There is a lot of contradictory on whether Julius Caesar was a hero or a villain. In spite of the fact that he is very famous, I believe that he was a cruel dictator. If I compared all of his rights and wrongs, then his corrupt actions would overrule his fair actions. Julius Caesar does not deserve to be put up on a pedestal due to all of his immoral and greedy acts. Overall, his need for personal happiness at the expense of Rome, punishing faultless citizens, and selfishly raising the number of senate members ruined the idea of Caesar being a brave
“Rhetoric, which is the use of language to inform or persuade, is very good in shaping public opinion. We are very easily fooled by language and how it is used by others” (Comfort). This quote by Ray Comfort describes how rhetoric can be used to persuade people by words alone. Marc Antony and Brutus both used many cases of rhetoric throughout William Shakespeare's play Julius Caesar. Each of them tried their best to persuade the audience to choose their side.
Mark Antony is trying to win over the people of Rome by his very effective use of rhetoric. In his speech, his overall point is to persuade the Roman citizens that Brutus’s claim of Caesar being ambitious is not true. Antony’s use of rhetorical devices such as a rhetorical question give the people a good message. When he is telling them that Caesar brought many captives to Rome, he asks, “Did this in Caesar seem ambitious” (3.2.18). Antony’s rhetorical question was very effective since he is making the people question Brutus’s claim.
Brutus looked at the bigger picture when it comes to the population of Rome he did not care about the negatives because the positive outweighed them. Brutus said this about the him helping of the assignation of Caesar “And pity to the general wrong of Rome— As fire drives out fire, so pity pity— Hath done this deed on Caesar”. He knew the problems of helping in the assignation of Caesar, but knew that Caesar would take advantage of his power and take full control of Rome and head start communism in Rome and with Brutus
There are many similarities and differences between some of literature’s most famous works. Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare can be compared to Harper Lee’s, To Kill a Mockingbird. Both works are very well-known to most. There are obvious relationships between the two. Despite an obvious difference, that one is a play and one is a novel, they can be compared with their plot, literary devices and subjects.
Antony is using physical evidence, in the form of a will ‘created’ by Caesar, to sway the Romans to his side and even though the evidence is fake, it still is evidence to the people and is making the them ponder how someone who is said to be ambitious could be so generous therefore fostering a reason for the Romans to stir themselves up to mutiny. Antony is using direct evidence so that the plebeians, who are simple people, have an observable object that they can see so they have physical proof of Caesar’s goodness therefore proving that Antony’s usage of logos is the most effective reversing the intense hatred the had against Caesar to an absolute devotion to
In William Shakespeare's play The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet, the use of multiple literary devices makes the play interesting. Dramatic irony, which is when the audience knows more than the characters, occurs numerous times throughout the play and grabs the attention of the audience. Soliloquies, which are lengthy speeches by a character to project their thoughts and emotions to the audience, this allows the audience to be more attentive. Allusions are references by characters to well-known places, events from myths or other literature that cause the audience to be absorbed into the play. After reading this marvelous play, it is obvious that Shakespeare uses dramatic irony, allusions, and soliloquies all written in blank verse to grasp the undivided attention of the audience.
Marc Antony, tells the crowd that Caesar was not ambitious even though Brutus and the conspirators thought he was. The Romans started to wonder if Brutus was actually the one who was in control because he received more power once Caesar was dead. To compare today’s ambitious politicians to the ambitious political leaders in Julius Caesar, it is noted that both groups of people wanted more power and more authority. Brutus was already of high power in the city of Rome, but was manipulated by Cassius who wanted even more power, showing that Cassius was the ambitious one behind the murder of Caesar. An opposing argument could be that leaders are not ambitious for power, rather they are just determined to help better their country.
Dr. Seuss can be compared to a familiar play writer, William Shakespeare who wrote countless plays during his time. Shakespeare’s plays were written in his own conventional style that was trending when he was first introduced. During William Shakespeare’s life time, upper class citizens mainly spoke Latin and French which was considered classy. English was a form of language that everybody spoke but was not preferred. Shakespeare was very innovative because he successfully collaborated the English language with his own free flow writing style that made his use of English very beautiful.
The characterization of Brutus proves that he rather make decisions for what is right and not for power which influences the fall of Caesar, the conspirators following him, and the outcome of his own life. Brutus in many ways can be seen as morally right and doing the best that he can, but he can be seen as swayed. In the beginning of the poem Brutus says about Caesar that he does “love him well” but then to say that he fears “the people Choose Caesar for their king” (Shakespeare 6). When it comes to people, Brutus is loving and wants the best for them. It's a decision between morals or friends and makes that decision clear that he rather choose the right morals over having a friend in power.
Chiwetel Ejiofor performs Hamlet from Hamlet with a vigorous tone yet perfect speed, he knows how to give a professional act. Most of the actors cited a piece of text from Shakespeare and gave their reason on how it is important to their life and others. A counterclaim that is encountered with this subject may be describing how Shakespeare 's work is outdated and how the stories were just stories. These points are not important to the argument because they are not valid against the claims of how Shakespeare can give the present day a view of the past, and how he still affects many people today. In conclusion, I believe that reading Shakespeare today should still be allowed in education.