Conflicting Perspectives

Julius Caesar, a Roman general, dictator, and leader, is considered to be one of history 's most influential and powerful rulers to this day, in which his rise to power, conquest of Europe, and controversial downfall all remain to be told during modern days. The play Julius Caesar written by William Shakespeare, portrays the events leading up to Julius Caesar’s assassination, and how those who conspired against him banded together and plotted Caesar’s demise. Many of those conspirators assassinated Caesar due to his quick rise to absolute power, his “acts” of disrespect against the senate such as his failing to stand to receive the title of becoming a “god,” and pure jealousy and anger towards Caesar’s success and rule over the Roman empire. Caesar, an ambitious man, was able to conquer many lands and peoples for Rome through successful military campaigns in which he became one Rome’s best generals due to the amount of successful battles he had won and the amount of blood he had shed for Rome’s expansion. However, Caesar’s trait of ambitiousness would prove to be a double edged sword.

In this play, Julius Caesar returns to Rome to find that he has the unconditional support of the Plebeians. As he gains more power, his friends worry that he will completely take over the city, and so they conspire with one another to kill him. Preceding the attack, the conspirators notice many strange occurrences in Rome, such as a “lion who looked at [them] and strutted by without bothering to attack,” a “threatening” and “destructive” storm, and a “common slave” whose “hand did flame and burn.” The conspirators perceive these bizarre circumstances as omens that they should kill Caesar and quickly carry out their plan. When the conspirators confront him, they stab him thirty-three times, and then announce his death to the citizens of Rome, expecting a positive response but receiving the opposite. Rome is plunged into violence as the plebeians attempt to find the conspirators responsible for Caesar’s death. Citizens swarm the streets of their city, killing innocent people, such as Cinna the Poet, believing that they are among the group of people responsible for killing Caesar. This violence and death represents the weak condition that Rome continues in throughout the play. Caesar’s body represents the body of Rome, and when he is wounded, the entire city feels wounded as well. The chaos that Rome undergoes after Caesar’s death is symbolic of his importance to the city. The

William Shakespeare's tragedy Julius Caesar provides audiences with an account involving the Roman dictator Julius Caesar, the 44 B.C. conspiracy that resulted in his violent assassination, and the continued violence that dominated Rome consequent to his death. In spite of the fact that the play's title is Julius Caesar, Caesar's character only appears in three scenes. The tragedy's central character is Marcus Brutus and most of the storyline relates to him and to his failure to understand matters from a general perspective when he has the chance to do so. The play actually demonstrates how violence can emerge from individuals misinterpreting behavior seen in others and the idea of violence dominates most of the play, shaping the way that characters interact and think.

Conflicting perspectives are the direct result of bias or self-interest as people are always quick to enforce the correctness of their perspective over those of others, by contrasting their perspectives with others, they seek to advantage their own point of view opposed to the viewpoints of others. Conflicting perspectives are caused by bias, or prejudice, and self-interest from a person, event or situation that is encountered. William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar and Philadelphia (1993), written by Ron Nyswaner and directed by Jonathan Demme, are both prime examples of when bias and self-interest lead to conflicting perspectives in society. More than anything else, conflicting perspectives are the immediate result of bias or self-interest

In the exciting play, Julius Caesar, Shakespeare describes the intense emotion and tension of an event that changed the Roman empire forever. Julius Caesar, the main character, is brought up to two opposing arguments, one from his wife and the second from his colleague, he must decide whether or not it is a smart decision to go to the Senate House or not. Julius is tested by his two weaknesses: his ego and superstition. Conclusively Caesar decide to side with Decius,his colleague, and go to the Senate House. Decius’s argument is much stronger because he addresses Caesar as more than just a husband, but as a strong leader. Decius also states that Caesars political goals are much more important than the relationship with his wife.

Julius Caesar was a Roman Dictator who was both loved and hated by those that he ruled over. Throughout the world, he has been written about in a variety of different ways and is portrayed as a politician as well as a selfish dictator. Three “firsthand” accounts that were written to give us a better understanding of Julius Caesar were “The Assassination of Julius Caesar”, “Tranquillus, Gaius Suetonius”, and “Plutarch, The Assassination of Julius Caesar, from Marcus Brutus”. We will explore the writings and explain how he is viewed from those around him and compare that to the history portrayed in the History books. With this, we will be able to get a better idea of who he was.

