question about romeo and juliet
Tue, 12 Oct 2004, 08:04 amWalter Plinge13 posts in thread
question about romeo and juliet
Tue, 12 Oct 2004, 08:04 amWhat in your words does "star-cross'd lovers" mean?
Walter PlingeTue, 12 Oct 2004, 08:04 am
What in your words does "star-cross'd lovers" mean?
Walter PlingeTue, 12 Oct 2004, 08:38 am
Re: question about romeo and juliet
to me "star-crossed lovers" means...
soulmates whose lives are destined to be romantically intertwined whether it be in this life or the next... :)
Blake.
Thou errant bat-fowling pumpion!
soulmates whose lives are destined to be romantically intertwined whether it be in this life or the next... :)
Blake.
Thou errant bat-fowling pumpion!
shannynTue, 12 Oct 2004, 01:54 pm
Re: question about romeo and juliet
I would have said "doomed".
Out of interest I looked it up - the Oxford Dictionary defines "star-crossed" as "thwarted by a malign star".
: )
Out of interest I looked it up - the Oxford Dictionary defines "star-crossed" as "thwarted by a malign star".
: )
crgwllmsTue, 12 Oct 2004, 03:40 pm
Re: answers about romeo and juliet
Blake wrote:
>to me "star-crossed lovers" means...
>soulmates whose lives are destined to be romantically intertwined >whether it be in this life or the next... :)
Shannyn wrote:
>
> I would have said "doomed".
> > Out of interest I looked it up - the Oxford Dictionary
> defines "star-crossed" as "thwarted by a malign star".
I wouldn't be surprised if the original etymology of the phrase, before it got in the Oxford, was that it was first invented by Shakespeare..? (Steve Lee, any idea?)
The interesting thing about the prologue of R&J is that it tells you straight away the tragedy that's about to happen..
"A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life,
Whose misadventured piteous overthrows
Do with their death bury their parent's strife"
A pair of lovers, fated by the stars (in an Astrological kind of way) to meet (cross paths); and also cursed (crossed) by those same stars, are going to take their own lives...
....their misfortunate and heartbreaking fall, resulting in their death, will end their parent's feud.
Now that we know, in the first two minutes, the unavoidable tragedy that's going to unfold over the rest of the play, we can sympathize even more with the fact that they are doomed to their actions....because nothing any of us can do will alter it.
There's an analysis of the prologue on this webpage:
http://www.clicknotes.com/romeo/SP1.html
but I don't quite agree with the author's last comment...
"If modern actors tried to cram all the words of Romeo and Juliet into two hours, they would have to talk so fast that no one could understand a word, but maybe all the words in the present text weren't delivered in Shakespeare's time either, because the last line of the prologue promises that "What here shall miss, our toil shall strive to mend" (Prologue 14), which means that if the audience doesn't like something, the actors will try to fix it in a future performance"
My interpretation of the last line is "We've just told you the whole plot in two minutes, but if there were any details here that were missed, our efforts (toil) over the next few hours will try to fill in the gaps...sit back and watch".
..although the point about "two hour's traffic" is an interesting one...perhaps Elizabethan directors were a lot like Claire Hooper (who recently cut Hamlet to 90 min)? Maybe Elizabethan actors DID talk really fast, but people back then COULD understand? Or maybe 'two hour's traffic of our stage" has another meaning..?
Shakespeare buffs, over to you?
Cheers,
Craig
>to me "star-crossed lovers" means...
>soulmates whose lives are destined to be romantically intertwined >whether it be in this life or the next... :)
Shannyn wrote:
>
> I would have said "doomed".
> > Out of interest I looked it up - the Oxford Dictionary
> defines "star-crossed" as "thwarted by a malign star".
I wouldn't be surprised if the original etymology of the phrase, before it got in the Oxford, was that it was first invented by Shakespeare..? (Steve Lee, any idea?)
The interesting thing about the prologue of R&J is that it tells you straight away the tragedy that's about to happen..
"A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life,
Whose misadventured piteous overthrows
Do with their death bury their parent's strife"
A pair of lovers, fated by the stars (in an Astrological kind of way) to meet (cross paths); and also cursed (crossed) by those same stars, are going to take their own lives...
....their misfortunate and heartbreaking fall, resulting in their death, will end their parent's feud.
Now that we know, in the first two minutes, the unavoidable tragedy that's going to unfold over the rest of the play, we can sympathize even more with the fact that they are doomed to their actions....because nothing any of us can do will alter it.
