to run from your fate, you just cannot escape it anyway, what is meant to be, will always find a way to you. He tried his best to run from the prophecy. First by deciding not to return to Corinth, the city where he grew up, and to never see the people he thought were his parents ever again, because he thought staying away from them will prevent the prophecy from getting real. Ironically, it was this action that led him to kill his real father Laius and to marry his mother Jocasta. When a heavy-handed man on the road nearly runs him down and then knocks him savagely, Oedipus hastily kills his attacker, who turns out to be his real father.

Also, he tried facing the Sphinx (a monster who was a winged lion with a human, female face), even after knowing that if he fails to answer her riddle he will die, because the Sphinx would leave people alone only when she got an answer to her riddle. Many tried to guess it, but failed and were killed. But Oedipus didn’t care about it since he had nothing to lose, instead he was happy about the thought that if he died then the prophecy might end. But surprisingly, Oedipus answered the riddle and won the reward, i.e., the throne of Thebes and the hand of Jocasta, the widowed queen (his real mother), that the Thebans promised to anyone who would free them from the Sphinx. So, just as he thinks himself free of his fate, he runs right into it literally. It is clear when he says “Exactly, He is my last hope – I am waiting for the shepherd. He is crucial” that how desperately Oedipus does not want to face the obvious truth and pretends not to see it, even after sensing that he did kill a man with similar appearance as Jocasta’s description of Laius and in similar circumstances as Jocasta’s description of the crossroad. Jocasta said that she was told by some servant that Laius was killed by a whole ‘band of thieves’. Neither could face the possibility of what it would mean if the servant turned out to be wrong.

His desperate attempts to escape fate arises not from ambition or pride, but from an understandable and desperate desire to live without committing disgraceful offenses. But even though he could not get away from his fate, he still had his free will to make his own decisions and face the events that were thrown at him because of his fate. Then, when he gets to know about the death of Polybus, his foster father, and the people of Corinth wanted to crown Oedipus as their king, he denied the offer and refused to go back to Corinth because he was afraid about the prophecy getting real. His fear was clearly depicted when he told the messenger from Corinth: “Never, I will never go near my parents. Always, terrified Apollo’s oracle might come true”. But none of his attempts seemed to have make any difference, because there was no way that Oedipus could have changed a curse that he was given before his birth. Also, he seemed to have inherited this attitude from his parents, who initially tried to kill their own son in order to avoid the fate. Oedipus went through major conflict with his fate, and within the conflict there are events with conflicts of their own. Even though Oedipus could not get away from his fate, the events that would lead up to his death could vary, but in the end his fate would come true. His life was a tragedy of fate and its tragic effect depended on the conflict between the all-powerful will of the gods and the vain efforts of human beings threatened with disaster.

Perhaps the story of Oedipus is meant to show that error and disaster can happen to anyone, that human beings are relatively powerless before fate or the gods, and that a cautious humility is the best attitude toward life.

Cassandra demonstrates the tragedies that may happen to a woman who is in marriage during Greek times, as she has done it numerous times during her life and was punished for them. A profit gifted with the power to see in the future, but cursed with no one believing her, she has been punished by the men whom she had/almost married. Raped, abused, and cursed she was very hapless, and though many women who were wedded were a victim of abuse, Cassandra seems to be a female who stands up for her rights, even if having to do wrong affairs to get justice she deserves. But should you be punished for your wrongdoings even if you were righting the wrong? The meaning of the name Cassandra in Greek is “she who entangles men”, so even her name creates this connection to men, though all of these bad things happened to her, you couldn’t say that she deserved them all. A victim she may be the reason for some of her misfortunes, but a woman who had been a slave and foreigner she was already given the harder life.

It seems that during Greek times, females were just used for marriage, that they would be owned by their husbands. “Marriage is for the girl what war is for the boy” (Mitchell-Boyask, p.271). This shows that even before Cassandra was even born, females sought to be married to give men children. Cassandra was viewed for not accepting those terms, even rejecting the Greek god Apollo. In the article ‘Cassandra – Feminine Corrective in Aeschylus’s Agamemnon’, Doyle explains Cassandra’s love life with him as an “uneasy relationship between Cassandra and Apollo…” (Doyle, p.57). Apollo would often abuse and rape her while still stating that he loved her, proving so by giving her the power to see the future as long as she would marry him. She said yes, though she ended up breaking the promise to marry Apollo. This is where it is her own fault for getting the curse, saying yes just to get something, but you’d have to think that she knew she wouldn’t marry him because of all the bad stuff he has done to her. Cassandra is the one who chose to say yes, it wasn’t already decided for her, so she could have prevented this problem from happening.

