Julius Caesar Marc Antony in Shakespeare’s play, Julius Caesar was murdered by Brutus despite Brutus’s allegations of Caesar’s quest for dictatorship status and supports his argument by manipulating the people’s emotions. Antony’s purpose is for the people to mourn for their lost leader through Brutus’s lies so that they would seek revenge on him. Antony speaks in a driven but sarcastic tone for the citizens of Rome. Marc Antony persuaded the people using pathos, ethos, and logos. In regards to their leaders murder, the Romans turned against the senate, there for Antony’s speech was more persuading than Brutus’s.
Rhetorical Strategies in Julius Caesar In Julius Caesar, Antony and Brutus deliver two speeches, both of which are driven by three rhetorical devices; ethos, logos and pathos. Though both were able to use the rhetorical strategies effectively, Antony’s speech ended up above both. Antony and Brutus, Begin with establishing their credibility first. Brutus breaks into ethos by talking about his honor, he tells the plebeians to keep his honor in mind. He also lets everyone know that Caesar was “ambitious” and he had to “slew” him because of it.
He starts out by adressing them as "friends" because he wants to come to them as a friend rather than a ruler trying to get power . He then uses a false disclaimer when he says " I come to bury Caesar , not to praise him " , as he will in fact praise Caesar . Later on , he counters what brutus says by providing that Caesar was not ambitious .He repeats 'honorable' so often inregards to brutus and the others , that to the crowd it starts to mean the opposite . The crowd are swayed to him by his dramatics , His underhanded way of making a point and his compelling proof for caesar's concern "the will" . They find it easily to accept him as an emotional and sincere speaker
In Act III Scene II of Julius Caesar, Shakespeare composes essentially a war in rhetoric between the characters of Brutus and Mark Antony. Although for different purposes, both speeches given by Brutus and Mark Antony, pertaining to Caesar’s murder, contain poignant and skilled rhetoric in order to win over the citizens of Rome. Brutus bases his speech upon the appeal of ethos, being straight forward and honest with his audience, defending his ethical foundation. On the other hand, Antony’s speech is based upon the appeal of pathos and logos, delivering strong emotional and logical examples to support his argument, as well as dramatic effects with his use of striking pauses and props. Both orators use many combinations of rhetorical devices from Isocolon and Chiasmus to logical fallacies such as Ad Hominem, in order to influence the citizens of Rome into agreeing with their opinion of Caesar’s death.
The entire play is energized and wrapped around the power and outcome of persuasive strategies. Act 1, Scene 2 is just one of many excerpts that use such persuasive tactics when Cassius is persuading Brutus to take part in a conspiracy to assassinate Julius Caesar due his increasingly puffed up ego. Some of them being successful and some not: such as emotional appeal, flattery, attacks on the person, as well as the absence of loaded words. An example that proves to be quite obvious in the case of persuasive strategies is the presence of emotional appeal during this scene. Though to understand, we must first know the character of the person being persuaded while evaluating this strategy as it’s by nature a very personal oriented sort of persuasion.
They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other.” It appeared that Henry had a lot of impact on the colonist with his speech. To some, their initial reaction was that Patrick Henry had gone too far. Many saw Henry as a radical when it comes to patriotism, thus a lot of the delegates believe that armed resistance is not necessary. Yet others said that they will continue to hope for peace and made the suggestion that America’s friends in the Parliament could eventually reverse the policies. He made the point that if they are not strong today when
Shakespeare presents conflicting perspectives about the event as both an act of brutal murder and an act for the greater good of rome in Act 3 Scene 1. Shakespeare uses Brtuu’s perspective to religiously justify the act, conveyed through the highly symbolic imagery “let us bathe our hands in caesars blood up to our elbows”. This graphic action on stage is highly confronting for his audience, encouraging them to question the reasoning behind the assassination. This is immediately followed by Anotony’s soliloquy; here he is positioned on stage with caesars body, a prop which allows him to maniulate the crowd to transgress from Brutus perspective of the killing as a divine sacrifice to ac act of meaningless butchery. He undermines Brutus, conveyed through his lamenting tone “thou art the ruins of the noblest man” to further challanege the perspective that caesars thirst for power was a threat to the roman republic.
Diverse and provocative insights are created through conflicting perspectives evident in Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar” and Kennedy Miller’s “Bodyline”. “Julius Caesar” explores conflicting perspectives on power and leadership of Caesar, Brutus, and Cassius whilst “Bodyline” creates conflicting perspectives from Jardine, Larwood, Warner and Bradman on the controversial test cricket series. “Julius Caesar” centres on the assassination of the Roman Ruler Julius Caesar and the conquest of power of those that were around him. Caesar’s belief in his own power conflicting with the others is expressed for example in the opening scene of Act III. Artemidorus tries to give Caesar his scroll which would warn him of the tragedies of his existence in the Capitol, but Caesar retaliates by
Cassius exclaims to be a “insupportable and touching loss,” shows that Brutus was wrong to kill Caesar, when even Portia, believes that taking her own life is the only way out. Brutus proves that even he felt that the assassination was unjustified. Shakespeare shows this when Brutus gets into an argument with Cassius about, “we now/ contaminate our fingers with base bribes.” A reason why Brutus killed Caesar was that he was corrupting the government and gaining power. This proves that killing Caesar is not bad, because Caesar’s corrupt ways appear in Cassius. Lastly, Brutus finally realizes that the assassination wasn’t right at the end of the play.
However by the end of the soliloquy, Shakespeare has Macbeth speaking in masculine iambic pentameter to show that Macbeth has persuaded himself to kill Duncan. “Words to the heat of deeds too cold breath gives”. The quote shows this because when said in front of an audience would sound firm and sure. This shows the he has overcome the doubts and fears he had that his conscience would be always reminding him of