English
Home > English > Advanced > Module C: Representation and Text > Elective 1: Conflicting Perspectives > Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jedibfa/5067647765/ 
Julius Caesar
by William Shakespeare
Materials written by Colleen Walles FTCL, BA, Dip Ed, MA.
Introduction
Approaches to Julius Caesar
Context, issues and representation
Relationships in Julius Caesar
Characterisation: ‘round’ characters
Characterisation: ‘flat’ characters
Imagery, symbols and allusions
Structuring responses and synthesing related texts
Notes on technique
Character analysis sheets
Resources
Introduction to Advanced English: Module C – Representation and Text
Module C – Representation and Text – ‘Conflicting Perspectives’ develops your ability to ‘explore various representations of events, personalities or situations.’ It also requires you to ’evaluate how the medium of production, textual form, perspective and choice of language influence meaning’ ( English Stage 6 Syllabus , p 52).
All the texts in this module contain a variety of conflicting perspectives that require students to develop their understanding of the concept through research into the context of the text, the composer’s context and the assumed audience. This study includes a variety of related texts from a range of genres and media (English Stage 6 Syllabus , p 52). Students should also research the context of the text, the composer’s context and the assumed audience.
The rubric in the Prescriptions is also important and must be reflected in your analytical responses to assessment tasks and the HSC, specifically your analysis of how the choice of textual forms, features, and language shape meaning and influence responses (p. 22. English Stage 6 Prescriptions 2009-2014)
Your study of Julius Caesar will provide insights into the relationship between representation and meaning in Caesar’s Rome, Shakespeare’s England and our own world. Consider how Shakespeare’s purpose and audience have influenced the textual forms and media of production. Also consider the extent to which choices for textual forms and the media of production by Shakespeare and the composers of related texts have shaped your response to the conflicting perspectives of contemporary events, situations and personalities in the texts.
It is essential that you understand how Shakespeare’s representation of conflicting perspectives in Julius Caesar include other key characters, events and situations, all of which were influenced by the context of England under the Tudor reign. The study also requires you to understand the influence of the dynamics of the thrust stage and the genre of tragedy.
Related Texts
Remember when you study other composer’s representation of events, personalities and situations that you need to evaluate how the different contexts, audiences and media have influenced these representations.
This study of a wide variety of related texts is another important aspect of Module C – Conflicting Perspectives. You need to read and view other texts that represent conflicting perspective to develop your ability to create original analytical compositions (p.89 Stage 6 English Syllabus).
All of the texts set for study represent the concerns and hopes of their composers and their social and cultural contexts. It is helpful to remember this when carefully selecting and structuring representations of appropriate events, situations and personalities into a convincing and informed argument in response to HSC questions.
In your own research remember the texts present the composer’s perspective and therefore it is always important to evaluate and analyse the information provided even in the light of conflicting or withheld information.
In your study you will need to evaluate:
- How the composer represents conflicting perspectives of events, situations and personalities through the use of the chosen media.
- The influence of the context in which the text is set and composed on the form including textual features, and values reflected in the text.
- How the composer’s purpose and the form and content of the text was influenced by considerations of the anticipated responders.
Mind Map of approaches to Julius Caesar
Some Conflicting Perspectives in Julius Caesar
Conflict in or between:
- The political and ideological agendas; the old Republican tradition which values honour, duty, stoicism and reason and the emerging Empire which values personal ambition and the divine rights of rulers.
- Freedom and equality or tyranny.
- The influence of the past and the ramifications of the present for the future.
- Private and public loyalties.
- Revelation and concealment – honesty and duplicity.
- Privileged ideas and perspectives – honour, loyalty, freedom, love, duty.
- Contexts – historical, political and cultural.
- Voice – sense of person, point of view.
- The value of rhetoric.
- The influence of supernatural.
- Symbolic use of imagery – blood, fire/spirit, metal/weapons, animals.
Note: Decisions relating to structure, language and media made by composers are designed to best reflect the concerns of their context and their authorial intention.
Exercise
Mind Maps are a useful first step in establishing the relationships between the texts and developing your understanding of the functions of the composer’s choices in representation. Create
- a mind map for each act to reflect shifts in power and conflicting perspectives
- a mind map in which you develop links between Julius Caesar and your related texts.
Context, issues and representation
The term tragedy is used to define a literary type or class, and during the Renaissance the rules were clearly defined and influenced by classical Greek and Roman tragedy. It was a genre of drama that represented ‘the disasters that befell human beings of title, power and position’ (p.705. A Dictionary of Literary Terms. J.A. Cuddon)
These personalities were characterised by intelligence, honour, passion and
nobility. All these qualities describe Julius Caesar and Brutus, both of whom are unable to escape their fate, bringing about their own destruction or having it inflicted on them.
Source
Shakespeare relied on Thomas North’s translation of Plutarch’s Lives for historical events and characters in Julius Caesar. In Shakespeare’s play Brutus and Caesar are equally noble and driven by their love of duty and the Roman people.
Written and first performed in 1599, Shakespeare engages the audience through characters who appealed to the Elizabethans who also valued honour and valour. Shakespeare’s characterisations of Brutus, Caesar, Antony, Cassius and Octavius resembled Elizabethan values more closely than those Plutarch represented as the Roman valuing of virtus. This valour is shown to be open to interpretation as when in Act 1, Sc 1, Marullus confronts the jubilant plebeians with the rhetorical question ‘What conquest brings he home?’ equating valour with military glory and conquests.
