who is the villain in Julius Caesar
Moshe Gotesman
who do you think was the villain in shakespeare's Julius Caesar?
Brutus? Cassiuis? or somebody else? Also who was the hero in the
story?
Richard Nathan
I don't think there is a hero in Julius Caesar. This is my least favorite
of Shakespeare's plays. Every character in the play is self-obsessed and
not particularly clever. Maybe it is a comment on politicians.
Jamison
>who do you think was the villain in shakespeare's Julius Caesar?
>Brutus? Cassiuis? or somebody else? Also who was the hero in the
>story?
Read the play, Moshe. If you're still stuck, share your general
thoughts and then ask us for help with the details. We're not here to
answer your homework questions.
Jane A Thompson
On 16 Nov 1996, Moshe Gotesman wrote:
> who do you think was the villain in shakespeare's Julius Caesar?
> Brutus? Cassiuis? or somebody else? Also who was the hero in the
> story?
I first read this play in middle school, when I found it unbearably
irritating that the title character pegged out so early in the play. I
wanted him to be the hero. I disliked Anthony and Brutus about equally,
but I couldn't quite get either securely into the "villain" spot.
Now I'd say--this is a play without these easy categories. Caesar is
great almost by definition, but up to the moment of his death the play
does not show him doing anything admirable. Anthony is Caesar's friend
AND a grand-stander AND a tinpot dictator. Brutus is noble but
treacherous. Cassius is torn by envy and love and possibly patriotism.
--Jane
Paul Treadaway
In article <56licl$8...@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>, Moshe Gotesman says...
>who do you think was the villain in shakespeare's Julius Caesar?
>Brutus? Cassiuis? or somebody else? Also who was the hero in the
>story?
Brutus was the noblest Roman of them all, wasn't he? The implication
I think is that he did a bad thing but for the best reasons. Cassius
was a conniving conspiratorial malcontent, who had a lean and hungry
look, allegedly, so he's probably the villain, if there is one,
though you could argue that that depends on whether he was actually
wrong about a republic being preferable to a monarchy at whatever
cost - in any case, it seems to be implied that his motives aren't
pure in the way that Brutus' are. Mark Antony is presumably the hero.
It seems to be the case that why you do something, not what you do
is the important distinction in JC. After all, Antony secures the
Julian family's position for many decades, the history of which
arguably demonstrate that Brutus was right.
cli...@aol.com
This is a truly perplexing question. i teach HS English (sophomores)
and JC is always the fave reading. After we have studied the play, we
have a "trial". . . . but not in the usual, format of the "American"
courtroom. We put Brutus and Cassius on the stand, charged with the
assasination of JC and the resulting chaos in Rome. This is always a
highlight of the course. . . the kids REALLY get into it! :) The idea
for this, which has evolved over the years, i believe was sparked by a
suggestion on this very newsgroup. The results are always different,
however, usually Cassius is found "most guilty" depending on the relative
strength of his attorneys' case and the "charisma" of the students who
have taken the roles. It is possible to make a STRONG case for almost any
character in the play, as far as the whole "hero/villian" thing goes.
What do i think personally? Who knows! i gain new perspective upon each
reading. . .
Don Deems
Deborah E Sager
Paul Treadaway (paul.tr...@dial.pipex.com) wrote:
: In article <56licl$8...@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>, Moshe Gotesman says...
: >who do you think was the villain in shakespeare's Julius Caesar?
: >Brutus? Cassiuis? or somebody else? Also who was the hero in the
: >story?
: Brutus was the noblest Roman of them all, wasn't he? The implication
: I think is that he did a bad thing but for the best reasons. Cassius
(Much snipped)
Read Issac Asimov's criticism of the play. I'll never be able to
see Brutus as hero again (which is definately what I was taught in school.)
- Deborah
--
Deborah Sager, Madame Librarian, Lyric Mezzo, and Social Sphenoid
The Penn Singers present BRIGADOON Dec 5, 6, 7 Annenberg School Theatre
FIGHT THE PATRIARCHY!
Will Ryan
Moshe Gotesman wrote:
>
> who do you think was the villain in shakespeare's Julius Caesar?
> Brutus? Cassiuis? or somebody else? Also who was the hero in the
> story?
Moshe:
If, in the course of your life, you decide to read any classical
history you will discover that Romans admired courage, selflessness,
scholarship and patriotism. Unfortunately they (at least the ones we
know about) were invariably greedy, self-serving, brutal and vain.
