who was responsible for the deaths of romeo and juliet

Josef Reuther

811

Who is to Blame for The Deaths of Romeo and Juliet?

            In Shakespeare’s play, “Romeo and Juliet”, the two protagonists, Romeo Montague and Juliet Capulet, are “a pair of star-crossed lovers” whose tragic death “buries their parents’ strife” In the play, several factors lead to the death of Romeo and Juliet; among these are fate, love and the rivalry between the Montague and Capulet family. The factor that is most responsible for their deaths however is the two families and their feud.

            The feud that exists between the Montagues and the Capulets made it virtually impossible for Romeo and Juliet to love on another. For ages the two families fought each other out of mere disliking for one another. “The continuance of their parents’ rage, Which, but their children’s end, naught could remove” [Prologue]. Nothing could stop the violence between the two families, but the deaths of Romeo and Juliet. “This, by his voice, should be a Montague.
Fetch me my rapier, boy. What dares the slave
Come hither, cover'd with an antic face, To fleer and scorn at our solemnity?
Now, by the stock and honour of my kin,
To strike him dead, I hold it not a sin,” as Tybalt states in Act 1 Scene 5 Line 61. Tybalt only sees Romeo as an enemy he is not capable of accepting him as a normal person. Because the families see each other as no more than enemies, this feud makes it nearly hopeless for Romeo and Juliet to carry on as lovers and in the end results in their deaths.

            Romeo and Juliet know what is at stakes if they choose to love each other and realize that it will all have to occur in secrecy. Both are also aware of how opposed to such love their parents would be. “My only love sprung from my only hate!
Too early seen unknown, and known too late!
Prodigious birth of love it is to me,
That I must love a loathed enemy,” [Act 1 Scene 5 Line 155] Juliet is devastated when she finds out that Romeo is a Montague and that it means that their love would be forbidden. Romeo reacts in a very similar way knowing just as well that the feud would prevent them from loving “O dear account! My life is my foe’s debt.” As can clearly be seen both Romeo and Juliet are very aware that merely because of an ancient feud they will not be able to be seen together and it leads them to take the risks that eventually lead to their deaths.

            One last piece of evidence that substantiates my claim that the family feud is the main factor leading to the deaths of Romeo and Juliet is that Lord and Lady Capulet force Juliet to marry Paris. “To go with Paris to Saint Peter's Church,
Or I will drag thee on a hurdle thither.
Out, you green-sickness carrion! out, you baggage!
You tallow-face!
Hang thee, young baggage! disobedient wretch!
I tell thee what: get thee to church o' Thursday,
Or never after look me in the face:
Speak not, reply not, do not answer me,” as Lord Capulet tells Juliet [Act 3 Scene 5 Line 155-160]. Juliet’s parents force her to marry Paris and threaten to banish her. This gives Juliet very little time to decide how to act. Juliet agrees to fake her death for all of Verona even though the entire plan is extremely uncertain and risky. In the end this leads to both Romeo and Juliet committing suicide, for they would rather die than not be able to love. 

            As can be seen due to the great feud that divided the Montagues and the Capulets, Romeo and Juliet ended up dead. They could see each other as no more than enemies and would never willingly accept the love between Romeo and Juliet. Both the feud and the sudden forced marriage to Paris contributed to the unfortunate deaths of the two lovers.

Should a Hated Word Be Banned

Josef Reuther

            The article “Should a Hated Word Be Banned?” by Jodi Rudoren focuses on the ever pressing and controversial issue of passing a bill “that would make it a crime to call someone a Nazi or any other slur associated with the Holocaust.” However the passing of such a bill would infringe on peoples right of free speech, making a decision on this bill a complicated one. It is wrong for a certain group of people to ban the use of a word for an entire nation and population.

            One piece of evidence that substantiates this claim is that by banning a word for an entire people you are infringing on their basic right of the freedom of speech. “The bill is the latest clash involving Israel’s insistence on being both a Jewish state and a democratic one, where free speech is a guiding principle and minority views are protected,” as the article stated. Banning these words would contradict many of the teachings and laws that Israel stands for. Additionally using the word Nazi or words related to it, as a synonym for something else would also become a crime an example of this would be Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be put in jail for the way that he compares Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the former Iranian president, to Hitler. Infringing the right of freedom of speech for an entire people is not write for the Israeli Government to do.

