Julius Caesar Essays (945 words) - , Term Papers

Julius Caesar Brutus Inability to Assume Political Leadership of the Conspiracy Against Julius Caesar In Julius Caesar, Shakespeare presents a broad range of historical personalities as complicated human beings in agonizing conflict with one another and with themselves. Literary authors A.L. Rowse once wrote, No issue hinders a mans leadership capabilities more than his confusing perception of honor, noble idealism, and inner self-conflict (15). In his drama about power, nobility, assassination, and revenge, Shakespeare examines this particular issue best in his simple yet complex characterization of Brutus. Guided by conflicting emotions, Brutus, an idealistic man, is unable to assume political leadership of the conspiracy against Julius Caesar. However, although he ultimately participates in Caesars murder, he is neither a clear-cut hero or villain. On the contrary, it is the corruption and instability of human nature that eventually leads to his downfall. Brutus lacks several important ingredients in regard to assuming political leadership: confidence and ambition. He is also indecisive. His inner conflict is first revealed in a conversation with Cassius in which he responds to Cassius fear that his friend Brutus disapproves of him. Brutus assures Cassius that he is not angry with him, but with himself: Cassius, Be not deceived. If I have veiled my look, I turn the trouble of my countenance Merely upon myself. Vexed I am Of late with passions of some difference, Conceptions only proper to myself, Which gives some soil, perhaps, to my behaviors. But let not therefore my good friends be grieved (Among which number, Cassius, be you one), Nor construe any further my neglect Than that poor Brutus, with himself at war, Forgets the shows of love to other men. (1.2. 37-46). In Scene I, Cassius utters the first in a series of persuasive remarks designed to win Brutus on the part of King 2 the conspiracy to destroy Caesar. But Brutus is incapable of assuming the leadership role as his self-conflict reflects both his personal love of Caesar and his duty to the Republic. He admits, however, that he loves honor more than he fears death, and that he will act in the public good at any cost. Later in the conversation, Brutus reassures Cassius, revealing that he is somewhat inclined toward Cassius sentiments. He then promises to consider the information that Cassius has already presented, to discuss it further, and to give him an answer at a later date. For the present, Brutus tells Cassius: Till then, my noble friend, chew upon this: Brutus had rather be a villager Than to repute himself a son of Rome Under these hard conditions as this time Is like to lay upon us (1.2. 171-174). Brutus noble character is established by both Cassius and Caesar. Brutus is a reflective man, dedicated to the principles of the Republic, to love and friendship, to duty, and to honor. For the sake of honor, he will even face death (as, in fact, he does at the end of the play). But as strongly as he holds to these ideals, he is just as strongly torn by conflicting loyalties to these ideals. Brutus makes decisions deliberately, and he is not quickly influenced by persuasive and passionate argument. He is torn between his love and admiration for Caesar and the anti-Caesar sentiments he admittedly shares with Cassius. The emotions of love and respect for Caesar that Brutus feels are authentic and deep. The effect is to make the political leadership against Caesar impossible. Again, Brutus conflict consists of his love for Caesar on one hand, and his concern for the social good and welfare of the Republic on the other. According to historian Steven Ozment, Brutus tends to rationalize his actions by altering his view of its desirability (qtd. in Roberts 152). He can find no justification to gain the political leadership of the conspiracy against Caesar in Caesars past actions; therefore, he finds justification for it in what Caesar might become. He assumes that Caesar will develop into a somewhat bombastic and unbearable tyrant if he is crowned king. On the basis of this assumption, he decides to murder him. The flaw of his reasoning is that Brutus does not raise the question of whether or King 3 not a moral end justifies immoral means, nor does he consider that his actions may be met with public disapproval. Brutus overcomes his