In this way, Shakespeare foreshadows the debate about valour from the opening scene. The value of valour is represented as depending on the value of the victim. Marullus reminds the citizens that Pompey was a military hero like Caesar and had also been feted as their hero in a similar fashion. Marulllus questions where their loyalty and love for Pompey is now which foreshadows their shifting loyalty to Caesar, Brutus and Antony.
Elizabethan England and audiences
These conflicting representations of courage, honour and valour resonated with the Elizabethan audience who were divided by a similar ideological debate under the rule of a female monarch. Therefore, Shakespeare’s Caesar is all too human. He is prone to deafness, the falling sickness and fever. The conspirators, represented by Cassius (Act 1 Sc 2 ll. 89 – 161), judged him unfit to rule. However, Shakespeare represents Caesar’s spirit as immortal by representing it as his ghost and by his influence on Antony and Octavius. (http://www.hull.ac.uk/renforum/v5no2.giddens.htm )
Representation of political scene and religious ritual
Religious ritual and ceremony are significant aspects of Shakespeare’s representation of the political scene in Rome. The religious significance of the ritual anticipation of Caesar’s triumphant procession into Rome is timed to coincide with the festival of the Lupercal which is symbolic of fertility. Here the political agenda is being advanced by association; the mob associates Caesar with plenty and triumph. This is why the tribunes opposed to Imperialism attempt to sabotage the symbols of triumph, dismantling the crowning of Caesar’s statues and dispersing the crowds in Act 1 Sc 1.
Humanising leaders and heroes – engaging the audience
Shakespeare engages the audience in the fate of both Brutus and Caesar through presenting them as very real human beings despite their social and political stature. In parallel scenes in their homes with their wives, in Act 2 Sc 1 and Act 2 Sc 2 respectively, they are both shown to be loving husbands. Both are troubled to sleeplessness due to the unrest in Rome and both are susceptible to flattery.
It is also important to consider Shakespeare’s treatment of the plebeians who represent a significant force in the balance of power during all three of their appearances, Act 1 Sc 1, Act 111 and Act V. Everyone is shown to be susceptible to particular representations of freedom, justice and loyalty.
Representations of conflicting ideologies
Honour was another significant aspect of nobility in Caesar’s Rome and Antony’s ironic repetition of ‘honourable men’ in Act 3 Sc 2 with reference to the conspirators and specifically Brutus is an effective, reductive, satiric device familiar to the Elizabethan audience. The Elizabethans, like the Romans, valued bravery and warlike masculinity in militaristic exploits in their leaders and Antony reminds the plebeians of this in his funeral oration. He suggests they now stand to lose both the spoils from Caesar’s military triumphs and their honour as a dominant military force under the rule of the pacific Brutus and the conspirators. This concern reflected the political tensions in England under a female ruler.
Shifts in political power systems and weakening of the aristocracy
However, the development of the plot itself and developments in the characterisation of Brutus and Cassius do not bear out these representations. Giddens argues that Brutus too is a victim of the ideology that militaristic might and valour are mutually dependent. The battle between the conspirators and Octavius reveals Brutus and Cassius redefine their status and future reputations for ’the most boldest and bravest hearts of Rome’ (Act 111 Sc 1) sentiments that resonated with Elizabethan aristocrats who sought to distinguish themselves under a monarch that favoured politics before warfare. A conflicting perspective of Antony too is represented in Act 1V where he challenges Octavius’ valuing of honour. Antony clearly sees that ‘de-emphasising valour as the foundation of honour’
http://www.hull.ac.uk/renforum/v5no2/giddens.htm
Relationships in Julius Caesar
Note: All political dominance depends on winning the support and loyalty of the citizens.
Shakespeare’s context and Caesar’s Rome
Julius Caesar reflects the concerns of the historical and socio–political context of the late Republican era in Rome. The value of noble breeding had already waned as seen in the resentment motivating the conspirators to challenge Caesar’s authority. It is also represented by the arrogant tone adopted by the Tribunes when they challenge and dismiss the citizens in Act 1 Sc1 although they are subjected to the witticisms of the plebeians.
The perspective of Brutus and Cassius is shown to be pro Republican Rome and anti endowing an all too human Julius Caesar with seemingly unlimited power. They consider themselves to be pro-democracy and anti-tyranny which are dominant themes in the play.
Shakespeare contrasts the motivation and perspectives of the two men who both claim to be motivated by love for Republican Rome. Cassius is represented as motivated by baser motives; personal ambition and jealousy. The conspirators belong to the group of optimates among the Patricians determined to retain the status quo and their significant privileges. They represent Caesar as a potential tyrant and enemy of freedom. However, Caesar and Antony represent the perspective of the populares and consider that they pursue justice for the poor including land and money. This is clearly articulated in the sentiments Antony professes during the funeral oration and the promise that Caesar’s will would benefit the people by providing them with a share of his private land and a payment of seventy five drachmas (Act 3 Sc 3.ll.248). Caesar’s power, like Antony’s after him was the result of his popularity with the people as established in Act 1. http://www.leithart.com./archives/000791.php
Power of the people
Significantly, not only Caesar and Antony rely on the love of the people to obtain power, so too do the conspirators. Although the plebeians may be motivated by misguided loyalty, money and land, the central conflict represents the two conflicting ideologies. In Act 1 Cassius seeks to involve Brutus in the conspiracy because he is popular with the plebeians and in Act V the conspirators fear Antony for the same reason.
Despite being influenced by Renaissance values within the Elizabethan culture, Shakespeare represents conflicting perspectives of the oppression of the people by a ruling aristocracy. Caesar and Brutus are consistently represented as of superior intellect, generosity and nobility. The opening of Act 1 Sc 1 represents as equally dangerous: ignoring the people’s rights and an autocratic ruling class represented by the Tribunes Flavius and Marullus. The audience are positioned to identify with the wit and independence of the Citizens.
