Romeo and Juliet
discussion
The Craziest Thing
date
newest »
newest »
Honestly, I don't know where I stand on love anymore.
When it comes to Romeo and Juliet, I didn't see love. I saw sexual attraction mixed with teenage rebellion. Perhaps over time love could have come from their relationship, but there is no way meeting, making out, having sex, and then killing yourselves is love.
As for love itself... I just don't know. I used to always believe that EVERYONE got the generic love connection. You know, your eyes meet across a crowded room, instant connection, and then you ride of into the sunset. The end.
Of course, as I grew up I realized how much more complex it is. Granted, I'm still a teenager, so what do I know? I've never even been on a date, let alone been in love!
However, I do think that love is a big deal to everyone, whether they know it or not. If you don't have people that care about you, and love you (it doesn't necessarily have to be romantic) then what do you have? A good job, money, shiny jewelry? That life gets lonely.
I love my friends, I love my family, but romantic love is the part of life that's still pretty tricky for me. How do you know that you actually love someone, and that it isn't just sexual attraction? How do you know that you love someone because you love them, not who you think they are? There's so much guesswork involved that I'm not sure how people find it.
But when you do find it, and you have that one person in the world that just makes everything ok, who you can always count on, who's always there, who you love with all your heart... well I guess it was worth all the trouble.
When it comes to Romeo and Juliet, I didn't see love. I saw sexual attraction mixed with teenage rebellion. Perhaps over time love could have come from their relationship, but there is no way meeting, making out, having sex, and then killing yourselves is love.
As for love itself... I just don't know. I used to always believe that EVERYONE got the generic love connection. You know, your eyes meet across a crowded room, instant connection, and then you ride of into the sunset. The end.
Of course, as I grew up I realized how much more complex it is. Granted, I'm still a teenager, so what do I know? I've never even been on a date, let alone been in love!
However, I do think that love is a big deal to everyone, whether they know it or not. If you don't have people that care about you, and love you (it doesn't necessarily have to be romantic) then what do you have? A good job, money, shiny jewelry? That life gets lonely.
I love my friends, I love my family, but romantic love is the part of life that's still pretty tricky for me. How do you know that you actually love someone, and that it isn't just sexual attraction? How do you know that you love someone because you love them, not who you think they are? There's so much guesswork involved that I'm not sure how people find it.
But when you do find it, and you have that one person in the world that just makes everything ok, who you can always count on, who's always there, who you love with all your heart... well I guess it was worth all the trouble.
The English language is extremely limited in that regard - only one word for any number of concepts. You love your parents, your spouse, your children, your friends, the house where you grew up, a particular book, rain, french fries, perhaps a deity, and yet no two of those refer to the same concept. Thence arises the confusion, and I think much relationship difficulty. I think the important distinction is between loving and being in love. Loving, by my own definition, is not a feeling but a decision to do what is best for the other person (and by extension for yourself, because you lose the power to assist others if you neglect yourself).
Being in love is a feeling, and only that. Infatuation is a chemical reaction. It means nothing. Plenty of people fall in love with abusive monsters or with narcissists incapable of offering anything back. The feeling does not make that a healthy relationship. Conversely, plenty of people choose to love others, usually family members, whom they strongly dislike. There is a certain nobility in choosing to care for someone you can't stand, which I cannot see in falling head over heels for someone you might always decide to ignore tomorrow.
Infatuation can lead to real love, and a decision to love can lead to affection, but it is almost always infatuation alone that is glorified in fiction.
Love is not the least bit new. Aeneas and Dido come to mind. The difference is that in older stories, infatuation is a problem to overcome. People fall in love, do impulsive things, and end up miserable because infatuation is transitory, and they have to live with the consequences of their actions long after the feeling has passed. Romeo and Juliet don't have to live with the consequences, but they do manage to shatter their families with their 'love,' and in Shakespeare's time, most of his audience would have known what it felt like to lose a child - it was their agony that would have resonated with the audience, not the title characters' fling.
As for its success in literature, I would say it stems mostly from our own insecurity. We all want to be loved, to have someone decide to take care of us, but most of us are at least on some level afraid no one will ever make that choice. It's attractive to think that love is something automatic and involuntary, that someone out there will meet your eye across a crowded room and suddenly be unable to resist your charms. We want it, but we don't necessarily want to work at it, or we want to think that it won't feel like work. And of course, every last one of us gets lonely.
Nicole di Angelo wrote: "Honestly, I don't know where I stand on love anymore. When it comes to Romeo and Juliet, I didn't see love. I saw sexual attraction mixed with teenage rebellion. Perhaps over time love could have..."
