Category: Love

Love is a powerful emotion that does not always run smoothly, and twists may occur along the journey. Hence, one’s capacity to endure the downsides of love may vary at different rates. In the play, Romeo and Juliet, the lovers are heavily impacted by love through their experiences, shown by their cynical emotions. In William Shakespeare’s ‘Romeo and Juliet’, actions that prove love does not always run fluently are recognized through Romeo’s experience with unrequited love and Juliet’s agony.

To start with, Romeo’s frustration is prompted by experiencing unrequited love. Romeo, still downhearted by experiencing the one-sided love for Rosaline, expresses the way he feels to Mercutio, and declares the following: “Under love’s heavy burden do I sink… Is love a tender thing? It is too rough, too rude, too boisterous, and it pricks like a thorn” (1.4.22,25-26). Through this citation, Romeo signifies the negative impact that this unanswered love has left on him, which also shows he has not overcome the situation. Moreover, he even utilizes a simile, ‘it pricks like a thorn’ to connect and express his emotional state of pain, the same in which a thorn terribly pricks and causes wounds. It is obvious that if Rosaline was to love Romeo mutually, his sorrow wouldn’t have deflected like so in the first place. Rosaline has hysterically impacted Romeo’s satisfaction of receiving love from her in return. Romeo yet mourns over his one-sided love for Rosaline.

Furthermore, Juliet’s agony is attributable to her separation with Romeo. After Nurse has told Juliet about Romeo’s banishment, Juliet contemplates on it and says the following: “That ‘banished’, that one word ‘banished’, hath slain ten thousand Tybalts… There is no end, no limit, measure, bound, in that word’s death, no words can that woe sound” (3.2.113-114, 125-126). Throughout this passage, it is clear that Juliet is awfully devastated by Romeo’s banishment from Verona. By considering this catastrophe, it is intelligible that Romeo’s absence keeps Juliet away from him, causing separation. As a result, the further disconnection between the lovers causes them both overwhelming yearning towards each other. From learning about Romeo’s banishment, Juliet can barely accept this reality considering the pain that comes along. Juliet is shattered by the outcome of Romeo being banished from Verona.

Therefore, through Romeo’s endurance with unrequited love and Juliet’s mental suffering, there is no doubt that love is not easy to sustain. First, things do not go Romeo’s way when he admits to loving Rosaline, since she does not acknowledge him back which leaves him demoralized. Next, Juliet distresses for her and Romeo’s special relationship when he is banished, for the sake of their bond and attachment devaluing in consequence. These certain characters are truly striving and endeavor in order to achieve and receive love in return. Love’s results can incredibly impact a person, and even change their views on it accordingly.

According to Stuart Hall, a Jamaican-born cultural theorist, and sociologist black people living in the diaspora are constantly reinventing themselves and their identities by mixing, hybridizing, and creolizing influences from Africa, Europe, and the rest of the world in their everyday lives and cultural practices. Therefore, there is no one-size-fits-all cultural identity for diasporic people, but rather a multiplicity of different cultural identities that share both important similarities and important differences, all of which should be respected.

Morrison wants to fight the myth-making that she sees surrounding the struggle for black Americans to assert themselves in the white-dominated society. She feels that a culture’s strengths should depend on what the people are, not on what they look like, she believes, “the concept of physical beauty as a virtue is one of the dumbest, most pernicious and destructive ideas of the western world”(Morrison 89).

Morrison examines the perspective view of the black community about beauty and the psychological damages it created to the black woman. The protagonist of the novel, The Bluest Eye, Pecola Breedlove is a young African American girl coming of age during the 1940s. she longs to be loved and accepted by her own community as well as in a world that rejects and diminishes the value of the members of her own race. Pecola Breedlove believes that if she has blue eyes, which is the symbol oh white beauty. She will be beautiful just like Shirley Temple and will be loved by everyone. Her yearning to have blue eyes culminates in madness. She is ignoring the reality that she cannot have blue eyes. Moreover, she thinks that if she can have blue eyes then her parents will stop quarrelling and they will all live happily. A black girl fails to appreciate their own race in terms of beauty for they believe beauty means white. The search for identity in being white because they are scared of being discriminated against by their surroundings. Pecola has so little sense of self-worth, however, that her anger quickly turns back to shame an overwhelming, self-blaming, self-hating emotion. Every time when she tries to live her surrounding makes her realized that she is ugly, not worthy even for touch. So Pecola self-segregates herself in order to earn self-respect. Whenever her brother and parents fight she shut herself up in the room and prays to God to make her disappear. But for Pecola’s mother, this fight gives her an identity. She considers herself a good Christian woman burdened by a worthless husband as punishment from God. She often speaks to Jesus about Cholly’s sins. Once, during a fight, Cholly falls on the stove, and she yells out for Jesus to take him. Mrs.Breedlove needs Cholly’s sins for her sense of self. Cholly Breedlove also needs her. If he hates her, he can keep his own identity free. By the end of the novel, her life is full of hatred which compels her to isolate herself. She is hated by her mother who considers Pecola as “ugly”, her father rapes her and is not able to live a worthwhile life which leads to perpetual frustration and drives into madness.

Morrison attacks the socially constructed western images of beauty and the psychological damages it creates for black women. Morrison rightly points out: “when the strength of a race depends on its beauty when the focus is turned to how one looks as opposed to what one is, we are in trouble”.(Morrison 88). Thus she analyses the ways of being that are ridiculed, declared inferior and in some cases, eliminated. But the community reinforces the identities of its members through belief and heritage and individuals must remain a part of the collectivity in order to be innately complete. Claudia, although she abhors the white ideals which are internalised by her community, she is accepting her heritage and blackness.