It is significant that Shakespeare’s other representations of the Citizens are as a violent mob during the death of Cinna, the poet and as self-seeking and easily manipulated during the funeral orations by Brutus and Antony respectively. Brutus’ funeral oration aims to restore order through appealing to their logic. In contrast Antony appeals to their emotions, subtly incites them to violent actions and develops their sense of thwarted entitlement with veiled references to Caesar’s will. Antony’s perspective prevails.
Style and Structure
Shakespeare uses contrast to structure the text and express his belief in the importance of unity in government, specifically loyalty to the ruling monarchy. The pattern of dualities includes contrasts between Brutus and Cassius, Brutus and Antony, loyalty and betrayal/self-interest, freedom and slavery. Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar represents the importance of evaluating conflicting perspectives especially before committing to violent and irreversible action.
Order and Chaos
The influence of Renaissance values and humanist concerns including the delineation of characters as the victims of fate is clear. Shakespeare uses the contrast between the characterisation of Cassius and Brutus to reveal the dangers of political assassination, in that even the noble Brutus is swayed by the machinations of Cassius’ frustrated ambition and desire for revenge. This is further developed by the actions of the conspirators who are motivated by personal agendas and not a desire for democracy. Shakespeare’s confronting use of blood imagery during and immediately after Caesar’s death represents the chaos that follows Caesar’s death. Order is restored by the death of the conspirators and the rule of Octavius Caesar.
Character development and change through ‘round’ characters (characters that develop and change throughout a work of literature)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ivoutin/2245812931/sizes/m/in/photostream/
Brutus
Shakespeare as an Elizabethan shared the Roman value for courage, action and dedication to duty as antidotes to injustice. His characterisation of Brutus is benign. Brutus alone struggles to achieve a balance and establish the validity of the proposed assassination. In Act 3 his nobility ironically precipitates the fall of the conspirators when he believes Antony and permits him to speak at the funeral. Brutus’ ideal new society demands an organizing social principle based on a mutual respect.
Where Brutus is consistently sincere in his love for Rome and ironically he begins to resemble the dead Caesar in his command of the conspirators and focus on physical courage. Further, he is represented as very human in his weaknesses: susceptible to flattery:
Cassius: ‘ Well Brutus, thou art noble,’ yet, I see
Thy honourable metal maybe wrought
From what it is disposed…I will this night
By several hands, in at his window throw
As if they came from several citizens
Writings, all tending to the great opinion
That Rome holds of his name…
(Act 1. Sc 2. ll.307 -310).
Cassius convinces Brutus that the Roman people want him as leader. He becomes the victim of questionable logic in his soliloquy in Act2 Sc 1 where he justifies regicide with the anticipation of Caesar’s tyranny.
Brutus’ focus on duty and logic does not preclude errors of judgement as in his internal debate expressed in the soliloquy in Act 2 Sc 1.His rhetoric in Act 111 in the funeral oration represents the internal conflict from reconciling the personal and public – his love for his friend and his love for Rome. There is a shift in his persona after Caesar’s death: Brutus as leader of the first Triumvirate and army assumes some of the characteristics of Caesar thereby precipitating conflict with Cassius. Brutus’ character however regains his nobility after the battle and through his death.
Mark Antony
Antony leads the offensive against the conspirators – particularly Brutus. A foil to Brutus in representing patrician values, he, like Caesar, privileges the voice of the people and their rights. He is a consummate politician, clear sighted and cynical, who correctly interprets the mood and potential of the plebeians for self-interest. His rhetoric in Act 3 in the funeral oration dominates the rhetoric of Brutus and represents his love for his friend as compatible with his love of Rome. He represents Caesar as essential for the welfare of the Roman people. His perspective of Caesar represents unquestioning admiration for him as leader of the Roman people contrasted with the perspectives of Brutus and Cassius. He also appeals to their emotions by focusing their attention on the butchered corpse of Caesar which he has had astutely positioned on the stage within their view. As a supporter of Octavius, he assumes military prowess as well as political leadership after the death of Caesar, Act 4 and 5.
Antony too is subject to conflicting perspectives of his character. Seen at first as a pleasure loving patrician in Acts 1 and 2, and intent on self preservation in Act 3 immediately after Caesar’s death, he is transformed when he returns with Brutus’ sanction into a formidable political opponent. In Act 4 and 5 he causes the downfall of the conspirators and when united with Octavius in battle, triumphs over the conspirators and restores order in Rome. This change represents the shift in Roman values away from a definition of valour in terms of physical prowess. This transition includes still another shift in the perspective Antony when he is represented as the warlike champion of Octavius Act V.
Caesar
Shakespeare represents Julius Caesar as supreme warrior, autocratic but benevolent leader- a god like figure. The ghost of Caesar in Act 5 Sc 2 represents Brutus’s error of judgement, the spirit of Caesar is undefeated and the influence of the past inescapable.
However, Caesar is represented as noble but flawed by physical weakness which is fore-grounded by Cassius in Act 1. The Romans valued physical power as a symbol of masculinity and valour and Caesar is shown to be lacking in this perspective. The Tribunes focus on Caesar’s recent failure to swell the coffers through war. The Elizabethan audiences too were divided in their views, favouring warlike characteristics in a leader, which Elizabeth as Queen sought to compensate for with rhetoric.
Caesar is also shown to be flattered by Decius into ignoring Calpurnia’s warnings. While he may be considered brave in ignoring the Soothsayer, he is arrogant in his dismissal of the pleas from the conspirators adopting an autocratic attitude and giving credence to the conspirator’s fears in Act 111 Sc 1. However, in death he is shown to be powerful first by Antony’s skilful rhetoric and manipulation of facts and later by the appearance of Caesar’s ghost before the battle in Act 1V. Sc 2.
