Flaws of a Tragic Hero! Honor can be looked upon in different ways. In the play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, Marcus Brutus is looking and thought to be honored for his selfless actions, but Mark Antony seems to think otherwise. Antony contrasts from Brutus, which helps Brutus’ development as a tragic hero and advances the plot.
In the play Julius Caesar, there are many different speeches made by many different characters. The two that give the best examples of rhetoric are those made by Brutus and Mark Antony. They are both on two different ends of the spectrum and are completely different though. Mark Antony Is an amazing speaker, he knows how to talk to a crowd and get them to join him in his endeavors. While Brutus is the exact opposite, he is not a very good speaker and has trouble getting the people on his side.
As we all know Julius Caesar died on March 15th 44 b.c. due to him being ambushed and stabbed by his most trusted friend Brutus for being too “ambitious.” The question that I now ask is if Caesar’s death was justifiable or not. In the play, we have two different point of views from two different characters; Brutus and Antony.
The Better Speech “A speech should not be just be a sharing of information, but a sharing of yourself.” This quote by Ralph Archbold is relevant in Shakespeare's play Julius Caesar when Brutus and Antony spoke to the people of Rome, after Caesar’s death. Although Brutus was an honorable man, his speech did not get the outcome he wanted. Antony was very cunning, concise and used pathos to influence the people of Rome. Overall, Antony knew beforehand how to manipulate the crowd with his speech more than Brutus.
How does a comparison of Machiavelli’s The Prince and Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar reflect the way their particular social, cultural and historical context can influence their choice of language, forms and features and the ideas, values and attitudes? Through a comparison, the historical, cultural and social context of literature are reflected through a writer’s language forms and features, highlighting the relevance of the ideas, values and attitudes of their time. As made evident throughout the Renaissance with Niccolo Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince,” which reveals itself to be a political guide on gaining and ruling a kingdom for Lorenzo De Medici, a potential candidate for leadership of Italy. Similarly, in William Shakespeare’s ‘Julius Caesar,’
Brutus vs. Antony The death of Caesar was a tragedy spreading all around Rome. No one knew what to do; everyone was in an uproar and filled with an unbelievable amount of emotion. The people of Rome were vulnerable to the words of Brutus and Antony, being persuaded a million different ways as the influential men gave their sides of the story. Throughout the play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, Antony and Brutus use emotion and logic and reason to try to explain Caesar’s death, to the people of Rome.
In The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, by William Shakespeare, a horrendous crime took place, in Act three Scene 1. Julius Caesar was killed by the conspirators. After his murder Antony, fearing for his life sympathized with the conspirators, but he became determined to prove they were criminals. The great and “honourable” Brutus and Cassius, talk to the crowd of plebeians, to announce the death of Caesar and to justify the terrible crime. Antony gave Caesar 's funeral speech, was not involved in the murder, but he declared loyalty to the murderers, but he still remained loyal to Caesar.
In the play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar one of the main characters Caesar is killed in Scene 3 act 2.Then Brutus and Antony both give speeches about how bad they feel. Brutus gives a good speech by using all three of the rhetorical appeals to persuade the crowd to want to listen to what he say by using logos,ethos,pathos to his advantage. Brutus gives a better speech that draws the audience attention,Antony not as much. Therefor here are some very valid points on why Brutus’s speech used the Rhetorical Appeals better.
In the play Julius Caesar, Antony’s speech was more persuasive than Brutus’s speech. Antony persuaded the people of Rome not by what he said, but by how he said it. Pathos and logos were used as a means of persuasion throughout his speech. He also used lots of literary devices in his speech like irony, bandwagon, strawman, appeal to pity, and symbolism. The most common type of irony used was verbal.
Brutus and Antony make speeches for Caesar’s Funeral and out of the two Antony is the stronger speaker. This is because he uses the rhetorical strategy Pathos and on example is the following quote, “He hath brought many captives home to Rome Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill... When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept... Yet Brutus says he was ambitious; And Brutus is an honourable man”(Act III, scene ii, line 1631-1632, 1634-1635, 1637-1638).
Mark Antony Over Marcus Brutus One can see as they read through Mark Antony’s and Marcus Brutus’ speeches, that they left a major effect on the crowd at Julius Caesar’s funeral. The varied reactions out of the crowd were based on the rhetoric these two characters illustrate. They both exercised parts of ethos, pathos, and logos. Mark Antony’s speech at Caesar’s funeral had more effect on the people of Rome.