Morrison also exposes the boundaries of black society that are set and defined by the dominant white community. Black people always admire the white geographical boundary but they are not allowed to enter unless they are employed by the white people. When Claudia and Frieda Mac Teer go in search of Pecola’s mother Pauline works for a white family, known as the Fishers. The girls admire the beautiful house with great furniture and gardens. Morrison tries to give a clear picture of how black society yearns for their identity amidst hybridised culture.

The novel reflects how Pecola’s quest for true women identity which according to socially structure culture is being white with a black eye. Above that Morrison clearly mentions that even the black man sees white beauty as something to be admirable that’s why Cholly Breedlove hates her daughter.

Pecola like many young black girls becomes metaphorically captured by the image of the white aesthetic. At the beginning of the novel, The Bluest Eye shows that black girl’s minds are captured by primary school texts such as Dick and Jane primer. There are other ways that the white aesthetic invades Pecola’s psyche. From candy wrappers to movie stars and dolls Pecola cannot escape the culturally promoted image of blonde hair and blue eyes. As the narrator, Claudia says bitterly: “the world had agreed that a blue-eyed, yellow-haired, pink-skinned doll was what every girl treasured. ‘Here’ they said, ‘this is beautiful, and if you are on this day ‘worthy’ you may have it”(Morrison 18-19). The narrator Claudia tries to resist the white aesthetic. She dismembers the white dolls by breaking the fingers and pulling out the eyes.

Without the money to purchase skin-bleaching creams or to access coloured contact lenses that allow today’s black girls to buy into the fantasy of whiteness, Pecola must find other ways to make the transformation from black to white. Pecola’s resolve is to digest whiteness, Pecola must find other ways to make the transformation from black to white. Pecola’s resolve is to digest whiteness. She achieves this by eating Mary Jane candy in which the candy wrappers feature a blonde, blue-eyed girl and frequently drinking from a cup that is stamped with a picture of a child icon Shirley Temple. Morrison shows that Pecola’s fascination with whiteness is not unique. Pecola’s older sister, Frieda, is also attracted to Shirley Temple. It clearly shows that they have been caught by white aesthetics. With so many images of white female beauty, black girls find it difficult to affirm their own beauty.

The home of the Fishers for whom Pecola’s mother works, for example, is a symbol of the utopian white world. The flowers that frame the house symbolise life as well as beauty. In addition, not only the exterior of the house but also the interior decoration is white. The Fisher home is totally different from the description of Pecola’s storefront, which is totally lacking colour, similar to the absence of colour that occurs in the fall once the flowers begin to demolish. Pecola, throughout the narrative, remains locked in the darkness of her reality. It is only when she eats the Mary Jane candy or visits her mother at the Fisher home that she can step out of her darkness.

Pauline’s southern mannerisms, her inability to dress as well as other women, and her failure to apply cosmetics tastefully leave her open for ridicule. Pauline is hurt by the women’s “goading glances and private snickers at her way of talking (saying ‘chil’ren’)” (Morrison 116). Similar to Pecola’s fascination with Shirley Temple, Pauline finds her salvation in the movie theatre where she learns to “assign” faces to categories “of absolute beauty”(Morrison 120), with white faces, like actress Jean Harlow. The more she watches the films, the stronger her desire becomes to mimic them. She thinks that she can lead a happy life if she looks and behaves like these white actors. The narrator clarifies, “The sad thing was that Pauline did not really care for clothes and makeup. She merely wanted other women to cast favorable glances her way” (Morrison 116). She wanted to be accepted, and so she mimics the white movie actors. She sees that white actors romance their heroines, something that she misses from her marriage to Cholly. She idealises the white life. As she sees the beautiful actresses on screen, she starts to internalize the notion that she herself is ugly as she does not look like them. “Along with the idea of romantic love, she was introduced to another physical beauty”(Morrison 120). When she secures a job as a domestic she is able to leave behind the ugliness and blackness of her own underworld reality and enters the Dick and Jane world. Pauline desires so much to become part of this white world that she neglects her own household as well as her own children in favour of her whiteness.

Geraldine is a minor character and is described as a mulatto. A curious behaviour depicted by Geraldine is her extensive bathing rituals, she uses costly bath products as an attempt to clean off the black in her. She keeps cleaning her house so it looks perfect, what she feels a white person’s house would look like. She feels that cleaning herself and her house will make her white. In the end, she has learned to hate the self and mimic, yet remains an ‘other’ as the society would never see her as a white and give her the reverence she desires. She ignores her son, her husband, and has affection only for their family cat, who like herself, loved to groom itself frequently.

In Sula Morrison shows that identity is not a definite thing but rather a notion that is fluid, always being shaped and moulded by life. She does this through the character of Sula. Although numerous relationships and incidents in Sula’s life contribute to her self and aid Sula in her quest for identity, the character ultimately lacks true identity but her self develops only as of the perception of others. Sula’s childhood contributes greatly to her identity and concept of herself. Many negative events in her childhood cause Sula to become self-centered and undirected. As a child, Sula is neglected by her mother, Hannah, and allowed to develop and grow with little care. One summer day, Sula overhears her mother says that she loves Sula but does not like her. This event shapes Sula’s identity, causing her to become independent, and she learns that she can count on no one. Another event, the death of Chicken Little, which is an accident but Sula’s fault, causes Sula to realise that she can not even count on herself. When she held responsibility for Chicken Little’s life in her hands, she let him go, causing him to fall to the river and down. The narrator sums up these two events: “The first experience [Hannah’s denial of liking her] taught her there eas no other that you could count on; the second [Sula’s accidental murder of Chicken Little] that there was no self to count on either”(Morrison 118-119).