            Another piece of evidence that corroborates this claim about the new bill, which would ban the public use of the word Nazi and other words related to the Holocaust in Israel is that simply it has become “a response to the increasingly casual use of such terms in everything from Israeli politics to teenage trash talk as well as what they see as a rising tide of anti-Semitism around the world.” Many Israelis have become upset with the careless of Nazi related terms and feel the need to act against it. It is wrong for some Israelis to ban the use of the word for an entire population because they feel that people have become to flexible with how they use these Nazi associated terms.

            The banning of Holocaust related terms for an entire nation would be wrong for the way that it infringes on the right of the people to have freedom of speech. As can be seen there is a select group of Israelis who believe that words such as Nazi are being used in too far a “casual” way. By making the use of such words a Federal crime the government is getting awfully close to denying the Israeli people their right to the freedom of speech. This highly controversial issue will continue to become an ever-pressing topic in Israel.

Sonnet

Josef Reuther
Sonnet

Shall I compare thy to a great full moon
who's light shines bright even in the darkest place.
Jealous stars dance to your marvelous tune
you illuminate my world with such grace.
Regardless of where, you love to beam clear
your reflection glistens on the river
you are so far away yet you seem so near.
But when clouds rule the sky you become hidden.
Dark my world becomes when you are absent
To the clouds in the sky you are forbidden
However my thoughts are about you constant
You guide me when no one else seems to care
and lead my path when no one else is there.

Martin Espada

Josef Reuther

Martin Espada

                  All of Martin Espada's poems talk about discrimination in our world and try to raise awareness to this subject specifically for Latin Americans. Espada's poems talk about the injustices done to Latinos and how in some cases others are denying even their culture.

                  One piece of evidence that substantiates this claim about the discrimination found in Espada's poems is his poem called "The New Bathroom Policy at English High School." In this poem Espada focuses on a High School where a principal hears Spanish being spoken amongst boys in the bathroom and cannot understand anything besides his own name. "The boys chatter Spanish in the bathroom while the principal listens from his stall / The only word he recognizes / is his own name," as Espada writes. As a result the principal decides to abuse the power entrusted in him and bans Spanish from being spoken within the bathroom of the school. This principal is denying these Spanish boys a part of their culture and is discriminating against their race simply because it is different from his and because he cannot understand what they are saying. As can clearly be seen this poem focuses on the discrimination of Latinos and the attempt at removing a part of their culture like their language.

            Another piece of evidence that supports this claim about discrimination being featured in Espada's poems, is his poem "Revolutionary Spanish Lesson" which focuses on what Martin Espada would like to do every time his name is mispronounced and not in the authentic Spanish way. "I want to buy a toy pistol, / put on dark sunglasses,/ hijack a busload/ of Republican tourists," Espada writes. He targets Republicans, for he feels they tend to discriminate and show less kindness to Latinos. "And wait/ for the bilingual SWAT team / to helicopter overhead, / begging me / to be reasonable," Espada adds. Rather ironically the people discriminating against him have the SWAT acting as their little protective angels when he himself has no protection against discrimination. As can be seen the discrimination that Martin Espada and other Latinos face clearly frustrates him to the point where he thinks about going to such extremes.

                  One last piece of evidence that corroborates this claim about discrimination in Espada's poems is his poem called "Two Mexicanos Lynched in Santa Cruz, California, May 3, 1877" which focuses on the hanging of two Mexicans by "gringos" in 1877. "When forty gringo vigilantes / cheered the rope / that snapped two Mexicanos / into the grimacing sleep of broken necks," as Espada wrote. These Mexicans were killed for no apparent reason by whites who overpowered them. The fact that Espada uses the word gringo for whites expresses a certain dislike he has towards them.  Espada talks about the injustice and brutalities done to these Latinos merely because they looked different from the whites doing this to them.

                  Espada's poetry tries to get people to think of Latinos who are being discriminated against. Discrimination and the denying of a certain culture is a common global issue and Martin Espada's poems raise awareness to this pressing topic.

Motoral Password Pills

Josef Reuther

811

The article "A Password Pill?" found in Upfront Magazine's issue from January 13, 2014 talks about a new pill created by Motorola. This edible password vitamin, which is actually a tiny chip reacts to the acids in a persons body, which activate the chip. The chip sends signals to your computer and phone that let you in without one having to provide a password. I believe these pills can prove to be beneficial, however also could be harmful if gotten into the wrong hands.

One piece of evidence that corroborates my claim about these password pills is that having these pills is most likely very efficient and practical. According to the article "the average person logs in a password about 39 times a day, and it takes about 3.2 seconds each time." The password pill can save the average person so much time if they are able to avoid having to login a password so often. Other biometric authentication those that then your body into a password are already on the market for instance Apple's new IPhone the 5s uses ones fingerprint to log in. Other apps such as FaceCrypt use ones face to sign in. Personally I believe that password pills are very efficient forms of technology, and that when they do officially hit the market that they will be used by consumers.