Almost any story connected with events in Roman History leaves one
begging the question who was the hero. In this case, Shakespeare, who
was a monarchist, found Julius Caesar, the benevolent dictator, an
heroic figure. His murderers, therefore, were villains and his
defender, Antony, a hero. Were this play written by a republican,
the depiction of Caesar, who had entered sacred Rome with his army,
suppressed the ancient republican Senate, and demanded dictatorial
powers, might be quite different. As to Anthony's personal flaws,
well, he was a Roman. His vices were those of a Roman as were his
virtues.
Caroline Marie Pruett
Will Ryan writes:
>
> begging the question who was the hero. In this case, Shakespeare, who
> was a monarchist, found Julius Caesar, the benevolent dictator, an
> heroic figure. His murderers, therefore, were villains and his
> defender, Antony, a hero. Were this play written by a republican,
> the depiction of Caesar, who had entered sacred Rome with his army,
> suppressed the ancient republican Senate, and demanded dictatorial
> powers, might be quite different. As to Anthony's personal flaws,
> well, he was a Roman. His vices were those of a Roman as were his
> virtues.
I think you are vastly oversimplifying here. Why must there be
a hero or villain at all? Everybody comes at it from a
different point of view -- it's amazingly like real life.
Brutus certainly conceives his action as heroic, and I think we
are supposed to admire his nobility BUT on the other hand, he
is consistently wrong and Cassius consistently right about the
course that they should take. Cassius always yields to Brutus'
moral authority and it's always a bad idea. I think Cassius is
the one truly intriguing and complex character in this play.
With everyone else, it's very easy to see where they are coming
from. Incidentally, I have a hard time seeing the portrayal of
Caesar as in any way positive. It is almost impossible to find
a good guy or bad guy in any of the roman plays (I'm excluding
Titus and just thinking of A&C, JC and Corio) BUT the greater
share of sympathy seems to fall with those who are nostalgic
for an old order (Coriolanus, Brutus, Antony in A&C), rather
than the vanguard of the new. So Antony is a ruthless upstart
in JC but in A&C (historically, only a few years later) he is
obviously middle-aged and associated with the old traditions
against the efficient but entirely unlikeable Octavius.
All IMO, of course
Carrie
Will Ryan
Carrie:
I was thinking of the funeral oration. In it, Antony make such a fine
case for Caesar I assumed that Shakespeare favored the dictator over the
Senate. You are right, of course, no character in Shakespeare is
simple -- all are complex and all can beguile us at times. Even the
monsters make some fine speeches. And Caesar here, when alive, is a
conniving fellow, conspiring to get himself crowned by public trickery
and popular acclaim. Antony canonizes him in the eulogy, but Caesar
was always meaner and greedier than he is made to appear in death.
Several years ago I taught a class in Money and Banking at a New Jersey
College. During the course, I cited several instances of inventory
swindles, including the multi-million dollar fertilizer scam pulled by
Billie Sol Estes in the eary 1960s. At the end of the lecture an older
student told he was from Texas and he had known Estes. "He was the
kindest, nicest, most gentelmanly yet unpretentious man I have ever
known, and the most likeable," he said, "I would have him as a neighbor
anytime." Real people are always multi-dimensional. (Shakespeare would
have loved this century. Imagine what he could have done with
characters like Moussolini or Peron, Huey Long, Joe McCarthy, or O.J..
. .)
About the "nostolgia for the old order," I've read a deal of Roman
history, but I've never read the "Julius Caesar" life from Plutarch
directly. Could that nostalgia have been derived from Plutarch?
Yours,
Will
Paul Treadaway
In article <32927F...@mindspring.com>, Will Ryan says...
>About the "nostolgia for the old order," I've read a deal of Roman
>history, but I've never read the "Julius Caesar" life from Plutarch
>directly. Could that nostalgia have been derived from Plutarch?
The Romans were politically very conservative. People always
wanted a return to the old days, whether or not they actually
existed.
Will Ryan
Paul:
From everything I've read about them, you're absolutely right. I know
that Plutarch wrote the "Lives" to establish parallels between famous
Romans and classical Greeks, presumably to teach principles by which to
live and aspirations for which to strive. Since the "Lives" were
Shakespeare's source for the Roman plays, I would suspect that the
sense of nostalgia for a faded past might have been gotten from
Plutarch, and might have well conformed with Shakespeare's feelings at
the time. We Americans are no slackers in inventing golden and serene
pasts, you know. I'm pushing fifty and I cannot ever remember a period
in my life when I wasn't being lectured on some perfect time, always 20
or 30 years ago, when all children were shy and respectful of adults,
when all girls were sweet and viginal and all young men (save those in
jail, and some of them, too) were perfect gentlemen. Politicians keep
invoking this nonsense in their speeches. I suppose it's a human
trait. I could probably stop off in Inner Mongolia tomorrow and hear
plenty of adults my age prate about the same things. Bah!