Caius Cassius
A foil to Brutus, his perspective of Caesar conflicts markedly with that of Antony. He interprets Caesar’s physical weakness as proof of his unfitness to be a leader of Rome. Cassius is represented as one who re interprets duty to suit an ambitious personal agenda. He is predominantly loyal and loving towards Brutus, Act 1V Sc 3.
Flat or two-dimensional characters that don’t develop or change throughout the play despite what happens in the plot
Casca - The first conspirator to strike Caesar, he adopts the persona of a simple man of the people, an astute and arrogant patrician.
Lepidus - Conspirator considered weak by Cassius and Brutus and disposable by Antony.
Octavius Caesar - The leader of second Triumvirate and an ironic consequence of the Caesar’s assassination. His was a far more inflexible form of autocratic rule.
Plebeians/citizens – Powerful force courted by conspirators and Caesar’s faction. Shown to be fickle, self seeking and easily swayed by rhetoric.
Tribunes – representation of the conflict between the old order of the patricians – Brutus, Cassius and conspirators and the new order represented by Caesar, Antony and Octavius.
Note:
Shakespeare used the actions of the characters and opinions other characters expressed about them to position the audience. We have to use this information to evaluate our own perspectives of them and the issues raised by the play as a whole. Shakespeare developed the tensions in the play inherent in reconciling personal and public agendas including love and loyalty between characters and an individual’s love for Rome. e.g. Brutus’ love for Caesar conflicting with his love for Rome.
Imagery, symbols and allusions
Pagan references permeate the text including a belief in the supernatural which is shown to be deceptive:
- Calpurnia’s dream convinces Caesar not to visit the Senate
- A conspirator Decius reinterprets the omens and persuades Caesar to appear at the Senate.
Shakespeare’s effective use of dramatic irony is seen here too when Caesar’s nobility and courage facilitate the conspirators’ plans.
Animal imagery dominates the omens, symbolic of power and later of the destructive primitive forces about to be unleashed by violent action precipitating a chain reaction of destruction. Elizabethan audiences, themselves conflicted in a desire for social stability were susceptible to omens and feared the supernatural.
Casca:
‘Against the Capitol I met a lion
Who gaz’d upon me/and went surly by’
…‘men all on fire, walk up and down the streets.’
(Act Sc 2 ll 14 – 32)
Caesar describes himself before attending the Forum:
…Danger knows full well
That Caesar is more dangerous than he:
We are two lions littered in one day
And I the older and more terrible.
(Act 2. Sc 2. ll. 44- 47)
Birds of prey are representations of defeat for the conspirators.
Cassius:
Two mighty eagles fell; and there they perch’d,
Gorging and feeding from our soldiers’ hands,
…This morning they are fled away and gone,
And in their stead do ravens, crows, and kites,
As we are sickly prey.
(Act 5 Sc 1.ll 79- 86)
Blood imagery
Caesar’s blood is variously represented as a source of salvation for Rome by Brutus before the assassination and when Brutus refuses to kill Mark Antony.
Brutus:
Our course will seem too bloody, Ciaus Cassius,
To cut the head off and then hack the limbs –
…Let’s be sacrificers, but not butchers, Ciaus.
We all stand up against the spirit of Caesar,
And in spirit of men there is no blood.
O, that we then could come by Caesar’s spirit,
And not dismember Caesar! But, alas,
Caesar must bleed for it…
Let’s carve him as a dish fit for the gods,
Not hew him like a carcass fit for hounds:
(Act 2 Sc 1. ll 161- 174)
Calpurnia’s dream before the assassination is another example:
Caesar:…
She dreamt to-night she saw my statua,
Which like a fountain with as hundred spouts,
Did run pure blood; and many lusty Romans
Came smiling and did bathe their hands in it.
(Act 2 Sc 1. ll 76- 79)
This is re interpreted by Decius as:…
Signifies that from you great Rome shall suck
Reviving blood… (Act 2 Sc 1. ll 85- 87)
After the assassination Brutus invites the other conspirators to bathe their hands in Caesar’s blood. This is in keeping with the representation of Caesar’s assassination as a ritual killing for the good of Rome. It is worthwhile to consider Shakespeare’s purpose and anticipated response from his audience around the thrust stage when including this bloody spectacle which is intensified when Antony reveals the bloodied toga and the body of Caesar to the citizens.
Brutus:…
Stoop Romans stoop
And let us bathe our hands in Caesar’s blood
Up to the elbows, and besmear our swords.
Then walk forth, even to the market place,
And waving our red weapons o’er our heads.
Let’s all cry ‘Peace, freedom, and liberty!
(Act 3 Sc 1. ll.106 -111)
Antony presents a very different interpretation of Caesar’s blood and wounds representing them to the citizens in the funeral oration as mouths that cry out for vengeance.
Antony:
Let but the commons read this testament,
Which pardon me, I do not mean to read,
And they would go and kiss dead Caesar’s wounds
And dip their napkins in his sacred blood;
…Even at the base of Pompey’s statua
Which all the while ran blood, great Caesar fell.
(Act 3 Sc 2. ll.130-133)
It is significant that the blood imagery in relationship to Caesar reveals the conflicting perspectives of the speakers. Caesar’s blood and body are symbolic of Rome itself, therefore when Caesar’s body is butchered, Rome is destroyed. The blood itself is also seen as purging Rome of disorder.
