In this assignment I will highlight, if I agree or disagree with the title of my assignment. I will also discuss which society conventions and rules blighted Romeo and Juliet's love, and which didn't really blight their love at all.

 and killed himself only for her to wake up and see him dead and kill herself too. So this is all affected (blighted) because of Capulet choosing her husband and the convention that father’s should choose whom their own daughters should marry.
  Capulet, Juliet’s father’s attitudes blighted Romeo and Juliet’s love for each other too because of the patrichaol power he had over his own family. He was very sexist ad caused a lot off violence within his family.        Such as the nurse who helps Juliet he speaks to her awful. This is all because of his male pride and honour, which was a very big thing in them days and sometimes, still is now. Women in Shakespeare times were expected to follow the rules imposed on them by men. For example “So you to Juliet and you go

 to bed” He also talks to the nurse with great ignorance too “peace you mumbling fool” He talks to people in his family and close to his family like they are class below him and something he as just brought in from outside on his shoe.
  The convention that is was wrong to have sex before marriage also blighted Romeo and Juliet’s love. This was all part of religion. It affected their love by making them want to get married much sooner so it would be right to have sex as they would be married. This was because they loved each other so much and wanted to show their love for each other with a sexual relationship, but couldn’t because of the convention and their religion. Religion also blighted their love as well as the convention. The convention also blighted their love because although they wanted to they knew it would be wrong a

nd they couldn’t show their love and affection for each other properly how they wanted to unless they were married. Although on the other hand one good thing did come out of this convention for Romeo and Juliet. This was the excitement of the passion the risk taking of breaking the rules and the well-known conventions. “Is motivated by passion not reason”
        The rule that the prince is in charge of Verona and that he can punish and banish people and even sometimes have them killed.  Sometimes this even happens without them having a reason to kÐÏࡱá>þÿ        6þÿÿÿþÿÿÿ5ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿer someone. For example in the story it says “steel club” will have been possible to murder someone a leg of lamb would just not be thought of. Only some one with a quick instinct with a non-exist able motive or plan would have hit someone with a leg of lamb, Mary picked up the leg of lamb just by instinct. On the other hand in complete contrast with Mary Maloney’s murder weapon. Dr Grimesby Roylott devises a complicated plan his snake comes down and the whole bell pull and vent would never have been thought of although the detectives were looking for evidence on a well thought out murder plan such as this. The plan is very well thought out and devious the weapon is also abnormal like the leg of lamb used. I think that if Sherlock Holmes was the detective for Mary Maloney’s crime she wouldn’t have got away with it. Also if Jack Noonan was the detective for Dr Grimesby Roylotts crime he might have got away with it too. This is because the two detectives area are also in complete contrast. Jack Noonan isn’t very professional he isn’t as good as a detective as Sherlock Holmes. “Oven of yours” for example he didn’t even check the oven the story shows no detail at all of how Jack Noonan searched the house. Now on the other hand Sherlock Holmes searches Dr Grimesby Roylotts house in great detail. Every little word spoke for example ‘Speckled Band’ also every clue or slight piece of evidence he examines he is very particular and professional in his work he doesn’t stop till he finds some evidence to crack the case. To do this he does this by a serious of clues some big and some small. “ Running his eye up and down the wall” “what’s in here”

  The settings in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ and the ‘Speckled Band’ are in complete contrast too. So if I were going to compare them it would be a very good comparison. The Maloney’s house is described as homely like a stereotypical house for a middle-aged couple. “Room warm and clean with clean curtains drawn” Two lamps alight” On the other hand the setting in the speckled band story is more complicated its not clean not homely in fact is sound pretty horrid “ we had no feeling of security” There is a mention of “exotic” animals and strange sounds “whistles” The setting in the ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ is not like a typical murder setting such as on a film its not stereotypical its not scary or making the reader think something is going to happen at all its peaceful really. To the complete contrast the setting in the speckled band sounds very spooky n suspicious The reader just knows that its is lead to think that Dr Grimesby roylott is the murderer but it’s a mystery of how he could have done such a thing such sneakily and left no clues (as we think before Sherlock Holmes finds them)

  The Language in the lamb to the slaughter is very simple compared to the language used in the speckled band “would fain” is an example of language from the speckled band which means would like to.  “Aperture is another word which means opening. ‘The Speckled Band’ story uses much longer complex words compared to the much shorter sentences used in the ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ The Lamb to the Slaughter’ is wrote in a way, which we are told exactly what the characters say.  “Hullo, darling” On the other hand the ‘Speckled Band’ story is narrated by Watson. It seems to be more reliable because of the omniscient narrator its an objective account. The narrator is not in the story and as nothing at all to gain by lying, as he was not there. The ‘Speckled Band’ is narrated by Watson he’s involved in the story and can’t get away from being in it. Watson also as a big interest in making Sherlock Holmes look and sound impressive which makes him bias to the subject. These two points on the stories narration shows how reliable each story is this is another difference in the stories as I compare them.

   In conclusion if I was going to compare the two murder mystery stories ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ and ‘The Speckled Band’ I would say that I find both the murder stories effective although they are very different and comparing them I see how different the two stories actually are they are different in lots of things as I have explained in my assignment there is contrast in the murders the victims the settings of the murders the detectives the language and the crime actually committed including before hand such as the motives. The two murder mysteries are a complete contrast to each other.