2007-05-28 00:34:04 · 6 answers · asked by NMRY 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Theater & Acting
I agree.
2007-05-28 00:47:40 · answer #1 · answered by Dimples 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't know if "fool" is strictly the correct word to define one in love, although it certainly has proven to be.
In Romeos case however, Juliette was as much in love in return. The fact that it was ill fated, primarily through external forces, was neither the fault of Romeo, or His love interest.
I'm not certain Hero defines him either although just yesterday I heard a WW2 Vet describe very succinctly what defines a hero. Those who died for a cause. In Romeos case that certainly fits, even if the cause was skewed by Love.
Good Q.
Steven Wolf
2007-05-28 01:57:43 · answer #2 · answered by DIY Doc 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, I totally agree. The affair which he was stuck in with Juliet is made complicated by his extreme dumbness. Yes, he was introduced as the love-struck hero in Shakespeare's drama, but I think he's more of an idiot than a hero because he drank the poison without actually CHECKING that Juliet is still breathing. Now the poor woman is left with the corpse of her lover. Tsk tsk.
2007-05-28 00:44:27 · answer #3 · answered by Eating Rainbows For Food 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
maybe he is your hero but not ours...i do not look at him as a hero...he is one of the main character in a play.
thats all.
he was not a fool in love either...he was just in love .
if anything
life had a play on their lives...and that is how the author says what life is all about... life is a stage, we all are the characters.the author has a say in all this....not us.
2007-05-28 00:48:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
i do
2007-05-28 00:39:03 · answer #5 · answered by charmed452 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
he was child rapist
2007-05-28 03:52:01 · answer #6 · answered by dbake 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