Although these password pills do seem to be very efficient if they are gotten into the wrong hands it could turn such a pill into a threat. These pills have the potential to revolutionize cyber bullying if someone by accident takes the pill of another person for instance they then have the ability to log into that other persons phone, computer, all social networks, and more this ultimately gives them the power to ruin the other persons life. Personally I think that for this reason these password pills can also have negative effects on society especially amongst teenagers and younger people.

As can be seen these very practical and efficient pills, which undoubtedly would make our lives easier will most likely also lead to certain negative effect. Personally I believe these pills would be better if they would work specifically for only one person.

Iran Nuclear Agreement

Josef Reuther   

The article "What's The Deal With Iran" by upfront author Patricia Smith talks about the nuclear agreement made between the U.S. and Iran. The deal forces Iran to pause it's nuclear program for 6 months in order to allow international inspections of the nuclear facilities that are suspected of being used to build atomic weapons. In return the U.S. has agreed to ease the sanctions that have crushed Iran's economy. Although this deal is a success for the United States, Iranian commitment is questionable.

One piece of evidence that supports this claim is that although the government officials of Iran "claim the nuclear program is for peaceful purposes" critics believe that Iran "can't be trusted to follow through on their promises," as the article stated. Iran has threatened Israel on numerous occasions and Israel considers Iran an "existential threat" even more considers the deal a "historic mistake," as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said. In 1979 during the Iranian revolution radical Shiite Muslims, Iranian students overthrew the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. Since then there have always been tensions between the United States and Iran. Due to these past events the United States Government is hesitant to trust the Iranian government to follow through on it's promises.

Another piece of evidence that corroborates this claim about the trustworthiness of the Iranian Government when it comes to the agreement is that the "hard line Islamic clerics" who run Iran still detest the U.S. There are two very different forms of Iranians, one which "loves everything American and the freedom that America represents," which consists mainly of young Iranians. However the radical leaders of Iran are against the ideas of the U.S. in fact on the contrary they despise everything American. For Iran to suddenly allow the international inspection of it’s nuclear facilities almost seems too good to be true and seems unlikely.

As can be seen although Iran has agreed to allow for international inspection the commitment to this promise on the Iranian side seems questionable. Many events in the past between the United States and Iran reflect Iran as a country rather poorly. Personally I believe that if Iran is to be trusted, international inspection should only occur under great safety precautions.

Iwo Jima

Josef Reuther

811

The book Flags of Our Fathers takes place during World War II at the battle of Iwo Jima, a small island in the west Pacific Ocean. The book is written from the perspectives of the American soldiers attacking the Japanese defenders on the island. The American soldiers are depicted as very heroic and praised for their great deeds and sacrifices by individuals, however the perspective and views of the Japanese defenders is not shown and are depicted as the cowardly antagonists of the American soldiers that hide in a mountain and in caves.

            One example of is that the American soldiers are portrayed as the vengeful, brave, courageous and heroic liberators of Japan, but it is rather unclear exactly what the fighting cause is for the Japanese soldiers. There is clear background history on the causes for the American invasion of Japan, which is the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The book is also is written according to American events and follows the movements and advances of the U.S. troops rather than the actions of the Japanese soldiers. What is what like to be a Japanese soldier who were sometimes as young as 14 is not described and how month prior to the battle they had hallowed out Mount Surbachi turning it into a vast complex of catacombs is not mentioned in much detail.

           

            Another example of this is that I think it would be interesting to see and understand how the Japanese soldiers were brought to the island and how they must have been threatened if they were a mere 14 years of age at times to bring them to the island. The Japanese knew that they were greatly outnumbered against the great American forces and each Japanese soldier was instructed to kill at least 10 American soldiers before he too died in the battle. I think it would be interesting to hear and read accounts from people who knew inevitably that they would die in the few weeks to come. All this would contribute to the overall intensity and desperate fight that the Japanese would be fighting and would make them seem less like the cowards that they are portrayed as.

            The voice and perspective of the Japanese who fought on the island is absent in the books description of the battle of Iwo Jima even though it would contribute so greatly to the understanding of the Japanese initiative. I also believe that if an account from a Japanese soldier was included to here the voice of a Japanese combatant and his view it would change how little modern people tend to think of the Japanese who fought at Iwo Jima the last stand of the Japanese troops.