In other words, you cannot simply say that she was just a victim or the cause of her troubles, she was both. Cassandra had her own fate from the start, and after that, she was the one who made her own decisions about which path to take, which made it harder for her. In reality, you cannot just blame your heritage for all of what your life is because you are the one able to make choices that can lead to your future.

From the very beginning, lovers are referred to as the ‘star cross’, referring to an astrological belief associated with time. The stars were thought to control the fate of humanity, and as time passed, the stars would move along their course in the sky and also chart the course of human life below. Romeo talks about a premonition he felt in the movements of the stars early in in William Shakespeare’s play ‘Romeo and Juliet’. The movements of the stars create time-dependent changes. Fate and time actually complement each other in some way. We can detail them in this famous play.

The play ‘Romeo and Juliet’ features Romeo Montague and Juliet Capulet, two ‘star lovers’. Their families are sworn enemies and continue the ongoing feuds between the two. In the book, fate plays a role in the story in many different scenarios. Something not simple through the story, it’s all fate. Capulet’s maid trying to distribute invitations to a party on the streets of Verona. The absence of a maid for a single particular problem. Off the road with Romeo and Benvolio, which is the street next read for him, and if Romeo’s Juliet of the Capulets had met in the streets of Verona in other streets, Romeo would never have been from the Capulet’s party. Benvolio told Romeo: “Go over there and compare your face with an unblemished eye to some I’ll show you”. She asks Romeo to call someone at the party to forget about his first love, Rosaline. This is bad for them, because when Romeo and Juliet meet, they don’t know that they are enemies. Romeo and Juliet fall in love with each other immediately, and get married the next afternoon. Here we see how quickly Shakespeare’s play reaches the usual ending. They decide to go to the party he will throw at the first place he sees. It’s fate, because Capulet decides to let Paris marry Juliet. Capulet believes that Juliet is grieving for her deceased cousin, Tybalt, who was recently killed by Romeo in anger over Mercutio’s death. What she doesn’t know is that she is grieving as her husband Romeo was sent into exile for killing Tybalt. Capulet and Paris decide on a date for the wedding; they agreed to take it on the Thursday of that week. Juliet goes to talk to Reverend Lawrence. He talks about a plan to keep him from marrying Paris, and when Romeo comes home with Romeo after waking up in the grave, his father is so happy with all the wedding plans that they get together, Juliet decides to postpone the wedding for the day. Juliet would drink a sleeping potion and fake her death, which means fate played a role in pushing her father’s wedding plans up. Because the wedding was postponed, Father Lawrence did not have time to deliver the letter of plans to Romeo. The priest’s messenger could not get the letter to Romeo in time. It shows that time plays a decisive role in their fate. If the messenger had been able to get the letter early, perhaps the tragic end would not have happened. Or, if the hour of the potion the priest gave Juliet had been shorter, maybe Juliet would have woken up early and prevented Romeo from committing suicide. But we see that there is no escape from the determined fate.

Therefore, in his play ‘Romeo and Juliet’, Shakespeare showed us how unimportant free will is in people’s lives.

My chosen texts are Bernardine Evaristo’s ‘The Emperor’s Babe’ and Aphra Behn’s ‘Oroonoko (The Royal Slave)’. Ultimately, the characters have no control at all, as they are figments of their author’s imaginations. However, upon closely examining the texts, the two characters which I will focus on have little to no agency and gradually lose all of their freedom, whereas most of the surrounding characters have comparatively more autonomy.

Starting with Zuleika from The Emperor’s Babe, her low social class, ethnicity and gender prove her powerless in controlling her destiny within the heavily hierarchical and patriarchal Roman society. Zuleika’s main opponents to her freedom are her husband Felix and her emotionally turbulent relationship with her family.