“Julius Caesar”, a play by William Shakespeare, constantly is unclear about who is in the right and provokes ambiguity, yet sometimes, it evokes deep pathos and divides the audience into two parts based on the audience’s personality. There were many choices to be made in the text; most of the important one’s , such as Caesar’s, are decisions that can swing in both directions. This also applies to the first scene of Caesar’s triumph. On the contrary, the moving speeches of Brutus and Antony at Caesar’s funeral will divide the audience into two. Without emotions, most events are ambiguous, but as sentiments allow the text to connect more personally with the audience, a rift is created within it.

The Tragedy of Julius Caesar presents a variety of themes that deal with human nature throughout the narrative. However, the most out-standing characteristics portrayed within would very easily be that of deceit and manipulation. The prevalence of these aspects allows the reader to have a deeper insight, not only on the nature of humanity, but within each individual's perspective. Deception is a key factor in the character’s’ plans throughout this book, as Cassius states in referring to Brutus, “thou art noble, yet I see the honorable mettle may be wrought” (I.ii. 169-170). To truly understand the significance of Shakespeare’s intentions, we must analyze what deception really is.

In William Shakespeare’s The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, Brutus and Antony delivered speeches on behalf of Caesar’s tragic death at the Forum. While their messages have various differences, many similarities can also be concluded from their presentations. Brutus, Caesar’s trusted servant, acted solely upon his loyalty for the country of Rome whereas Antony, a close friend of Caesar’s, believed more in loyalty to his friend. This influenced their diction and tone which were exhibited through the writings of their speeches.

What comes to mind when one thinks of “Romans”? Power, dominion, or even greatness could describe these noble people. The Romans were arguably one of the most powerful civilizations in history, so how could a people of such greatness come to such ruin? Power is a dangerous privilege for any worldly nation to possess, and when mixed with a scandalous concoction of greed and corruption, could spell the end of an entire civilization. Julius Caesar showcases Shakespeare’s own interpretation concerning the demise of Rome’s most famous leader. This play spotlights various examples of imagery to help the audience understand the author’s interpretation of this historical tragedy. Imagery is a kind of figurative language used to help the reader

Shakespeare`s Roman plays amplify the wavering balance between two pulsing political organs in the body of Roman government: the unstable mob and the tyrannical leader—or the leader assumed to have the capacity for tyranny. Caius Marcius ‘Coriolanus’ and Julius Caesar, two titular Shakespearean characters with opposing dispositions, meet their fates in nearly identical ways as tragic Roman heroes in like worlds of deception, rhetoric, and post-truth politics. In these worlds, the opinions of the Roman people, though easily swayed, are ultimately more resonant and powerful than any one person’s in the Roman government alone. Both Coriolanus and Julius Caesar are excavations of rudimentary human

In the story Julius Caesar, Caesar has killed the king Pompeii to become king of Rome himself which he successfully did. The commoners loved there previous king Pompeii but as soon as he was killed they celebrated their new king Julius Caesar and the death of Pompeii. The tribunes Flavius and Murellus are trying to convince the commoners that Caesar is not the king they want but the king that is going to harm them in the long run because of his military power. The commoners are being disloyal in a way that they are being rude to there lost king Pompeii. Flavius is getting mad at the commoners because of there disloyalty but if the commoners are not being disloyal they could be merely choosing favorites and maybe they didn’t like king Pompeii

Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar is a striking testament to the highs and lows of the human experience that has captivated the world for generations. Even in the first act, the audience can witness the unraveling of an epic plot and the intricate characters that make it so. The story opens with the celebration of Lupercalia, where the most powerful man in the Roman empire, Caesar, is parading through the streets. Near the end of his march a soothsayer warns him of his nearing death, only to have the notion quickly dismissed. However, only moments later, two senators meet in private to ensure that his death is unavoidable. In this way, Julius Caesar weaves the moods of power, internal struggle, and tension to

For anyone that has found their way to Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, they know it is pretty easy to get caught up in a range of different emotions, ranging from anger, all the way to revengeful. At times, I found myself cringing at only the thought of some of these characters, and with others, I found myself secretly rooting for them. Through these emotions, we tend to develop certain feelings towards the different characters, whether it be a certain liking or disliking towards them. Personally, I had quite the difficulty depicting from who I thought deserved to be titled as the best and who deserved to be labeled unhonorable. Though through looking over and analyzing this play, I have found my reasonings as to who reins my favorite and who stands on the opposing side.

The Tragedy of Julius Caesar is a play written by William Shakespeare. There are numerous themes in this story. But one of the themes is the power of capricious attitudes towards the characters inside the play.