Sula’s relationship with the character Nel also plays an important role in shaping her identity. Morrison created the characters of Sula ana Nel to be a whole. She describes the two as “unshaped, formless things” who found relief in each other’s personality”(Morrison 53). Morrison writes that Sula “clung to Nel as the closest thing to both an other and a self, only to discover that she and Nel were not one and the same thing” (Morrison 119). Sula used Nel to fill a gap in her personality, but Nel’s personality changes and she moves on to marry Jude, Sula discovers that Nel could never fill her gap and she must make her own identity.

By portraying Sula as only half a person and the second of her as her conventional best friend. Morrison denies Sula the originality she wants. Philip Page explains that the consequences of a person’s attempt to find meaning in a relationship are that they have difficulties in maintaining a workable self-concept. Their identities become entangled with her pursuits for fulfilling relationships with another, and their identities suffer (Page 69-70). This notion holds true in Sula because, as Sula engages in her relationship with Nel, she loses grip on her own identity, confusing it with Nel’s, and ultimately her identity suffers. These events in Sula’s past cause her to strive to create her own identity. In other words, as Philip Page writes, “Neither aided by the usual models for self-development nor checked by the usual restraints, and finding that she can neither find an identity in the other nor form her (either in conjunction with or separate from that other), she [Sula] drifts into the attempt to make herself” (Page 73). After discovering that she has “no center, no speck around which to grow” (Morrison 119). Sula sets out to create her own identity. As the narrator says that Sula is

“completely free of ambition, with no affection for money, property or things, no greed, no desire to command attention or compliments – no ego. For that reason she [feels] no compulsion to verify herself – be consistent with herself” (Morrison 119).

Sula is declaring that she wants to “make [her]self” (Morrison 92) beyond community and social expectations. She uses her life as a medium, exploring her thoughts and emotions. She feels no commitment to please anyone else unless it makes her happy. One way Sula attempts to find her identity is through sexual acts. Carmean writes, “The sexual act becomes for Sula an act of self-exploration and affirmation” (Carmean 39). The narrator writes that Sula “went to bed with men as frequently as she could” (Morrison 122), taking pleasure in the act and not feeling guilty. It is through sex that Sula can explore her identity and become intimate with herself.

After sex, Sula enters that “Post-coital privateness in which she met herself, welcomed herself, and joined herself in matchless harmony” (Morrison 123). This act emphasises that sex is not a way of sharing intimacy with a partner, but rather a way for Sula to become closer to herself. Patrick Bjork gives further explanation on this topic when he writes,

“Sula is not interested in love, sexual gratification, or even simple human contact, she

wishes instead, as she does with all of her exploratory gestures, to visibly demonstrate the community’s certitude and conformity and, as a result, create her own form” (Bjork 77).

The birthmark above Sula’s eye serves as another contributor to her identity. The mark is interpreted differently depending on the viewer’s perspective. To Shadrack, whose livelihood is catching and selling river fish, Sula’s birthmark resembles a tadpole, symbol of Shadrack’s earthy nature. To Jude, it looks like a poisonous snake, which recalls the serpent in the biblical garden of Eden and symbolises the sin that the married Jude commits when he has a sexual affair with Sula. To Nel, including the narrator, the birthmark is a stemmed rose, a symbol of beauty and rose to her plain face. This stemmed rose imagery is a positive symbol of Sula’s character. She remains true to herself, which Morrison linking Sula’s birthmark to the image of the traditionally beautiful rose.

Ironically, all of Sula’s attempts at an egoless, guiltless life lead her not to identity but instead to solitude and isolation. Sula never discovers herself or finds a focus in her life. She becomes “an artist with no art form” (Morrison 121). She never achieves completeness in her life. Even when she dies, Sula welcomes the “sleep of water” signifying through water that even as she dies, she is simultaneously being reborn. While Sula’s identity is always changing and never completed. She helps to define the identities of others within her community. Nel expresses, “Sula never completed she simply helped others define themselves” (Morrison 95). By presenting herself in the manner she did, aided the community in defining themselves.

By presenting Sula the way she does, Morrison depicts that identity is not a definite characteristic easily defined, but rather a complicated thhhat changes throuuughout life. She suggests that people are not made up of the unified personality or self, but, instead, have many different identities. In the case of Pecola wants to create an identity by admitting herself to the world’s perceptions despite her unique black identity and everchanging identities and physical beauty. In the thinking of achieving whiteness, she starts to lose her innate blackness.

True love. Romantic or unflustered and usually portrayed in a sexist fictional story. Love. Problematic and hesitant and usually kept in the dark of most cases. “The course of true love will never run smooth”. Author and Director William Shakespeare foregrounded the ‘true love’ stigma in his play ‘Romeo and Juliet’. Telling a story of two young star-crossed lovers who are both doomed and unfortunate. Born to feuding families in the mediaeval Verona. Love obstacles being the key theme in this play. Its connections remain potent as ever, for our 21st century fragile self-worth and depression are major problems of these days. I feel as though this true love stigma that William has planted into everyone’s unstable mindset attributes to humanity’s inherent variations as loves demon-ridden and overwhelming nature, that overwhelms all logical reasons and thoughts.

Humans are and never will be perfect so love can’t be expelled. Everyone in society is unambiguously and completely different. A variation of souls and their inequality and incoherence usually clash. Their effects were highlights by dramatist some 400 years past. If Romeo and Juliet are considered the embodiment of affection, then the feuding homes of Montague and Capulet are a hyper-exaggerated illustration of such disparities. Within the play, the homes are similar with self-identity and Juliet’s love for lover poses the stark question: do you sacrifice their identity, beliefs and values or their ‘true love’? Juliet oft cites her difficulty, “My solely love sprung from my only hate… Prodigious birth of love it is to me that I must love a loathed enemy… Wherefore art thou Romeo”. I personally cannot recall one relationship wherever my individual distinctions haven’t manifested themselves as disagreements or complications. Today a lover associated Juliet serve solely as a reminder that friction is an inherent a part of ‘true love’ as a result of we tend to are all completely different. These variations have allowed us to become additional acceptive as a society, evidently within the group action of twosome and the radical decline of thought racism. Indeed, there will exist no ‘true love’ of a friction less nature as a result of we tend to all disagree. We tend to could also be asked to outline our identity or convictions. However, this will solely result in personal growth that is way additional significant than the petty disagreement that preceded it.

