Julius Caesar Analysis Essay, Research PaperAristotle was possibly the innovator of modern twenty-four hours play, morespecifically dramatic calamities.
He foremost defined what acalamity is: A play which contained hubris, poignancy and/orbathos, and the most valued component in a calamity, a tragichero. This was normally the chief character who is baronial in hisworkss, yet has one defect which causes him to fall. The tragicplants of Shakespeare were no exclusion. In the play, JuliusCaesar the reader can clearly see many of the rules of acalamity. That is all except for the tragic hero.
Ideas as towho is the tragic hero scope from Cassius to Julius Caesarhimself. The problem is all characters have stuff to turn outand confute them. However the hypothesis that Marcus Brutus isthe tragic hero is wrong. One component to a tragic hero isthe hero has merely one tragic defect, and Brutus clearly has morethan one defect in his character. The first defects in Brutuscharacter is his naivete and the premises he makes aboutother characters. Through out the full narrative these two defectsare reflected in many of his determinations and actions. A particularillustration is his position on the Roman public. Thinking all Romansare honest and baronial it is non merely wrong, but itpestilences him until the really terminal of the drama.
One caseoccurred as the plotters were run intoing. Brutus stated, Lashkar-e-taibaskill him boldly, but non wrathfully & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; This shall do ourpurpose necessary and non covetous & # 8230 ; . ( Shakespeare, JuliusCaesar, 2.1. 172 & A ; 177-178 ) . He candidly believed that allinvolved were traveling to kill Caesar for honest grounds.
Notone time did he oppugn the motivations of everyone, where, in worldBrutus likely was the merely involved for baronial grounds. Brutusdoubtless convinces the reader of his ain naivety when heprovinces, & # 8230 ; allow us bathe our custodies in Caesars blood & # 8230 ; Lashkar-e-taibasall call ^Peace, freedom, and autonomy! ! ( 3.1.
106 & A ; 110 ) Justby his enthusiasm, Brutus is non cognizant of any other motivations. He merelybelieves that, Peace, freedom, and autonomy are the lone motivations.Another illustration was during his address at Caesars funeral. & # 8230 ; nonthat I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more ( 3.2. 18-20 ) .Addressing the aristocracy of his actions and his love for Rome, Brutusguesss that the people understand him because of their equal lovefor their state.
This premise is apparent because he uses it asthe exclusive ground for killing Caesar. A ground that Brutus believes thepeople agree with, otherwise he would non utilize it to apologize such aoffense. Last that same deficiency of penetration is seen in when Brutusdeclares, & # 8230 ; I have done no more to Caesar than you shall make toBrutus ( 3.2. 28-29 ) Paraphrased he says that the people would make thesame to him if he became ambitious, as he dIdaho to Caesar for goingambitious. Yet the people barely understand him.
One citizen provesthat! when he states, Caesars better parts Shall be crowned inBrutus ( 3.2 39-40 ) . The citizen wholly misses the point Brutus isseeking to do, and blurts out a random, nescient remark. Throughoutall the naif determinations and premises Brutus still has anotherruin. A defect that is closely related, but still different.
The 2nd defect seen in Brutus is his 1 sided perceptual experience ofmany things. His perceptual experiences of attitudes, values, beliefs, andmore. This can be seen during his funeral address. Concentrating merelyon the political facets of the blackwash, he non one timeMichigans to see that Caesar was more than a representation ofthe future Rome, but a individual excessively. I slew my best lover forthe good of Rome ( 3.2. 33-34 ) says Brutus.
He dose non one timegrieve for Caesar, or demo compunction for Caesar. He innocentlyreferences merely one side of the state of affairs. This incorrectperceptual experience is so used against him n Cassius address. Cassiusmakes it kick to the audience that Brutus did non see Caesaras a individual, and hence converting the crowd against Brutus.A 2nd illustration of Brutus hapless perceptual experience was after theblackwash.
As Rome & # 8217 ; s state of affairs turned into civil war Brutusstill speaks of award and aristocracy. & # 8230 ; Did non great Juliusbleed for justness interest? ( 4.3. 19 ) , & # 8230 ; I am armed so str!ong in honestness ( 4.
3. 67 ) , our hosts are brimming, our cause is mature( 4.3. 214 ) . On and on he goes focused on what he still deems of import.
Once once more Brutus perceptual experience is wrong and world is muchdifferent. Not many still value candidly, and most know that at thosetimes, it would non assist you travel in front. Rome begins to fall, and whathopes of salvaging it make non focus on around the honest and baronial pointof position Brutus clings on to. Yet it is his defect that he is nescient ofsuch things.
One defect, that are many within Brutus.Brutus has two, possibly three, distinguishable defects in his character,and many ruins. Brutus foremost is naif, and assumes to muchabout the people of Rome. He does listen to them, but what hehears is either misinterpreted, or it is set aside because itdoes non hold with his preconceived impressions of what thepublic should be stating. All of this makes it really clear thatBrutus is non the tragic hero. Who so is the hero? As statedbefore, there is concrete grounds proving and confuting manyother characters. But so is Julius Caesar genuinely a calamity?Does non a calamity have a clear tragic hero? Cipher will of all timeknow.
But whether Julius Caesar is a calamity as most believe,or a historical history as others believe, it is a beautifulwork of art. Literature at its really best, something that willne’er be forgotten.331