When a disaster brings death, is there always someone at fault? There are times when the disaster was pure misfortune. However, there are also times when the disaster was brought by a single person. Romeo and Juliet, a famous play by the just as famous William Shakespeare, hosts a plethora of deaths, and there is only one person to blame. The one who brought so much death and destruction was someone who brought the play into existence in the first place; that person is none other than Romeo himself for going to the fateful party and bringing Juliet’s, and many others’, demises.
To begin with, Romeo was the person who brought himself, and his companions, to the party, in which he met Juliet. Romeo was never invited to the party; Romeo lied to a servingman who could not read and said that he was on the guest list. As a result, the servingman told him that his “master is the great rich Capulet, and if [Romeo] be not of the house of Montagues, [he] pray come and crush a cup of wine” (1.2.85-88). Not only was Romeo not invited: he, and his family, was despised by the hosts of the party. At the party, Romeo met Juliet and fell in love, despite knowing that “[his] life is [his] foe’s debt” (1.5.132). The two families hated each other, …show more content…
This is a misconception. If one says that Friar Laurence is at fault for failing to deliver his letter, than Friar John is at fault because he was the one sent to deliver said letter. However, Friar John’s path to Mantua was blocked by a closed city riddled with disease. From that, Friar John is not at fault, but the town is. Even more complex, the town had no power to prevent a plague back in this era of humanity, so the town is not at fault, but the disease. The disease is a cause of nature, which officially makes nobody at fault. Thus, it is impossible for Friar Laurence to be at