The tragedy of Julius Caesar Brutus may have had a good speech, but it wasn’t even as good a speech as Antony’s. Brutus and Antony are good friends of Caesar, Brutus talks about how Caesar was ambitious and how he needed to be killed for Rome while Antony defends Caesar and tells everyone how Caesar was not ambitious. Although Brutus speaks about the reasons Caesar would be Rome’s downfall, Antony delivers the more effective speech because he tells everyone the positive side of Caesar, and speaks his heart out about him. Antony had a better speech than Brutus. Because Antony’s speech was about how Caesar wasn’t ambitious and was more effective than Brutus’s speech. Antony states, “Caesar was my friend, faithful and just to me. But Brutus …show more content…
Antony states, “When the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept; Ambition should be made of sterner stuff. Yet Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honorable man. You all did see that on the Lupercal I thrice presented him a kingly crown, which he did thrice refuse. Was this ambition?” This shows that Caesar wasn't an ambitious person, he cared about the poor, and he refused to take the crown three times. Antony states that Brutus is an honorable man called Caesar Ambitious. This answers the essay question, saying that Caesar wasn’t an ambitious person. Antony proved this by stating the positive side of …show more content…
On lines 17-23 Brutus states, “If there be any in this assembly, any dear friend of Caesar's, to him I say that Brutus' love to Caesar was no less than his. If then that friend asked why Brutus rose against Caesar, this is my answer: not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more. Would you rather that Caesar were living, and died all slaves, than that Caesar were dead, to live all free men? ” Brutus tells everyone that he rose up against his friend Caesar for Rome, Brutus didn't want anyone to be slaves under Caesar’s control. This shows that Brutus’s speech is effective by stating the reasons Caesar would be Rome's downfall. He tells everyone if they would rather be free men or slaves under Caesar’s control. This connects to the thesis because Brutus states the reasons Caesar will be Rome's downfall, and so the people decided to kill
Although both gentlemen used the same three persuasive appeals in their speeches, one was obviously more effective. Antony did a more sufficient job of getting his point across. He understood what he would have to od to win the crowd. He used the three appeals, ethos, pathos, and logos, to his advantage and evn though Brutus also used the same three appeals, his speech did not impact the Roman countrymen nearly as much as Antony. Both speeches had the same structure and used the same rhetorcial devices but Antony’s speech was much more influencial and because of that, he help build the great history that is Rome.
...rence between these speeches is obviously that they had different views. As said earlier, Brutus was trying to approach that killing Caesar was a good deed for Rome, while Antony’s view is that Caesar did not deserve to die and that the conspirators were the real enemies. They also used their rhetorical devices in different ways to state their points, persuading different people in the audience.
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.
The first and most obvious difference in the two funeral orations is their lengths. Brutus's speech is composed of 403 authoritative words; whereas Antony's speech makes an immense impact with 1097 words. Brutus is over-confident and only says what he needs to in order to get his point across. He does not expect anything more than a tear-filled eulogy from Antony, therefore shortening his explanation of Caesar's murder. Brutus is also having some regrets about his murderous deed, and he does not want to sound as if he is defending himself or his motives, simply interpreting them. Antony, on the other hand, has much more to say than Brutus anticipates. His speech is split into six lengthy sections. First, Antony counters what Brutus says by proving that Caesar was not ambitiou...
In the Tragedy of Julius Caesar, Antony’s speech is more effective than Brutus’s because Anthony uses logos, ethos, and pathos to try and rally up the crowd without breaking his promise to Brutus, saying that he wouldn’t talk bad about the conspirators. White Brutus is just trying to tell the crowd why the conspirators killed Caesar and why it would help them and all of Rome. Another reason is because Anthony knows that the crowd of common people don’t know how to think for themselves, and so he can easily manipulate them into rebelling against the conspirators. Also, Mark Anthony knows that he can get to the people because of how close he was with Caesar and how Caesar trusted him. Instead of just using emotion to get the common people to rebel against the conspirators,
...ns. This made Antony's speech more effective in the fact that he used detailed reasoning for why Caesar was not ambitious. This was why the people came to his favor in the end. The tones and rhetorical devices they used helped to capture their audience by appealing to their emotions and helping to move the views of Antony and Brutus's views across to their listeners. Comparing effectiveness and ineffectiveness of both speeches was important in determining which way the people would be swayed.