On your first paragraph: I agree. They had an overwhelming amount of chemistry and were not mature enough to know how to control it. They raced into things. I mean, they kissed before they knew each others' names. As for them killing themselves, I believe the message was because of the vow they made to one another during the balcony scene. Since they promised they would never part after marriage or whatever, it was "written in the stars." Hence another description of the term "star-crossed lovers."
Yes, the whole "love at first sight" thing can happen through chemistry, but it is usually not that easy. There are so many factors that go into that it is an entire other matter.
I agree with you on the fact everyone wants to be loved (unless they are a psychopath or something ridiculous). Although those things are important, there is something special about the companionship of a fellow soul with yourself. (Money is not important, of course, but I am sure we would all rather be crying in a Lamborghini.)
I think you answered your own question. Romantic love is a game of guesswork because half the time you do not know what/who you are falling in love with. It is confusing. But the more aware you are and the more questions you have, it means you are serious about this person for whatever reason.
Regards to you and love! (Wow Romeo and Juliet makes everything I say sound corny.) Thanks for answering.
M.R. wrote: "The English language is extremely limited in that regard - only one word for any number of concepts. You love your parents, your spouse, your children, your friends, the house where you grew up, a ..."Gosh, your first paragraph is packed with smarts! I feel the same way about descriptive words trying to live up to feelings. (You can check out the poem "But a Poet" on my profile which deals with the same thing.)
In your second paragraph: Agreed. There are a lot of differences between nouns, verbs, and adjectives. The same word with different conjugations can have completely different concepts. An act of love, like you say, would be standing up for someone you care about. But love, the noun, the most real yet most invisible thing in the world, lives inside us and helps us act every day.
Infatuation is an interesting thing. It comes on strong but dies pretty quickly. "Loving someone you can barely stand"--this seems to be the hardest thing to do and also the dominant theme in some religions.
Infatuation seems to be glorified in everything. But what is the difference of being in love/strongly attracted to someone or just infatuated with them to an unhealthy extreme?
Wow, this paragraph changed my point of view on things. Thank you for telling me this. Perhaps I meant to say love is not a "new" concept, but just becoming less rare. Even so, who are Aeneas and Dido? (I apologize if I should know this if I am bringing up this entire topic.) I seriously wonder what would have happened if Romeo and Juliet did not kill themselves. Do you think their relationship would have sophisticated or one of them would be unfaithful? It frustrates me not to know.
Yeah, its success in literature, like you said, seems to be the hopefulness we will be reassured as much as Romeo and Juliet were when they saw each other. But true love is a lot of questions and wondering. The thing is, why do some people (including me, unfortunately) look to this play with reverence despite its horrible ending? You think it would be a warning for violent passions, but is seems to encourage falling in love more.
Overall, I think the feelings Romeo and Juliet had were too hard for them to control. If things had happened slower, then maybe they would have had a chance.
Jen wrote: "M.R. wrote: "We all want to be loved..."And there you have it. Everyone wants to be loved.
When you are born, you turn to your mother for love. As you grow, you learn to seek approval and accep..."
Yeah, A LOT of popular stuff is literature people can identify with.
Yes, I have read about the four Greek words for love but forgot them. However, words cannot describe the feelings one has, whether they are love or not. Books that come close are always popular. The ultimate goal of writing is to come close to describing the feelings one has.
Romeo and Juliet had a STRONG, and I mean, really STRONG (and I hate using the word really) infatuation. Perhaps it could have evolved into some kind of love, but it was too overwhelming for them to control, apparently. They were naive in every sense of the word.
Thanks for commenting!
Italia8989 wrote: "But what is the difference of being in love/strongly attracted to someone or just infatuated with them to an unhealthy extreme?"Generally, infatuation is based solely, or mostly, on attraction. It is a superficial, yet sometimes very intense, feeling. Love is deeper, more mature emotion based on understanding and respecting a person as a whole: flaws, strengths, scars and all. While infatuation tends to be selfish, focusing on making yourself happy; love is more concerned with making the other person happy, even if you have to sacrifice a bit of your own happiness to make it happen. Infatuation is about receiving; love is about giving and, hopefully, receiving in turn.