Love doesn’t ‘run smooth’ attributable to its irrational nature. Once soft on, as Romeo and Juliet clearly were, one is totally absorbed. Love has associate impulsive tendency to override rational thinking which frequently has negative consequences. Romeo’s immatureness and thoughtlessness is recognized in his speech communication with Benvolio, wherever he rebuts with, “O teach me how I should forget to think”, thinking he has no management over his emotions. This is often echoed within the couple’s maybe rash call to be married once scarcely meeting one another, “Is Rosaline, whom thou didst love so dear, so soon be forsaken?”. Moreover, love’s insanity is seen in Juliet who is aware of that the wedding is “too rash, too unadvised” and “too sudden” nevertheless is willing to risk everything, as well as denouncing her name and identity as a Capulet. I’d wish to assume that I even have never acted without reasoning over one thing I’m addicted to, but this might be untrue. I have, within the past, acted completely illogically once it came to one thing I felt powerfully regarding. Today, the results of such thoughtlessness might be manifest as violence, divorce or the other of the multiple social justice problems that presently plague society. It may conjointly manifest as associate with love incorrupt bond between two folks. This insanity is summarized in common television program ‘How I Met Your Mother’: “Love doesn’t add up. You can’t logic your way into or out of it. Love is completely nonsensical. but we’ve to keep doing it, or else we’re lost”. Love is overwhelming, irrational and fleeting; one should strive their hardest to avert the warmth of the instant lest it led to a regretful. Love may be a gamble as a result of one cannot predict however they’ll react once consumed by love. Romeo and Juliet’s fateful story weren’t ‘romantic’ as a result of Romeo succumbed to his thoughtlessness. We will learn from Romeo therein we must always consider carefully regarding everything we tend to do and not be influenced by external factors. Therefore, love will consume someone showing emotion and can’t be ‘smooth’ as a result of its erratically illogical.

Romeo and Juliet are doubtless one in all the foremost noted love stories to this point, masterfully tangled with ethical messages that are still of relevance these days. Love, and its imperfect nature, echoes throughout the play. Romeo and Juliet’s happiness to opposing homes symbolize our own disparate characteristics. Through this we tend to learn that everyone is completely different and, although at first associate obstacle, it ultimately is a platform for improvement and private progression. Also, love induces insanity. This is often seen within the Romeo’s forceful, unreasonable and hot-headed actions. The importance of coolness and composition within the heat of the instant is obvious here. Within the nowadays these dated themes are still eminent. We tend to are afflicted by our variations, as Romeo and Juliet were. Truthfully, love is however a short moment in our short lives. Love isn’t excellent and rather than excruciating over its coarseness, embrace its flaws within the finish love is altruistic as a result of it provides the rare chance for us to grow as a society.

Is the love that Gatsby feels driving his relentless pursuit of winning over Daisy? Are all of his schemes to ‘win’ over Daisy worth it? In Gatsby’s eyes Daisy represents the American Dream, wealth, power, fame, and beauty which is the reason why Gatsby is attracted to her. Although Gatsby’s fantasies with Daisy never become a reality, his love for her can only be felt in the pursuit, not in ‘having’ her as his own. In ‘The Great Gatsby’, Fitzgerald tries to focus on Jay Gatsby and his constant pursuit for Daisy Buchanan. While Gatsby is away at war, Daisy falls in love and gets married. During the next 5 years all Gatsby tries to do is win over Daisy although she has found someone else. The question that still remains is, is this love or is it the idea of being with her that is causing his obsession? Perhaps he only wants to be with her because she lives the American Dream and Gatsby wants to be a rich and powerful man that he feels he is meant to be.

We see closer to the middle of the book the romantic past between Daisy and Gatsby. Daisy is invited to tea where Gatsby happens to pass by and sees Daisy. Now, reunited Gatsby and Daisy act very uncomfortable towards each other. During this encounter they do not truly start to connect with one another until Gatsby is told that Daisy is embarrassed. They start to get to know each other again, but Gatsby is surprised to see what kind of person Daisy has evolved into over these years. “As I went over to say goodbye, I saw that the expression of bewilderment had come back into Gatsby’s face, as though a faint doubt had occurred to him as to the quality of his present happiness. Almost five years! There must have been moments even that afternoon when Daisy tumbled short of his dreams—not through her own fault but because of the colossal vitality of his illusion. It had gone beyond her, beyond everything” (Fitzgerald). Gatsby is not as satisfied as he thought he would have been when he was reunited with Daisy. Throughout these years, he had built up this idea of Daisy but now, Daisy was not the girl that his memory thought she was. It was his imagination that made him keep thinking of Daisy this certain way even though she has evolved. When Gatsby saw Daisy, he assumed that everything would fall back into place and be as it was before he went off to war. His imagination of Daisy tried to recreate what he and Daisy had in the past and he thought it would become his reality. Gatsby wanted to change his life from being in a poor family to a rich and wealthy man of society and he believes Daisy is the factor that is able to change that for him. She symbolizes the life that Gatsby has always wanted. “Her voice is full of money” (Fitzgerald). He so desperately wants Daisy to fall in love with him because she is the only ticket to getting the life he has always dreamed of. He believes that getting Daisy to love him despite everything can prove that he has changed for the better.

