Thetragedy of Julius Caesar, Rhetorical Analysis

853 Words4 Pages
Daniel Ojeda Period 2 12/8/2014 Outside Reading Essay- The Tragedy Of Julius Caesar Rhetorical Analysis William Shakespeare’s play, The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, embeds a true tragedy, and explains the causes and effects of Julius Caesar’s death, explained and portrayed by the dialogue of the characters in the play, mostly by use of rhetoric. To be more specific, in the play, after Julius Caesar’s death, two speeches are given to the commoners at Caesar’s funeral, one speech from Brutus with a purpose to justify the conspirator’s actions of assassinating Caesar and one speech from Mark Antony with a purpose to counter Brutus’ accusations of Caesar having a flawed ambition and being a tyranny to Rome. Both Brutus and Mark Antony are masters of speech and both are acknowledged experts in the art of rhetoric. Both Brutus and Mark Antony give their speeches more power and effectualness by using rhetorical appeals and devices, but the question that is not a rhetorical one is which speech has proven itself to be most effective and persuasive, and how? The commoners, the Plebeians, wish to hear Brutus’ reasons, to be “satisfied” with an explanation of the assassination from Brutus, first. To gain credibility, Brutus builds his ethos by saying, “Believe me for mine honor, and have respect to my honor, that you may believe.” (870) Brutus knows it will help his speech if his credibility is established first, thus he stating that his words are true, by his honor. Then, with a clever antithesis, Brutus gives an explanation of Caesar’s assassination telling the Plebeians, “Not that I loved Caesar less but that I loved Rome more.” (870) The antithesis shows despite the love Brutus had for Caesar, Brutus’ love for Rome required Caesar’s death. Brutus continues his speech with various rhetorical questions structured with parallelism of epimones. Brutus asks the men, “ Had

More about Thetragedy of Julius Caesar, Rhetorical Analysis

Open Document