Romeo and Juliet's relationship was based on attraction and little more. They did not know or understand each other. Could it have morphed into love? Possibly. It is impossible to say. The truth is that most infatuations, however strong initially, usually fade in time. Sometimes it grows into love, but more often it fizzles out. "First love" is strong because it is a new and thrilling feeling. But it usually doesn't last since it is most often based on a shallow knowledge of the other person, and of yourself. How many of us truly know who we are and what we want and/or need in a partner when we are teenagers? Not many, if any at all. Also, that is an age at which we are constantly changing, our tastes, like, dislikes, desires, goals. What we want at 15 is often different than what we want at age 20, and what we want at age 20 is usually different than what we want at age 25.
Italia8989 wrote: "But if you think about it, the whole "love" thing is pretty new. Back in the day, your father (if you are a girl) would trade you in for a few mules from a man and marry you off. Parents cared for you only until you could do your own work."I would have to disagree with you a bit here. Love has always been important. Romeo and Juliet became popular because people relate to it, then and now. The fact that arranged marriages were common does not mean that people did not desire or search for love. There were some terrible parents back then, just as there are today, but in general parents have always wanted their children to be happy. Many fathers married their daughters off to the highest bidder because they wanted them to be cared for. The man proved his ability to do so by presenting a “gift” to the father. It's hard to see this as loving, since today women have the ability to make their own money and care for themselves, but back then women were totally dependent on men. If a woman married a poor man who could not provide for her, she and her children could easily starve to death, or become slaves. There were definitely some fathers who cared more about money than their daughter's happiness, but many chose men that their daughters liked, even loved. Many men chose to marry one woman over another because they loved her. Other couples grew to love each other in time. Some who were not so fortunate ran away and eloped to be with the one they loved, while others had affairs with their true love behind their spouse's back. If they did not find love in their marriages, many searched for it outside of it.
Today arranged marriages are common in many parts of the world. People in those lands will tell you that parents arrange the marriages of their children because they love them and want them to make a good match. People often marry hastily because they are infatuated with someone, not because they are in love. The parents see things that the children often do not. Namely, how compatible a couple is. The western world has villainized arranged marriages, but many people feel very favorable about it. I have spoken to a few people who are in arranged marriages and they both are very happy and satisfied with their marriage and deeply love their spouse. Arranged relationships are actually making a comeback in a way through dating websites. You may not realize it, but it is really a glorified matchmaker.
If parents didn't care for their children, the world would not be as populous as it is today. With the lack of medical knowledge and the extreme poverty that many people faced, the world was very hard on children. If their parents did not love and care for them, they would have died. Human children are one of the most defenseless creatures on the planet. Most parents remained involved in their children's lives as they grew older and had children of their own. When the parents could no longer care for themselves, the custom was for them to live with and be cared for by their children. Why would the child do so if their parents were terrible people who didn't care about them?
Romeo and Juliet was about the recklessness of young love (at least how I interpreted it). Many people can relate to it. People around the world have faced failed or doomed love. The story is timeless. The tragedy, although extreme in R&J, rings a bell of truth for most people. I think tragedy can be just as beautiful, and possibly more so, than romance. It is something that we have all faced and some, such as Romeo and Juliet, are destroyed by it. Not all physically die, some just die emotionally.I'm not really sure how to answer your question about love itself, but I will try. To say that love is just a chemical process is a shallow understanding of the human body and chemistry. We are made up of chemicals, they are a big part of who we are and why we do what we do. Basically, love turns on the motivation and reward centers of the brain, while turning off the part responsible for making decisions. We are strongly motivated to give and receive love and are rewarded for doing so (with that happy, giddy feeling), while at the same time unable to act rationally and see the consequences of our actions in regards to the person we love. That is why many people, especially the very young who are feeling it for the first time and haven't learned to control it, become reckless in love. The chemical response is the same as that for addiction. We become addicted to the person we love, and will do almost anything to be with them. Supposedly, it is also similar to insanity. So you can be literally insane with love. The truth is that we are hard-wired to want love. We need it. We all know about the studies that prove that without love babies fail to thrive. In the Bible, it states that man was made in God's image. It also says that God is love, his very essence is love. Now you may not believe in the Bible or in God (that is fine, this isn't a discussion about that, so please keep comments to yourself), but whether you do or not, the truth is that the essence of man is love, it is human nature to love. It is what motivates and drives us, and makes us happy. Why do people want loads of money? Usually it is for approval. For the respect and adoration of others. They want to be loved and feel that money is the way to get it. Others use it to fill the void that is left by the lack of love. It is impossible to be happy without love in some form. Most people I know would allow harm to come to themselves for those that they love. Be it their children, parents, romantic partner, family, or friends. Love is also the trait that we most respect and admire in others. An act of selflessness motivated by love for others can drive all but the most unfeeling to tears. By reading romances we get to be a part of someone else's journey to love. We get to daydream about the day we will fall in love, or are reminded of our own love story. It gives us hope that our day will come and renews our motivation to search for it. Love is something that we all understand and relate to. So love stories bring us together and allow us to understand each other.