There's an analysis of the prologue on this webpage:
http://www.clicknotes.com/romeo/SP1.html
but I don't quite agree with the author's last comment...
"If modern actors tried to cram all the words of Romeo and Juliet into two hours, they would have to talk so fast that no one could understand a word, but maybe all the words in the present text weren't delivered in Shakespeare's time either, because the last line of the prologue promises that "What here shall miss, our toil shall strive to mend" (Prologue 14), which means that if the audience doesn't like something, the actors will try to fix it in a future performance"
My interpretation of the last line is "We've just told you the whole plot in two minutes, but if there were any details here that were missed, our efforts (toil) over the next few hours will try to fill in the gaps...sit back and watch".
..although the point about "two hour's traffic" is an interesting one...perhaps Elizabethan directors were a lot like Claire Hooper (who recently cut Hamlet to 90 min)? Maybe Elizabethan actors DID talk really fast, but people back then COULD understand? Or maybe 'two hour's traffic of our stage" has another meaning..?
Shakespeare buffs, over to you?
Cheers,
Craig
Walter PlingeSat, 16 Oct 2004, 11:50 am
Re: answers about romeo and juliet
ok, so LITERALLY i was wrong...
but to ME "star-crossed lovers" is a phrase which inspires thoughts of soul-mates, love and it's ability to overcome anything...
for me josie gellar aka drew barrymore said it best...
"That thing, that moment, when you kiss someone and everything around becomes hazy and the only thing in focus is you and this person and you realize that that person is the only person that you're supposed to kiss for the rest of your life, and for one moment you get this amazing gift and you want to laugh and you want to cry because you feel so lucky that you found it and so scared that that it will go away all at the same time."
it's thoughts like these that come into my head when i think about "star-crossed lovers"... maybe i'm just looking at it from the wrong angle, maybe i'm just plain wrong and maybe... just maybe the romantic in me who always hopes that juliet will wake up just that little bit sooner (even though deep down he knows it cant happen...) just wants that happy ending!
oh well babbled for long enough!
Thou goatish elf-skinned malt-worm!
but to ME "star-crossed lovers" is a phrase which inspires thoughts of soul-mates, love and it's ability to overcome anything...
for me josie gellar aka drew barrymore said it best...
"That thing, that moment, when you kiss someone and everything around becomes hazy and the only thing in focus is you and this person and you realize that that person is the only person that you're supposed to kiss for the rest of your life, and for one moment you get this amazing gift and you want to laugh and you want to cry because you feel so lucky that you found it and so scared that that it will go away all at the same time."
it's thoughts like these that come into my head when i think about "star-crossed lovers"... maybe i'm just looking at it from the wrong angle, maybe i'm just plain wrong and maybe... just maybe the romantic in me who always hopes that juliet will wake up just that little bit sooner (even though deep down he knows it cant happen...) just wants that happy ending!
oh well babbled for long enough!
Thou goatish elf-skinned malt-worm!
crgwllmsSat, 16 Oct 2004, 06:31 pm
Re: The Wise and Wherefores...
blake wrote:
>
> ok, so LITERALLY i was wrong...
>
> but to ME "star-crossed lovers" is a phrase which inspires
> thoughts of soul-mates, love and it's ability to overcome
> anything...
No Blake, I really LIKED your answer, it was succinct and just as valid as any other put forward so far.
If I am right in supposing that Shakespeare may possibly have actually invented the phrase (he is known to have invented about 2000 words that passed into common English usage..!) then my answer perhaps explains literally what the word meant at the time of writing, BEFORE r&j became such a well-known fable in our culture.
Your answer incorporates an idea that we all have in our minds SINCE r&j became tragic 'heroes'....When we try to explain 'star-cross'd lovers', the answer we think of is 'Romeo and Juliet' (!) and then we express it further by saying "soul mates, love and it's ability to overcome anything..".
'Romeo & Juliet' has become so synonymous with the idea of overpowering love that the original words now seem to have a new meaning, and the logic of explaining their definition seems to act in reverse. The question is now the answer.
Cheers,
Craig
[%sig%]
>
> ok, so LITERALLY i was wrong...
>
> but to ME "star-crossed lovers" is a phrase which inspires
> thoughts of soul-mates, love and it's ability to overcome
> anything...
No Blake, I really LIKED your answer, it was succinct and just as valid as any other put forward so far.
If I am right in supposing that Shakespeare may possibly have actually invented the phrase (he is known to have invented about 2000 words that passed into common English usage..!) then my answer perhaps explains literally what the word meant at the time of writing, BEFORE r&j became such a well-known fable in our culture.
