The Tragic End Of Romeo And Juliet Was The Result Human Action Not Fate As The Prologue Suggests.

The prologue foretells the death of the star-cross’d lovers suggesting that Romeo and Juliet’s death was the result of fate but in fact, the unfortunate lovers’ lives came to an end as the result of human action and its consequences. One action leads to another, resulting into more havoc, chaos and also misunderstanding.

“A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life;” prologue L6.

In Line 6, Romeo and Juliet was referred to as star-crossed lovers, suggest they have been defeated by stars/ fate. One example that contradicts the theory that Romeo and Juliet met their end because of fate is the role of Friar Lawrence. Although his actions were intentionally good, it caused much pain for the other characters in the play.

Friar Lawrence plays a huge part in the tragic deaths of the teenagers. He offers his help to Juliet, thinking he maybe could “spy a kind of hope” (Act 4, sc i, ll 68). He offered her poison to fake her death which solves her fear of marrying Paris. He did not take careful consideration of the chances that things will not turn out the way he expected. Friar Lawrence entrusted a friar (who was unaware of the urgency) to deliver the letter. If Friar Lawrence had thought about what would happen if Romeo didn’t receive the message in time, he probably would have taken better precautions. It is very hard to argue that this confusion and misunderstanding contributing to the tragic end of Romeo and Juliet this was вЂ?destined’ when it was the result of Friar Lawrence’s unwise decisions.

Another example of human actions controlling the plot is Juliet Capulet. Juliet needs help to solve all her problems as if she has trouble thinking of a sensible solution. She makes hurried decisions and seems to view life in a pessimistic way when trouble comes her way. When she sought the