On the other hand, there is Oroonoko from The Royal Slave, who although shares the similar powerlessness that Zuleika, encounters due to their ethnicity, he nevertheless is a male character of high birth. Oroonoko’s oppressive factors can be seen to mirror Zuleika’s, as his only family member is a major cause of his suffering, similar to Zuleika’s parents forcing her to marry. His freedom is further diminished by an oppressive society that he is forced into, this again mirrors Zuleika. Interestingly, both Oroonoko and Zuleika are royalty within their original cultures (although Zuleika’s claim is debatable), however upon moving to a new society, they find that their previous statuses are ignored and their ethnicity is the basis for their harsh treatment and lack of freedom. Zuleika claims: “dad was chatting his usual bollocks, about really being the exiled king of Meroe”, and the narrator of Oroonoko describes the prince’s status: “he had only left him for his Successor, one Grand-child, Son to one of these dead victors”.

Evaristo’s choice to make Zuleika female is intriguing, as women’s history has largely been overshadowed and controlled by men. This itself mirrors her power struggle, as she is quite often controlled and imprisoned by Felix. Evaristo’s choice seems deliberate, as there are other female characters within the book who do seem to hold the power within their relationships. For example, Alba’s husband is powerless in stopping her having affairs; “he lets it go, otherwise he knows full well, I will go”. Further, the characters mostly surrounding Zuleika seemingly have more control than she does, for example Venus is able to elope with her lover and Felix can easily leave for months at a time and visit his mistress. It seems as though only Zuleika’s mother, Valeria and Aemilia experience a similar lack of agency, despite the fact that ultimately they all have control over Zuleika as her slave girls tell Felix of her affair and her mother shows more attention to her brother.

Nevertheless, Zuleika’s marital experiences diminish her freedom gradually, until she is eventually completely confined to her house awaiting her death; “many an errant wife ended up in an unmarked grave outside the city walls”. Evaristo’s choice to make Felix poison Zuleika is a final example of his controlling ways, as he not only controls whether she lives, but also the pace at which she dies; “it was not despair sapping my energy but arsenicum”. Zuleika’s socialization is especially controlled by Felix to begin with, as “he is too selfish to share his new bride just yet”. This controlling behaviour towards Zuleika impacts her greatly, and paired alongside Felix’s inability to show her pleasure, it causes her attention to turn to the Emperor. Zuleika’s toxic marriage was neatly summed up by Alba’s comparison between herself and Zuleika; “No one imprisons me. I’m not you”.

Returning to Oroonoko, his experience of control is different from Zuleika’s in the fact that it is his grandfather who becomes jealous of his betrothed and cruelly keeps the lovers apart, thus having overall control over the relationship; “what Love would not oblige Imoinda to do, Duty would compel her to”. Behn’s choice to make the king the oppressor is calculated as he cannot be disobeyed, therefore giving him considerable control over the two lovers. Even after Oroonoko and Imoinda escape the king, they are forced into a life of slavery and discover that they have less agency than before. The unfortunate and uncontrollable circumstances that Behn places Oroonoko and Imoinda within are heightened by the cruelty of surrounding influences, such as the jealousy of the king and the deception of the slavers. These traits are also opposite to those of the two lovers, which is seemingly another device by Behn to differentiate between characters that are protagonists and antagonists, which not only controls the characters, but also the reader’s perceptions of them.

The little freedoms that Oroonoko exercises seem to draw more restrictions to him, for example, when he demands and receives some liberty upon the slave ship, he is met with binding and a forced name change when he reaches land: “Oroonoko was first seiz’d on, and sold to our Overseer… so that Mr. Trefry gave Oroonoko that of Caesar”. Similarly, Zuleika’s encounters with this cruel cycle seemingly allow her freedoms such as becoming a lover of the Emperor; “I felt an overwhelming urge to take my rightful place as official consort” and then snatch her happiness away with imprisonment. The technique of this cycle has long existed, with one of its most prominent forms being the ‘Wheel of Fortune’ during the Medieval period. Both authors seemingly employ it’s use to further push the assumption that their characters ascension and descension, which greatly affect their freedoms, are no more controllable than the elapse of time.