Italia8989 wrote: "But what is the difference of being in love/strongly attracted to someone or just infatuated with them to an unhealthy extreme?..."I think Emma got most of what I would have said, but in response to this particular bit, I think it's important to note that attraction and infatuation are essentially the same thing. The words are usually used to indicate different intensities, but infatuation is just strong attraction, and neither is inherently unhealthy. It's just that neither on its own can form the foundation of a lasting relationship and either, if unchecked by careful consideration, can put one in positions that can cause severe emotional damage.
The problem is not that infatuation is glorified - it is a wonderful thing, and it does feel good, and it's probably something that everyone ought to experience. The problem is that infatuation is glorified in absence of commitment, especially in situations that, according to the book, are supposed to be lasting rather than just a fun summer fling. Too many couples get a happily-ever-after when, in real life, they would very shortly realize there is nothing they enjoy doing together. The story is over when they end up together (or kill themselves rather than be apart), and we never get to see them a few months down the line, when they're trying to find a solution to their first major disagreement.
Aeneas and Dido are mythological characters who received treatment in Vergil's Aeneid. Aeneas is a Trojan hero and Dido is the queen of Carthage. He makes a stop in her city, and they have a brief whirlwind romance, but he leaves to fulfill his destiny and found Rome. She had assumed they were married, since they had slept together, and is devastated and shamed when he leaves her (especially since she had sworn to be eternally celibate to honor her dead husband, which means she has broken her oath and has lost the lover for whom she broke it), and she kills herself.
The result is that, for pretty much the rest of their history, Rome and Carthage are constantly at war.
Emma wrote: "Italia8989 wrote: "But what is the difference of being in love/strongly attracted to someone or just infatuated with them to an unhealthy extreme?"Generally, infatuation is based solely, or mostl..."
Thanks for your tips. I already knew the difference in the words, but needed some in-depth clarification.
Emma wrote: "Italia8989 wrote: "But if you think about it, the whole "love" thing is pretty new. Back in the day, your father (if you are a girl) would trade you in for a few mules from a man and marry you off...."This is interesting. Thanks and sorry for my probably harsh wording--your argument obviously wins. :) I guess I just got carried away with something someone said.
About arranged marriages: Yes, I met a couple who was arranged, too who had been married for a while. They were happy and appeared to care for one another. I think part of the reason why I used to have this biased opinion about arranged marriages during the Renaissance is because every book I have read/movie degrades them like I said. The people either ran away, were unhappy with their spouse, or ended up with someone else.
Let me rephrase what I said above in my first discussion comment: I realize parents cared for their children, but like I made reference to in the previous paragraph, every book/movie I have read about things during these times were always marrying their children off as quickly as possible. I know now that this was their culture and how each generation functioned. They thought they had their children's best interests at heart, and perhaps for the time period they did.
Again, thank you for making me more open in the regards of "ancient" times. It is important to know what people did and why.
Emma wrote: "Romeo and Juliet was about the recklessness of young love (at least how I interpreted it). Many people can relate to it. People around the world have faced failed or doomed love. The story is ti..."Wow. Just wow, I love your explanation. I have my own take on the reasons but wanted some other opinions, and this soared above my expectations.
Yeah, I definitely think love is more than a chemical process in the brain. It is scientifically, but it is so much more. In the discussion above I was making reference to what someone said. I sort of got carried away because it bothered me so much. :P Love is an addiction, and being love-struck/sick can have similar affects as cocaine. It can limit decision making because it sort of turns off that particular section of the brain temporarily. I love that quote from the Bible! (Yes, I am a Bible nerd.) Yes, we are all made in God's image, God is Love, love is life, etc. So there is life inside all of us. "Coincidentally" my favorite Bible passage is the one about love Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians. Yes, the tale of Romeo and Juliet is sad but it helps us understand one another and how we all (or most of us, at least) live for the same thing: Love. :)
M.R. wrote: "Italia8989 wrote: "But what is the difference of being in love/strongly attracted to someone or just infatuated with them to an unhealthy extreme?..."I think Emma got most of what I would have sa..."
Thanks for your answers! I agree with them. I already knew the difference between the two words, but still wanted some opinionated clarification.