The blood imagery is contrasted with the imagery of fire which represents the spirit of Caesar and Rome which transcends Caesar’s physical weakness which his death cannot destroy. This is represented by the appearance of the Ghost at Phillipi.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dewfs/4261455269/sizes/z/in/photostream/
Structuring responses and synthesising related texts
You must always focus on the question and not respond with a prepared answer. It is essential that you begin by focusing on key concepts examined in the text which are represented by the composers’ representation of personalities, events and situations.
Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar addresses contextual concerns with the power of language and representation to sway the opinions of the citizens. Skilful rhetoric endows Julius Caesar, the conspirators and then Octavius Caesar supported by Mark Antony respectively, with the power to rule Rome. Opinion is swayed by the power of representation.
We are positioned by Shakespeare to evaluate and analyse how key personalities achieve this power in specific situations and during particular events such as the Lupercal, situations like the manipulation of Brutus and Caesar respectively and the speeches in the aftermath of the assassination.
Shakespeare gives us insights into the personalities of Caesar, Brutus, Cassius and Mark Antony in their struggle for power by their actions, speeches, opinion of others and the opinion of their characters by others.
Central concepts that can help us to organise material are dominant themes or concerns including:
- Democracy and tyranny
- Freedom and Oppression
- Dominant and Conflicting ideology
- Honour and Ambition
- Personal loyalty and Public duty
- Love and duty
Your focus must always be on the ‘how’ – the choices the composer has made to represent their ideas and how these choices have been influenced by context and medium. For example in Elizabethan England the medium of choice was Shakesperean tragedy but in 20th century USA the choice might be film.
Suggestions for contemporary events, situations and personalities
- Bin Laden – September 11
- Unrest in Libya or Egypt or Syria
- Tibet – religious dissent
- Aung San Suu Kyi , Burma
- Iraq war –Sadam Hussein
- Detention centres – Guantanamo
- Nelson Mandela
- Martin Luther King
- Assassination of John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy
Synthesising related texts with the themes, ideas and concepts in Julius Caesar
Complete the table below about Julius Caesar
| Democracy – Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
Tyranny - Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
| Freedom - Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
Oppression - Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
| Dominant ideology - Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
Conflicting ideology - Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
| Honour - Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
Ambition - Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
| Personal loyalty - Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
Public duty Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
| Love - Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
Duty - Act, Sc, lines, Quote, Analysis of example |
Create a similar table to analyse your related text focusing on the type of text – film, TV, print medium, visual text etc.
Download an interactive PDF version of the table that can be used for Julius Caesar and related texts.
In the case of related texts that deal with a contemporary personality, event or situation these questions can be asked:
- What is the composer’s choice of medium?
- How does the medium influence the representation and positioning of the responder?
- How is the text related to the concepts addressed in the core text – ambition, loyalty etc.
Note: Synthesise your arguments, example and analysis of the representations.
Structuring responses
- Make sure to achieve clarity in your structure and use language appropriate to the chosen text type and audience.
- Always respond to the question and use the type of text nominated including:
- essay
- interview
- speech
- review
- conversation
- lecture
- feature article etc.
Options for paragraph structure
Concern or statement about the text related to the question
- Core text – example, explanation, analysis of technique, quote and anticipated audience response in context.
- Related text - example, explanation, analysis of technique, quote and anticipated audience response in context. This must be synthesised with core text by words such as – in contrast, similarly, in comparison, however, therefore etc.
Note: Repeat the structure above until a comprehensive and integrated response to the question is achieved.
Analysis of Text and Language in ‘Julius Caesar’
Make sure to comment on:
- Contrast between perspectives of: Caesar – Brutus, Cassius, Casca, Tribunes, and Plebeians. Consider shifts in perspective of plebeians from Act 1, Act 3 and Act 5.
- Shakespeare’s purpose
Focus on:
- Honour, nobility of spirit, loyalty, duty, love
- Social stability based on mutual respect or bought by the promise of reward
- Rhetoric as a source of power
- Imagery including blood, spirit, water, fire, metal, animals
Additional Notes on technique
Iambic pentameter – Alternation of light and heavy syllables in a line of verse consisting of five beats – one unaccented syllable followed by an accented syllable. Speeches are generally in iambic pentameter which in rhythm most closely resembles normal speech. It lends itself to a more evocative and dramatic vocabulary and rhythm than most prose. Shakespeare also uses prose to create a contrast between high status characters, Caesar, Antony, Octavius, Brutus and Cassius and the low status characters, the citizens.
Note: Shakespeare uses prose for Brutus’ funeral oration. This choice reflects Brutus’ purpose which is to avoid violence by appealing for calm through the use of logic not emotion. The rhythmic quality of this prose is created by repetition. This is contrasted with Antony’s highly effective rhetoric, including ironic repetition and emotional appeal which rouses the citizens to riot.
Soliloquy – Significant means of engaging the audience facilitated by the Elizabethan thrust stage and the proximity of the audience. Similar to the voice over used in film to reveal the characters persona’s perspective and motivation. This is an effective device for developing dramatic irony, engaging the audience and even involving them as co conspirators. See Brutus’s soliloquy in Act 2. Sc. 1 ll. 9-34
Monologue – Similar in function to soliloquy as in Antony’s speech to the corpse of Caesar in Act 3 Sc 1 ll. 254-276. This speech intensifies the dramatic irony of the dialogue with the conspirators. Antony’s monologue in the funeral address to the citizens is designed to evoke a violent response from the audience in Act 3. Sc 2. ll.74- 107.
Duologue – A device for revealing the perspectives of two characters. Often contrasts perspectives and characters inviting audiences to form their own perspective. See Brutus and Cassius in Act 1.