Both authors also make the choice to assert the idea that family plays a part within agency. The obvious favoritism and detachment that Zuleika’s parents show is starkly clear in one line; “I would make contact with the aliens”. By giving Zuleika a loathing of her family, Evaristo has created a sense of emotional freedom. As much as Zuleika despises her family, and so can distance emotionally from them, she also longs to get the attention and encouragement that she was denied (as is evident within her breathless speech on pages 83-5), thus both liberating and restraining her.

Finally, both Behn and Evaristo allow their prominent characters to fall victim to the most restrictive force of all: death. Zuleika’s untimely murder at the hands of her husband proves to be his final controlling act towards his “errant wife”, whereas Oroonoko’s killing of Imoinda is the opposite. Oroonoko saves Imoinda and their unborn child from the life of slavery that is otherwise inevitable, yet his own death mirrors Zuleika as he too is viewed as disobedient and killed for attempting to find freedom and happiness. The slaying of both Oroonoko and Zuleika is heightened by their reactions, as both appear to accept their fates and effectually “surrender” to dying, which points to the surrender of their agency as well.

However, it can be argued that the reactions to their fates are their last defiant gestures of agency, as they control what they do in their final moments. Zuleika speaks to Alba and chooses what she will have written on her grave, and Oroonoko’s last request is a pipe to smoke as he is executed, and he does so with no indication of pain or alarm. Therefore, it is evident that both Oroonoko and Zuleika were inevitably controlled from the start, and despite snatches of agency over their lives, they could never truly break free from the bindings that prevented their autonomy.

The narrator has clearly seen many events and the story of each event is told throughout the novel. The story starts off bearing true faith that it is true, because she has either seen the events unfold or have been told firsthand by the involved characters. The way in which this novel is written gives a reader a more intimate encounter with the unfolding events. In the beginning, we are painted the picture of the South American colony Suriname; where we are introduced to how slaves were put into the slave trade and brought to America. The innocence is put on full display as the natives are described. The narrator talks about the kind of innocence that was in the Garden of Eden, before the fall of Adam and Eve. Coramantien’s King was over 100 years old and due to wars he had no heirs to take his throne however, he did have a grandson who was the prince and his name is Oroonoko. At seventeen Oroonoko was meant to die, the General he was training with took an arrow meant for him. Oroonoko was made a General himself and sent off to fight in wars; after a while he was brought back in order to be restored into a ranking member of society. He was taught different languages very well and could speak and write many different ones to the point, and unless you knew he was a great warrior, you wouldn’t assume so. Oroonoko walked many ways of life and in each one honor was the number one value he followed and this is where his moral dilemmas stemmed from.

The General that was training Oroonoko had a daughter Imoinda and within the first meeting they fell madly in love with each other. Their love was evident as they decided to wed “After a thousand assurances of his lasting flame, and her eternal empire over him, she condescended to receive him for her husband; or rather, received him as the greatest honor the gods could do her” (Oroonoko). Unlike the King, Oroonoko’s sense for honor made him vow he would never take another woman while he lived. Receiving the blessing of the King to marry was very important to Oroonoko due to his morals, so he took Imoinda to the King to get his blessing. Imoinda was very beautiful and the King wanted her for himself. Imoinda and Oroonoko sneak away and consummate their agreement, when the King found out he sent them both into slavery. Oroonoko was still bound by his honor, even after receiving word that Imoinda died he returned to war fighting for the King before he was sold to Tefry in an English colony.

Due to his royal background Oroonoko was renamed Caesar. He was treated more that of a guest than a slave, and the other slaves referred him as a God. During this time he finds out that Imoinda had not died, rather she also had been sent to the Colony and renamed as Clemene. Since Caesar was looked up to by other slaves, his words alone led to revolts and to runaway slaves; which led to divesting constancies for Caesar and Clemene, who is now with an unborn child. Since Caesar was to blame for so many of the issues, the Governor, Byrum, has him whipped. Caesar has finally reached the end of his ropes, so he works on a plan to kill the Governor and other settlers within the Colony. Governor Byrum hears this plan of Caesar’s to get revenge, so he puts in place a plan of his own to hang Caesar. This deeply concerned Caesar as he did not know what would happen to Clemene and his unborn child, in the event his plan didn’t work and was captured or killed. In the event he failed, Clemene would face the possibility of rape and an un-honorable death. This caused Caesar to come up with the honorable plan of killing Clemene and their unborn child, those that caused them such pain, before he took his own life. Clemene agrees to this plan after he kills them, “hand resolved, and a heart breaking within, gave the fatal stroke, first cutting her throat, and then severing her yet smiling face from that delicate body, pregnant as it was with the fruits of tenderest love” (Oroonoko). He mourns for two days before carrying out the rest of his plan. Before he could carry out his plan he was found by a search party, this caused Caesar to harm his own body to show he had no fear of death. Caesar was brutally torn limb by limb until he falls under the weight of death.