Throughout the story we do see evidence that Gatsby really is in love with Daisy. “Gatsby bought that house so that Daisy would be just across the bay” (Fitzgerald). This suggests that Gatsby wants to be closer to Daisy so that he can watch over her and protect her from any form of harm. The only reason he hasn’t done anything too drastic is because he is afraid. “He’s afraid. He’s waited so long” (Fitzgerald). He tries to overcome his fear by asking Nick to ask Daisy to tea in hopes of Daisy still being as in love with him and he loves her. Gatsby even remembers the exact date since their last encounter together. “Five years next November” (Fitzgerald). This is a romantic hint that he truly loves her. The memories Gatsby recalls including the time he first met Daisy and the first time he kissed her proves his passion that he has for Daisy. Even firing all of his servants so that Daisy’s reputation wouldn’t be ruined is another example of the love that he feels for her. Gatsby’s intentions were good and his love for her is true but his expectations of her were not what he had expected after all these years.

Even with all these factors present it is still possible that Gatsby is not really in love with Daisy but he just loves the idea of being in love with her. Gatsby is only in love with Daisy because of her identity and what she represents. He is unable to forget the past where Daisy once saw him as a perfect man in her eyes and can’t accept his new reality. Gatsby’s want of wealth and power only proves that he only loves the idea of her and not actually her. He loves who she thought he was in the past and can’t comprehend the idea of love that he is truly feeling in the present. The fact that she married Tom Buchanan, a very wealthy man only made Gatsby think that she was really choosing him. In addition to this it is very likely that he only loved the thrill of trying to win over Daisy. “It excited him too that many men had already loved Daisy—it increased her value in his eyes. He felt their presence all about the house, pervading the air with the shades and echoes of still vibrant emotions” (Fitzgerald). The idea of winning Daisy out of all these other men who would have done anything to have her love them is what Gatsby wants above all else. Being the winner of the ‘prize’, which is Daisy, is a race that many try to complete but do not win. Gatsby thinks that by winning this ‘race’ he will have everything his heart desires which is wealth, power, and the girl he has supposedly always wanted. His imagination and unwillingness to overcome the past is what is blocking him from seeing his reality. “He talked a lot about the past, and I gathered that he wanted to recover something, some idea of himself perhaps, that had gone into loving Daisy” (Fitzgerald).

Overall, it is debatable whether or not Gatsby actually loved Daisy or whether he just loved the idea of her. There is evidence that suggests that Gatsby truly does love Daisy but there is also evidence which proves he does not actually love her. There are many theories that people have but in conclusion he really only loved the idea of winning her over rather than actually being in love with her. After he came back from the war his love for her faded. The love he thought he had for Daisy was his imagination and the reality he had constantly pictured in his head. She had evolved into a different person over the years and was not what he had expected. He is not truly ready to accept that fact that Daisy moved on and is living a different life that is not with him.

Using three different types of passion, Shakespeare’s ‘Romeo and Juliet’ describes love: the unrequited love between Romeo and Rosaline, the true and sincere love between Romeo and Juliet, and the pessimistic love between Mercutio and the Nurse. Using traditional notions of love specific to the era helps convey the message that it can take many forms. Since Romeo and Juliet are sincere, the play implies that true love is found beyond love. Romance changes their perspectives on love.

The genuine romantic love shared by Romeo and Juliet is the principal subject of the play. Romeo completely turns from an inexperienced dreamer into a devoted lover upon falling in love with Juliet. “Did my heart love till now? Forswear it, sight! For I ne’er saw true beauty till this night”. Romeo does not use flowery, premeditated speech anymore. He articulates all he needs to without all the decorations of a Poetic conceit, he knows just what he is feeling. He acknowledges that whatever he had felt before that was totally different, and as a consequence, he wonders if he had ever been in love previously. Romeo does not use inconsistencies or ornate words when thinking of Juliet. He calls her a “true beauty”, as opposed to “wisely too fair”.

Romeo and Juliet demonstrate a love that is pure and truthful, but the more deceptive and lustful kinds of love, as represented by Mercutio and the Nurse, must not be forgotten. Whose views on love vary significantly from those of Romeo and Juliet which seems to focus only on the superficialities of the human body. He brushes off the love sickness of Romeo, suggesting that sexual pleasure is absolutely important for Romeo. “For this driveling love is like a great natural that runs lolling up and down to hide his bauble in a hole”. Mercutio doesn’t want women’s emotional ties; instead, he wants to experience the pleasures of women. “This is the hag, when maids lie on their backs, that presses them and learns them first to bear, making them women of good carriage”. It is clear that Mercutio is unable to grasp the passion Romeo has for Juliet. He sees the connection Romeo and Juliet have as just another notch to add to the bedpost. Mercutio is persuaded that love “is as thin as the air” and “more inconstant than the wind”.

While it is regarded that Romeo and Juliet is a timeless saga of romance, it really should be noted that perhaps the play is essential because of how true love is depicted. We are changed by true love. It frees us to look out at the soul outside the body. Conversely, the desire for true romance would go unmet when the wonders of love are replaced by desire, the mystique of which is just skin deep.

The concept is famous in Disney movies, scientists today still struggle with identifying it, and for the lucky ones, it is first experienced the moment they reach safe arms. This concept is known as ‘love’ and in William Shakespeare’s ‘Romeo and Juliet’, love is made notorious in the tragedy of the play’s plot. While the romance between Romeo and Juliet is undeniably significant to the storyline, various types of love play their role as well. Through these different forms of love, Shakespeare manages to create an intriguing conflict arising in the play’s development.

