Seneca in his play Thyestes and William Shakespeare in his play Titus Andronicus both use their central characters Atreus and Titus respectively to show how power can morally debase humans. Atreus and Titus both regard power as an excuse for murder and other horrible acts as a means to destroy as they please for their benefit. This is shown by how Atreus disgraces Thyestes by killing his sons in order to fulfill a revenge plot that goes against the god Fury. This is also shown by Titus when he sacrifices Tamora’s eldest son Alarbus for the gods and murders his own son Mutius to keep his honor. Thyestes has a central theme around how the characters relate to the dead. This is shown through Atreus’ thoughts as well as the actions of the attendant, …show more content…
messenger, and Thyestes. The attendant is an important character because he reveals Atreus’ beliefs and attitudes towards the gods. Atreus’ manipulation is best shown by his own words, “Do you think I want to be king on sufferance? Let them / suffer whatever they must and, first of all, me” (217-219). In ancient Greece, power was believed to be held in the hands of the people under democratic rule. As the sovereign, Atreus wants to rule with totalitarianism under the guise of a philosopher king. His subjects fell so well for this deceit that they were telling of his greatness with words such as: “The wonder of love exceeds our fondest hopes. The brothers have reconciled, their anger melted like metal in fire. Strangers may keep their hatred going, but brothers are bound to each other forever. It does us good to see that it can happen, restoring our faith in human kindness.” (546=553) However, Atreus’ beliefs were not the norm amongst the audience and were over-exaggerated to show them the extent of his horrific belief system. His acts are also explained through the messenger’s frantic explanation after witnessing the mutilation of Thyestes children at Atreus’ hand. Seneca is extra careful to explain Atreus’ actions, not only to help the audience come to terms with his elimination method, but to deepen the shock and contrast his actions with civility. Seneca allows the messenger to explain the views of that time period and stress the horror of the deed committed, whereas simply showing the deed doesn’t emphasize the pain of Thyestes’ reaction. Despite Thyestes having shown stoicism, he begs the gods: “O great gods! How can you not hear this? How can you stand it? I pray you all, attend. Gods of the earth, Gods of the sky, gods of the sea, see What has been done here, and not at all for my sake— For I am beyond all help or comfort—but yours, For the sake of your own honors, the sake of the world You rule, send down to us your drastic, cleansing Anger. With fire, burn away this filth!” (1069-1076) Thyestes desires divine intervention to punish Atreus’ act of maiming the dead.
He along with other characters felt that Atreus’ actions toward the dead was unjust and disrespectful towards the gods. As far as the story is concerned, it stops after the banquet scene, but some earlier foreshadowing implies how Atreus is condemned to such dishonor when the Fury tells his father, Tantalus’ ghost, “ Let there be competition / among your issue to exceed one another in guild. / Let swords be drawn on this side and that” (24-26). This shows that a father’s issues may impact the future generations. This also questions whether the future generations should obey gods that will punish them for the past kin’s …show more content…
decisions. Titus Andronicus is another example of character who cannot handle power well.
As Titus returns home with captures, he rejects kingship and elects Saturninus. He also barbarically sacrifices a Goth who is Tamora’s eldest son to appease the death of one of his sons. Tamora soon becomes the main antagonist after marrying the important political figure Saturninus. As the play continues, Titus makes several other violent decisions like killing his son who dares to try and stop one of his actions. As he becomes obsessed with violence, people start to hate him. Titus’ was mishandling his power and making himself vulnerable for attack. Another act that shows his self-centered nature is when he blames the gods for his misfortune by saying, “He doth me wrong to feed me with delays” (4.3.43). Titus hates the gods for not helping him when he is in trouble—he uses the gods to get what he want. Titus uses the gods more as a political device to assert power than he actually worships
them. Both Titus and Atreus embodied how power and leadership can have negative consequences when handled improperly. Throughout history, Rome is famous for having powerful leaders. One of the most notable leaders was Cincinnatus. As a Roman statesman, he was seen as the epitome of virtue and leadership. When the republic needed him he famously left his plow in the ground, took on the burden of dictator of Rome for two weeks, stifled the invasion, and immediately resigned when his job was done. Titus tries to be virtuous and powerful like Cincinnatus, but he is blinded by his ego and greed. As a war hero, Titus would rather die in battle and be seen by his actions, but his past caught up to him. As a selfish and ego driven hero, he is ironically destroyed by the prisoners who he captures. A fitting demise for an abusive warrior showing that violence and power does not overcome all. Both characters have flawed ways of handling power. As Atreus speaks about his disbelief in the gods, he continues to unknowingly enact the god’s wishes. This is because the Fury says to Atreus’ grandfather’s ghost, “Your grandson Atreus sits brooding now the cloudy thought that will stain the ground with blood” (59-61). The powerful god is vengeful and destructive much like the humans. Even Titus who tried his hardest to appease the gods was stuck down by his enemies. This further questions whether citizens of Rome should obey gods that will punish them for the past. These stories paint a bad picture of the gods, and makes the audience question the legitimacy of the gods. As shown in both plays, kings are frustrated and tired with the gods, which brings back the theme of kings being people also. Titus and Atreus are imperfect in different ways throughout the plays that reflect their morals. In these stories, it seems to be better to accept reality as what it is, because pushing beliefs don’t seem to end well. One of Titus’ major faults was in his belief that sacrificing people would appease mystical gods that he never met. Atreus and Titus show their hubris in different ways. Atreus is rebellious against godly power so much that he equates himself as a god, even saying “No god remains, but only myself” (896) whereas Titus is abuses people’s views of the gods to justify his own actions. This shows that the gods wanted strife. When Atreus shows his disbelief in the gods, he shows his ignorance which destroys his credibility in the eyes of those who know such as the attendant who proclaims “without honor and virtue, what is a throne” (219). When Titus kills other characters out of rage and excuses, he loses power and respect from those who had trusted him. As both characters use the gods for their own power needs, they either have or will have ample punishments awaiting them.
