More handpicked essays just for you.
Challenges faced in writing argumentative essays
Challenges faced in writing argumentative essays
Challenges faced in writing argumentative essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the play Julius Caesar by Shakespeare, Brutus and Antony both display their sides of Caesar in hopes of getting the Plebeians to support them. Mark Antony, a friend of Caesars, effectively persuades the crowd that the conspirators are traitors rather than heroes while technically keeping his promise to avoid saying anything negative about them. Antony convinced the mob that Caesar cared for the common people by manipulating the definition of the words “honorable” and “ambitious,” and using props, thereby delivering the more effective speech in the end.
Antony asks many rhetorical questions to indirectly manipulate the meaning of the term “ambitious” which also sways the crowd against Brutus and the conspirators. Initially, Brutus accuses Caesar of being ambitious to explain one of the reasons for assassinating him. He assures the people that Caesar had, “tears for his love, joy for his fortune, honor for his valor, and death for his ambition.”(3.2.29-30) Brutus clearly establishes that he believed Caesar was hungry for power; this sets the stage up for Antony to easily oppose Brutus later in order to make Brutus look bad. The meaning of ambitious here is having a thirst of power, Caesar was killed because he was claimed to be ambitious. Considering this, Antony contradicts Brutus’s claim and causes the crowd to question Caesar’s motives and Brutus’s accuracy due to his kind actions. Antony tells the people that Caesar “hath brought many captives home to Rome/whose ransoms did the general coffers fill: Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?”(3.2.97-99) Antony makes Brutus look like a liar by verifying that Caesar did good things instead of being hungry for power. He successfully changes the meaning of ambitious from a power-thirs...
... middle of paper ...
...low him even to the point that they will risk their lives to get revenge on the conspirators. The fact that Antony persuaded the people to do such things proves that Antony’s speech was more effective at reaching its goal of turning the people against the conspirators.
As a final point, Antony and Brutus both spoke at Caesar’s funeral to prove their reasoning’s to the people. Antony’s speech turned out to be the more effective one because he manipulates the words ambitious and honorable to contradict Brutus, he uses props to provide substantial evidence to the people, and his speech was more effective because it essentially persuaded the people to be on his side whereas Brutus did not convince the people of anything.
Works Cited
Shakespeare, William. “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar.” Elements of Literature: Kylene Beers. Austin: Holt, 2009. 842-963. Print.
To start off, for Mark Antony to fully manipulate the audience into supporting Caesar, he must first be able to connect with his audience. Antony does exactly
Shakespeare, William. "The Death and Life of Julius Caesar." www.shakespeare.mit.edu. N.P., n.d. Web. 22 Feb 2016. ;.
Shakespeare, William. “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar.” Elements of Literature: Kylene Beers. Austin: Holt, 2009. 842-963. Print.
The most predominate and important aspect In the play Julius Caesar, by William Shakespeare are the speeches given to the Roman citizens by Brutus and Antony, the two main charaters, following the death of Caesar. Brutus and Antony both spoke to the crowd,using the same rhetorical devices to express their thoughts. Both speakers used the three classical appeals employed in the speeches: ethos, which is an appeal to credibility; pathos, which is an appeal to the emotion of the audience; and logos, which is an appeal to the content and arrangement of the argument itself. Even though both speeches have the same structure Antony’s speech is significantly more effective than Brutus’s.
The people are essential to Antony's plan. He didn't just go and give a speech about how he felt, he knew what would come from his actions. “ I thrice presented him the crown, which he did thrice refuse” Antony is trying not to show Caesar faults, but shows how Brutus lied about Caesar being honorable, later stating honor should be made of stronger stuff . Antony is showing that when Brutus says Caesar was ambitious, he was showing that Caesar wasn't ambitious and that Brutus lied. Antony knows that if he can make Brutus seem not honorable, he can get the people to turn on the perfect
(877) in order to make the crowd feel complete and utter guilt for their betrayal and anger towards the conspirators who killed their beloved idol. Brutus and Antony’s use of Ethos, Logos, and Pathos throughout the novel are just examples of the everyday persuasion used around us daily, when reading the play it does look like one giant competition to see who is the most persuasive and influential character. Even in today’s economy, companies have to compete for the attention of consumers’ worldwide and politicians who argue their beliefs and views to millions of voters in order to get what they want, because the art of persuasion is just one big game. Works Cited Shakespeare, William. The.
