Many of Shakespeare's plays explore the issue of political power. These works investigate
how political power is acquired; how it is wielded; and most importantly how it effects the
individual. Shakespeare seeks to illustrate through the tragic lives of his characters Coriolanus,
Julius Caesar, and Marcus Antony that political power is a destructive force when it is not
respected and utilized responsibly.
The character Coriolanus was a man accustomed to power. He was a great warrior skilled
in the art of physical domination and was adept at controlling thousands of men. Coriolanus was
comfortable in his position as a leader of the armies of Rome because no one questioned his
authority. In his capacity as a soldier, he gained great wealth, fame and respect. He received quite
a different reception though when he attempted to enter into the world of politics.
Coriolanus began his foray into the political arena upon his triumphant return from the
battle of Corioli. He had done many great deeds for the city of Rome and had spilt much of his
own blood in the process. Several people-including his friend, Menenius and his mother,
Volumina-believe that due to his heroic accomplishments Coriolanus should be given a position
as Consul. During his bid for consulship, Coriolanus reveals however, that he is in no way ready
or able to exercise the responsibility that comes with the attainment of political power.
Flaws in Coriolanus' character come to light which suggest that he would not excel as
leader of the people. One significant problem is that he has a great distain for the common man.
Although once loved for his victories, he is viewed as an enemy of the peo...
... middle of paper ...
...eption, Antony mistakenly takes his own life believing that Cleopatra has
already taken that final step.
Marcus Antony was unable to handle his political power because he allowed an obsession
to overtake his life. He gave up his wife, his home and his power for the love of the Queen of
Egypt, a woman who was eventually responsible for his death. Antony's lack of political
responsibility instigated war and caused the deaths of many people, including his own.
The characters of Coriolanus, Julius Caesar, and Marcus Antony are all changed in
some way by the appeal of political power. Some were corrupted while others were lost in its
intoxication. All three plays suggested that to be a politician one had tread carefully. If you
allowed the power to overtake you, it could cost you your career, your humanity or even your
life.
Julius Caesar is the leader of Rome and is seeking to become king in a matter of time. Though he is a good military strategist, he lacks knowledge in running government and is too greedy to have any concern for the peasants when he is alive. Caesar is all about conquering and power and he is afraid of nothing. Before he is murdered, he says “The things that threatened me ne’er looked but on my back. When they shall see the face of Caesar, they are vanished” (II, ii, 575). Th...
would jump at the chance to acquire that power as soon as possible, no matter
taught the acutes how to play cards and he taught them to gamble. His very
It is important to understand that Coriolanus is a soldier. He is not a politician. He is well-versed in the ...
One of Caesar’s greatest victories in battle was just after he had gained control over the lands of Bituriges, Vercingetorix. He started to lead his army to the Boii oppidum of Gorgobina, another city under his control. On the way, he stopped his troops at Vellaundunum, oppidum of the Senones, and set up siege. He did not want to leave any enemies behind him who might get in the way of the grain deliveries and supply. The Carnutes, one of Rome’s enemies, had just heard of the siege at Vellaundunum. They gathered troops to Garrison Cenabum, the Carnutes stronghold. Caesar’s army camped out right in front of the fort.
Caesar’s power in Rome was growing, and people were afraid he was going to turn Rome into a monarchy. However, Caesar did not want to be known as a king, but he was appointed dictator for life.
noble birth and he had a lot of responsibility in his kingdom. He is looked up to by most for leadership and guidance.
was very involved in the public and even helped some campaigns in his time . Over all
He was captured as a slave then taken to the gladiator arena, hopefully he would get the chance to die but was encouraged by those around him to fight on. This shows on how doomed he was when he was betrayed and responsible for not saving them on time. He starts to earn his fame and glory which started to challenges Commodus fame, after trying to get back to his army to march on Rome he betrayed and captured. Even though he would die in the arena he manage to kill Emperor Commodus and saved Rome from a tyrant. He does deserve a little praise for what he has done and prevented it from its own destruction.
Caesar presently had. Brutus is a supporter of the republic government. Brutus says, " We
...for the Romans. Besides that, he conquered Gaul (modern France) and defeated his rival Pompey in the civil war of 49-45 BC. By doing so, he managed to bring peace to Rome and also expanded Rome's provinces. Caesar proved himself as a potential leader, whom the Romans agreed after the conspirators killed him.
When a person is in power, situations arouse where they can acquire anything by lying, bribing, conning, or stealing. With these in mind anybody in power could easily become a powerful foe.
... Faith and trust in God helped him to be a leader for the people.
He defended an amazingly diverse clientele, dealing with the issue of slaves (pro Q. Roscio comoedo in 76), inheritance (pro Caecina in 69), citizenship (pro Archia in 62), and bribery (pro Cn. Plancio in 54), as well as causes such as the Catiline Conspiracy, which he attacked in four speeches in November of 63. He also countered Caesar's command in Gaul in 56 and, of course, directed the Philippics at Marc Antony in 43.(Bunson).
Some theorists believe that ‘power is everywhere: not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere… power is not an institution, nor a structure, nor possession. It is the name we give to a complex strategic situation in a particular society. (Foucault, 1990: 93) This is because power is present in each individual and in every relationship. It is defined as the ability of a group to get another group to take some form of desired action, usually by consensual power and sometimes by force. (Holmes, Hughes &Julian, 2007) There have been a number of differing views on ‘power over’ the many years in which it has been studied. Theorist such as Anthony Gidden in his works on structuration theory attempts to integrate basic structural analyses and agency-centred traditions. According to this, people are free to act, but they must also use and replicate fundamental structures of power by and through their own actions. Power is wielded and maintained by how one ‘makes a difference’ and based on their decisions and actions, if one fails to exercise power, that is to ‘make a difference’ then power is lost. (Giddens: 1984: 14) However, more recent theorists have revisited older conceptions including the power one has over another and within the decision-making processes, and power, as the ability to set specific, wanted agendas. To put it simply, power is the ability to get others to do something they wouldn’t otherwise do. In the political arena, therefore, power is the ability to make or influence decisions that other people are bound by.