The Guilty Of Brutus In Shakespeare's Julius Caesar

390 Words1 Page

The choice between murder, or letting tyranny roam free seems to be a simple option. Most would choose to stop any authoritarian rule before it causes harm. However, it would be fair to assume that the choice grows more complex when personal relationships are involved in the matter. Like in the case of Marcus Junius Brutus. He had the choice to either kill his dear friend, or allow tyranny to take its hold on Rome. In the text of Julius Caesar, written by William Shakespeare, the dilemma of duplicity is presented to the characters. Cassius, a key conspirator, picked his solution with a considerable amount of emotion, acting upon an underlying envy for Caesar's immense power. Yet this is not the case for Brutus. “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings”, …show more content…

“I know no personal cause to spurn at him, but for the general. He would be crowned – How that might change his nature, there’s the question”, (Shakespeare 2.1 11-13). From the text, it is shown that Brutus is acting from a place of concern for the general welfare of Rome itself. His ideas of assassination are more of a reform rather than a harsh political venture. Brutus did not at all relish in the murder of Caesar; he was more willing to take his own life than Julius Caesar’s. Brutus, described as a tragic hero, has a key issue. Murder is objectively immoral, but in what context? Does it correct itself when there's a purpose or reason behind it? There is an immense effort to convince themselves, the conspirators, that what they are doing is not unethical, but the opposite. “Let’s be sacrificers, but not butchers, Caius. We all stand up against the spirit of Caesar, and in the spirit of men there is no blood”, (Shakespeare 2.1 180-185). The delicacy shown by Brutus shows a lack of desire to murder Caesar; reluctance weighing heavily on his

Open Document