In order to grasp the concept of love, the Oxford English Dictionary defines the term as “senses relating to affection and attachment”, and when that feeling is one-sided, it is considered unrequited love. Unrequited love appears as early as the first scene of Act I, the instance being Romeo and Rosaline. Romeo’s unrequited love for Rosaline marks the beginning of plot development, since his heartbroken state eventually leads him to his encounter with Juliet. This is depicted when Romeo expresses his sorrows about Rosaline to Benvolio, which Benvolio advises him to “examine other beauties” (I.i.224) and convinces him to attend the Capulet party in hopes of curing his unrequited love (I.ii.84-89). Another instance is Paris’ unrequited feelings for Juliet, which builds tension within the plot as he poses an obstacle for the couple and a rival to Romeo. This tension surfaces when Juliet’s arranged marriage to Paris causes her to fake her death, as she claims she finds suicide as a better alternative than marrying him (IV.i.77-88), stating, “O, bid me leap rather than marry Paris / From off the battlements of any tower” (IV.i.77-78). Additionally, Paris’ unrequited feelings guide him to a rivalry against Romeo, when he mourns Juliet’s death (V.iii.12-16) and engages in a duel with Romeo which ultimately ends with his demise. Despite the seldom appearance of unrequited love, it fulfills its role of arising conflict in the play.

Shakespeare portrays familial love as another barrier in Romeo and Juliet’s relationship, pressuring the plot to turn on a happy end for the couple. Familial love is distinguished as the love between family, a prominent example would be between Juliet and her father, Lord Capulet. Initially, Lord Capulet displays his love for Juliet by informing Paris that his daughter is too young for marriage when Paris requests Juliet’s hand, he then proceeds to state, “But woo her, gentle Paris, get her heart/ My will to consent is but a part/ An she agree, within her scope of choice/ Lies my consent and fair according voice” (I.ii.16-20), claiming the option of marrying Paris is determined by Juliet’s feelings and not his own. However, Lord Capulet’s affection twists the plot when he forces Juliet to wed Paris despite her wishes against it due to her affair with Romeo. As a result, this sparks a heated argument between the two in Act III Scene 5 and only offers an additional reason for Juliet to fake her death. For Juliet, her familial love for the Capulets affects the play’s plot because it compels her to decide between familial love and romantic love, a crucial decision that eventually unravels the plot leading to its tragedy: the deaths of the star-crossed lovers.

Throughout the play, one major type of love is romantic as it contributes the greatest in terms of plot development. According to the Collins Dictionary, this form of love is “characterized by romance and involving sexual attraction”. The evident example being Romeo and Juliet, as their attraction for one another transpires countless conflicts throughout the course of the play. One instance is the lovers concealing their relationship from their respective families, going to great lengths such as marrying in secret in Act II Scene 6, despite Juliet’s engagement with Paris. Because their romantic love is incredibly overwhelming, they prioritize pursuing each other over their own values, even if it means defying their families, which causes the plot to develop further tension and suspense. Dark themes also arise in the plot following Romeo’s banishment when the couple ultimately seeks suicide if they cannot be reunited. For instance, the moment Romeo decided to poison himself in front of Juliet’s tomb upon hearing of her death, “Come, cordinal and not poison, go with me/ To Juliet’s grave; for there I must use thee” (V.i.85-86), followed by Juliet’s suicide after she discovers Romeo dead in her arms. In this scene, rather than escaping with the Friar, she wishes to stay, stating, “Go, get thee hence, for I will not away” (V.iii.160). Considering these events, romantic love ensues the growth of suspense in the play’s conflicts.

In ‘Romeo and Juliet’, Shakespeare accomplishes to illustrate an engaging series of conflicts using various types of love in the play. Although each form of love appears to contribute in varying amounts, whether to initiate tension, suspense, or simply advance the conflict, Shakespeare is able to present each type with a task in the play’s development. Any type of love can be an enigma, especially the romantic type, but is love a feasible explanation to drive others to suicide?

Romantic love, in a personal sense, is an intense and uncontrollable emotion that not only defined as a sense of happiness but it is also defined as pain, fear and every other emotion but intensified. Romantic love is also defined by the experiences and feelings people may gain from one another. The term romantic love holds such a heavyweight for some people, while with others it’s pushed to the back of their mind. If love holds such an overall power, why is it that each person can define it as something different. Many people may look at romantic love in a superficial or materialistic way while others see it in a more simplified sense. The world tends to create an overall view of love as rainbows and happiness but love also includes all the pain, anger and heartbreak that someone can bring you. I think that if more people realized that love isn’t only euphoric but everything in between the approach and context that people see love it would change drastically. It is more likely that people will start to see it in a more realistic way instead of the social produced version of romantic love.

I tend to see love like a coin. One side is everything great, the happy memories, the passion and the sense of comfort. The other side is the side of pain, fear, and anger but it is still holding the same amount of passion as the ‘happy side’. To truly define love, you have to acknowledge that in the worst of moments the passion that love brings is still there just in a different state. Not many people bring up the fact that love is screaming at one another until your lungs hurt or crying to your friends about how much you hate that you love the person that hurts you the most. If you didn’t love the person then why does it hurt so bad when they leave or when you fight, if you didn’t love the person then why do you get so angry by their action. Love can bring any emotion to the surface of your mindset and intensify it.

