Romeo And Juliet And 1984 Comparison

594 Words3 Pages

A conflict is always started by an intruding force. It could be hate, love, jealousy or bad decisions. In both Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare, and 1984 by George Orwell, a conflict arose that needed to be dealt with. Every conflict, must have a peacemaker, someone who does whatever it takes to keep the peace and disperse a crowd. First of all, in Romeo and Juliet the conflict that Prince Escalus had to step in to stop was first started by Sampson’s hate for all Montagues. This caused him to bite his thumb at the other servant. Biting a thumb was an extremely rude gesture similar to today's middle finger. Likewise, in 1984 Winston's hate for the Party had caused him to write rebellious things about the Party. Throughout the book Winston joined a rebellion to overthrow the Party, and has also …show more content…

In Romeo and Juliet, Prince Escalus came in and stopped the brawl with his monologue. This monologue included a threat of death if they did not stop fighting. By doing this he is trying to change the families for the better. He doesn't only stop the fight, but he also tries to make them improve at being nicer towards each other. In a like manner, one of the Party’s biggest members stepped in to stop a conflict. His name is O'Brien. O'Brien had been watching Winston for some time and found it a proper time to stop him from doing anything worse. First he caught Winston and Julia saying that they were the shadows, signifying that they were rebelling. This made Winston paralyzed with fear. Next O'Brien wanted to “fix” Winston. He tortured Winston until Winston had believed everything he wanted him to believe, and he continued until Winston loved Big Brother. In both novels the peacemakers, O'Brien, and Prince Escalus, maintained order. In order to prevent the conflict from recurring, they tried to change the citizens that had caused the conflict in the first