Antony, on the other hand, did show emotion and was able to persuade the crowd by his emotional speech. Both of their speeches have a different point of view, but Antony's was easier to believe considering how he felt and actually put emotion into it. Brutus' speech was very selfish and dishonorable. For example, "He would be crowned: How that might change his nature, there's the question.
Although Brutus' speech gave another side of why Caeser needed to be assassinated, Antony delivers the more effective speech because he is another side of what Caeser really is and defends Caeser. Antony slowly tried to prove Caeser wasn’t quite the ambitious man, as Brutus stated. Anthony states “I thrice presented him a kingly crown” (Antony, section 3) when he was talking about Caesers ambition. However, Caeser wasnt really
Mark Antony's funeral speech in Shakespeare's The Tragedy of Julius Caesar ultimately was more persuasive due to the evidence he gave against Marcus Brutus and for Julius Caesar by ethos, pathos, and logos. This speech was after Caesars death and was Antony's opportunity to convince the audience that Caesars death was a terrible wrong. The purpose of this speech was to question the citizens of Rome if his death really was a tragedy and to question Brutus as an "honourable and noble' man. Antony provided a by far more persuasive speech than Brutus due to his effect on ethos in the begging and middle of his expression.
them, which was his original purpose. It was Antony’s appeal to the crowds emotion that ultimately. swayed them to his side. In conclusion, both Brutus and Antony’s. speeches were very important to the drama so that their audience can
His method ends up working, and the audience begins agreeing with him more, describing him as noble, saying he should have a statue with his ancestors and that he should be crowned. Brutus is also not a very good listener and doesn’t allow anyone to have their own opinion about Caesar, calling them rude, vile and base if they are offended or upset by his speech, he wholeheartedly believes that he is doing what is right for the country, however, this is quickly disproven by Mark Antony who uses emotional appeal and rhetoric; he tells the audience that Caesar brought captives home to Rome, that he cried for the poor, and how Caesar refused to be crowned king three times. The
The Tragedy Of Julius Caesar Essay In The Tragedy of Julius Caesar William Shakespeare transcribes the assassination of Julius Caesar in ancient Rome and the following power struggle. Brutus, one of the heads of the conspiracy made the decision to classify Mark Antony, Caesar's most trusted friend, as a non-threat and not necessary to be killed. After the assassination, Brutus permits the infuriated Mark Antony to speak to the masses of Rome along his side before Julius’s funeral. Brutus believed Antony’s speech would calm the people and help back the conspirators cause to bring about a new Rome However, Anthony uses his intelligence over Brutus’s blind loyalty to steer the people in the opposite direction.
The Influence of Speech Both Brutus as well as Antony uses the power of speech in different ways to persuade the Roman people. There are multiple contrasts and similarities in their use of Logos, Ethos, and Pathos. Also, their speeches differ in how each man identified their audience.
There are a lot of similarities and differences between Brutus and Mark Antony speeches at Caesar funeral. Both speeches are very convincing and persuasive to the crowd. This essay will be about comparing and contrasting the two speeches. In my opinion I think that Mark Antony’s speech was better and more convincing.
Antony is more driven by emotions like as if he is trying to appeal to his audience, Brutus let Antony speak only to further his position in society. Brutus concerns himself with his self-image and what the public will see of him. During Brutus’ speech he praised Caesar for his leadership, his ability as a public figure. He expressed how sad he was to be forced to kill Caesar for the greater good of Rome. Both speeches were to expressed to the public the reasons for Caesar's death and how it benefited the public.