Love is one of those ideas that people always connect with a happy point in their life or a point they want to get to. People tend to fantasize about what love can bring them, in the article ‘Regulation of Romantic Love’, Sandra J. E. Langeslag and Jan W. van Strien speak on how “Romantic love has positive effects on individuals and society as a whole. For example, love is associated with positive emotions such as euphoria and romantic relationships enhance happiness and life satisfaction” (Langeslag & Strien). They speak on how because love has these positive connotations people strive for the emotion to feel better within their lives. Langeslag and Strien also support the idea that love tends to come with negative points too such as stress, jealousy and sometimes shame and that those emotions are just as intense. Langeslag and Strien further speak to the fact that many people think that love is uncontrollable and that you can’t change the way you feel while in this state of emotion. Within the article, they decided to test how people saw love and see if people’s point that love is uncontrollable supported their actions. After having multiple participants fill out a questionnaire the questions pertaining to controllability came back that the participant didn’t feel in control when it came to love or infatuation but did feel in control when it came to attachment. From reading this it just solidifies the thought that love is uncontrollable and that even though you can make yourself become less attached the emotion of love is still there and is still intense.

Love is something that is so sought after in society that people forget the big picture of it all. While researching what people labeled as love many saw it as something different than what I thought many would say. I saw that people tend the label love as very materialistic, superficial or action based. Many people had described someone buying them roses or jewelry and said that’s what love is or they would describe someone constantly giving them affection and say that’s what love is. People also stated how when people just ‘look good together’ than they must be in love. In the article ‘Can’t Buy Me Love’ Mario Mikulincer and Phillip R. Shaver brought to light a point that was made by two other Psychologist Zhou and Gao that money is a part of love and that “money can make a person more attractive to others, increasing access to potential romantic partners, and increase the likelihood of social approval and respect”. Zhou and Gao saw love in the manner that I described earlier and was bringing up that nowadays people are finding their version of love through a physical and material attraction. Although in my opinion people may obtain a strong sense of lust, I don’t believe love is material. I think that this view came with the new social norms of people wanting to have something to post and prove to not only themselves but also others that their partner is the best and that their love is overwhelming.

Although this view is very popular its known to many that love can’t be bought. Money can make a more favorable environment for love but you can’t achieve an overwhelming passion for money. In the article ‘Can’t Buy Me Love’ by Mario Mikulincer and Phillip R. Shaver they have the view that money may replace love or buy love temporarily but isn’t something to rely on: “We suspect that, although money may substitute for or purchase love in some circumstances, long run it may not fully replace the primary need for love, support, and comfort from other people”. Mikulincer and Shaver argue the point made by two other Psychologists Zhou and Gao that money can replace social support and deviate the stress and pain that comes with natural emotions like love. The point that Mikulince and Shaver are trying to convey is that “the fragility of avoidant defenses and indirectly imply that strategies aimed at replacing love and support may collapse under circumstances. It is under these circumstances that the availability, sensitivity, and responsiveness of loving others become critical for soothing oneself and maintaining or restoring emotional equanimity”.

While the world is trying to achieve this sense of perfect true love and relationships, they lose the fact that true romantic love should have pain and struggle to it. Love isn’t simple so why make the view of it seem so simple. Why force the idea that love should be confined to one side of the emotional spectrum. Love is supposed to make a person grow, it’s supposed to challenge a person to nearly a defeat a point where they feel their lowest, love is what makes a person human. The pain that comes with love is undeniable and inevitable so why do people so often not associate pain with love. True romantic love is intended to be hard and it’s meant to make you sacrifice and make you do things you typically would never do.

All things considered, romantic love is something that is so uncontrollable and cannot be confined to one set of emotions. Romantic love is something that may be obtained by people and can be seen as either happiness or pain but will still hold passion no matter which it is seen as. Love is a challenge that needs someone to step in as a challenger who is ready for the intensity of it. The world cannot label love as simply euphoric and anymore it needs to be defined as a mix over overwhelming hurt that brings comfort and is able to heal and destroy a person at the same time. Love is defined by every range of emotion.

In the play, ‘Romeo and Juliet’ the author William Shakespeare presents the relationship between the two youths as one that is destined from the start, but in contrast, their love is also ill-fated. Their relationship only lasts for three days all of which they are oblivious to what the future holds for their relationship until their demise. Within the play, it is evident that their relationship is predestined when in the prologue Romeo and Juliet are described to be a ‘pair of star-crossed lovers’, which initially suggests that their relationship was doomed from the start and is due to the dismissive hand of fate, this paired with describing their love as ‘death marked’ only further reflects this idea. The prologue is a sonnet, briefly explaining the play and foreshadows what occurs late on, it takes the form of dramatic irony as the audience already has an idea of what will happen however, the lovers do not know this themselves, supporting the idea that they fail to recognize their destiny which is all in the hands of fate. The use of dramatic irony changes the way the play is viewed as we await their final demise knowing that this is due to their failure to recognize what the future holds for them.

Shakespeare presents their relationship as is based on love at first sight which blossoms into true love between the pair, this is clearly reflected in their first meeting in Act 1 when they both go against all expectations from their family to be together and ultimately in their death in Act 5. In the extract, we see the feeling Romeo experiences reciprocated by Juliet as they are seen to fall in love as soon as they meet, Romeo’s feelings towards Juliet are seen as pure and gentle when he says “to smooth that rough touch with a tender kiss”. The use of the adjective ‘tender’ illustrates this idea and also when he describes himself as not worthy of Juliet’s touch, this is contrasted when Juliet does in fact show interest in him as well and then they later share a kiss. Their relationship grows throughout the play and we see the two fall into true love with each other as they are determined to stay together, almost as if they are meant to be. It is clear that their love may be true for each other when we see Juliet go against her father’s wishes to marry Paris in Act 3 Scene 5: “He shall not make me there a joyful bride!”. As we know children in the Elizabethan era were seen as property and their father was the head of the house, children would very rarely have a choice on who they would wish to marry as this would’ve been chosen to often secure wealth. However, because Juliet does not conform to this idea, it illustrates her true love for Romeo as she is willing to do this for the sake of their relationship. The ultimate portrayal of their relationship being one of true love is due to their death in Act 5 as after the death of Romeo Juliet feels as though she cannot live her life without him and proceeds to kill herself: “O happy dagger”. By using the adjective ‘happy’ Juliet shows that she is happy to die all for the sake of being with Romeo once again. The reader is left to interpret this as a portrayal of true love as to why else would Juliet go to such a length for a boy with who she had been in a relationship with for three days.