The author tells the tale of Oroonoko in attempts to have the readers live by their own morals, and make a life full of honor, which grants them the free will all slaves fought and died for. Everyone is allowed to make their own decisions without the say of another, and this is a privilege that so many before did not have; and that so many today have forgotten they have. The characters of this tale Oroonoko and Imoinda did not have the choice to marry, live a free life, be sold as slaves, or to have their child. We today get that honor and the choice to build a future built on a base of morals that Oroonoko lived and died with.

Works Cited:

• Bear, R.S. Oroonoko: or, the Royal Slave, www.luminarium.org/renascence-editions/oroonoko.html

What are the Odds? What happens when coincidences occur that seem too incredible to be true? Coincidences are defined as, “a remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection.” These coincidences are considered to be random and meaningless events that happen in our lives; they don’t matter in the grand scheme of things. Paulo Coelho, however, shows in The Alchemist that some of the coincidences that occur during a shepherd’s quest to find “treasure” are connected not only to each other but to the “Soul of the Universe,” the metaphysical entity that is intertwined with all of life and the reason why everything in life is connected.

Santiago, a young shepherd boy, had a recurring dream at the base of a sycamore tree in a sacristy that if he were to go to the Egyptian pyramids, he would find treasure (Coelho 15-16). It was only until he met the “old king” and was given two stones used for divination, Urim and Thummim, and advice to watch out for the “omens” that he decided to venture out to the desert to find that treasure and pursue his “personal legend” (Coelho 32-33). Already, the reader can see that Santiago isn’t on a strict timeline: he’s made every action thus far on a whim.

After spending over eleven months on the road, he stopped at a large caravan loading site to prepare for his voyage through the desert to the pyramids and met a man referred to as the “Englishman.” During their initial encounter, it was revealed that he too had Urim and Thummim stones and that he was looking for a man named the “alchemist,” who turned out to be the exact person Santiago needed to find as well (Coelho 71-73). There had to be an outside force that acted on this unlikely, but important, meeting. The Englishman even told Santiago that “it was no coincidence that he had met [the Englishman] with Urim and Thummim in his hand,” himself (Coelho 73). It took over eleven months for Santiago to get to the caravan. Multiple caravans went through the desert and over two hundred people that Santiago could have sat next to and met during his journey. The odds of him getting to the same caravan on the same day as the Englishman, finding him out of two hundred people in the place, and letting the Englishman see Urim and Thummim that day to start their journey together are extremely low; these two people had to be connected in some way to allow this meeting to happen.

Santiago spent most of those months in his journey beforehand working for a crystal merchant until one random day he got the urge to leave to continue pursuing his “Personal Legend.” He could have left any other day during that span and not have found the Englishman, ending the journey towards his Personal Legend. The fact that everything happened how it did shows that those coincidences were not just coincidences: they were fated events that had a direct impact on Santiago’s life. Santiago and the Englishman were connected for this journey, along with all that led up to the meeting.