Dialogue – As above and often used to advance the plot or provide the background – Act 1 dialogue between Brutus, Cassius and Casca.
Anecdote – Recount that reveals perspectives of the speaker about significant situations, events and personalities. See Cassius’ anecdote about Caesar’s weakness in Act 1.
Allusions – Supernatural, myth and religious. Intensifies the tension and develops thematic concerns. Used throughout the play to build tension, foreshadow significant events and in conjunction with characters to emphasise their stature.
Motifs – facilitates representations of themes and links elements of the plot, often used to characterise personalities by association.
Example: blood/fire/spirit, metal/weapons, love, animal imagery.
Ritual – Effective device for legitimising a political agenda - Act 1. Sc 1, the ceremony and celebration of the Lupercal is aligned with the triumphant return to Rome of Caesar which implicitly endows the proposed crowning of Caesar by Antony with the sanctity of a religious celebration.
- Brutus represents the assassination of Caesar as a religious sacrifice. Act 1 Sc 1. 162. The conspirators try to sanctify their political purge as a means of purifying themselves and Rome itself, an idea easily identified with by Shakespeare’s Christian audiences accustomed to the ritual of the sacrifice of Christ’s body and blood during the mass.
- Shakespeare’s opposition to regicide represents a conflicting perspective of this ritual sacrifice and scapegoating of Caesar. The repetition of blood and the predominance of gore in the immediate aftermath to his death are confronting and represent the conspirators as butchers.
- Antony’s mastery of rhetoric and drama intensifies this by personifying each wound. Act 3. Sc 2 http://www.leithart.com./archives/000791.php
When studying the prescribed texts
Refer to the Syllabus requirements, Prescription rubric and HSC Markers’ comments.
Integrate the ‘how’ of the language in your comments on narrative structure, characterisation, setting, mood, themes, pace and tension. This analysis and evaluation of the media and techniques also applies to all the composers of your related texts and their representations.
HSC Markers regularly remark on the ability of better students to critically consider the concepts and evaluate how the texts represent their concerns. The more sophisticated, informed and fluent responses demonstrate control of their own language, a detailed knowledge of the set text and their own related material integrated and interpreted in keeping with the requirements of each question.
Exercise:
- How is Shakespeare’s context of Tudor England and his concerns for loyalty to the ruling monarch and Protestantism reflected in:
- Characterisation of Caesar, Brutus, Cassius, Antony,
- Structure of the plot
- Language used by each character
- Research Shakespeare, and his literary, social and historical context.
- Research representations of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. Comment on how the choice of media and the context has influenced representations of conflicting perspectives of the events, situations and personalities.
- Julius Caesar addresses enduring and context specific issues. Discuss with detailed reference to the text and two related texts of your choosing.
- Choose a representation from a current socio-political or cultural context and write a feature article, speech or interview. Analyse the representations of conflicting perspectives of personalities, situations and events in the chosen text and establish consistent and clear synthesis with Julius Caesar.
- Write an interview with an Australian author of political documentaries for a leading newspaper with the focus on his /her choice of voice, structure, style and intended readership. The interview should reveal a thorough knowledge of Module C – Conflicting Perspectives and Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar and ideas from a related text.
CHARACTER: CAESAR
SITUATION/ EVENT: CROWNING & ASSASSINATION
| Character/method flat, rounded, dynamic, static |
Perspective – Examples | Conflicting perspective direct indirect |
Representation Technique | Quote | Act Scene Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marullus | Opposed to Caesar as Emperor. Represents patrician arrogance | Indirect | Hostile, arrogant tone. Rhetorical questions, foreshadows ideological debate the informs the play. | Wherefore…ingratitude . | Act 1 Sc1 ll. 33-56 |
| Flavius Flat, static |
As above | Indirect | As above | Flavius:…These growing feathers pluck’d from Caesar’s wing/Will make him fly at ordinary pitch, …servile fearfulness. | Act 1 Sc.1 ll. 73 –75 |
| Cassius Flat, static |
Foil to Brutus, leader of other conspirators. Ambitious, manipulative and jealous of Caesar. | Indirect | Dialogue, anecdote, hostile tone, imperative, rhetorical questions, metaphor, direct speech. Focus on .physical weakness unacceptable in military leader. Honour, equality and freedom Rhetorical question, apostrophe, cumulative listing. |
Cassius ….but of my single self/I had as lief not be live as live to be/in awe of such a thing as I myself…And bear the palm alone. Why, man, he doth bestride the narrow world/Like a Colossus…As easily as a king. And why should Caesar be a tyrant then?….But I am armed and dangers are to me indifferent |
Act 1 Sc 2 ll. 94 -131 Act 1 Sc 2 ll. 134 -161 Act 1 Sc 111. ll. 102 - 115 |
| Cascar Flat, static |
Casca – a foil to Cassius. First to strike Caesar. Represents himself as simple man. Character represents the arrogance of patricians | Indirect | Prose – creates credibility for Casca’s account of the event. Contemptuous of the citizens and of Caesar’s weakness. Arrogance of patricians. | Casca … I saw Mark Antony offer him a crown… stinking breath…receiving the bad air. | Act 1 Sc 2 ll. 234 – 249 |
