The Intertwining of the theme of Desire and Darkness

The Intertwining of the theme of Desire and Darkness

Romeo and Juliet is a global-famous catastrophe authored by Shakespeare William regarding two young “lethal lovers” and the part played by their heart-breaking suicides in terminating a long-running family hostility. It is one of the most celebrated of William’s plays, one of his earliest dramatic victories, and is believed to be the most typical love tale of the Resurgence and certainly in the history of the Western way of life. From the play, there are some many incidences where themes of darkness and desire intertwine.

Desolately, Juliet and Romeo come from the two fighting clans, the Capulets and the Montagues correspondingly, which decides their compelling, short desire affair. Shakespeare table several efforts in the play to bond the hatred/ darkness between the kinfolks, nevertheless only the passing away of the lovebirds has the likelihood to make a permanent change. Eventually, the families’ loathing for each other begins from a robust desire to maintain their kinfolk’s honour and pride and neither party appears proficient of overpowering the “ancient grudge” and the seething tension and complaints.

Regardless of the hatred of the Capulet’s and Montague’s, the love between  Juliet and Romeo is robust and intuitive.  Upon their first get-together, the “star-crossed lovers” seem instinctively attracted to each other and uninformed of one another’s adversary status. Romeo stresses how Juliet’s gorgeousness manifest itself from other individuals. She is a “snowy dove trooping with crows” (pp, 45). He is instantaneously courteous towards her. However, she is a Capulet, and his desire is more profound than his exaggerated display of love to Rosaline. Juliet likewise is much more saintly and emits softness and cleanliness. Romeo articulates his enthusiasm: “O she doth teach the torches to burn bright! It seems she hangs upon the cheek of the night as a rich jewel in an Ethiop’s ear” (pp 45). The information that they are from clans that have dark wish towards each other creates their desire more pressing, desperate and intense.

In the veranda scenario, Juliet and Romeo explain their profound love and dedication to each other. They immensely regret the fact that they are foes and resent the social limitations on their love for the reason that of their diverse “names”. Juliet screams in desolation, “Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo” (pp 85). Juliet denotes to the uncertainty of affection and the details that hate and love are entangled: “my only love sprung from my only hate”. She is sincerely disappointed because Romeo belongs to Montague. Nevertheless, both approve that their desire for each over overshadows their folks’ detestation.

Shakespeare recommends that the desire has the likelihood to bond the spirits of hatred and animosity that darken among the lovers’ relatives and for this matter, Lawrence Friar settles to wed  Juliet and Romeo. He trusts that it is irrational for the two lovebirds to be disjointed by their clashing families. He further assumed that the nuptial between the two clans hypothetically might resolve the directionless hostility that troubles the streets of Verona. The Prince rebukes both groups: “Three civil brawls  … have thrice disturbed the quiet of our streets” (pp 80).

The canker’d hate and  “ the malicious rage” between the folks, the loss of Mercutio and Tybalt and the anticipated wedding to Paris are entirely occasions that pursue to inject a sense of earnestness into their bond.  Similarly, the oxymoronic disparities associating to the death-love nature of their association, likewise inoculates a sense of tragedy.

Despite abhorrence,  Juliet and Romeo are romantically and intuitively attracted to one another and harbour a need to ascend above trivial complaints. Shakespeare advocates that desire is far more significant to odium and doesn’t heed to barriers and borders. Juliet’s remarks disclose her longing to “doff thy name”.

The conflicting darker powers of animosity insert a sense of earnestness into the affiliation and tip to thrill-seeking sacrifices as a manifestation of their desire.  Mercutio and Tybalt characterise the dark forces of each household that intimidate the harmony and weaken the deep love of  Juliet and Romeo. Shakespeare proposes that these damaging powers are divisive and disruptive and cause death. As a blazing Capulet, Tybalt acted a protruding responsibility in continuing the vendetta via his confrontational and ill-advised efforts to shield their clan conceit. The dramatist consciously forms disparity between Tybalt’s outraged and blazing posture and Romeo’s yearning for amity to strengthen his idea that the revulsion merely hints to division and death. This is predominantly apparent during his lethal bumping with his mirror picture, Mercutio. Mercutio sceptically proposes that Tybalt (“Good King of Cats”) is foolish and wishes him to draw his weapon, “Tybalt, you rat-catcher, will you walk” (pp 70).  Outraged after Prince Capulet’s shield of Romeo during the masked ball, Tybalt has been treating for this prospect. The spectators are conversant that he dislikes “peace” as he disgusts “hell, all Montagues, and thee.” Tybalt calculatingly intents to wound Romeo’s superiority as Mercutio offended his. His allegation to Romeo that, “thou art a villain”, might be denoting to a man of common birth, for example, a labourer, which is intentionally unpleasant and appears to give Romeo no choice than to react.

Work Cited

Shakespeare, William. Romeo and Juliet. Cambridge University Press, 2003.