Skip to main content

What are three reasons why Friar Laurence is to blame for the deaths of the lovers in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet?

Friar Laurence is to blame for the deaths of Romeo and Juliet for three reasons. First, he never should have agreed to marry them in the first place. He did so because of his idea that their marriage might mark the end of the bitter feud between the Montagues and Capulets. The part of his plan which was missing, however, was how the couple would ultimately announce that marriage. Although his heart was certainly in the right place, his decision ignored the possibility that several things could go wrong.


Second, the Friar should not have given Juliet the sleeping potion which would allow her to fake her death. While his plan sounded good in theory, it also had too many variables. When Juliet came to him at the beginning of Act IV, he should have advised her to confess to her father of her relationship with Romeo. It's quite possible, judging from Capulet's expressed opinion of Romeo and his love for his daughter, that he might have understood. He probably realized that Tybalt was out of control and his death inevitable, so he might not have blamed Romeo. 


Third, the Friar fails in the most important aspect of his plan. He was not able to get his message to Romeo in time to alert him to Juliet's situation. Instead of sending Friar John, he should have sent the message with Balthasar who, according to Act V, Scene 3, was someone that the Friar knew well. He must have known that the impetuous Romeo was capable of anything and how important reaching him in time was to the entire plan. As with his earlier decisions, the Friar again totally misjudges the situation. When he is confronted by the Prince in the end, he even admits his guilt:



I am the greatest, able to do least,
Yet most suspected, as the time and place
Doth make against me, of this direful murder.
And here I stand, both to impeach and purge
Myself condemnèd and myself excused.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more