| Brutus Dynamic, rounded |
Perspective of Caesar as a potential tyrant. Cassius focuses on his own honour and urges Brutus and Casca to join him in freeing Rome from the perceived threat. | Soliloquy. Begins with a phrase suggesting this is the continuation of an internal conflict. Animal imagery, extended metaphor of adder represents Caesar as a lethal threat to democracy and freedom. The ladder represents the potential shift in Caesar’s perspective of the Roman people. Dominated by questionable logic and tension between personal and public loyalty. Effective use of caesura to balance one perspective against the other. Dominated by imagery of blood, reflects Shakespeare perspective that regicide is not a valid solution for securing democracy |
It must be by his death: and for my part/ I know no special cause to spurn him….And kill him in the shell. Our course will seem too bloody,…Let’s carve him as a dish fit for gods/not hew him as a carcase fit for hounds…When Caesar’s head is off. |
Act 2 Sc 1 ll.10 -34 Act 2 Sc 1 ll.161 - 182 |
|
| Caesar’s perspective of himself as a fearless Roman leader The audience may form the perspective of Caesar as self aggrandising and susceptible to flattery. |
Dialogue: Animal imagery. | The gods do this in shame of cowardice…And Caesar shall go forth. | Act 2 Sc 2 ll. 41 - 48 |
||
| Caesar Rounded |
Shakespeare’s perspective of Caesar revealed directly through Caesar’s actions and words. Gives some credence to Brutus’ fears. | Perspective of Caesar suggests there are some grounds for conspirator’s fears and conflicts with Antony’s unquestioning loyalty in the funeral oration. | Dialogue. Arrogant dismissive tone, animal imagery. | These crouching…Know Caesar does no wrong: nor without cause will be satisfied. | Act 3 Sc 1 ll. 35–48. |
| Antony Rounded, dynamic |
Antony reveals his perspective in the soliloquy to Caesar’s corpse. | Conflicting perspective. | Soliloquy. Loving, loyal tone. Develops into hostile and prophetic tone against the conspirators. Hyperbole, Onomatopeia, Alliteration. Imagery of blood, ironic development of perspective of Caesar’s death as a religious ritual. Classical allusions. Highly emotive use of iambic pentameter reveals the intensity of Antony’s horror and evokes empathy in the audience. Contributes to the dramatic irony of the scenes where Brutus believes him and allows him to speak at the funeral. | O, pardon me, thou bleeding piece of earth…groaning for burial | Act 3 Sc 1. ll. 254 –276 |
| Brutus Rounded, dynamic |
Brutus attempts to calm the crowd and convince them that the conspirators killed Caesar for the good of Rome. | Indirect. Caesar as honourable man and tyrant. Martyr to Rome | Prose. Measured pace, repetitive, Cumulative series of clauses to develop logic, rhetorical questions, focus on central themes of honour, ambition, freedom/tyranny, conflicting loyalties – personal love/public duty. Perspective of Caesar’s death as ritual sacrifice to the good of Rome. Dramatic irony foreshadowing his own death. | Romans, countrymen, and lovers!…suffered death. | Act 3 Sc 2. ll.12 - 46 |
| Antony Rounded, dynamic |
Antony incites the crowd to riot by convincing them the conspirators have killed Caesar for personal ambition not the good of Rome thereby depriving them of privileges they were due under Caesar. | Conflicting perspective with Brutus. Caesar as noble and generous. | Monologue/speech in three linked stages. Iambic pentameter. Intensely dramatic tone and vocabulary. Passionately devoted to Caesar, ironic in the treatment of the conspirators specifically Brutus, the next potential leader. Rhetorical questions. Apostrophe animal imagery, personification. Focus on duty, love, honour, ambition. Effective use of ironic repetition to satirise the conspirator’s motives. Effective use of withheld information – the will and the dramatic impact of the bloody corpse. Drama escalates, focus on blood imagery. | Friends, Romans, countrymen… Take thou what course thou wilt. |
Act 3 Sc 2 ll. 74 -136 ll.118 - 137 ll.168 - 261 |
| Brutus Rounded, dynamic |
Brutus acknowledges perspective of Caesar as immortal | Indirect | Speech. Apostrophe, sprit, blood, body imagery developed. | O Julius Caesar…entrails | Act 5 Sc 3 94 - 96 |
CHARACTER: BRUTUS
SITUATION/ EVENT: CROWNING & ASSASSINATION, BATTLE
| Character/method flat, rounded, dynamic, static |
Perspective – Examples | Conflicting perspective direct indirect |
Representation Technique | Quote | Act Scene Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brutus Rounded, dynamic |
Brutus represents himself as patient, valuing honour before life but unwilling to act against Caesar | Direct | Duologue. Third person distancing himself from the emotions expressed. | … Brutus had rather be a villager… Lay on us. |
Act 1. Sc 2 ll. 172- 175 |
Cassius |
Cassius flatters Brutus to his face but reveals he mean to manipulate and flatter him into the conspiracy. | Indirect | Soliloquy | Brutus , thou art noble… seduc’d | Act 1. Sc 2 ll. 307-311 |
| Brutus Rounded, dynamic |
Brutus’ response to what he thinks is the Roman people’s need for him reveals he is susceptible to flattery although he is also devoted to Rome. Represents Brutus’ pride in is his heritage as a patrician | Direct | Soliloquy. Reading from letters, rhetorical questions, personification, emotive tone, historical allusion. | ‘Brutus thou…’ …hand of Brutus | Act 2. Sc 1 ll. 44-58 |
| Brutus Rounded, dynamic |
Brutus’ refusal to take an oath represents him as valuing honour, truth and freedom against tyranny. | Direct | Dialogue. Personification, blood imagery, caesura, rhetorical questions. | No, not an oath…from him. | Act 2. Sc 1 ll. 114 - 140 |
