More handpicked essays just for you.
Short notes on Shakespeare's historical plays
Essay on Shakespeare's historical plays
Rhetorical analysis essay cdc
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
"Et tu, Brute?" (3.1.1153). The immortality of the quip is astounding, as people today who haven't even read The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, by William Shakespeare, quote Caesar's famous last words, sometimes unknowingly. In such is displayed the power of rhetoric, an attribute also revealed by the lasting effects the two different eulogies presented at Julius Caesar's funeral-of-sorts. Indeed, in presenting distinct speeches before a crowd of plebeians and Caesar's corpse, Brutus and Mark Antony change Rome's future in indubitably surviving ways: demonstrations rally in the streets of Rome, Brutus and his operation's puppeteer-of-sorts Cassius flee, and a war between those who'd avenge Caesar as true friends of Rome and those whose unquenchable …show more content…
thirst for power leads them to question everyone above and below them in society. Intriguingly, the rhetoric begins to crumble, however, and make way for the violent and perhaps barbaric Rome that followed after the events of the play. The values of each orator are communicated implicitly through employment of different rhetorical techniques: Brutus travels a detached and logical path through his speech, wishing to tempt the audience into a collective state of obedience and trust through use of governmental sapience and bureaucratic reasoning, whereas Mark Antony foremost desires to make Caesar out as a cordial human being and as a friend who was murdered under hideously inadequate pretenses. Brutus, without much poignancy, asks "Who is here so rude that would not be a Roman?" (3.2.1404-1405). Such a question goads the mob mentality into mute, agreeable conformity, as patriotism was a substantial value held by many Romans during the time, as witnessed throughout the work. In nobody is this characteristic more pronounced than in Brutus himself, who has ever desired to witness Rome led with reason and justice, and upon veritably Roman principles. It is because Brutus "loved Rome more [than Caesar]" that he assassinated him, implying that he hopes the people will gleam from his speech that he will always pursue the good of Rome in whatever he appoints for those with any control over it to do (3.2.1397). Consequently, the crowd, yet under the gauzy mob mentality, and also wooed by the impressive and intensely Roman feats of Brutus' forebears, proclaim that Brutus should be given "a statue with his ancestors" (3.2.1421). Meanwhile, during Mark Antony's speech, the suasion Mark Antony garners through repeated tugs at the collective heartstrings of his audience cements the eventual disapproval of the conspirators and thus leads to a commotion that forays into the streets of Rome with fiery determination; the plebeians present are moved to cry things like, "Revenge! About! Seek! Burn! Fire! Kill! Slay! Let not a traitor live!" upon following Mark Antony's example of valuing truth and revenge (3.2.1570-1571). If Mark Antony hadn't so strongly hinted at throwing such a tantrum, and had instead acted upon a principle of meditative reflection and of peaceful mourning, it's doubtful such a heated insurrection would have occurred. Nay, Mark Antony's values of vengeance derived from his deep-rooted friendship with Caesar lead his speech and cause the commotion that essentially exiles Brutus and Cassius from Rome, as discovered when a servant describes the two as ". . .rid like madmen through the gates of Rome" (3.2.1631). This shows that Mark Antony's indisputable lust for revenge sets up the war that occurs at the conclusion of the work, as the exiled meet with two of the Second Triumvirate to do battle. Also, Mark Antony values transparency as to how badly he wants Caesar avenged. "Poor soul, his eyes are red as fire with [weeping,]" a plebeian says during his speech, proving that Mark Antony's passion and pathos reach people and convince them to rise up in consequent scenes (3.2.1487). Juxtaposed with the orators' respective primary appeals is the format of each speech.