In William Shakespeare's play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, two speeches are given to the people of Rome about Caesar's death. In Act 3, Scene 2 of this play Brutus and Antony both try to sway the minds of the Romans toward their views. Brutus tried to make the people believe he killed Caesar for a noble cause. Antony tried to persuade the people that the conspirators committed an act of brutality toward Caesar and were traitors. The effectiveness and ineffectiveness of both Antony's and Brutus's speech to the people are conveyed through tone and rhetorical devices.
Shakespeare, William. “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar.” Elements of Literature: Kylene Beers. Austin: Holt, 2009. 842-963. Print.
In William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, Mark Antony—a loyal friend to Julius Caesar, the former emperor of Rome—gives a speech to the Roman commoners in order to persuade them to turn against Brutus, for Brutus and the conspirators had slain Caesar. Antony’s uses rough and sharp diction, a scornful tone, and honest anecdotes in order to achieve his purpose of manipulating the common people to take his side.
Gaius Julius Caesar, commonly known as Julius Caesar, is an important figure who laid the foundation of the Roman Empire. He is one of the most famous roman ruler, Rome as ever had. He helped to establish the transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire, ended the Republic System when he was named Perpetual Dictator (44BC). And vastly created many other political and civil reforms. He was a very influential leader.
In William Shakespeare play Julius Caesar, Caesar is assassinated, and the city of Rome becomes enraged, demanding the death of the conspirators that murdered him. Brutus, one of the main assassins, talks to the mob and persuades them to understand that they are at an advantage without Caesar, the tyrant, as the dictator of Rome. He then leaves Mark Antony, who has meticulous orders to not try to pin the murder on the conspirators’ selfishness, but can speak numerous praises about his superior. Mark Antony then speaks to the persuaded crowd about Caesar’s endeavors and the benefits that Caesar gave to the kingdom, giving everything that was necessary and more. Mark Antony’s speech riles the citizens of Rome to mutiny without actually revealing his personal intentions of wishing to do so. In William Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar, Mark Antony’s speech is more persuasive that Brutus’ speech
Antony’s goal was to persuade the crowd of plebeians that the conspirators acted impetuously and Caesar did not need to be killed. He uses many rhetorical devices to strengthen his speech and gain the support of the crowd. From rhetorical questions to the use of pathos, Antony masters the art of persuasion. His speech moves the crowd from believing Brutus’ reasoning for killing Caesar, to understanding that Caesar did not have to die.
& respects the intelligence of the common people to understand a speech given in verse. Brutus's authoritative air is once again illustrated at the very opening line of his oration when he demands the attention of the people, "Romans, countrymen, and lovers, hear me for my / cause, and be silent, that you may hear. Believe me / for mine honor and have respect to mine honor, that / you may believe"(Act III, scene ii, lines 13-16). this one line, Antony uses Brutus's words to his advantage by changing them to make himself sound friendlier. By the very first word of Antony's speech, one can infer that he is about to give a humbling oration; he uses the ethical appeal to convince the people to believe in his cause rather than Brutus's. Finally, while the crowd is in awe of Brutus's raw power and booming authority, Antony uses sarcasm He is "an honorable man" (Act III, scene II, line 84) in a tone of biting mockery, therefore questioning Brutus's credibility. & nbsp; It is true that the Roman people have emotions that sway with the winds, but this is partly due to the great speaking skills of both Brutus and Mark Antony.
Antony, though he kept to his bargain, brought the audience to his side in a variety of ways. He used all three methods of persuasion to his advantage. He claimed the killers of Caesar to be honorable and noble, and in the very act of doing so turned Brutus' followers against him. This shows the true ability of Marcus Antonius, and that he is a far greater threat than the conspirators recognized. This power of words is well known, and Aristotle's three methods of persuasion live on in modern speechwriters. Ethos, logos, and pathos are just as effective in our time as in that of Shakespeare, the Roman Empire, and wherever there are people to speak and people to listen. Thus even today, this speech of Shakespeare through Antony shows the sheer impact that mere words can have.
Heller, Agnes. "Julius Caesar." The Time Is Out of Joint: Shakespeare as Philosopher of History. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2002. 311-335. Rpt. in Shakespearean Criticism. Vol. 115. Detroit: Gale, 2009. Literature Resource Center. Web. 16 Dec. 2010.