I think I remember hearing about the tale now that you mention it. If it is the one I am thinking of it was written before Shakespeare and he sort of based Romeo and Juliet off of it.
Nicole di Angelo wrote: "Honestly, I don't know where I stand on love anymore. When it comes to Romeo and Juliet, I didn't see love. I saw sexual attraction mixed with teenage rebellion. Perhaps over time love could have..."
This is going to sound extremely cliche, but when you taste true love for the first time, you'll know it. At first, it grabs hold to the point you can hardly breathe & it's as if your heart literally beats for the other person. Only time can reveal a person's true nature & you never ever stop learning about one another- I mean never. Flaws become apparent once you become comfortable with one another, and you accept them, because you know that the flaws are part of what makes that person who they are. No one is perfect, no one. If perfection is what you strive for, you will be disappointed everytime. We all have flaws. That's what makes us beautiful. When you fall in love, it's easy to forget about your own happiness. That's why love is work. You have to work to stay together, and if both are willing to make sacrifices and compromise with one another, if you are willing to face any situation head-on together, then love really can conquer anything. It's definitely possible to have a healthy, lasting relationship with someone you're in love with. It has to be mutual, though. Both parties have to be willing to throw their soul into it. If one of you isn't, then chances are very good that it isn't true love, and it will never last. Love conquers all & when you know, you know. Cliche, cliche-but so true. I'm living proof. :)
Sunsette wrote: "Nicole di Angelo wrote: "Honestly, I don't know where I stand on love anymore. When it comes to Romeo and Juliet, I didn't see love. I saw sexual attraction mixed with teenage rebellion. Perhaps ..."
Aw, this paragraph was beautiful. (Um, this might be weird, but I feel like I had a dream I was typing this--weird deja-vu.) I am happy to see you are "living proof." Thanks for your answer. :)
Italia8989 wrote: "I realize parents cared for their children, but like I made reference to in the previous paragraph, every book/movie I have read about things during these times were always marrying their children off as quickly as possible. I know now that this was their culture and how each generation functioned. They thought they had their children's best interests at heart, and perhaps for the time period they did."First of all, thanks for you kind comments. :) I agree that most books and movies portray that time period in the most negative light possible. I don't know why, maybe because it makes for a more interesting story? People are basically the same as they have always been, customs and culture may change, but emotions and motives don't. I'm not saying that those things you mentioned never happened, I'm sure that they did often, but no more so than there are terrible parents today. Part of the reason that people married young was because they died young. For those who survived childhood, I believe the average life expectancy was around 35. Few people lived to 60.
Sunsette wrote: "Nicole di Angelo wrote: "Honestly, I don't know where I stand on love anymore.
When it comes to Romeo and Juliet, I didn't see love. I saw sexual attraction mixed with teenage rebellion. Perhaps ..."
I'm glad that you've found that, Sunsette :). That's what everyone keeps telling me: I'll understand when I feel it. It's not that I don't believe you, I do, I just have my doubts. I've seen love not work the way that everyone expects it to, and I don't want to spin this elaborate fantasy only to be crushed in the end.
When it comes to Romeo and Juliet, I didn't see love. I saw sexual attraction mixed with teenage rebellion. Perhaps ..."
I'm glad that you've found that, Sunsette :). That's what everyone keeps telling me: I'll understand when I feel it. It's not that I don't believe you, I do, I just have my doubts. I've seen love not work the way that everyone expects it to, and I don't want to spin this elaborate fantasy only to be crushed in the end.
Italia8989 wrote: "Thanks for your answers! I agree with them. I already knew the difference between the two words, but still wanted some opinionated clarification...."I'm pretty good at being opinionated. ;D
Yes, the Aeneid was long before Shakespeare's time. He was very well-read, though, and used a lot of the classics to create his own classics.
Nicole di Angelo wrote: "Sunsette wrote: "Nicole di Angelo wrote: "Honestly, I don't know where I stand on love anymore. When it comes to Romeo and Juliet, I didn't see love. I saw sexual attraction mixed with teenage re..."
Aw, thanks! Believe me, I understand. I went through my fair share of failed relationships. When I stopped looking for it is when love finally found me. I consider myself very lucky. Never give up hope. :)
Emma wrote: "Italia8989 wrote: "I realize parents cared for their children, but like I made reference to in the previous paragraph, every book/movie I have read about things during these times were always marry..."You're welcome! :)
M.R. wrote: "Italia8989 wrote: "Thanks for your answers! I agree with them. I already knew the difference between the two words, but still wanted some opinionated clarification...."I'm pretty good at being opi..."