Brutus uses prose, perhaps showing less calculation than his words would have one think he'd want to flaunt; in understanding his speech theretofore, the divide between his masterfully premeditated words and his apparently hasty organization of said words is seemingly unintentional and perhaps even sloppy. However, such an odd combination can actually withal have the effect of causing his audience to think he conceived of his reasons on-the-fly; his use of prose can be interpreted as his attempt to appear inherently logical and innately judicial by the most brilliant faculty so as to build up an even bigger ethos in an unexpected and confounding way. And it works; consequent cries from the plebeians include, "Live, Brutus, live, live!", a quote that seems far too emotional for an audience who merely just listened to a speech involving much dispassionate logic; yes, it is the prose style of the speech that allows introspection and application to reality of the part of his audience, causing the mob to associate his more calculated claims with human values and attributes instead of those of, say, a statue (3.2.1419). In contrast, Mark Antony uses blank verse, which is fairly poetic and rhythmic; this is likely so as to provide a structure and flow that shows wherewithal and intention and provides a sense of ethos, which the words themselves seem to lack in pursuing the piercing and vivid pathos they did. It can be said that the sobbing on Mark Antony's part contributed to his speech and even bettered it; but sobs alone do no good in this sort of setting if there's no fruitful organization of them. Mark Antony's weeping before the mass of plebeians could simply result in a lump in the collective jugular anatomy of the people there; however, it is not so: because of the deliberate organization of his speech, Mark Antony is able to convert raw emotional power into neat and logical
stanzas to provide concurrent appeals to both ethos and pathos. "The evil that men do lives after them; [the] good is oft interrèd with their bones," Mark Antony orates, employing iambic pentameter (3.2.1447-1448). Rhythmically conjoining heartbeat with the heartbreak described makes for a powerful speech that uproots whichever sort of credibility Brutus was able to muster and thus galvanizes both the frustration with which the plebeians mutiny and the conviction with which Mark Antony later rides to battle in the conclusion of Julius Caesar. The use of repetition, including epimone, in each of the orations exhibits the consideration that went into the speeches and the irrefutable nature of the claims made respectively therein. Brutus wants to leave his audience without doubt that the potential of a life in bondage that the Romans faced warranted the death of the titular character. as such, he uses the mantra, "If any, speak, for him have I offended" thrice to convey the corresponding claim (3.2.1404). Interestingly, Mark Antony uses a similar method that, as he succeeded Brutus' speech, seems almost to mock Brutus. He both ironically and unironically lauds Brutus with a repeated, "Yet Brutus says he was ambitious, [and] Brutus is an honorable [man,]" so as to both build his credibility with an audience that has a recently established affinity toward Brutus and humiliate and disembowel the seemingly logical conclusions Brutus made within his own speech (3.2.1465-1466). Also, in seeing the reactions such repetition achieves, such as, " They [the conspirators] were villains, murderers. The will, read the will!", upon tempting the audience with Caesar's benevolence contained within the will he repeatedly mentions, Mark Antony is able to justify himself as reasonable, as he had previously opposed a group of conspirators some ten or more members strong; he had to receive support and fomentation for the cause he would take to the battlefield later on in the form of that given by the plebeians (3.2.1527). The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, penned by the timeless William Shakespeare, shows how differing values that surface during difficult times may lead to conflicts most brutal. Brutus ends up taking his logic with him to the grave soon thereafter, while a victorious Mark Antony survives the war waged between the two orators and their company with his notions of even postmortem friendship, companionship, and fidelity. Having resolved the dispute with intense warfare, the respective eulogies highlighted just how divisive and destructive words were becoming in Rome as the bruised pulp of rhetoric that remained began to disintegrate upon the beginning of the warfare. In such ends as that which Brutus met is displayed the costliness of sticking to a value without rhetorically being able to persuade others, and this was the greatest precursor of all: Rome would fall into a dynasty jaded with words in which despotism could not be tested by any sort of pathos and in which swords sliced through seemingly all logic and reason. Word Count: 1441
In William Shakespeare's, Julius Caesar, rhetorical devices are used throughout Decius Brutus’s speech to Caesar to persuade him to attend the senate, and ultimately meet his demise. Decius Brutus uses repetition to directly play into Caesar’s ego and convince him to show at an event he was previously very unsure of. Decius first uses repetition to make Caesar feel as if he were an irreplaceable addition to the senate. He addresses Caesar as, “most mighty Caesar…” (2.2.74) multiple times throughout his oration. The repetition of “mighty” draws Caesar’s attention away from the fact that he really must not go to the senate and instead focuses on why he must. Caesar is known to be easily persuaded by the promise of attention or rewards. Decius