Lastly, Shakespeare presents the growth of the relationship of the two lovers throughout the play as a whole, initially, when they first meet in Act 1 Scene 5, Romeo is seen to woo Juliet as he falls in love with her immediately due to his impulsive nature, this is presented when Romeo claims Juliet’s love through religious imagery: “This holy shrine, the gentle sin is this: my lips, two blushing pilgrims”. By describing Juliet as a ‘holy shrine’ he is complimenting her and makes her feel valued and by personifying his lips to be ‘pilgrims’ he is referencing religious ideas and beliefs. This appeals to Juliet as she recognizes these ideas and by linking them to their relationship it makes her believe that his love for her is pure and perhaps accepted by God which will make her feel confident in their relationship. As the play progresses, we see a shift in the balance between Romeo’s impulsive, persuasive nature and Juliet’s role in their relationship, as it is initially based on Romeo almost manipulating her into loving him in return as she is inexperienced in love. We find this out when she explains that Romeo is her “only love” in Act 1. However, throughout the play, we see Juliet fall into deep, true love with Romeo. But the reader is left to question whether this happens naturally or as a consequence of Romeo’s earlier actions and that their relationship may not be the truest form of love. This contradicts the earlier point of their relationship being true love and is almost left up for interpretation by the reader.

Shakespeare presents Romeo and Juliet’s love in the extract as pure, holy, and sacred. The idea of their love being holy is evident when Romeo says, “have not saints lips, and holy and palmers too?” which is part of an extended Christian metaphor. The particular use of the noun “saints” within the metaphor used by Shakespeare suggests that Romeo is comparing Juliet to the divine figure of a saint and therefore that she is heavenly which makes their love seem sacred as she herself is sacred. Alternatively, the noun could symbolize that Juliet acts as Romeo’s savior as a saint is a pious figure who ultimately does good that saves someone or a group of people. Although this reiterates the purity of their love, it could also be foreboding as a saint often sacrifices themself for another. Shakespeare may also be using irony here as ultimately, Juliet will lead to the downfall and death of Romeo and vice versa. The fact that Shakespeare uses irony may emphasize the character’s naivety, though, and therefore, their love is still presented as pure as they themselves are young and naïve. Overall, Shakespeare perhaps intended to make the audience feel the love that Romeo and Juliet had for one another and may promote sympathy for them as, through the use of irony, the audience is reminded of the tragedy of the play.

Shakespeare also presents Romeo and Juliet’s love as eternal and destined. The idea of their love being eternal is evident through Shakespeare using a sonnet, with a rhyme scheme of ababcdcdefefgg. The use of the sonnet presents their love as being eternal as the shared sonnet creates a link between the two as if they are destined to be together because they have made up this sonnet. Alternatively, it could again be foreboding of their demises as they are presented as being eternally linked and therefore, destined to suffer the same fate as they ultimately do. However, Shakespeare also may nod to the fact that although their death is a tragic one, they are destined to be together and the previous use of religious imagery and their love being holy may mean they are together in heaven. Overall, Shakespeare perhaps wished the reader to feel sympathy for the pair’s fate but through their first interaction, he also emphasizes that they are destined to be together and therefore, despite their tragic ending, maybe together even after their deaths.

When someone says, “I love you,” or “I am loyal,” which do you think has a bigger impact? Love or loyalty. According to Google, love is an intense feeling of deep affection, while loyalty is defined as giving or showing firm and constant support or allegiance to a person or institution. Now, according to these definitions, love and loyalty are two completely different things. However, the two have quite a few things in common.

Love is basically a feeling when you like someone a lot, and loyalty is simply being there for someone whether you like them or not. I believe loyalty is greater than love because you can love someone and still stab them in their back. Loyalty, however, doesn’t involve much feeling. With loyalty, you can love or hate someone but still have their backs. Love is just a mere feeling of becoming attached. Loyalty is having someone’s best interest regardless of your history together.

Similarly, love and loyalty both incorporate wanting what is best for a person. For example, you can buy someone soup when they are sick because you love them, but you can also buy someone soup when they are sick because of your loyalty to them. On the contrary, the main difference between love and loyalty is that love is a feeling and it comes from the heart, while loyalty is a mentality that derives from the mind.

Loyalty can be broken easier than love because one can do anything out of love. Someone could kill someone because they “love” them, but you can’t kill someone and expect to have loyalty or, at least, the same level of loyalty as that person. I conducted a small poll of about twenty people on “Which Carries the Most Weight, Love or Loyalty”. Out of those twenty people, four of them said love carried the most weight, while a whopping sixteen people voted loyalty. Those who chose love said they did so because, in their book, love includes loyalty.

They believe there is no love without loyalty and no loyalty without love. However, they are only half right, one can have loyalty without love, but one can also have love with loyalty. Additionally, sixteen out of twenty people I surveyed who said that loyalty carries more weight than love, said they chose that answer because people say “I love you” all the time even when they hurt the person, but when people are loyal, they won’t hurt the person in the first place.

They would only want their best interest. In conclusion, my poll and Google definitions help elucidate my point that loyalty has significantly more weight and more meaning than love. The definitions also help in assisting a person with their own opinion on love and loyalty. Learning the original meaning of a word can alter and expand a person’s usual way of thinking, making love and loyalty mean more than just what a dictionary says it means.