Yeah, people tend to criticize him for that, but part of being a writer is acknowledging others' works too and how you can improve by reading/writing things similar to them.
Hi, I have another question. (I realize I can make another topic, but this seems relevant enough.)Anyone can conclude the fact Shakespeare was foretelling us throughout Romeo and Juliet that "violent passions have violent ends." But was he trying to tell us something else about love at first sight? Was he trying to send us a message about what true love is supposed to be, or was he just emphasizing the fast-moving obsession between the couple? Did Shakespeare's own views on life/love reflect on this? Just like, "Love does not see with the eyes; therefore is winged Cupid painted blind" sends us a message, does the interactions/love-at-first sight between Romeo and Juliet give us some kind of clue about when we have found the one? Obviously Shakespeare was a human just like the rest of us (hopefully if you are reading this you are human) and did not have any knowledge we do not possess, but he was intelligent, especially for his time period.
That is it for now. Thanks if you are going to answer. Beware because I may have more questions later. :) (Something about Romeo and Juliet captures my interest more than any other piece of literature.)
That is an interesting question, Italia. Judging from what we know of Shakespeare's life, I'd say he understood a good deal about hormonal and impulsive love. Don't forget, he married a pregnant Anne Hathaway when he was only 18 years old and she was 26! That would actually be considered a bit scandalous today. I can just imagine how it was viewed in 1582 :D
Christine wrote: "That is an interesting question, Italia. Judging from what we know of Shakespeare's life, I'd say he understood a good deal about hormonal and impulsive love. Don't forget, he married a pregnant A..."Thanks for answering! Haha, every time I see that name I think of the actress Anne Hathaway.... Do you know if she was pregnant with his child? I doubt the age difference was scandalous back in 1582 because usually people married someone who was much older/younger than themselves.
From what we know, we must assume that Anne was pregnant with his child, he raised the baby as his own. I think the age difference WOULD have been scandalous because William was younger. Usually marriages were made between much older men and younger girls. (Even Queen Elizabeth was thought of as scandalous when she considered marriages to younger men for political laisons.)Anne Hathaway the actress, yes I think of her too!
Christine wrote: "From what we know, we must assume that Anne was pregnant with his child, he raised the baby as his own. I think the age difference WOULD have been scandalous because William was younger. Usually m..."Well, it certainly appears he had a complicated relationship tale of his own. True, I had a feeling this was the case.
Yes, I think it was complicated! He spent a lot of time away from his wife when he went to London. Some historians suspect he may have been bi-sexual also. I believe he understood love in many aspects.
Those are some interesting comments. If you were informed about this stuff online, do you mind sending me the link so I can read it?
Most of that information I have gathered over years of studying him, biographical information, etc. There is a great film called 'In Search of Shakespeare'. I would not normally take Wiki at face value, but a lot of what I have mentioned is actually in this article:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexualit...
Christine wrote: "Most of that information I have gathered over years of studying him, biographical information, etc. There is a great film called 'In Search of Shakespeare'. I would not normally take Wiki at face ..."Thanks for this! Wikipedia can be unreliable sometimes, but usually you can tell whether the information is true or not.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Here is mine: Everyone has the capability to love, assuming anyone who can comprehend this is at least halfway human. But if you think about it, the whole "love" thing is pretty new. Back in the day, your father (if you are a girl) would trade you in for a few mules from a man and marry you off. Parents cared for you only until you could do your own work. "Friends" were people who you made good trades with on a regular basis. I am not saying no one was in love in any sense and people did not care about each other. My point is, times were different. Anyway, love is important. It may not be rare, but it is important. It is something your mind cannot control. Love unleashes your true self, and you cannot control what is does. It holds a certain power over every individual if it is true. It changes the people and circumstances in the world. It does not matter how it works, but what it does. Even a wonderful emotion such as love can make people kill, steal, cheat, and lie. It is what happened in Romeo and Juliet. But it can also make someone care and feel, save and restore, and do the simplest yet kindest things in the world. It helps us become our true selves and brings us closer to our truer purpose. We cannot even begin to feel what real love is. It probably would be too overwhelming, and so our brain reduces it into its own formula. Love is something everyone naturally craves, and to overcome it and not feel it might seem victorious because you have gone against nature. But it is powerful, and once you start feeling it in whatever form it comes in, you can never let it go. It is what keeps the human race going. We cannot help but thrive on it. This fact, that it controls us wholly and completely, and the fact we all know this and let it, welcome it even, this makes love the big deal that it is.