Antony asks rhetorical questions and lets the audience answer for themselves. Brutus uses ethos by stating that he a noble man and that is why the people should believe him but infact Antony questions his nobility by saying what Brutus said,” Brutus is an honourable man”(III.ii.79). In a way, Antony states what Brutus states to convince the audience by using examples that Brutus is wrong. Antony himself knows what kind of man Brutus is but lets the people figure it out on their own. In addition, Brutus uses logos by expressing that fact that Caesar died because of his ambition. This argument is severely under supported because his reasons are invalid and simply observations. Antony uses “did this in Caesar seem ambitious” to question Brutus’ argument (III.ii.82). Antony gives examples backing his argument like when Caesar refused the crown thrice to prove his humbleness. The way Antony convinces the people to rebel is by using pathos. He brings the audience in by stepping down to their level and showing them the body of Caesar. While Antony talks at Caesar's funeral, he pauses because” heart us in the coffin there with Caesar “(III.ii.98). When Antony becomes emotional, he reminds the audience about what injust event happened to the much loved
Mark Antony’s speech, whose aim is to counter Brutus’ speech, enlightens the crowd on the unjust murder of Caesar. Though he never directly communicates to the crowd of his feeling towards the conspirators, Antony was able to effectively convey to the crowd, through the use of verbal irony and other stylistic devices/techniques in his speech, his true views of the assassination. Moreover, Antony was able to shrewdly emphasize his belief of the undeserved assassination of Caesar through the wide use of epiphoral and anaphoral structure in his speech. Antony emphasizes the wrongdoings of Brutus and Cassius through the ingenious use of the epistrophe along with verbal irony as he notes that “I should do Brutus wrong, and Cassius wrong” (III, ii, 125). Moreover, he stresses the importance of punishi...
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 Tragedy of Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare is a historic tragedy about the brutal murder of the Roman senator, Julius Caesar. Within the play, Caesar has two close friends—Brutus and Antony. Antony is a loyal friend, supporting Caesar and encouraging him in his climb to kingship; Brutus is a king-fearing traitor who leads the plot to murder Caesar. After Caesar is murdered, both friends make speeches—Brutus to justify his actions and Antony to passive-aggressively disprove his claims. In the speeches, they use three rhetorical literary devices: ethos, the appeal to gain the crowd’s trust; pathos, stirring the crowd’s emotions to influence behavior; and logos, the use of logic to reason with the crowd. By comparing the use of ethos, pathos, and logos in each speech and by
Shakespeare uses dramatic pathos, ethos, repetition and logos in the case of Antony to make his speech memorable in his effectiveness to sway the audience’s opinion. William’s use of Antony having the last word and subterfuge powerfully displayed a moment of literature memorable for the art of persuasion and manipulation. He veiled the true intent. The weaker written speech for Brutus had one effective point. The point that he killed Caesar for Rome. The breakdown of Brutus’s speech makes readers feel the tension and
After Julius Caesar’s death in Act III, Brutus and Marc Antony spoke out to the people at Caesar’s funeral. Both speeches by William Shakespeare, given to the Roman people by the main characters in this Act, Brutus and Antony were both ways of trying to get the people on their side. In the speeches spoken to the crowd, they used a variety of the same three classic appeals such as Logos, Ethos, and Pathos. Each speech pretty much had the same structure but one was way more effective on the crowd than the other. And I am going to explain everything put into the speeches and the outcome of who won over the Roman crowd in the end.
In his play Julius Caesar, Shakespeare employs various rhetorical strategies such as direct address, repetition, and apostrophe in Antony’s eulogy to convince the crowd into believing that Caesar was a good ruler. His excellent use of rhetoric begins before he starts his speech through the establishment of familiarity. Before Antony begins his speech, he refers to the crowd as “friends, romans, [and] countrymen” to establish a personal connection, indicating the use of direct address (3.2.82). By referring to the crowd as “friends,” Antony removes any separation between him and the audience, establishing a close bond by choice. As it came first on his list, it emphasizes the importance of his friendship with the audience as friendship implies
William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar is a tragic story of the dog and the manger. After Caesar is killed Mark Antony, a good friend of Caesar, plots to revenge his bloody death. He knows there is strength in numbers, and through a speech at Caesar's funeral, Antony plans to win the crowd of Rome and turn them against Brutus and the other conspirators. Cassius is one of the leading conspirators and is weary of Antony; Brutus is confident that there is nothing to fear, but he speaks before Antony at the funeral just to be safe. These two speeches, vastly different in message but similar in delivery, move the emotions of the people. Brutus's and Antony's speeches differ in length, have similar ways of keeping the crowd's attention, and differ in tone.