Strangely, regardless of the fact that Aaron immediately returns to behaving diabolically, it is noteworthy that out of all the parents in Titus Andronicus, Shakespeare portrays Aaron as the parent who sacrifices all for his child. Tamora believed herself to be wholly degraded after begging for Alarbus’ life, and she made no further sacrifices for her children. To Titus’ credit, he chopped off his hand in an effort to save two of his sons, but Aaron gave his life for the benefit of his child. Shakespeare skillfully salvages the noble family line, and the remaining Andronicus family members, mainly Lucius and his son, will continue as imperialists. Plainly, although Titus lost many sons in the war with the Goths, he did not despair over his losses.
This theme of death giving meaning to life is prevalent throughout the Odyssey. Hell is death, heaven is now, in life, in the field of time and action.
During the funeral he goes on to praise the ancestors of Athens for the inheritance from generation to generation. He describes how great Athen's charachter is and how luxurious it has become. In this way, he is able to honor the dead soldiers and most importantly what it was they fought for. He urges every citizen to become more like these soldiers, and to love their city. Just like these soldiers did, he argues that every citizen should be willing to sacrafice themselves for the sake of Athens and everyones freedom.
One of the distinguishing factors in portraying Titus centers in its origin: "Titus Andronicus [...] must be considered as an experimental play" (Bowers 118). Being Shakespeare's first attempt at tragedy, it obviously has room for error. Yet, as some critics and scholars would say, I believe there is a similar element found in all of Shakespeare's works, no matter when they were written: "Shakespeare constantly reminds us that the character's predicament and humanity is very like our own" (Barton 184). No matter what the plot is, or where he chose to set the story, Shakespeare captures a fundamental element of humanity. Within Titus Andronicus, it is undoubtedly humanity's search for revenge: "Titus Andronicus is a play of social piety, outrage, suffering, and revenge" (Barber 133). The first three elements that Barber attributes to the work are consequential to the fourth; it is the revenge and spite of Titus, Tamora, and Aaron that fuel the other three elements.
Titus Andronicus and Medea are both Greek tragic plays. They show the changes in society and the structure of Greek and Roman government. Medea portrays the role of all women in Corinth and she sheds light on the truth about corruption in Greece. Titus Andronicus is a typical war hero, he does everything to bring pride to Rome. Titus kills his son for going against him and Titus’s daughter, Lavinia is raped and her tongue is cut out and her hands cut off. The pain Lavinia encounters destroys Titus and his reputation. Civilization in Medea and Titus Andronicus is distorted by the notions of gender, monstrosity, and identification.
Throughout the play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, the audience constantly sees Brutus, an honorable man, go against his own beliefs because of men filled with hatred and jealousy. Brutus
...f his honor. When Titus allows Aaron to cut off his hand, he is letting Aaron take away his honor. By the end of the play, Titus has nothing to show of the honor he once killed for.
The main character in the play is Titus Andronicus while the antagonists are Tamora, Aaron and Saturninus. Titus is a roman hero because he has aided in defeating the Goths. On the other hand, he has lost his own sons through conflicts. In the play, he has a strong urge of revenge. Saturninus, late emperor of Rome’s son, does not obey the authority. Bassiunus is Lavinnia’s lover. Tamora is the Goth’s queen with a strong urge to revenge because her son, Alarbus, was executed. Aaron is a moor who has been given evil personification. Marcus, Titus’s brother, always defends the rights of the people. Titus’s sons include: Lucius, Quintus, Martius and Murtius. Publius is Marcus Andronicus son. Sons of Tamora are Alarbus, Larbus, Demetrious and Chiron. Lavinnia is a vey innocent girl who suffers from unpleasant offenses.