| Brutus Rounded, dynamic |
Brutus represents himself as the patron of Roman freedom having assassinated Caesar | Direct | Dialogue. Apostrophe, | O Antony… Reverence |
Act 3. Sc 1 ll. 165 - 177 |
| Brutus Rounded, dynamic |
Brutus seeks to calm the citizens and represents himself as valuing his duty to Rome before his personal love for Caesar. | Direct | Monologue/speech. Prose, repetition of ambition, honour, freedom and love. Regular rhythm and pace, rhetorical questions, effective use of pause. Represents Caesar’s death as ritual sacrifice for Rome. | Act 3. Sc 1 ll. l3 - 39 |
|
| Antony Rounded, dynamic |
Antony represents the conspirators, especially Brutus as butchers, driven by personal ambition, enemies to Caesar and Rome. | Indirect | Monologue/speech. Iambic pentameter. Brilliant use of rhetoric and irony. Satirical device of reductive repetition reverses Brutus’ argument. Rhetorical questions, emotive language, repetition of blood imagery and personification, effective symbolic use of toga and wounds. Subtle manipulation of audience through withheld information about Caesar’s purported will. | …The noble Brutus…to me. …Through this the well beloved Brutus struck…traitors. |
|
| Brutus Rounded, dynamic |
Brutus, represents himself as a valorous soldier and loyal Roman, challenges Cassius about his motivation in Caesar’s death. Shift in Brutus’ persona, military valour privileged. | Direct Conflicting perspective of Brutus now seen as a leader and warrior |
Duologue. Rhetorical questions, challenging tone, animal imagery | Remember …such a Roman. | Act 4. Sc 3 ll. 18 - 28 |
| Brutus Rounded, dynamic |
Brutus, represents himself as a valorous soldier and loyal Roman willing to die for honour. A noble Roman. Speeches that follow in Act 4 dominated by the language and concerns of warfare. | As above | Dialogue. Rhetorical questions, challenging tone, animal imagery | No, Cassius,….well made | Act 5. Sc 1 ll. 110 - 118 |
| Antony Rounded, dynamic |
Brutus, represented by his nemesis as the ultimate representation of Roman values. | Indirect | Dialogue. Admiring tone, hyperbole, emotive language. Could represent Shakespeare’s perspective of Brutus and re enforcement of his values. |
This was…man. | Act 5. Sc 3 ll. 68 -75 |
Note: Perspectives of Cassius are represented mainly in his interactions with Brutus but also in his perspectives of Caesar and Antony which conflict with the perspectives of Brutus.
CHARACTER: ANTONY
SITUATION/ EVENT: CROWNING & ASSASSINATION, BATTLE
| Character/method flat, rounded, dynamic, static |
Perspective – Examples | Conflicting perspective direct indirect |
Representation Technique | Quote | Act Scene Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Servant | Situation immediately after Caesar’s death. Negotiation of power. Continues until after Antony’s funeral oration achieves his objective – revolt. Antony’s message is relayed to the conspirators to obtain assurance of safety. Foreshadows his political acumen rather than valour. | indirect | Recount. Body language implied in message represents Antony as conciliatory | Thus….Antony | Act 3 Sc1 ll. 124 -138 |
| Antony | Antony’s grief reflects his perspective of duty, honour, valour and devotion to Caesar. His challenge to the conspirators is to kill him however he has already been assured of his safety. Note his soliloquy to Caesar’s corpse for insight into his character – loyal, clever, potential leader | direct | Dialogue: Dominated by themes of loyalty and valour. Hyperbole in blood and spirit imagery, rhetorical questions. Foreshadows his subsequent skill with rhetoric and political acumen | O mighty… spirit of this age | Act 3 Sc1 ll. 149 - 164 |
| Antony | As above. Consider the conflicting perspectives of Brutus and Cassius, specifically Cassius’ distrust if Antony. | As above | Dialogue: As above. Apostrophe, Address to the dead Caesar and the conspirators. Animal imagery Alludes to perspective of himself as ‘coward or a flatterer’ which is delivered by ritual hand sakes the conspirators. Shakespeare’s perspective against regicide can be seen the focus on blood and gore to confront the audience. | I doubt…lie! | Act 3 Sc1 ll. 184 - 211 |
| Antony | Antony’s grief reflects his perspective of duty, honour, valour and devotion to Caesar. See further analysis of this speech in perspectives of Caesar. | As above | Monologues. As above. Blood/spirit of Caesar symbolic of Rome itself. Conspirators undermined by skilful rhetoric. Antony represented as supreme orator able to manipulate citizen through the gamut of emotional responses. | Friends, …Take thou what course thou wilt. | Act 3 Sc 2 ll. 74 - 262 |
| Antony | Conflicting perspective of Antony as arrogant and warlike – military valour combined with political skill. Like the change in Brutus after Caesar’s death, both men take on decisive roles as leaders. Antony is predictably more cynical and ruthless - condemning men to death and retracting legacies | direct | Dialogue. Blood./spirit, caesura, irony, extended metaphor and animal imagery to describe Lepidus. | He shall not…mischiefs. | Act 4 Sc1 ll. 6 - 50 |
Resources:
Board of Studies NSW (1999) Stage 6 Syllabus English Preliminary and HSC Courses.
Board of Studies NSW Prescriptions: Area of Study Electives and Texts Higher School Certificate 2009-2012
Shakespeare, William (2004) Julius Caesar, Cambridge University Press, New Cambridge Shakespeare.
Knight, G.Wilson. The Imperial Theme, University Paperbacks, 1972, Great Britain.
Gurr, A. The Shakespearean Stage 1574-1642, Cambridge University Press, 1994, New Cambridge Shakespeare.
Harwood, R. All the World’s A Stage, Secker & Warburg Ltd. 1984. England.
Websites
http://www.hull.ac.uk/renforum/v5no2.giddens.htm
http://www.leithart.com./archives/000791.php
|