Your answer incorporates an idea that we all have in our minds SINCE r&j became tragic 'heroes'....When we try to explain 'star-cross'd lovers', the answer we think of is 'Romeo and Juliet' (!) and then we express it further by saying "soul mates, love and it's ability to overcome anything..".
'Romeo & Juliet' has become so synonymous with the idea of overpowering love that the original words now seem to have a new meaning, and the logic of explaining their definition seems to act in reverse. The question is now the answer.
Cheers,
Craig
[%sig%]
Walter PlingeSun, 17 Oct 2004, 03:38 pm
Re: answers about romeo and juliet
um...................you don't know that whole qoute off by heart do you???
do you??........DO YOU!!?!!!!!!!!
how many times have you watched that?i love that movie and now belive that you are really Josie gellar in disguise.
michal vartan is mine. accept or die.
from poo.
do you??........DO YOU!!?!!!!!!!!
how many times have you watched that?i love that movie and now belive that you are really Josie gellar in disguise.
michal vartan is mine. accept or die.
from poo.
Walter PlingeWed, 10 Nov 2004, 05:45 am
Re: answers about romeo and juliet
The play itself uses a sufficient amount of fate images to support the supposition that the star cross's lovers are "fated" to die and become the punishment that buries the feud.
I read the last line of the prologue to suggest that what is "missed" in the prologue will be corrected during the course of the play; providing we pay attention.
What I feel the prologue misses is the role choice plays in the destruction of the two lovers. Romeo's choice to defend his honour rather than honour his wife is a good place to start. It wasn't fate that caused Mercutio's death, it was Romeo's choice to try to stop the duel. It wasn't fate that killed Tybalt, it was Romeo's choice to cast aside his duty to his wife and embrace his honour in its place.
In Sonnet 116 Shakespeare gives us a fairly clear picture of his view of love and its nature. Romeo and Juliet face many of the same choices throughout the play and yet respond differently. How do thier choices measure up to the premise of Sonnet 116? Romeo fails the test, Juliet passes.
The prologue suggests fate, but also suggests that that supposition may be flawed.
My view anyway
g
I read the last line of the prologue to suggest that what is "missed" in the prologue will be corrected during the course of the play; providing we pay attention.
What I feel the prologue misses is the role choice plays in the destruction of the two lovers. Romeo's choice to defend his honour rather than honour his wife is a good place to start. It wasn't fate that caused Mercutio's death, it was Romeo's choice to try to stop the duel. It wasn't fate that killed Tybalt, it was Romeo's choice to cast aside his duty to his wife and embrace his honour in its place.
In Sonnet 116 Shakespeare gives us a fairly clear picture of his view of love and its nature. Romeo and Juliet face many of the same choices throughout the play and yet respond differently. How do thier choices measure up to the premise of Sonnet 116? Romeo fails the test, Juliet passes.
The prologue suggests fate, but also suggests that that supposition may be flawed.
My view anyway
g
shannynWed, 10 Nov 2004, 02:12 pm
Re: answers about romeo and juliet
True... Of course it COULD be argued that Fate takes into account the personalities and human weaknesses of the characters entangled in its web...
That is, you could say that fate DID kill Tybalt - THROUGH Romeo's choice to defend the honour of his friend over his duty to Juliet (incidentally I have always considered Romeo's murder of Tybalt to be a defence of Mercutio's honour rather than Romeo's own - maybe that's just me - but Romeo did attempt to make peace with Tybalt for Juliet's sake, before Mercutio's death).
After all, to my way of thinking this act of Romeo's is not at all out of character - he is young, impetuous, and violently reactive (albeit very sweet) from beginning to end. So (to give Fate a rather Pratchett-esque personification), could we not argue that Fate was betting on exactly what the young protagonist WOULD choose, when He rolled the dice...?
Just a thought...
That is, you could say that fate DID kill Tybalt - THROUGH Romeo's choice to defend the honour of his friend over his duty to Juliet (incidentally I have always considered Romeo's murder of Tybalt to be a defence of Mercutio's honour rather than Romeo's own - maybe that's just me - but Romeo did attempt to make peace with Tybalt for Juliet's sake, before Mercutio's death).
After all, to my way of thinking this act of Romeo's is not at all out of character - he is young, impetuous, and violently reactive (albeit very sweet) from beginning to end. So (to give Fate a rather Pratchett-esque personification), could we not argue that Fate was betting on exactly what the young protagonist WOULD choose, when He rolled the dice...?
Just a thought...