Shakespeare’s complex play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar contains several tragic heroes; a tragic hero holds high political or social esteem yet possesses an obvious character flaw. This discernible hubris undoubtedly causes the character’s demise or a severe forfeiture, which forces the character to undergo an unfeigned moment of enlightenment and shear reconciliation. Brutus, one of these tragic heroes, is a devout friend of the great Julius Caesar, that is, until he makes many execrable decisions he will soon regret; he becomes involved in a plot to kill the omniscient ruler of Rome during 44 B.C. After committing the crime, Mark Antony, an avid, passionate follower of Caesar, is left alive under Brutus’s orders to take his revenge on the villains who killed his beloved Caesar. After Antony turns a rioting Rome on him and wages war against him and the conspirators, Brutus falls by his own hand, turning the very sword he slaughtered Caesar with against himself. Brutus is unquestionably the tragic hero in this play because he has an innumerable amount of character flaws, he falls because of these flaws, and then comes to grips with them as he bleeds on the planes of Philippi.
Written one year apart from the other, one cannot fail to recognize the parallels between William Shakespeare's tragedies Julius Caesar and Hamlet. To begin, they are both stories of assassinations gone horribly wrong. Although the details of the plays are different, the two assassins (Brutus and Hamlet) provide interesting comparison. Through these two killers, Shakespeare reveals the different levels of justice; one’s personal sense of justice; others’ perception of justice; the justice of the monarchy that supports Shakespeare’s craft. Through this, the audience realizes that a just person is not always a humble one, a condition that may turn out to be a fatal flaw in the end. When a man decides to play God by taking justice into his own hands, the world can unravel much more quickly than he had ever imagined.
In the play Julius Caesar, written and preformed by William Shakespeare, there are many characters, but two, Brutus and Cassius, stood out. The play begins in Rome where a celebration of Julius Caesar's victory over the former ruler of Rome, Pompeii. The victory leads to Caesar's betrayal by his jealous companions. Senators and other high status figures are jealous of Caesar's new and growing power, while others, like Brutus, fear the tyrannical rule Caesar could enforce. The conspirators, Brutus and Cassius being the most important, assassinate Julius Caesar and Marcus Antonius, better known as Antony, and Octavius Caesar, Caesar's heir to the thrown, revenge Caesar's death. Antony convinces the Roman populous to destroy the conspirators and eventually begins a war with Cassius and Brutus' armies. Both Cassius and Brutus commit suicide to save their honor and Antony and Octavius win the war. The characterizations of Brutus and Cassius show a distinct contrast in their character traits and motives for the assassination of Julius Caesar.
The motif of ambition runs continuously throughout Julius Caesar, written by William Shakespeare, which originates in Ancient Rome and highlights the power struggles, politics and deceit of those vying for power. Ambition leads many of the characters such as Caesar, Cassius, and Brutus to a fate different from what they expected. The play revolves around Caesar, his ascent to power and his eventual loss of everything. Although ambition may lead these public officials to power, it is the same ambition that will be their downfall, ultimately resulting in the death of Julius Caesar, Cassius, and Brutus.
In his tragic trilogy, The Theban Plays, Sophocles portrays the essence of Ancient Greek life; their culture, politics, religion and the maxims that are intended to guide their daily life through the actions of the main characters, Oedipus, Creon, and Antigone. Sophocles employs the use of thematic structures that coherently affects each character uniquely, and one of the most common themes depicted in these plays is that of fate vs freewill. In the Theban trilogy, Sophocles uses a well-structured theme of fate vs freewill to establish the relationship between the Greeks and the gods, as well as to illustrate the limits of mortality.
Honor and power is what drives the conspirators to assassinate Julius Caesar in William Shakespeare's play Julius Caesar. Caesar is now the single leader of Rome, and members of the Senate have concerns that he will abuse his sole power. Therefore, they plot and accomplish the assassination of Caesar in an attempt to rebuild the balance of Rome. Rome falls into chaos with an unknown future with no central leader for the people to follow. In Act I, Scene 2, Cassius, a member of the Senate, explains to his friend, Brutus, that Caesar is not the god he makes himself out to be. Instead, he argues both he and Brutus are equal to Caesar and are just as deserving of the throne. Cassius’ speech to Brutus diminishes Caesar’s godly demeanor through
The Tragedy of Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare is an intimate portrayal of the famed assassination of Julius Caesar and the complex inner workings of the men who committed the crime. In one particularly revealing scene, two of the men closest to Caesar, one a conspirator in his murder and one his second-in command, give orations for the deceased. Despite being simple in appearance, these two speeches do much of the work in developing and exposing the two characters in question. Though both have a love for Caesar, Mark Antony's is mixed with a selfish desire for power, while Brutus' is pure in nature, brought to a screeching halt by his overpowering stoicism. These starkly-contrasted personalities influence the whole of the play, leading to its tragic-but-inevitable end.