We have all tried to convince someone that we are right and another person's wrong.Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose it all depends on how strong your argument is. Other times you're even trying to win over a crowd like in a debate. Well in the tragedy Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare Antony and Brutus both give a speech to the people of Rome trying to convince them to side with either Brutus or Antony. Antony says the murder of Caesar was not justified and Brutus thinks it was. Mark Antony gave a more effective funeral speech than Brutus.
Playwright, William Shakespeare, in the play Julius Caesar, utilizes many instances of rhetorical devices through the actions and speech of Caesar's right-hand man, Mark Antony. In the given excerpt, Antony demonstrates several of those rhetorical devices such as verbal irony, sarcasm, logos, ethos, and pathos which allows him to sway the plebeians. The central purpose of Mark Antony’s funeral speech is to persuade his audience into believing that Caesar had no ill intentions while manipulating the plebeians into starting a rebellion against their new enemies, Brutus and the conspirators.
William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar is a tragedy that includes events leading to the fall of Julius Caesar, as well as the impact this has on the Roman citizens and conspirators. Following Caesar’s death, Brutus and Antony both deliver speeches in hopes of gaining supporters. Some readers believe that Brutus’ reasons for killing Caesar are more convincing due to his use of certain strategies. However, Antony’s speech is more successful since he uses a wider range of persuasion techniques and stronger supporting arguments. This information is important because it helps the readers understand how Antony and Brutus’ differences during the funeral speech can greatly impact the way people view Caesar’s assassination. Although Brutus effectively
One of these speeches, delivered by Cassius, carries the sole purpose of recruiting Brutus to aide with Caesar's assassination plot. During this speech, Cassius uses powerful emotions to try to elicit feelings of hatred towards Caesar from one of his closest friends. Another famous speech in the play, delivered by Brutus directly following the murder of Caesar, displays such powerful use of rhetoric that Brutus changes the feelings of a crowd of thousands from anger to gratitude. When Brutus speaks, he persuades the audience that the murder of their most beloved ruler actually took place to benefit them, which is no easy feat when dealing with an angry mob. Brutus speaks with such powerful emotion that the crowd knows no other way to feel, as shown here, " Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more. Had you rather Caesar were living and die all slaves, than that Caesar were dead to live freemen?" (3.2.23-25). Lastly, Mark Antony’s speech, directly following the one given by Brutus, shows perhaps the most powerful use of rhetoric in the whole play. In one monologue, Antony changes the crowd’s mind again, this time against Brutus. Without saying anything negative about any the conspirators, Antony successfully drums up an army of people ready to fight in honor of their great leader. By far the most successful
Shakespeare is no where close to modern text but, he does know how to achieve a certain purpose in writing which is used today. The play, Julius Caesar, has two very important speeches that are uttered by the characters Mark Antony and Brutus while at Caesar’s funeral. Brutus’ speech, which shows what should be his sorrow for Caesar’s death that he allowed, uses the rhetorical appeal pathos in order to get his point across. This appeal provides emotion to persuade the audience into believing the speaker. In this case, Brutus is making an effort to get the people of Rome to believe that Caesar had to die. That’s why throughout the speech, he continues to state how he is mourning the loss of his friend. There are also rhetorical strategies
The speech made by Marcus Antonius, called Antony, in Act Three, Scene Two of Julius Caesar shows that despite being considered a sportsman above all else, he is highly skilled with the art of oratory as well. In the play by William Shakespeare, this speech is made at the funeral of Caesar after he is killed by Brutus and the other conspirators. Brutus claimed earlier, in his own funeral speech, that the killing of Caesar was justified. He felt that Caesar was a threat, and too ambitious to be allowed as ruler. Much of this sentiment, however, was developed by the treacherous Cassius. Antony, on the other hand, felt that the conspirators were traitors to Rome and should be dealt with. This speech used a variety of methods to gradually bring the crowd to his side, yet maintain his side of the deal with Brutus. This deal was that he, “shall not in your funeral speech blame us...” (3.1.245) for the death of Caesar. Antony holds his end of the deal for the majority of the speech, yet by doing so convinces the crowd of Brutus' and the others' disloyalty. In many ways, this speech can be seen as the ultimate rhetoric, and it includes all three of Aristotle's methods of persuasion. This are the appeal to credibility, called ethos, the appeal to emotions, called pathos, and the appeal to logic, called logos. All three of these devices are used to great effect during the speech of Marcus Antonius.