Walter PlingeThu, 19 May 2005, 05:04 am
Re: answers about romeo and juliet
i need an example in r&j that they are firm believers in fate can anyone help?
Walter PlingeThu, 26 May 2005, 08:51 pm
Re: answers about romeo and juliet
crgwllms wrote:
>
> "A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life,
> Whose misadventured piteous overthrows
> Do with their death bury their parent's strife"
>
> A pair of lovers, fated by the stars (in an Astrological kind
> of way) to meet (cross paths); and also cursed (crossed) by
> those same stars, are going to take their own lives...
> ....their misfortunate and heartbreaking fall, resulting in
> their death, will end their parent's feud.
Actually, I think the "take their life" line is nothing to do with their fated suicides, but a reference to the previous line:
"From forth the fatal loins of these two foes,
(their parents - the Monts and the Caps)
A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their lives."
... which I take to mean that they owe their very existence to their parents' bonking.
Open to interpretation, of course.
the meddoes.
>
> "A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life,
> Whose misadventured piteous overthrows
> Do with their death bury their parent's strife"
>
> A pair of lovers, fated by the stars (in an Astrological kind
> of way) to meet (cross paths); and also cursed (crossed) by
> those same stars, are going to take their own lives...
> ....their misfortunate and heartbreaking fall, resulting in
> their death, will end their parent's feud.
Actually, I think the "take their life" line is nothing to do with their fated suicides, but a reference to the previous line:
"From forth the fatal loins of these two foes,
(their parents - the Monts and the Caps)
A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their lives."
... which I take to mean that they owe their very existence to their parents' bonking.
Open to interpretation, of course.
the meddoes.
crgwllmsFri, 27 May 2005, 02:24 am
Fate accompli
melissa18 wrote:
>
> i need an example in r&j that they are firm believers in fate
> can anyone help?
Why do I get the feeling you want someone to do your homework for you?
I actually don't think they ARE firm believers in fate. I can't find any real evidence for Juliet, anyway. She makes up her own mind about what she does, and although she may feel treated unfairly by the fates, she seems in full control of the decisions she makes.
Romeo seems more guided by the fates, feeling he can not change the course of events, that is, BEFORE he meets Juliet:
ROMEO
my mind misgives
Some consequence yet hanging in the stars
Shall bitterly begin his fearful date
With this night's revels and expire the term
Of a despised life closed in my breast
By some vile forfeit of untimely death.
But He, that hath the steerage of my course,
Direct my sail! On, lusty gentlemen.
Later on he says, "I am fortune's fool", convincing himself that the fates have forced him into the wretched state of causing Tybalt and Mercutio's death.
But really, everything else he does in the course of his love for Juliet is defying the fates rather than subscribing to them...in fact if he accepted fate and didn't then suicide over Juliet's body, the play would have had a happy ending.
Many classical tragedies (Oedipus, MacBeth, etc..) are actually about proud individuals who try to defy their fate...the irony being that they usually bring about the fate they wish to avoid. But these are examples of NOT believing or trusting in fate.
Therefore I reckon your premise is unfounded.
For more examples, read the play yourself!
Cheers,
Craig
[%sig%]
>
> i need an example in r&j that they are firm believers in fate
> can anyone help?
Why do I get the feeling you want someone to do your homework for you?
I actually don't think they ARE firm believers in fate. I can't find any real evidence for Juliet, anyway. She makes up her own mind about what she does, and although she may feel treated unfairly by the fates, she seems in full control of the decisions she makes.
Romeo seems more guided by the fates, feeling he can not change the course of events, that is, BEFORE he meets Juliet:
ROMEO
my mind misgives
Some consequence yet hanging in the stars
Shall bitterly begin his fearful date
With this night's revels and expire the term
Of a despised life closed in my breast
By some vile forfeit of untimely death.
But He, that hath the steerage of my course,
Direct my sail! On, lusty gentlemen.
Later on he says, "I am fortune's fool", convincing himself that the fates have forced him into the wretched state of causing Tybalt and Mercutio's death.
But really, everything else he does in the course of his love for Juliet is defying the fates rather than subscribing to them...in fact if he accepted fate and didn't then suicide over Juliet's body, the play would have had a happy ending.
Many classical tragedies (Oedipus, MacBeth, etc..) are actually about proud individuals who try to defy their fate...the irony being that they usually bring about the fate they wish to avoid. But these are examples of NOT believing or trusting in fate.
Therefore I reckon your premise is unfounded.
For more examples, read the play yourself!
Cheers,
Craig
[%sig%]