Contradictions in Brutus’ Character The central theme of the play ‘Julius Caesar’, authored by the celebrated dramatist William Shakespeare, is the conspiracy against Caesar, his assassination and the subsequent civil war between the pro-Caesar faction and the anti-Caesar faction, that causes much blood shed in the country. This is the precise political background which is set for the play. Caesar’s rising power and his popularity among the plebeians is of much concern to the Roman nobility. While a section of them is jealous of him, Brutus is worried that Caesar will rule the country in a tyrannical manner depriving the liberty of the subject. He is thinking of the common good and not the personal convenience.
Unlike Caesar, Brutus is able to separate completely his public life from his private life; by giving priority to matters of state, he epitomizes Roman virtue. Torn between his loyalty to Caesar and his allegiance to the state, Brutus becomes the tragic hero of the play. Julius Caesar - A great Roman general and senator recently returned to Rome in triumph after a successful military campaign. While his good friend Brutus worries that Caesar may aspire to dictatorship over the Roman republic, Caesar seems to show no such inclination, declining the crown several times. Yet while Caesar may not be unduly power-hungry, he does possess his share of flaws.
Another fault that Cicero importantly highlights in his speech is that of the misuse of friends. Cicero expresses great indignation at not only the way Verres is trying to put his friends in positions of authority but also the openness with which this is done. An example that Cicero brings up is Verres having his defending attorney, Q. Hortensius Hortalus, elected as consul for 69BC and attempting to have Q. Caecilius Niger, his ex-quaestor, as prosecuting attorney, both of which would help his case. At the election of Hortensius,
In awe of such thing as I myself. I was born free as Caesar; so were you" (I,I). His argument advances with adding in ethos by slyly stating he loves freedom and despises tyranny. It is evident to the reader that Cassius is demonstrating irony through his words. Cassius is a threat to freedom by seeking the death of Caesar.
Antony’s eulogy to the plebeians is used as a device to show Antony’s opinion of Caesar as a noble and worthy leader and contradict Brutus’s tyrannical classification. Brutus revolves his speech around Caesar’s ambitions and their damage to Rome. Contrastingly, Antony repetitively presents the rhetorical question, “Was this ambition” to the audience which refutes the core of Brutus’s argument and encourages the audience to question Brutus, helping Antony build up imagery of a faultless Caesar brutally murdered. Furthermore, Antony repetitively directs the audience towards the body of the murdered Caesar stating “what a rent the envious Casca made”. While this device may be devalued in the textual format of the play, when performed in the theatrical environment with effective props, it is highly confronting to the audience and further directs the
The online transcript of Mitt Romney’s 2012 acceptance speech, with a section open for comments, represents conflicting perspectives through internal contradictions inherent to the political speech form and the medium of production - an internet site with a comments section. The speech also reveals how the manipulation of language can represent a single perspective, countering any conflict. In this case, the singular perspective is that Romney is the candidate. The public and private persona a leader possesses is often in conflict, with the public curious to know both in order to accurately assess the character’s ability to lead. The dramatic form through which Shakespeare represents Caesar allows both the public and private representations of Caesar to be evaluated by the audience.
When the soliloquy of Cassius in Act 1 Sc. 2 begins it is evident of Cassius’ Epicurean view and his evil desires and intention to use Brutus to murder Caesar, ‘Caesar doth bear me hard, but he loves Brutus…’ the contrast apparent in Cassius’ statement exemplifies that he uses this knowledge to his advantage to coordinate who he would influence to plot against Caesar. The use of rhetorical devices in Brutus’ soliloquy ‘Shall Rome stand under one man’s awe?’ targets Brutus’ fear of Caesar’s misuse of power and dictatorship further supplementing our understanding of the influence that Cassius had implanted onto Brutus, successfully being able to justify and solidify Brutus’ will to kill Caesar. Cassius twists Brutus’ patriotism towards Rome to motivate Brutus into thinking that Caesar’s intentions for the Roman Public would be used in ways that would lead to the fall of Rome. ‘Let’s kill him boldly, but not wrathfully…carve him as a dish fit for the gods’ the use of a metaphor reveals that his intentions are not to kill Caesar out of spite but instead with regret and considers Caesar as a person of a respectful status.
The process of change can be challenging and can be achieved through a painful and erratic process to enlightenment and humility. Lear’s hubris quickly becomes apparent in the first scene. The love trial is a result of his materialistic assessment of love, demanding love in return for land, while dismissing his royal duties. Shakespeare gives Lear an imperative style, “Which of you shall doth love us most?” and his language is laden with the commands and imperious statements suited to a monarch convinced of his position and superiority. Lear’s hubris blinds him from the sycophantic “love declarations”, disguised with hyperbolic
The passage begins with a speech given by Brutus to the conspirators, followed by the debate of involving Cicero in the conspiracy, and the dilemma of whether Marc Antony should be killed along with Caesar. Shakespeare uses dialogue and various figures of speech to bring out an emotional response in the audience. Brutus’s speeches show us the power of his words and how easily they can have an influence on the rest of the conspirators. He delivers a highly effective speech on why Romans like them must not take oaths, because the thought of the future state of Rome under Caesar’s tyrannical rule must motivate them to keep their word. He states that oaths are only for cowards and feeble old people, and people who cannot be trusted for they would otherwise have broken it.
Further, Othello’s invocation of his own military triumphs might be seen as another example of Othello dangerously misordering his priorities. He seems to position his political reputation as his biggest concern, as he did in Act III, scene iii, lines 353–355, when, having decided that Desdemona does not love him, he exclaimed, “Farewell the tranquil mind, farewell content, / Farewell the plumed troop and the big wars / That make ambition virtue.” At the same time, however, Othello’s final speech does seem to restore to him somewhat the nobility that characterized him at the beginning of the play. From almost the first time he opens his mouth, Othello demonstrates—and the other characters confirm—his hypnotic eloquence when he speaks about his exploits in battle. Othello’s final speech puts us in mind of his long speech in Act I, scene iii, so that we see him, even if only for a moment, as we saw him then. This process of conflating two different times and views of Othello is similar to the rhetorical effect achieved by Othello’s dying words, where he makes his suicide seem a noble and heroic deed by conflating it with the killing of a Turk in service of the state.