An even more remarkable “coincidence” occurred when Santiago finally made it through the desert and arrived at the pyramids. Finding a scarab beetle digging itself into the sand, and remembering the alchemist’s teaching that proved to him that “life attracts life” (Coelho 120), Santiago started to dig at the same spot where the scarab was located. After digging for a while, a few refugees from the tribal wars beat him and stole his gold. Before leaving, one of the refugees chastised Santiago for following crazy dreams and mentioned that he too had a recurrent dream a couple of years before at this exact spot where, “there was a sycamore tree growing out of the ruins of the sacristy, and [he] was told that, if [he were to dig] at the roots of the sycamore, [he] would find a hidden treasure” (Coelho 167-168). This location was exactly where Santiago was when he had his recurrent dream, and after Santiago went back there and dug at the base of the sycamore tree, he found a buried treasure chest. Here, Santiago and the refugee were connected through their dreams. The refugee, while trying to dismiss his dream, ended up in the location of his dream while Santiago was there; the refugee was meant to travel by that spot to tell Santiago where to go to finish his Legend. Their dreams were created for each other and connected through the Soul of the Universe.

Dr. Carl Jung, the founder of analytical psychology, didn’t believe these incredible coincidences were random events; they were more of a phenomenon than anything. Jung defines these phenomena as “events at a human scale that are rare or unique, and so nonreproducible, [that put] them outside the purview of science” (Cambray 11). He placed all of these phenomena under the general term of “synchronicity”: “the simultaneous occurrence of events which appear significantly related but have no discernible causal connection.” These events Santiago went through were certainly related but didn’t cause each other to happen, exhibiting a synchronicity trait and indicating that there is something larger to them than mere coincidence.

The idea of synchronicity shows that there may be a larger purpose for those incredible coincidences we experience. All of what Santiago went through led him to find the treasure; if one thing changed, he may never have found his treasure at the end. If he hadn’t found the Englishman, he would never have known to look for the alchemist: the man who virtually led him along his path to find his Legend. If Santiago hadn’t met the refugee from the tribal war who just happened to be crossing the pyramids at the same time and wasn’t told about his dream, then he never would have completed his Legend. As Santiago noted, “Intuition is a sudden immersion of the soul into the universal current of life, where the histories of all people are connected” (Coelho 76-77). Santiago and the Englishman felt that intuition to meet when they did, which is when they were supposed to meet. Coelho showed that everyone who influenced Santiago along his journey was connected and that they all worked together in their ways to guide Santiago along his course, whether they knew it consciously or not.

This concept of synchronicity doesn’t explain why those rare and incredible occurrences happen, however, only that they are not coincidences. The element of life that connects everything in it together and the concept that “life attracts life,” as Coelho puts it (120), is in the ethereal realm. Coelho conveys this idea when describing one of the main climaxes of Santiago’s quest to reach out to the elements around him to turn himself into the wind. As Santiago reached out to the “hand that wrote all,” or God, “the boy understood that the desert, the wind, and the sun were also trying to understand the signs written by the hand, and were seeking to follow their paths,” and then realized that he had “reached through to the Soul of the World, and saw that it was a part of the Soul of God. And he [then] saw that the Soul of God was his soul” (Coelho 156-157). Santiago realized that everything in life was connected through the Soul of the World, a part of God, and thus a part of ourselves. Coelho is saying that we are all connected through these metaphysical entities.

Proving that we are all connected in life has yet to be done, as it’s more of a metaphysical thought stream than anything else so far, but the “Global Consciousness Project,” or GCP, shows a logical conclusion that there may be something there. The GCP is a collaboration project from scientists around the world that have linked random-number generators where one displays a “1” or a “0” and another tries to guess the outcome. Comparing it to a coin-toss, the probability of the generator guessing the number is around 50/50, however when world events happen that link people across the globe, the generators start to connect better with themselves, and the probability of one guessing the correct letter increases an incredible amount (Nelson). This experiment shows that there is a field of consciousness that exists when we come together as people, shown more prominently when world events happen, that affects the world around us; we can be interconnected, even though we are mostly trying to live our lives independent of each other.

Events that happen that are too extraordinary to be passed off as mere coincidences happen for a reason, and they happen because we are all connected in life. The GCP experiment shows that there is a field of energy that can affect things around in, the magnitude of which depends on how strong the connection between the humans is. The concept of synchronicity shows that because of these connections that exist in our world, certain events line up to push us toward our “Personal Legends.” Learning how to discover the meaning of those events is what separates the enlightened from those still on the quest. Santiago learned to find meaning in his experiences and completed his Personal Legend, and it all stemmed from recognizing the meaning of events in our lives and realizing that everything he went through was connected and allowed him to get to where he wanted to go.